I'ts in the words..."Try", meaning "check", and "Square" meaning 90
degrees." It's use to check for dead-on 90 degrees, that is angle
measure, not for measuring length. For example, you'd check if your
blade was square to the table. It is also used for marking 90
Linear measures are added to extend the possible use on some squares,
but the Try Square still serves its purpose.
Bugger it! I checked a little more, and Ebay is listing Tri Square,
and Try square. However, they show little difference, except in one
case they show a Combination Square set as a "Machinist's Tri Square."
I give up. But I've known all of my life a "try square" to be a
simple tool for checking if 90 degrees, period. ....and I'm a senior.
Squares without marks are usually (but not always) more precisely
I use my expensive squares without marks only for CHECKING squareness.
I use my less expensive squares with marks for layout and scribing
lines with an awl or marking knife.
On 9 Jul 2004 12:27:24 -0700, firstname.lastname@example.org (Charles
You almost lost me on this one, but I see (I think). You mean that
you'd hold the scribe or knife against the mark while dragging the two
down the length of the wood? Then it makes sense to have a cheap
square for that purpose. Myself, I'd rather use a tool designed for
that purpose: a nice rosewood/brass marking guage.
I think the "correct" way to do it is to use your highly-accurate
macninist's square to check the accuracy of your try square. Once you
have verified that your try square is, indeed, square, you use the try
square to draw lines perpendicular to the reference edge on your
workpiece. The marking gauge (or a height gauge) would be used to
draw lines parallel to your reference edge.
You can verify if your square is square by simply using it to draw a line
perpendicular to the edge of a board and then flipping the square over to
the other side of the line and seeing if the line is parallel to the square
with no gap.
It all depends on how much error you are willing to accept.
Woodworking does not require the same level of precision
that machining does so the tools for each trade, while sometimes similar
in purpose, are different in execution.
(Amazon.com product link shortened)89384034/sr=1-6/ref=sr_1_6/102-9208339-5187338?v=glance&s=hi
This thread is hilarious. Some one suggest that is spelled a certain
way because that's the way it is on e-bay. Ha, any using billboard to
check their spelling? English is in a constant state of change, both
in the meaning of words and the spelling of words, so anything is
possible and generally is when you look at the way people spell in
news groups and e-mails. Just saw a reference to not "paint the floor
into a closet." What the hell is that? The saying is "painting
yourself into a corner."
If you want to see a "standard spelling, or standard meaning" use a
dictionary, and if that isn't entirely satisfactory use your knowledge
of English. Anything is is just opinion which is very little value.
"Tri" is a prefix that means 3, it is not a word. So a Tri Square
(two words) is inherently substandard. A try square is simply two
legs at a right angle, there is no 3 of anything.
A machinist or combination square, may have three parts, but there
aren't 3 angles as someone suggested. The cast part with the level
does has a right angle on one side and a 45 degree angle on the other
side as measured against the slide. So you could call it a bisquare,
but what the hell would that mean. If you have the common third piece
fits on the slide, you end up with two 45 degrees from the slide or 90
degrees with itself. So now it could be call a tri-something since it
has three pieces, of if you count angles maybe a quart- or
quintsquare, but again, what the hell would that mean? Maybe that's
why the correct name makes some sense, a square used by a machinist or
a square with a combination of uses.
Discussion is great for amusement, but if you want the correct meaning
or use of something, consult a dictionary or an accepted or noted
technical manual. Still, people make mistakes, so also use your
brain. Hell, the Third International Websters, even forgot to put
Uranus in the original printing. Maybe someone didn't make a mistake
but was just trying to be being politically correct?
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 01:21:37 +0000, George E. Cawthon wrote:
Yes, it is a try-square ... to 'try' the trueness of an edge or face.
But just to keep things lively, consider that the straight edge provides
the third angle. 45, 90, 180 ... there's your three angles.
The machinist squares are not marked with distances because they are only
used to test for squareness and even then, only on comparatively rough
Yes 180 degrees is a certain amount around a circle, but a straight
edge is an angle? Ok, how about this, "the shortest distance between
two points is an angle?" Something just doesn't seem right about
The truth is stranger than fiction. 180 degrees is just as arbitrary an
angle as any other.
Heck, it's not even always true that the shortest distance between two
points IS an angle. Try going in a straight line from New York to LA
and you'll see what I mean.
If you actually could do that it would be the shortest route, but that would
have you 200 miles or so underground somewhere in the Midwest. Since we
are compelled to move on the surface of a sphere we are compelled to take
Regardless, an angle is not a distance. As for 180 degrees being an angle,
yes, it is an angle, but measuring it is not usually something that one
needs to do.
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
Well if you take a straight edge 36 inches long, where is the axis of
the 180 degree angle. Is it at 15 inches, 20 inches or some other
distance from one end. Just how do you figure the length of each leg
of the angle? If you think 180 degrees is an angle, then you better be
prepared to point to the axis point, and if you don't point to the
exact point that I have previously determined it to be then be
prepared to forfeit your reward.
Excellent straw man. Unfortunately, there are many mathematical concepts
that are not easily defined. It doesn't, however, mean they aren't true.
For example, take the concept that a circle of infinite radius can be
represented by a line. Where is the center of a circle of infinite radius?
I'd say a 180 degree angle has an infinite number of axes.
I'm no mathematician, but a line (note A line, meaning one line)
doesn't have to have a dimension so of course it can be any length.
It needs two points and then it can go off forever. As far as the
center of the circle, well the circle is twice as big as the radius
but the radius in infinite so the center has to be half of the
infinite diameter. Yeah right.
Not infinite at all, not even existent. As I understand it, an angle
requires two lines. If you take two lines and place them in same
plane and the same direction and they touch at any point, you define a
single line by definition. The only thing that has changed is the
dimension of the line, but it is A line. If you have a straight
edge, it is ideally defined by the two end points, and whatever is in
between is just a mechanical holder or a visual aid. If it is a
single line, then there is no axes and no angle formed.
You wouldn't, nor could you. The door and the wing-sweep actuator are
not lines, they are solid figures and you are considering two solid
figures in reference to each other (door-wall) and
(actuator-whatever). But if you want to visualize them as lines in a
single plane, then when they are at 180 degrees you have two lines
that are separated by a space, or if they touch you have a single
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.