The hammer marks around the stand off post for the small dial are most likely from driving the pins tight with a bench hammer Concentric circles are a very common form of instrument ornamentation in the 18th century. Couldn’t the knurling around the dial face be to aid in reading the dial? They had dividing engines to index the dial but the final demarcation would have been hand engraved over those lines Yes, the anvils are wrought iron but more likely than not, they are case hardened on the working faces The mounting holes are rough, out of round and countersunk because that is what it looks like when you cold punch holes by hand. Lathes could be driven by a great wheel. They could cut wrought iron, it is as soft as butter, just don’t blow out the grain. Much larger iron screws were being turned before this. Think printing presses and leg vises. But the threads would sometimes be swaged in hot before being turned to size. This saves on material and avoids cutting across the grain of the iron. Two things to look into: 1. Surface finish. Non critical surfaces should be cross filed fairly coarsely an irregular. Finer surfaces may be draw filed. Critical surfaces would have been ground or lapped, possibly scraped. 2. Check the assembly screws. They most likly show signs of being cold swaged, not cut. With wrought iron the grain is everything. Watt or not. If it was made in the 18th century it was made by hand, with files chisels and hammers. These men were not machinists, which is not to say that they weren’t insanely talented, but they had very different priorities. You don’t drill a hole if you can punch it. If it needs to be round, ream it, if not, leave it be. You don’t make everything perfect and precise unless it needs to be. Good hand work looks good, functions well and has no reverence for extraneous precision or regularity. I have more to share. Message me for more info.
I have no experience but the base could have been made after the fact by even the exhibitors just to show it off. something like this would have been unwieldy to use so screwing it to a table with a quickly made sheet of brass might have been a quick fix. whoever used it before that might have just held it with a clamp or some other tool you'd find in a workshop for their use
I stopped the video and was just about to write the same thing - seems whoever made this instrument was not very concerned about it looking nice, as otherwise they would be more careful with assembling it and using non-marking tools. But that's a hint also - it was probably a practical project, maybe a prototype or a quick clone of a previous design - likely an "internal" tool for production.
I'm a 7 year time served toolmaker and this is the kind of project given to an apprentice to be constructed in the early years of his apprenticeship to give experience of using all types of predominantly but not exclusively, hand tools and processes. It has all the hallmarks of an early learning apprentice. When times where slack and orders light the project would be worked on, so would take some time ( maybe ?) to complete and have various levels of workmanship exhibited, here from very poor hand counter sink holes to poorly finished file and hammer marks and poor dimensioning, evidenced in the stand height , as the apprentice's skill level progressed . It would also answer the questions of why the seemingly unnecessary application of ' decoration ' knurling, et al., which would have been for experience of the various processes in the craft and also some of the apparently 're used ' materials surplus to requirements from maybe the scrap bin or left over from other projects which could be utilised at low cost (if any ) for a seemingly useless apprentice's project that could , ( would?) more than likely never possibly be finished ?) . I myself had a similar project as i am sure many, many other apprentices did also? The craftsman that taught me served his apprenticeship in the 1800's and he would not allow me to use any power tools of any kind and definitely no emery cloth !...Everything was ( to my annoyance in the 1960's ) by hand ...something I later valued more than any other aspect of the trade I learned.
I'm a 30 years toolmaker and I would tend to agree. It appears to be a possible apprentice project. My project in my second year was a punch grinding spinner...I lapped the last half thousands in the rotating axis to improve precision...
Great comments... a couple of my friends are Swiss tool & die masters, based on their apprentice work of very high calibre, this device certainly looks like it would have been, as you say, either an assigned practice task, or even a 'personal project ' of an apprentice, using material at hand, and trying different techniques. Pretty 'grotty' looking, in places! But, 1776....
@@sailaway1015 The problem with it being an apprentice piece is that, if it was made before 1867, it was a genuinely revolutionary device. It isn't in any way a copy of the Palmer micrometer, so it was at least made by someone who hadn't seen even a drawing of one. So I think that, when it was made, it was revolutionary. An amateur inventor might make something revolutionary, and make it relatively poorly, but it doesn't seem likely that an apprentice would be tasked with making something revolutionary.
As a machinist, I've made dozens of special tools for specific jobs. Decades ago, I began stamping my initials, and date in my custom tooling, and most has my mark, but all my early tooling made to purpose generally wasn't marked, and many of them got made into other tooling. All the tool marks you showed make sense, if one thinks of 18 century, and only make sense later, if it were an apprentice's work, not at all a journeyman, but certainly well on his way. I've worked on a 17th century clock, in New Bern, NC, in Tryon Palace, and it was very similar in construction tool marks, strikes, there was an awful lot of handwork done even in the 19th century, but l would easily put it prior to the 19th unless found reason to think otherwise. Thanks for this, it was very interesting, and a real question to be answered,
I used "1751" and other stuff you've given us so generously in my classroom to give my children the understanding of how science was created. I thank you for your wonderful insight and perspective.
I just binge watched everything on your channel. Much to my dismay you are still young as channels go. FWIW I have an engineering sheepskin and plenty of machining experience along with a strong interest in the history and science and manufacturing. The way you have organized information along with testing and research is WAY above par. Much respect!!
The base holes that you referred to as being chamfered look exactly like holes that I hot punch in the blacksmith shop. You back punch then turn it over and punch through a bolster. When you flatten out the burr it has the appearance of being chamfered.
Now that makes sense as engineering back then was way closer to blacksmithing than it is now. EG when was the pillar drill invented? 1895 or something? I bet before then getting holes in sheet metal used mainly blacksmithing techniques.
@@gordonlawrence4749 RE: "when was the pillar drill invented? 1895 or something?" Pillar drill, made by Joseph Whitworth & Co., Manchester, c. 1860. J. Whitworth & Co. developed their first power-driven drilling machine in 1847. This machine is numbered 197. The power source is linked via bevel gears to the drill bit. The drill has a spear-shaped bit. It has four speeds at which the bit can rotate. The table has a lateral movement that is adjusted by a screw running underneath it. This enables the operator the position the workpiece directly under the drill bit more easily. The 1854 Encyclopedia of Useful Arts described Whitworth drills as “… one of the most complete tools of the kind ever constructed”. This machine was presented to the Museum by the University of Manchester’s Engineering Dept in 1974. Reference: collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co8405231/whitworth-pillar-drilling-machine-drill
This devise was probably bolted to a workbench on the shop floor in Watt's factory and used to gauge parts during production. It would remain there in use every day until the product(s) it was gauging ceased production or it was made obsolete by modernization. In our shop we have made lots of custom gauges to quickly measure parts in production. These gauges are mostly made from scraps we have on hand. No need to look pretty, just get the job done. Once the gauge is no longer required it goes into storage just in case the job it was used for returns. This "micrometer" in particular just happened to make it to show & tell at the museum.
Sounds very pausable to me. Perhaps they made dozens of these micrometers and this is one that was put on a shelf somewhere. Probably the one was made by an apprentice either using blue prints or copies of parts from the original micrometer. its likely that during use. screws got lost and were replace with other screws available. I doubt that was the original made by James, but likely a copy using his original design. There also no maker marks or initials which leads me to believe it was just a shop use micrometer.
As a youngster, I worked in a machine shop and yeah if I needed to build something for shop use, I’d use whatever was handy in the scrap shelves like iron, steel, brass, stainless, aluminum and no it didn’t need to be pretty, just get the job done. I only used stock metal when it was required which was a few times.
Ahh, thinking back to all the odd fixtures I have made that served to give a dial-indicator a home. Minus the indicator, it was a pile of random junk. With the indicator installed, the junk became a trusted and highly reliable measuring device. Another thought on 'shop-tooling'; a go/no-go indicator wouldn't need to be 'calibrated' in the sense of displaying thickness accurately, rather it has to be repeatable. Quickly picking out under/over sized parts is not a job that requires hours of finishing work on the gauge.
The same is done in electronics. If I'm designing a new bit of gear then I usually do the design on paper, then cobble together a proof of concept, then the test gear is cobbled together, only then is a full production unit made and the test equipment can end up looking like a deranged bird has nested in it.
Sounds feasible, but has any explanation been offered as to why the smaller dial has 19 divisions? Surely this would have been harder to measure/manufacture than one with 18 say, (divides into 360). Is 19 required for a particular measurement, or has someone just mis-counted?!
Yes.. Unfortunately, they hadn't invented Phillips, hex or Torx screws yet in the 1700s. They were limited to using screws invented by Sir Ian Flathead.
Your channel is amazing. I'm no mechanical engineer, but I've started to take an interest in how the stuff I'm into is made and your philosophy of appreciating the hard work that's gone into the world around us is inspiring.
You could find out if the dial markings were made using the hands of the instrument itself by seeing if the deviations in the lead-screw follow a pattern that is also seen replicated in the dial face markings. The hole in the dial was likely used to indicate the position of the two dials when assembling it as there are also indicating holes or marks in the small dial, possible a pin is placed in the hole then the other dial is placed with it's marks at the quarters and a block is placed in the "U" to indicate the lead-screw then everything tightened. The outer edge serrations were likely not just decorations as the rest of the tool doesn't indicate a "decorative mind" made this device likely used to ad more precision to assembly or they interface with other device parts that are now missing. This might also be why the unit doesn't sit flat on a table as it was used in a larger device now long gone. The soldered in pieces are a common way to align parts that were made on cruder devices, this way they can be filed by hand to fit more precisely. The screws holding the base on were crude because they didn't need to be more precise. The marks on the back are directly in line with the pins and indicate how many times the pins were driven in and out. The marks are vise jaw marks where the piece was held to be cut and filed....not hammer marks. This might have been more of an adjustable "Go No Go gauge" as the crudeness indicates less needed repeated accuracy as once set it could be locked in place, one would assume that the bottom of the "U" shaped channel was made this way by drilling a hole then sawing down to the circle, this could also indicate the precise edge to locate a single piece to be checked repeatedly. Everything to me indicates that this was part of a larger machine and not so much a single tool measuring device as there are indications that the dials had other uses in the device and the base was made to locate the opening in the "U" at some specific place in the bigger machine. Just my tow cents not in any way to be confused with "facts", and darn well worth what you paid for them.
I could probably add a dime. Pin holes for locating dials. Two dials, one cent. Need to set threads with minimal backlash. three cents for easy. Need to figure out a basic indicator. Two cents. (should be worth way more.) It's a "Mother Tool" Old school would be mount shaft on the ends. Make form around main part of good threads. Divide @ centerline for casting. Pour Babbitt. Bottom half is solid in the base. Top half is adjustable end to end for preload. Or you could just precision machine everything, and put it together.
i cant say how much i enjoyed this. when i became a machinist, 1971. i got interested in machine tool history. but not much was available. dont forget, you dont know where you are going if you dont know where you came from.
This channel is a symbol to me of everything wrong with RUclips. He don't post very often, but when he post is s masterpiece. But the algorithm just ignore and don't send me the notification, even when bell marked. So if I don't go to my hundreds of channels and see what the makers with low quantities are doing I just lose some gems. But RUclips keep trying to make me watch some bad channels with low content value but high frequency and view time just because the classification that the bots have done are similar of what I actually like.
I LOVE the Science Museum in London. I've visited many a time starting when I was eight years old... In my career as a Senior School Science Lab Tech, I used to go there with classes of students. I now take my grandchildren there. I still love it just as much as I did when I first went there. Probably love it more, now I have a greater understanding of the history of some of the exhibits... I once had a sample of my own work there when I worked for a company that held the World Record for the lowest mass of objects that could be accurately measured. It could accurately weigh the mass of 1/50 of the ink of a full stop in a newspaper. This was pre-digital. Everything was mechanical, with old fashioned 12 volt light bulbs the illuminate graticules.
Please please please keep making these. Your videos are fantastically informative and interesting and it's so cool to hear this stuff from someone who's just super psyched about it. You're just super.
I concur with the other comments that making a tool in-house is usually a necessity when access to the expenditure of funds is restricted, but you can overcome this hurdle by scavenging in the scrap metal bin to find the materials you need to make the needed tool. Often times a specialized tool is so rare, no one else makes or sells them and that is the motivator to make it yourself. It is so rewarding to see your creation work as intended.
If so wouldn't you think it would have a narrower range like a snap gauge, more economical I would think. No I would guess it was maybe a dedicated instrument for a in process measurements on some ones bench.
Excellent video! Its very cool they let you help take it apart and examine it. The large brass back plate looked almost like it had been cold rolled like a modern plate. Hard to tell on a phone screen. The screw and the movable jaw fascinate me. My guess as to why the jaw has deeper grooves in the middle is the lead screw may have a slight bow. Or that was the main use of travel and I'm sure allot of dirt got in there. I just visited the Precision machine museum in Windsor VT. They have the #1 Bridgeport there as well as the #1 Brown ad Sharp gauge block inspecting micrometer. Keep it up you are doing an awesome job telling this story!
Hear hear! It is beautiful in its own character, wavy wrought iron grain plainly seen, expensive slab of yellow brass... Just think...measuring devices and instruments that were the descendants of this piece of work eventually allowed the human race to design/test/implement powerful rocket travel, that got us out of our atmosphere, into space, and the moon. If devices such as these never existed, there’s NO WAY that would’ve happened on 16 July, 1969 Anno Domini.
Just found this channel a few days ago, and I'm blown away buy the quality of information that you are providing. I regularly run 7 axis WFL Millturn machines, orbital grinders, and other extremely impressive modern machines, and have worked on shafts that sell for $750,000, and while they are very cool machines the machines/tools that you are are simply some of the most amazing things that I've ever seen. Thanks for the videos, and keep up the amazing work
The base could have been attached to a block like you show, or it could have been to bolt the mic down so it doesn't get borrowed. It also looks like a later addition, possibly a spare part, to replace a broken original. If it has seen use in a workshop it may have battlescars. I don't see hammer marks in the back of the fixed anvil, but I do see the knurling we still have in the jaws of bench vises. The 'convex' thread depth of the moving anvil is perplexing. Perhaps it was sawed in two. ...IMO filing isn't crude. It just takes manual dexterity.
I am positive that this was a bench device remember during that century a lot of work was done in a vice on a bench with a file or treadle powered saw or drill press.
Regarding the hammer marks at the back, I couldn't help but notice that the orientation of the marks and their positions are in line with the pins on the posts. It looks like a hammer and a punch of sorts was used to drive them in which lead to clouds of hammer marks with a particular orientation and distance regarding the pins.
I don't recall if James Burke discussed this particular instrument on his brilliant show Connections, but I do remember one episode that told the centuries long story of ever-increasing screw precision. Thank you for this wonderful video!
Interesting piece of history. Are the irregularities on the big dial really "random", or is this actually a correction because the threaded rod is not perfect? I do think the bent sheet metal base was not initially there and was just added in a rush to make it more presentable for the exhibition.
Came here from Alec Steele, and got what I expected. Professional, well made videos. Of course, I immediately subscribed. I look forward to seeing more videos in the future.
Yes, please do! Your narration style is soothing (a la Clickspring's Chris) and your writing and subject matter is very compelling! You deserve to be part of the cadre of great RUclips machine folk.
I just watched your video about etching brass dials. Ferric chloride is a good choice for brass, but it needs to be diluted with water a lot, for aluminum as it thermally runs away (splattered on the neighbor's siding 20 feet away). For copper or brass there are two tricks that speed up the process, agitation and heat. Both can be done with aquarium supplies. A regulated heater in glass, you don't want to get your ferric chloride more than 80 - 100 deg F. A small air pump with a plastic tube used to inject oxygen for the fish, can stir up the ferric chloride across the material being etched. This gives two benefits, by moving fresh ferric chloride across the surface and removing any stationary bubbles.
yup! right up there with this old tony, abom79 and clickspring in my humble opinion. I love the mixture of machining, theory and history... very good video and audio quality... for sure a future favorite!
Hello from France, you are such a good narrator and your videos are very well realized. Please keep going. They are few channels like yours on youtube, it is truly a gem.
This video is amazing. I very much appreciate how you use strong deductive logic to determine form and function of this early micrometer. Many people don't realize how much went into this sort of instrument and this video shines light on some of that unappreciated work. I haven't read through all the comments below, but this video made me think of a book I read by William Rosen called The Most Powerful Idea in the World. The book touches on how lead screws on lathes allowed for more precision and repeatability. Keep these videos coming as they are some of the more interesting content on RUclips!
When I did my apprenticeship, each of the other students in my year made a part of a larger project, to prove the skills that they had learned. In my training school the project was a scale-miniature steam traction engine. The finished working engine took more than 5 year's apprentice-intakes efforts to complete. I never saw it running and don't know who has it now, but it showed how much a lad leaving school could learn in his first year in engineering training. This may well be such a piece, but obviously from a long time ago.
It's funny just last week I made a small fabricated metal part for a fixture,similar to the micrometer base that had 4 counter sunk holes evenly spaced on each side but after it was forming. Since I used to be pretty good at forming things I drilled and countersunk the 4 holes first for the sake of ease in clamping and drilling in the drill press. When I went to assemble the fixture the countersunk holes were facing the wrong direction, Damn, how did I do that! I need the fixture finished right now so I countersunk another set of hole on the opposites side of the 4 original holes countersunk in error and installed the part, no one will ever notice unless they take it apart, by then I will be long gone in my grave. May this be have happen to James Watt micrometer, or the maker of the micrometer who ever he was?
It must have been soooooo amazing back in that time, when they held that gathering to bring all the inventions into one place. Just to compare and examine what others were working on completely on their own. I wish I could take a time machine to events like that.
Engineers often build their own version of a device that's known about because they need it immediately and can not wait for a commercial version to enter production or the production run is too limited/expensive. I'm not sure that Watt built this or even requested it built, in the above situation he would have built 2 or more prototypes in case the first one failed with more uniform parts, probably.
Please dont' stop those kind of videos. I really like your channels as a whole. I have heard things in here that were not talked about on other channels. You view things from other angles... nice.
You've done an excellent job taking this apart, scrutinize and pointing out inconsistencies in this piece. Impressive! This only the second time I've seen your program. So I subscribed. Thank you! Also I must agree with Anchor Bait."You are a special person. Please don't change."
First off, you DO sound like an expert, or at least further along than basically anyone I've ever heard talk. Your self deprecation is funny, and lends to your intelligence, but is unwarranted in my opinion. :) Secondly, this video is awesome, I've been a machinist for 12 years and this was a treat to watch. I can't being to imagine what type of equipment they were using in the 1700s, but I wouldn't knock the craftsmanship of this because doing things like that by hand is incredibly hard if you don't have the tools we have access to today. I'd put my hat in the ring of this being a prototype.
This micrometer appears to have been cobbled together for use in a factory or in an artisan's shop. The sloppily made screws, the re-purposed "dials" (gears?), the poorly mounted hands, the poor quality of the stock (which appears to have been scrap), the rough workmanship, ... It was expected to suffer a lot of abuse, so it wasn't finely made. It had to be accurate enough only for factory purposes. Also, it's very big, so it wasn't intended to make scientific instruments. Possibly it was intended to make interchangeable parts for rifles.
The eccentric dial hands had be questioning... questioning if their misalignment was indeed from heat or if that’s an overly-wise, possibly too quick answer.
@@robertgardner7470 -- Do you know that the screws have a "class 3 thread fit"? This micrometer appears to have been assembled from whatever scrap parts were available. Scientific instruments from the 18th and 19th centuries usually are beautifully crafted.
This channel is going to unbelievably big, once people realize it's here. New subscriber here. It only took about 35 seconds of the video to convince me to subscribe. Keep up the great work! 🙂👍
Hi Machine Thinking, RUclips just reminded me of your channel, and I really miss your great videos! I absolutely love how you're explaining the origins of precision machining and how it all started. Hope you put out some new videos soon! All the best :)
It is highly accurate 1/1900 in. It has no numbers assigned to the graduations. The slotted holes of the stationary anvil allow the lead screw to be adjusted tight against the threads of the sliding anvil to insure repeatability. You could use a pound note or dollar bill to see where the dial stops to, and that would be 0.002".
The errors you point out, and the possibility that it was made from scrap suggest to me it was a project attempted by an apprentice. I will allow others to grade his work but the fact it survived would suggest he, at least, was proud of the attempt
How about William Gascoigne, british inventor who is credited to have invented a micrometer in 1640 by multiple written accounts as well as very detailed drawings ? I get that this one is still the Oldest to be around today but it would hardly be the first as you mention in your video.
I struggled with bringing that in. If you re-watch the video I was careful to say "world's first micrometer for measuring physical objects" and "first end measurement micrometer" exactly for the reason of Gascoigne whose device was for astronomical uses. Point taken though, and this story arc is not over so there will likely be some place to fit him in ...
Imagine that as a creative person, you keep mementos of your old works to measure growth and personal achievement. Then after a long time of creating, you make yourself a kind of trophy, a souvenir for yourself of your journey as a craftsman and an inventor.
That this probably isn't actually the first micrometer by a longshot, and that Watts wasn't coming up with anything new at all. The existence of the Antikythera mechanism shows us that devices like this micrometer (an extremely primitive device in comparison) were likely around long before this time.
MT, I just stumbled across your channel. Man what a hidden gem you have here! This content is amazing and very rare on youtube in such a well done manner. I hope this channel blows up in short order. Keep up the wonderful work. Regards A new fan
Someone like Watt who produced precision instruments wouldn't intentionally downgrade his skills to make something that may be a prototype even if it was made in haste. Pride of workmanship just wouldn't allow it.
Yes and no. It's been thrown together. The dial face is clearly from a watch or clock maker, or even taken off a clock, and that extra hole is where it was fixed originally. But if it was a prototype of a genius strike idea, to prove it worked, then it simply is what it is - once it works, you build a "perfect" one, and that one ends up somewhere else probably doing something else. That stand is clearly something that was added afterwards, to keep it upright.
My guess is that it was a prototype that was made by Bergeon of Switzerland and made its way into service in a firearms factory. Bergeon has been making precision measuring tools for hundreds of years. Keep up the great videos, they are great!!
Credit were credit is due. The Brits gave science, chemistry, and physics a huge push! I grew watching "The Mechanical Universe" on Public Broadcasting, an every other scientist was from the UK. Other cultures also had scientists, but along with discoveries a lingua franca and consistent writing were key. English just took off as the language of science, replacing German, and Latin. Codification and standardization was key. You video is great and I am sure that Ave, Curious Droid, The Idahoan Show, Captain Disillusion, and a few maths vids, all fed into my algo to get me here!
Here's what it looks like to my *completely* uninformed and uneducated opinion: It was possibly made in Watt's workshop by none other than Matthew (or insert any other name), the faithful, unknown, unloved, lanky assistant. He made it with parts lying around one night as he was cleaning up all of the Master's gears from one of the work tables. He showed Watt what he had done the next morning, proud and excited, and probably talking quite a bit with many hand gestures, expounding about how it could lead to many revolutionary and futuristic machines "the likes of whiche we ha' ne'er seene afore an' which maye bringge about a newe age of technologyes an' other wonderes" (Unknown journal of my own invention, p. 56). Whereupon, Watt, amazed, promotes his lanky assistant and gives him another sixpence a year as a bonus, which allows our faithful hero Matthew to "marrye his belovede Mathilda of Essex whome he ha' seen passing through th' shoppe five yeares previous but ne'er mention'd it to anyone, keepinge it close an' secrete." (Unknown journal of my own invention, p. 72) Matthew becomes the foreman of the workshop, and the device passes into Watt's hands whom, because of his age, no longer can think of all of the amazing things it could help to create "for he hath runne out of his youthfulle ideas as his age an' successe sette in." (Unknown journal of my own invention, p 107). And, hence, the device was left forgotten after a time in the workshop, Matthew having long forgotten about it as well and settled in with his new family in the making, retiring as a respectable gentleman, and Watt having pursued other business interests, no longer even remembering the episode. Thus ends the tale of the first micrometer invented in the workshop of Watts by his faithful assistant Matthew.
The only thing that could make this story more complete, would be the addition of the 10 letters that have since been eliminated from the English alphabet!
The knurling on the dial looks to be functional and not cosmetic. Did you count the notches? They may be fractions. It would be easy to add a ratchet stop onto the knurled dial. You have a great narration style easy to listen to and you tell a great story.
I thought “ratchet” too, but didn’t take time to pause and count on my 5” screen. OR, maybe to add traction to drive a belt to another device, like a counter of some sorts or what I’ll call a “sum readout wheel.”
I'm thinking they were for 'grippage' for the (possibly leather-faced) lockdown pad that helped to ensure repeatability as a short run (changeable settings) guage on a single process machine. The 'knurling' or 'serrated' edge didn't have to be pretty or precisely spaced, just functional. I have to agree with the concensus that it was quickly cobbled together from available scrap for an urgent need to streamline a 'hiccup' or 'bottleneck' in a production line. Maybe the 'oddly countersunk from both sides' base was just that way in the previous life of the salvaged material. Who's to say why the base is even there to begin with? Maybe it sat in a conveniently located depression in the cast iron framework of said machine. Heck, it may have been stored in a nice little wooden box and only removed for setting up a repeatable setting at several spots on the machine when changing a production run (every factory has a set up guy, we all know him. He's the one that takes more breaks than Evel Knievel's bones!). Well, enough of my personal theories. I have to tune my air guitar to alpha waveform for the grays (they are borrowing it for an extended interdimensional tour date).
It definitely seems like a prototype that could have been made at that time. The base seems like it was made to allow the piece to be displayed. This would explain why it was so crudely made compared to the rest of the piece. The fact that it isn't working off of a division of 100 also indicates that it is likely an older piece of work.
Man this is so friggin cool. Even though I've been a subscriber for years and I thought I had gone through most of your videos, this is just showing up in my feed. Belated thank you for this and I share in your excitement and reverence for this device.
Wow you make amazing videos. I was wondering if you would like to make some videos about ancient machines 1000s of years ago. I find them fascinating. It’s also crazy how much mechanical technology has been forgotten when we transitioned from machines to electronics.
In 1966, high school, I made a micrometer for a science project. Used a 1/2"-20 bolt. Made a degree wheel and a explanation of how it worked. Got an A. Then worked in machine shops for 47 years. I have no idea where it ended up. Maybe it will show up somewhere and people will try to figure out who made it.
As a blacksmith, it's very cool to see wrought iron screws! The quality of the threads is also very nice; in regards to how they were manufactured, the lead screw could have been held in between centers and run a dye around it, unpowered, just to keep it straight. I don't know exactly what kind of quality dyes they would have had access to in the 1700s, but they definitely had thread cutting taps and dyes before metal-working lathes were particularly useful. Wrought iron is very soft and ductile, so it wouldn't be too out of the question to turn wrought iron on a lathe, but I don't the lathes of the day had a feature to cut threads in a pass like modern lathes do. All lathe turning done at the time, be it wood, brass, or iron, would probably have been by hand.
Thanks for this video :) Using a hand countersink from both sides gives you a better chance of getting the hole close to the centre, from one side it’s more likely to go further off centre 🍀
Great video and comments. Im not sure but can confirm re-purposing bits of dead/redunant machine's commonplace in sheetmetal and general metal workshops in the 90's,we had some crude looking however pretty magical machines that used to bend tube as well as form flat stock into joists.Same can be said for many volunteer run mechanical restroration groups who mostly run on shoestring budgets often using century+ old machines,tools an skills.
There are so many aspects of this micrometer which point to it being a prototype. Being a blacksmith and having a good bit of experience with true wrought iron, I am a bit surprised by the use of wrought in this device. High carbon had been around already for centuries and cutlers used it for making knives. If this was to be a "fine" piece I would think carbon would have been procured and utilized instead of the very soft and highly wear prone wrought. It was interesting to see the hammer marks which speaks to their forged origin. Great video!
It's a matter of tooling. These folks didn't have access to modern, high performance tool steels that makes it easy to precisely cut and mill medium or high carbon steel parts. Wrought iron was softer, brass even softer, which allowed better dimensional control with the blister steel or case-hardened tools they had at the time.
Hi! I was going to leave a comment about some issues I noted, but Hammerandhearth beat me to them and added a couple I didn't think of. On my own I will point to what seems somewhat odd - the condition of the screws and the hammer marks seem to denote that the micrometer was more times disassembled and reassembled, by not very careful people, than actually used for measuring. This could then be a prototype someone made and took for Watts appraisal (once that was his business) and was moved around, from hand to hand (possibly copied in the process), but never made it to actual production by Watt. The identity of the original inventor was probably lost in the sands of time.
1. Those hammer marks are in plane with the pins. I'd guess it is from repeated removal and reinstalation of the pins with a hammer. 2. The dial is clearly hand indexed. 3. The soldering looks almost like a fix 4. Iron would have been a possible retrofit as the brass wore during measurment on the original. Likely produced by a local smith for the craftsman. 5. The mounts look like a later addition. 6. All things used to be hand-fitted, even if machined. I doubt Watt produced it, but might have interacted with it or helped. No way to know with the limited data we have.
![Jack Harlow - Hello Miss Johnson [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Q86_nlRoIGw/mqdefault.jpg)
The hammer marks around the stand off post for the small dial are most likely from driving the pins tight with a bench hammer
Concentric circles are a very common form of instrument ornamentation in the 18th century.
Couldn’t the knurling around the dial face be to aid in reading the dial?
They had dividing engines to index the dial but the final demarcation would have been hand engraved over those lines
Yes, the anvils are wrought iron but more likely than not, they are case hardened on the working faces
The mounting holes are rough, out of round and countersunk because that is what it looks like when you cold punch holes by hand.
Lathes could be driven by a great wheel. They could cut wrought iron, it is as soft as butter, just don’t blow out the grain.
Much larger iron screws were being turned before this. Think printing presses and leg vises. But the threads would sometimes be swaged in hot before being turned to size. This saves on material and avoids cutting across the grain of the iron.
Two things to look into:
1. Surface finish. Non critical surfaces should be cross filed fairly coarsely an irregular. Finer surfaces may be draw filed. Critical surfaces would have been ground or lapped, possibly scraped.
2. Check the assembly screws. They most likly show signs of being cold swaged, not cut. With wrought iron the grain is everything.
Watt or not. If it was made in the 18th century it was made by hand, with files chisels and hammers. These men were not machinists, which is not to say that they weren’t insanely talented, but they had very different priorities. You don’t drill a hole if you can punch it. If it needs to be round, ream it, if not, leave it be. You don’t make everything perfect and precise unless it needs to be. Good hand work looks good, functions well and has no reverence for extraneous precision or regularity.
I have more to share. Message me for more info.
I have no experience but the base could have been made after the fact by even the exhibitors just to show it off. something like this would have been unwieldy to use so screwing it to a table with a quickly made sheet of brass might have been a quick fix.
whoever used it before that might have just held it with a clamp or some other tool you'd find in a workshop for their use
Good thoughts all around, Hammerandhearth. I especially appreciate the reminder about extraneous precision at the end there.
Hammerandhearth . I agree about the hammer marks. How could the narrator not see that?
Hammerandhearth, I agree the hammer marks are perpendicular to the pins.
I stopped the video and was just about to write the same thing - seems whoever made this instrument was not very concerned about it looking nice, as otherwise they would be more careful with assembling it and using non-marking tools. But that's a hint also - it was probably a practical project, maybe a prototype or a quick clone of a previous design - likely an "internal" tool for production.
I'm a 7 year time served toolmaker and this is the kind of project given to an apprentice to be constructed in the early years of his apprenticeship to give experience of using all types of predominantly but not exclusively, hand tools and processes. It has all the hallmarks of an early learning apprentice. When times where slack and orders light the project would be worked on, so would take some time ( maybe ?) to complete and have various levels of workmanship exhibited, here from very poor hand counter sink holes to poorly finished file and hammer marks and poor dimensioning, evidenced in the stand height , as the apprentice's skill level progressed .
It would also answer the questions of why the seemingly unnecessary application of ' decoration ' knurling, et al., which would have been for experience of the various processes in the craft and also some of the apparently 're used ' materials surplus to requirements from maybe the scrap bin or left over from other projects which could be utilised at low cost (if any ) for a seemingly useless apprentice's project that could , ( would?) more than likely never possibly be finished ?) . I myself had a similar project as i am sure many, many other apprentices did also? The craftsman that taught me served his apprenticeship in the 1800's and he would not allow me to use any power tools of any kind and definitely no emery cloth !...Everything was ( to my annoyance in the 1960's ) by hand ...something I later valued more than any other aspect of the trade I learned.
@Alan Muldowney
It is a pleasure to read the opinion of an actual expert. Thank you, sir.
@@spaceman081447 Yes, even from my layman's eye the workmanship seems generally crude.
I'm a 30 years toolmaker and I would tend to agree. It appears to be a possible apprentice project. My project in my second year was a punch grinding spinner...I lapped the last half thousands in the rotating axis to improve precision...
Great comments... a couple of my friends are Swiss tool & die masters, based on their apprentice work of very high calibre, this device certainly looks like it would have been, as you say, either an assigned practice task, or even a 'personal project ' of an apprentice, using material at hand, and trying different techniques. Pretty 'grotty' looking, in places! But, 1776....
@@sailaway1015 The problem with it being an apprentice piece is that, if it was made before 1867, it was a genuinely revolutionary device. It isn't in any way a copy of the Palmer micrometer, so it was at least made by someone who hadn't seen even a drawing of one. So I think that, when it was made, it was revolutionary. An amateur inventor might make something revolutionary, and make it relatively poorly, but it doesn't seem likely that an apprentice would be tasked with making something revolutionary.
You are a special person. Please don't change
Forensic gearhead....
a true skill of high order
As a machinist, I've made dozens of special tools for specific jobs. Decades ago, I began stamping my initials, and date in my custom tooling, and most has my mark, but all my early tooling made to purpose generally wasn't marked, and many of them got made into other tooling. All the tool marks you showed make sense, if one thinks of 18 century, and only make sense later, if it were an apprentice's work, not at all a journeyman, but certainly well on his way. I've worked on a 17th century clock, in New Bern, NC, in Tryon Palace, and it was very similar in construction tool marks, strikes, there was an awful lot of handwork done even in the 19th century, but l would easily put it prior to the 19th unless found reason to think otherwise. Thanks for this, it was very interesting, and a real question to be answered,
I used "1751" and other stuff you've given us so generously in my classroom to give my children the understanding of how science was created. I thank you for your wonderful insight and perspective.
That’s the biggest compliment I could imagine. Can you give me more context around your students and what you are teaching?
I just binge watched everything on your channel. Much to my dismay you are still young as channels go. FWIW I have an engineering sheepskin and plenty of machining experience along with a strong interest in the history and science and manufacturing. The way you have organized information along with testing and research is WAY above par. Much respect!!
The base holes that you referred to as being chamfered look exactly like holes that I hot punch in the blacksmith shop. You back punch then turn it over and punch through a bolster. When you flatten out the burr it has the appearance of being chamfered.
i was thiknign the same thing, but the concentricity made me want to accept a rough/ over-done deburr with a rusty beaver
Now that makes sense as engineering back then was way closer to blacksmithing than it is now. EG when was the pillar drill invented? 1895 or something? I bet before then getting holes in sheet metal used mainly blacksmithing techniques.
@@gordonlawrence4749
RE: "when was the pillar drill invented? 1895 or something?"
Pillar drill, made by Joseph Whitworth & Co., Manchester, c. 1860.
J. Whitworth & Co. developed their first power-driven drilling machine in 1847. This machine is numbered 197. The power source is linked via bevel gears to the drill bit. The drill has a spear-shaped bit. It has four speeds at which the bit can rotate. The table has a lateral movement that is adjusted by a screw running underneath it. This enables the operator the position the workpiece directly under the drill bit more easily. The 1854 Encyclopedia of Useful Arts described Whitworth drills as “… one of the most complete tools of the kind ever constructed”. This machine was presented to the Museum by the University of Manchester’s Engineering Dept in 1974.
Reference: collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co8405231/whitworth-pillar-drilling-machine-drill
This devise was probably bolted to a workbench on the shop floor in Watt's factory and used to gauge parts during production. It would remain there in use every day until the product(s) it was gauging ceased production or it was made obsolete by modernization. In our shop we have made lots of custom gauges to quickly measure parts in production. These gauges are mostly made from scraps we have on hand. No need to look pretty, just get the job done. Once the gauge is no longer required it goes into storage just in case the job it was used for returns. This "micrometer" in particular just happened to make it to show & tell at the museum.
Sounds very pausable to me. Perhaps they made dozens of these micrometers and this is one that was put on a shelf somewhere. Probably the one was made by an apprentice either using blue prints or copies of parts from the original micrometer. its likely that during use. screws got lost and were replace with other screws available. I doubt that was the original made by James, but likely a copy using his original design. There also no maker marks or initials which leads me to believe it was just a shop use micrometer.
As a youngster, I worked in a machine shop and yeah if I needed to build something for shop use, I’d use whatever was handy in the scrap shelves like iron, steel, brass, stainless, aluminum and no it didn’t need to be pretty, just get the job done. I only used stock metal when it was required which was a few times.
Ahh, thinking back to all the odd fixtures I have made that served to give a dial-indicator a home.
Minus the indicator, it was a pile of random junk.
With the indicator installed, the junk became a trusted and highly reliable measuring device.
Another thought on 'shop-tooling'; a go/no-go indicator wouldn't need to be 'calibrated' in the sense of displaying thickness accurately, rather it has to be repeatable.
Quickly picking out under/over sized parts is not a job that requires hours of finishing work on the gauge.
The same is done in electronics. If I'm designing a new bit of gear then I usually do the design on paper, then cobble together a proof of concept, then the test gear is cobbled together, only then is a full production unit made and the test equipment can end up looking like a deranged bird has nested in it.
Sounds feasible, but has any explanation been offered as to why the smaller dial has 19 divisions? Surely this would have been harder to measure/manufacture than one with 18 say, (divides into 360). Is 19 required for a particular measurement, or has someone just mis-counted?!
it was made by sir james click-spring in 1759
The surface finish is not good enough for him :D
Yes, at first I thought his finished clock was CGI, too perfect.
We know this is not true. It was Sir Chris Clickspring.
He made it when he was 6
Yes.. Unfortunately, they hadn't invented Phillips, hex or Torx screws yet in the 1700s. They were limited to using screws invented by Sir Ian Flathead.
Your channel is amazing. I'm no mechanical engineer, but I've started to take an interest in how the stuff I'm into is made and your philosophy of appreciating the hard work that's gone into the world around us is inspiring.
You could find out if the dial markings were made using the hands of the instrument itself by seeing if the deviations in the lead-screw follow a pattern that is also seen replicated in the dial face markings.
The hole in the dial was likely used to indicate the position of the two dials when assembling it as there are also indicating holes or marks in the small dial, possible a pin is placed in the hole then the other dial is placed with it's marks at the quarters and a block is placed in the "U" to indicate the lead-screw then everything tightened.
The outer edge serrations were likely not just decorations as the rest of the tool doesn't indicate a "decorative mind" made this device likely used to ad more precision to assembly or they interface with other device parts that are now missing. This might also be why the unit doesn't sit flat on a table as it was used in a larger device now long gone.
The soldered in pieces are a common way to align parts that were made on cruder devices, this way they can be filed by hand to fit more precisely.
The screws holding the base on were crude because they didn't need to be more precise.
The marks on the back are directly in line with the pins and indicate how many times the pins were driven in and out.
The marks are vise jaw marks where the piece was held to be cut and filed....not hammer marks.
This might have been more of an adjustable "Go No Go gauge" as the crudeness indicates less needed repeated accuracy as once set it could be locked in place, one would assume that the bottom of the "U" shaped channel was made this way by drilling a hole then sawing down to the circle, this could also indicate the precise edge to locate a single piece to be checked repeatedly.
Everything to me indicates that this was part of a larger machine and not so much a single tool measuring device as there are indications that the dials had other uses in the device and the base was made to locate the opening in the "U" at some specific place in the bigger machine.
Just my tow cents not in any way to be confused with "facts", and darn well worth what you paid for them.
It seems that, with my two cents, we have a grand total of four cents,... I concur !
Over a repeatable wooden nickle blank now. Get out the master guage from the lab and we'll double check. 🔬
I could probably add a dime. Pin holes for locating dials. Two dials, one cent. Need to set threads with minimal backlash. three cents for easy. Need to figure out a basic indicator. Two cents. (should be worth way more.) It's a "Mother Tool" Old school would be mount shaft on the ends. Make form around main part of good threads. Divide @ centerline for casting. Pour Babbitt. Bottom half is solid in the base. Top half is adjustable end to end for preload. Or you could just precision machine everything, and put it together.
plus one good stuff
i cant say how much i enjoyed this. when i became a machinist, 1971. i got interested in machine tool history. but not much was available. dont forget, you dont know where you are going if you dont know where you came from.
My biggest disappointment with this channel is finding out I've run out of videos.
Run
Patience is a virtue, my friend.
Quality vs Quantity
Hello from 3 years into the future feeling the same way.
This channel is a symbol to me of everything wrong with RUclips. He don't post very often, but when he post is s masterpiece. But the algorithm just ignore and don't send me the notification, even when bell marked.
So if I don't go to my hundreds of channels and see what the makers with low quantities are doing I just lose some gems.
But RUclips keep trying to make me watch some bad channels with low content value but high frequency and view time just because the classification that the bots have done are similar of what I actually like.
I LOVE the Science Museum in London. I've visited many a time starting when I was eight years old... In my career as a Senior School Science Lab Tech, I used to go there with classes of students. I now take my grandchildren there. I still love it just as much as I did when I first went there. Probably love it more, now I have a greater understanding of the history of some of the exhibits... I once had a sample of my own work there when I worked for a company that held the World Record for the lowest mass of objects that could be accurately measured. It could accurately weigh the mass of 1/50 of the ink of a full stop in a newspaper. This was pre-digital. Everything was mechanical, with old fashioned 12 volt light bulbs the illuminate graticules.
Please please please keep making these. Your videos are fantastically informative and interesting and it's so cool to hear this stuff from someone who's just super psyched about it. You're just super.
I concur with the other comments that making a tool in-house is usually a necessity when access to the expenditure of funds is restricted, but you can overcome this hurdle by scavenging in the scrap metal bin to find the materials you need to make the needed tool. Often times a specialized tool is so rare, no one else makes or sells them and that is the motivator to make it yourself. It is so rewarding to see your creation work as intended.
I think this was a purpose built micrometer like it was mounted on something and used for basically the same part or process on a particular machine.
That was more or less what I was thinking.
If so wouldn't you think it would have a narrower range like a snap gauge, more economical I would think.
No I would guess it was maybe a dedicated instrument for a in process measurements on some ones bench.
@@peterweller8583 basically what I meant.
Excellent video! Its very cool they let you help take it apart and examine it. The large brass back plate looked almost like it had been cold rolled like a modern plate. Hard to tell on a phone screen. The screw and the movable jaw fascinate me. My guess as to why the jaw has deeper grooves in the middle is the lead screw may have a slight bow. Or that was the main use of travel and I'm sure allot of dirt got in there. I just visited the Precision machine museum in Windsor VT. They have the #1 Bridgeport there as well as the #1 Brown ad Sharp gauge block inspecting micrometer. Keep it up you are doing an awesome job telling this story!
Alec Steele sent me here and I am already in love with this channel, it may be weird to say but that Micrometer is gorgeous.
Hear hear! It is beautiful in its own character, wavy wrought iron grain plainly seen, expensive slab of yellow brass...
Just think...measuring devices and instruments that were the descendants of this piece of work eventually allowed the human race to design/test/implement powerful rocket travel, that got us out of our atmosphere, into space, and the moon.
If devices such as these never existed, there’s NO WAY that would’ve happened on 16 July, 1969 Anno Domini.
Just found this channel a few days ago, and I'm blown away buy the quality of information that you are providing.
I regularly run 7 axis WFL Millturn machines, orbital grinders, and other extremely impressive modern machines, and have worked on shafts that sell for $750,000, and while they are very cool machines the machines/tools that you are are simply some of the most amazing things that I've ever seen.
Thanks for the videos, and keep up the amazing work
Im a watchmaker by trade, and i see a lot of watchmaker/builder type of markings and methods used.
Could you please elaborate on that? I very sincerely would love your specific input.
Yeah I thought watch makers were the first machinist.
Machine Thinking Instagram: _ sir.marc _ i’ll awnser you there
@@machinethinking are you going to be doing a follow up this device? Amazing piece of history.
I’m sure the hammer marks weren’t there on the original build but on a later repair or adjustment, shows it was used a lot
extremely interesting - horribly jealous that you got such a good look at the object! so many questions - await russell's article with bated breath
The base could have been attached to a block like you show, or it could have been to bolt the mic down so it doesn't get borrowed. It also looks like a later addition, possibly a spare part, to replace a broken original. If it has seen use in a workshop it may have battlescars.
I don't see hammer marks in the back of the fixed anvil, but I do see the knurling we still have in the jaws of bench vises.
The 'convex' thread depth of the moving anvil is perplexing. Perhaps it was sawed in two.
...IMO filing isn't crude. It just takes manual dexterity.
Please please please keep posting videos. I'm a young Machinist in Houston and this material intrigues me.
This measuring tool appears to have been made for a more specific application rather than a general hand held measuring tool as later shown.
I'm sure this is actually intended to be carried in ones pocket.
I am positive that this was a bench device remember during that century a lot of work was done in a vice on a bench with a file or treadle powered saw or drill press.
This is so very key. I finally found my favorite RUclips channel. Thank you sir.
Regarding the hammer marks at the back, I couldn't help but notice that the orientation of the marks and their positions are in line with the pins on the posts. It looks like a hammer and a punch of sorts was used to drive them in which lead to clouds of hammer marks with a particular orientation and distance regarding the pins.
That just seem SO obvious, I’m not sure how it was overseen! Stuff happens, more often than such great videos! I love the “forensic” aspect of it!!
I don't recall if James Burke discussed this particular instrument on his brilliant show Connections, but I do remember one episode that told the centuries long story of ever-increasing screw precision. Thank you for this wonderful video!
Interesting piece of history.
Are the irregularities on the big dial really "random", or is this actually a correction because the threaded rod is not perfect?
I do think the bent sheet metal base was not initially there and was just added in a rush to make it more presentable for the exhibition.
Came here from Alec Steele, and got what I expected. Professional, well made videos.
Of course, I immediately subscribed. I look forward to seeing more videos in the future.
Alec Steele brought me here and I’m glad he did
Me too
Me too.
#metoo
Me three
yup, subbed :D
MT, I sure hope you come back soon! Your videos are fantastic.
Please start a Patreon account and I’ll support. Please make more excellent videos. Thanks again.
Yes, please do! Your narration style is soothing (a la Clickspring's Chris) and your writing and subject matter is very compelling! You deserve to be part of the cadre of great RUclips machine folk.
Here here edit: maybe a video on voice recognition lol
Hear Hear
@@JimmysTractor, that would be an interesting video.
Don't feed the communists at Patreon, there are other ways.
(Don't) Shut up and (, furthermore, please) take my money!
I just watched your video about etching brass dials. Ferric chloride is a good choice for brass, but it needs to be diluted with water a lot, for aluminum as it thermally runs away (splattered on the neighbor's siding 20 feet away). For copper or brass there are two tricks that speed up the process, agitation and heat. Both can be done with aquarium supplies. A regulated heater in glass, you don't want to get your ferric chloride more than 80 - 100 deg F. A small air pump with a plastic tube used to inject oxygen for the fish, can stir up the ferric chloride across the material being etched. This gives two benefits, by moving fresh ferric chloride across the surface and removing any stationary bubbles.
Man, your channel is AWESOME, I just watched all your videos at once and I need more... keep up the good work! also make a patreon account!
Thiago Ennes LoL i just did the same thing. Very underrated RUclips channel. I have a feeling it’s going to take off soon
yup! right up there with this old tony, abom79 and clickspring in my humble opinion. I love the mixture of machining, theory and history... very good video and audio quality... for sure a future favorite!
Ha, I just did the same. Bingeing on MT. Really good content.
i am starting to see a pattern. ahhahahahahaha
Hello from France, you are such a good narrator and your videos are very well realized. Please keep going. They are few channels like yours on youtube, it is truly a gem.
This video is amazing. I very much appreciate how you use strong deductive logic to determine form and function of this early micrometer. Many people don't realize how much went into this sort of instrument and this video shines light on some of that unappreciated work. I haven't read through all the comments below, but this video made me think of a book I read by William Rosen called The Most Powerful Idea in the World. The book touches on how lead screws on lathes allowed for more precision and repeatability. Keep these videos coming as they are some of the more interesting content on RUclips!
When I did my apprenticeship, each of the other students in my year made a part of a larger project, to prove the skills that they had learned. In my training school the project was a scale-miniature steam traction engine. The finished working engine took more than 5 year's apprentice-intakes efforts to complete. I never saw it running and don't know who has it now, but it showed how much a lad leaving school could learn in his first year in engineering training. This may well be such a piece, but obviously from a long time ago.
It's funny just last week I made a small fabricated metal part for a fixture,similar to the micrometer base that had 4 counter sunk holes evenly spaced on each side but after it was forming. Since I used to be pretty good at forming things I drilled and countersunk the 4 holes first for the sake of ease in clamping and drilling in the drill press. When I went to assemble the fixture the countersunk holes were facing the wrong direction, Damn, how did I do that! I need the fixture finished right now so I countersunk another set of hole on the opposites side of the 4 original holes countersunk in error and installed the part, no one will ever notice unless they take it apart, by then I will be long gone in my grave. May this be have happen to James Watt micrometer, or the maker of the micrometer who ever he was?
It must have been soooooo amazing back in that time, when they held that gathering to bring all the inventions into one place. Just to compare and examine what others were working on completely on their own. I wish I could take a time machine to events like that.
Engineers often build their own version of a device that's known about because they need it immediately and can not wait for a commercial version to enter production or the production run is too limited/expensive.
I'm not sure that Watt built this or even requested it built, in the above situation he would have built 2 or more prototypes in case the first one failed with more uniform parts, probably.
Please dont' stop those kind of videos. I really like your channels as a whole. I have heard things in here that were not talked about on other channels. You view things from other angles... nice.
never thought I would be so interested in mechanics
You've done an excellent job taking this apart, scrutinize and pointing out inconsistencies in this piece. Impressive! This only the second time I've seen your program. So I subscribed. Thank you! Also I must agree with Anchor Bait."You are a special person. Please don't change."
10:44 "In my highly inexpert opinion..."
Basically how I start all my sentences.
the mystery! the intrigue! beautiful work, and I'll love to see what's uncovered.
I'm going to derive a little bit of pride when this channel has hundreds of thousands of subscribers, and I was here at, (the already impressive) 17k.
it's 28k now !
34k now. Holy shit, i haven't seen a channel grow like this before.
@@abiku2923 wtf 😲
this is fast, light speed need a job lol
@@hexx2525 that make sense 👍
64k now⏳
First off, you DO sound like an expert, or at least further along than basically anyone I've ever heard talk. Your self deprecation is funny, and lends to your intelligence, but is unwarranted in my opinion. :) Secondly, this video is awesome, I've been a machinist for 12 years and this was a treat to watch. I can't being to imagine what type of equipment they were using in the 1700s, but I wouldn't knock the craftsmanship of this because doing things like that by hand is incredibly hard if you don't have the tools we have access to today. I'd put my hat in the ring of this being a prototype.
This micrometer appears to have been cobbled together for use in a factory or in an artisan's shop. The sloppily made screws, the re-purposed "dials" (gears?), the poorly mounted hands, the poor quality of the stock (which appears to have been scrap), the rough workmanship, ... It was expected to suffer a lot of abuse, so it wasn't finely made. It had to be accurate enough only for factory purposes. Also, it's very big, so it wasn't intended to make scientific instruments. Possibly it was intended to make interchangeable parts for rifles.
The eccentric dial hands had be questioning... questioning if their misalignment was indeed from heat or if that’s an overly-wise, possibly too quick answer.
@@robertgardner7470 -- Do you know that the screws have a "class 3 thread fit"?
This micrometer appears to have been assembled from whatever scrap parts were available. Scientific instruments from the 18th and 19th centuries usually are beautifully crafted.
This channel is going to unbelievably big, once people realize it's here. New subscriber here. It only took about 35 seconds of the video to convince me to subscribe. Keep up the great work! 🙂👍
Excellent work. Your channel is the best thing on yt:)
Hi Machine Thinking,
RUclips just reminded me of your channel, and I really miss your great videos!
I absolutely love how you're explaining the origins of precision machining and how it all started.
Hope you put out some new videos soon!
All the best :)
I subscribed 15 sec ago, and it was 19k. Now it's 24k. Hi all fans of Alec Steele! o/
Coming here after your feature in Destin’s recent video. I can tell already I’m going to be a big fan of yours. Great video! Really enjoyed this.
How on earth this channel has so few subscribers? Thank you for your work!
...because there are no tits and asses
Becuse Alec Steele hadn't yet mentioned it in a video...
Amazing details, curious just how well it works as a micrometer from a practical standpoint.
How accurate is it? Did you test it with anything of known thickness?
This channel is AWESOME! THANK YOU!!!!
It is highly accurate 1/1900 in. It has no numbers assigned to the graduations. The slotted holes of the stationary anvil allow the lead screw to be adjusted tight against the threads of the sliding anvil to insure repeatability. You could use a pound note or dollar bill to see where the dial stops to, and that would be 0.002".
The errors you point out, and the possibility that it was made from scrap suggest to me it was a project attempted by an apprentice. I will allow others to grade his work but the fact it survived would suggest he, at least, was proud of the attempt
How about William Gascoigne, british inventor who is credited to have invented a micrometer in 1640 by multiple written accounts as well as very detailed drawings ? I get that this one is still the Oldest to be around today but it would hardly be the first as you mention in your video.
I struggled with bringing that in. If you re-watch the video I was careful to say "world's first micrometer for measuring physical objects" and "first end measurement micrometer" exactly for the reason of Gascoigne whose device was for astronomical uses. Point taken though, and this story arc is not over so there will likely be some place to fit him in ...
Imagine that as a creative person, you keep mementos of your old works to measure growth and personal achievement. Then after a long time of creating, you make yourself a kind of trophy, a souvenir for yourself of your journey as a craftsman and an inventor.
Fascenating. Does anyone know how to get Clickspring's view on this?
Sir, I just sent him the video, stay tuned
That this probably isn't actually the first micrometer by a longshot, and that Watts wasn't coming up with anything new at all. The existence of the Antikythera mechanism shows us that devices like this micrometer (an extremely primitive device in comparison) were likely around long before this time.
Who cares what that hack thinks.
@@martybadboy - Sacre bleu!
MT, I just stumbled across your channel. Man what a hidden gem you have here! This content is amazing and very rare on youtube in such a well done manner. I hope this channel blows up in short order. Keep up the wonderful work.
Regards
A new fan
Someone like Watt who produced precision instruments wouldn't intentionally downgrade his skills to make something that may be a prototype even if it was made in haste. Pride of workmanship just wouldn't allow it.
Possibly, but maybe it was just proof of concept and never meant for anyone to see?
Yes and no. It's been thrown together. The dial face is clearly from a watch or clock maker, or even taken off a clock, and that extra hole is where it was fixed originally. But if it was a prototype of a genius strike idea, to prove it worked, then it simply is what it is - once it works, you build a "perfect" one, and that one ends up somewhere else probably doing something else.
That stand is clearly something that was added afterwards, to keep it upright.
Martin from Wintergatan sent me here. Immediately subbed after watching this video, the one on rail road and the Mesta press!!
Keep up the good work!
well it definately wasnt made by Clickspring
My guess is that it was a prototype that was made by Bergeon of Switzerland and made its way into service in a firearms factory. Bergeon has been making precision measuring tools for hundreds of years. Keep up the great videos, they are great!!
This strikes me as an apprentice's project.
Credit were credit is due. The Brits gave science, chemistry, and physics a huge push! I grew watching "The Mechanical Universe" on Public Broadcasting, an every other scientist was from the UK. Other cultures also had scientists, but along with discoveries a lingua franca and consistent writing were key. English just took off as the language of science, replacing German, and Latin. Codification and standardization was key. You video is great and I am sure that Ave, Curious Droid, The Idahoan Show, Captain Disillusion, and a few maths vids, all fed into my algo to get me here!
Here's what it looks like to my *completely* uninformed and uneducated opinion: It was possibly made in Watt's workshop by none other than Matthew (or insert any other name), the faithful, unknown, unloved, lanky assistant. He made it with parts lying around one night as he was cleaning up all of the Master's gears from one of the work tables. He showed Watt what he had done the next morning, proud and excited, and probably talking quite a bit with many hand gestures, expounding about how it could lead to many revolutionary and futuristic machines "the likes of whiche we ha' ne'er seene afore an' which maye bringge about a newe age of technologyes an' other wonderes" (Unknown journal of my own invention, p. 56).
Whereupon, Watt, amazed, promotes his lanky assistant and gives him another sixpence a year as a bonus, which allows our faithful hero Matthew to "marrye his belovede Mathilda of Essex whome he ha' seen passing through th' shoppe five yeares previous but ne'er mention'd it to anyone, keepinge it close an' secrete." (Unknown journal of my own invention, p. 72) Matthew becomes the foreman of the workshop, and the device passes into Watt's hands whom, because of his age, no longer can think of all of the amazing things it could help to create "for he hath runne out of his youthfulle ideas as his age an' successe sette in." (Unknown journal of my own invention, p 107).
And, hence, the device was left forgotten after a time in the workshop, Matthew having long forgotten about it as well and settled in with his new family in the making, retiring as a respectable gentleman, and Watt having pursued other business interests, no longer even remembering the episode.
Thus ends the tale of the first micrometer invented in the workshop of Watts by his faithful assistant Matthew.
Loved it, thanks.
Can I get your book on Amazon yet? Nicely done!
The only thing that could make this story more complete, would be the addition of the 10 letters that have since been eliminated from the English alphabet!
@@buddyclem7328 Thank you! :D
@@firstmkb Thank you and sorry I missed replying to your comment for so long. Much appreciated. :)
Had to give this a like as it's fascinating. You are so lucky to have got close up with an item in The Science Museum.
The knurling on the dial looks to be functional and not cosmetic. Did you count the notches? They may be fractions. It would be easy to add a ratchet stop onto the knurled dial. You have a great narration style easy to listen to and you tell a great story.
I thought “ratchet” too, but didn’t take time to pause and count on my 5” screen. OR, maybe to add traction to drive a belt to another device, like a counter of some sorts or what I’ll call a “sum readout wheel.”
I count 8, 9, and 10 knurls between long marks on the face of the large dial (just 3 samples counted). Thus (probably) not a nonier nor a ratchet.
I'm thinking they were for 'grippage' for the (possibly leather-faced) lockdown pad that helped to ensure repeatability as a short run (changeable settings) guage on a single process machine. The 'knurling' or 'serrated' edge didn't have to be pretty or precisely spaced, just functional. I have to agree with the concensus that it was quickly cobbled together from available scrap for an urgent need to streamline a 'hiccup' or 'bottleneck' in a production line. Maybe the 'oddly countersunk from both sides' base was just that way in the previous life of the salvaged material. Who's to say why the base is even there to begin with? Maybe it sat in a conveniently located depression in the cast iron framework of said machine. Heck, it may have been stored in a nice little wooden box and only removed for setting up a repeatable setting at several spots on the machine when changing a production run (every factory has a set up guy, we all know him. He's the one that takes more breaks than Evel Knievel's bones!). Well, enough of my personal theories. I have to tune my air guitar to alpha waveform for the grays (they are borrowing it for an extended interdimensional tour date).
It definitely seems like a prototype that could have been made at that time. The base seems like it was made to allow the piece to be displayed. This would explain why it was so crudely made compared to the rest of the piece. The fact that it isn't working off of a division of 100 also indicates that it is likely an older piece of work.
Alec sent me here!
Man this is so friggin cool. Even though I've been a subscriber for years and I thought I had gone through most of your videos, this is just showing up in my feed. Belated thank you for this and I share in your excitement and reverence for this device.
Made from scrap as an idea or proof of concept that is all still says nothing about who made it !!!!! 😯😯😯
Well just watched all your videos back to back. Enjoyed them. Thanks for taking the time to post. These videos are why i only watch RUclips
Alec Steele sent me here.
Wow you make amazing videos. I was wondering if you would like to make some videos about ancient machines 1000s of years ago. I find them fascinating. It’s also crazy how much mechanical technology has been forgotten when we transitioned from machines to electronics.
Pretty obvious some crafty watchmaker did it.
Excellent presentation! Compliments on the scripting of your work. Great writing. This is reminiscent of the Antikythera astrological instrument.
Alec Steel sent me here
Just came across your channel, subscribed love the content. Thank you!
Alec Steele sent me
In 1966, high school, I made a micrometer for a science project. Used a 1/2"-20 bolt. Made a degree wheel and a explanation of how it worked.
Got an A. Then worked in machine shops for 47 years. I have no idea where it ended up. Maybe it will show up somewhere and people will try to figure out who made it.
so you did not measure anything with it ?? what a waste
No numbers are engraved, merely graduation marks. It is more accurate than any dial caliper that is currently used.
@@robertgardner7470 so you did not measure anything with it ?? what a waste
I’m sure he did It’s just not in the video.
YOu have some big RUclips subscribers. I'm glad my RUclips suggestions brought you in. Great video. I'll be watching the rest of them.
One of history’s mysteries, thanks for the great video
As a blacksmith, it's very cool to see wrought iron screws! The quality of the threads is also very nice; in regards to how they were manufactured, the lead screw could have been held in between centers and run a dye around it, unpowered, just to keep it straight. I don't know exactly what kind of quality dyes they would have had access to in the 1700s, but they definitely had thread cutting taps and dyes before metal-working lathes were particularly useful.
Wrought iron is very soft and ductile, so it wouldn't be too out of the question to turn wrought iron on a lathe, but I don't the lathes of the day had a feature to cut threads in a pass like modern lathes do. All lathe turning done at the time, be it wood, brass, or iron, would probably have been by hand.
Thanks for this video :) Using a hand countersink from both sides gives you a better chance of getting the hole close to the centre, from one side it’s more likely to go further off centre 🍀
Great video and comments. Im not sure but can confirm re-purposing bits of dead/redunant machine's commonplace in sheetmetal and general metal workshops in the 90's,we had some crude looking however pretty magical machines that used to bend tube as well as form flat stock into joists.Same can be said for many volunteer run mechanical restroration groups who mostly run on shoestring budgets often using century+ old machines,tools an skills.
Happy New Year! Thanks for all the content in 2018!
There are so many aspects of this micrometer which point to it being a prototype. Being a blacksmith and having a good bit of experience with true wrought iron, I am a bit surprised by the use of wrought in this device. High carbon had been around already for centuries and cutlers used it for making knives. If this was to be a "fine" piece I would think carbon would have been procured and utilized instead of the very soft and highly wear prone wrought. It was interesting to see the hammer marks which speaks to their forged origin. Great video!
It's a matter of tooling. These folks didn't have access to modern, high performance tool steels that makes it easy to precisely cut and mill medium or high carbon steel parts. Wrought iron was softer, brass even softer, which allowed better dimensional control with the blister steel or case-hardened tools they had at the time.
Back of the fixed anvil hammer marks at 10:59 look more like vice marks in my opinion.
Great work
A very intelligent analysis. Please keep contributing!
Hi! I was going to leave a comment about some issues I noted, but Hammerandhearth beat me to them and added a couple I didn't think of.
On my own I will point to what seems somewhat odd - the condition of the screws and the hammer marks seem to denote that the micrometer was more times disassembled and reassembled, by not very careful people, than actually used for measuring. This could then be a prototype someone made and took for Watts appraisal (once that was his business) and was moved around, from hand to hand (possibly copied in the process), but never made it to actual production by Watt. The identity of the original inventor was probably lost in the sands of time.
It has a hand made look about it as well as some machining. Who ever made it, wow, impressive
As with most, the earliest one we can find, there probably were others even earlier seeing how precise some machinery has been made in ancient times.
That was great! Keep us updated when we learn more.
Great job fixing the flicker!
1. Those hammer marks are in plane with the pins. I'd guess it is from repeated removal and reinstalation of the pins with a hammer.
2. The dial is clearly hand indexed.
3. The soldering looks almost like a fix
4. Iron would have been a possible retrofit as the brass wore during measurment on the original. Likely produced by a local smith for the craftsman.
5. The mounts look like a later addition.
6. All things used to be hand-fitted, even if machined.
I doubt Watt produced it, but might have interacted with it or helped. No way to know with the limited data we have.