What is it? Set 344

Page 4 of 4  


What if this is some sort of easel? And the two 'clamp jaw' pieces aren't finished because there was another part that covered them....that hooked onto the top and bottom of the picture frame? That would explain why it tightens by hand. Of course, it doesn't seem to tilt so that's a problem, but this sort of reminds me of something an artist might use...
Nothing in google.images, but I'll keep looking.
--riverman
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm telling ya, it's a Hodgsonia Nut Cracker! :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Sure you could. Just use a die like you would for a bolt. I still have a bunch of sacrificial face plates I made from wood when I had a Nova lathe. Use a 1 & 1/8" tap to make them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think the center 'contact points' are actually round knobs, and that the legs are attached by wooden bolts, and are removable. Whatever it was for, possibly portability is a factor?
--riverman
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
humunculus wrote:

Ahh, that's been bugging me!
I wonder why someone with the tools and craftsmanship to make three fancy wooden screws, would fail to smooth the top clamp jaw.
I think it was a kit, assembled by a peddler who had fine sandpaper and varnish but nothing to smooth ripples in a board.
If it was built when lumber was milled by machine, metal screws should have been readily available. Why didn't the kit provider supply them?
I think the provider was an unemployed man for whom the price of metal hardware was an obstacle. Millions of Americans were in economic straits in the 1920s; the Depression made it worse.
The size of the frame suggests to me that it was to hold something about the size of a soccer ball. The holder would sell if it appealed to the customer and the price was right.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

1980 - Hodgsonia Nut Nutcracker
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

1975 Lock picking 1979 bullet
Robert
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Rob H. wrote:

1977: on the left, the plate has two screw holes. On the right, it has one. I think it was mounted so that the left fork extended past the edge of a counter, where it might be bumped.
How about a small, durable balance to weigh something like nails in one-pound increments? An attachment with a hanging pan would have gone on the left fork and an attachment with a counterweight would have gone on the right fork. A fork would keep the attachment from rotating and let it slide home to the predetermined distance from the fulcrum.
The right fork is closer to the fulcrum than the left fork, but that doesn't mean a weight attached to the right fork would be closer than a hook attached to the left fork.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
1977 - It's only 5-3/4" long, tapered prongs 1" long and 1" apart. The teeter-totter action (*Four seat teeter-totter for Lilliputians) is less than an inch. The chain latch suggestion seems to be the best, so for, IMO, but Rob hasn't verified that as correct. There are old latches, for large shutters, that have a single sided/arm lever mechanism, but not double pronged. Those shutter latches had 2 parts, one for the shutter and one on the window facing. I can't think of any other bifold closure (?) that would require that (1977) sort of mechanism (with another piece to go with it at each end), either. But it's obvious there is another part that plugs into or is caught/hooked onto those prongs. Whatever movement is there, is slight.... to assist in leveling/aligning 2 sides of something? I can't imagine the unit standing alone, with some small extensions (plug-ins) on each end, only, like a door knock missing the knocking parts.
1980 - Whatever it clamps, it can't be too tight. The top knob is made for hand tightening, at most, not cranking. I highly suspect it's for domestic use, only... guessing: maybe for holding some sort of bag/sack for hand sewing closed. *Chicken/turkey/goose guillotine!
Sonny
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Sonny wrote:

If with an attachment in place, the load hung from a point between the tips of the tines, I measure 78mm from the fulcrum. The corresponding distance on my triple-beam balance is 64mm.
I see two limitations on accuracy: imprecision in distances from the fulcrum, and friction at the fulcrum. In some applications, a rugged fulcrum and the ability to remove protruding parts would matter more than accuracy.
Instead of a hardware store, how about a farm? In his feed house, my uncle had a spring scale to hang a bucket. I think it read to 60 pounds. Even if it had been accurate, it couldn't be read precisely. However, it was cheap, durable, and out of the way.
To measure feed within 5%, 1977 looks like an improvement on my uncle's spring scale: cheaper, smaller, more accurate, more reliable, more durable. If it measured as much as 60 pounds, I would expect an attachment to hold a small balance weight much farther from the fulcrum than the load.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.