How old are your books ?That's not even inclusive. I have come across threads specified as "National Standard" that date pre UNF/UNC and can find no reference to them in any of my Machinery's Handbooks.
That's not even inclusive. I have come across threads specified as "National Standard" that date pre UNF/UNC and can find no reference to them in any of my Machinery's Handbooks.
Oldest one I have is 1941.How old are your books ?
Where do you get that from my remark? I was just stating that even with all that listed, there are even more thread standard out there.So it's not handy and helpful?
Nice. Handy to take a look through for those that I've not heard of (for example, Waltham thread and the two German thread types amongst a few others) and google them to see their origins, uses and specs.
Should be tapping 6-32's, one of the weakest screws... Easy to snap when you least suspect Try it sometime in gummy aluminum, bet you can't just break one!Nice. Handy to take a look through for those that I've not heard of (for example, Waltham thread and the two German thread types amongst a few others) and google them to see their origins, uses and specs.
Might knock up a spreadsheet from the HTML tables.
Oh, and I suspect @MyLilMule was referring to (and thus agreeing with your thread title) the ridiculous number of threading standards, some of which are still used for no reason other than "eh, it's what we've always used"
I mean, at a minimum, I'd like to see a "World Congress of Threading Standards", run only by engineers, pick either imperial or metric for thread dimension specifications (don't care which; they're just measurements) and have the penalty for making threads in the 'non-approved' units be a whole of life sentence of hard-labour.
That hard labour being 14 hours/day of tapping 5/16" 24 threads in 01 steel by hand, using only lard as cutting oil (every tap you break, adds another hour to your day!).