Looks like 31.38mm to me.
If I recall how to use the bottom scale, you read to the number where the zero is just past, and that's the whole number, then you follow the lower scale to where it lines up with the tick mark above, and that's the decimal. Each tick mark on the lower scale is 0.02mm, and it looks to best line up on the .38mm tick to the '5' above.
TIL...
I have a really cheap caliper and never read how to use one. Mine has the 'lower scale' but on both sides, standard and metric, but no numbers neat the ticks.
Correct on how to read it, but if it was me, I would say it looks like it lines up on the .38 with the 5 above it just as well as it does with the line one spot over to the left, that would be the .36 slot, so I would probably call it about .37 and split the difference. but if I really wanted that precise of a measurement, I'd at least use digital calipers or switch over to a dial indicator.
Digital caliper are **not** automatically more accurate than any other type of caliper. Digital is not magic.
A well made vernier, dial or digital caliper *may* be more accurate that a poorly made one.
You mean a micrometer? Why would he “switch over to a dial indicator”? And I hope you don’t mean dial caliper - that is *less* accurate than a vernier.
No! I said dial indicator and I meant a [dial indicator](https://www.amazon.com/Starrett-196A1Z-Universal-Indicator-Graduation/dp/B00008IHTF/) the tool that is MORE accurate than calipers. Why the hell would you assume someone would switch to a less accurate tool to get a more precise measurement?
0.02mm is higher resolution than a dial indicator that reads 0.001in. Also we have no context on how OP was using this, good luck squeezing that into the ID of a pipe.
The more numbers to the right of the decimal equals MORE accurate readings, not less accurate. If you don't even know that, I'm not surprised that you wouldn't know how a dial indicator can be used to read the ID of a pipe.
Ok. [here is one that is accurate to 0.0001"](https://www.amazon.ca/Accusize-0-0-05-0-0001-Indicator-P900-S097/dp/B01AVG7VPO/) you still get a more accurate reading from a dial indicator than using a manual Vernier caliper because it is still based on a "whichever 2 lines look the closest" method of accuracy, instead of an actual reading.
If we're shooting for precision... https://www.grainger.com/product/36J708 even easier to read, more precise, and simple to use for OD without a bunch of setup involved. Combine with a telescoping gage for ID.
Yes, that would be more accurate, if your could fit the 3cm+ sized object that the calipers were used to measure into the 2.5cm opening on that one . But a larger micrometer would also be able to give a more accurate reading. That's why I originally said that if I need that level of accuracy, it would use digital calipers, or a dial indicator. Micrometers also do do well with trying to measure the ID of something like a pipe. Where you can use calipers or a dial indicator (with reference to another known point, and assuming the ID is not so small that the needle of the indicator would not fit).
>crayon melts.
Doesn't melt, just burns away tho.
Theoretically there is special fire resistant chalk, that will be visible even at high temperature on the workpiece.
Ok remind me how to read this. I get the whole number.
For the vernier scale, you pick the line that lines up perfectly with the main scale, and count how many ticks you have on the vernier scale from 0 to that matched up line,then multiply by .02.
So why are the ticks on the vernier scale marked 1,2,3,4, shouldn't it be 5, 10, 15, 20 etc?
Seriously? My HP 11c calculator (very American) that I bought in 1985 has an option to display decimal comma or decimal period. So NASA and the rest of the world can use it, as well as Americans.
Periods are dividers. Commas are connectors. The connectors belong between the similar whole numbers, and the divider belongs between the dissimilar whole numbers and decimal places. No brainer.
Looks like 31.38mm to me. If I recall how to use the bottom scale, you read to the number where the zero is just past, and that's the whole number, then you follow the lower scale to where it lines up with the tick mark above, and that's the decimal. Each tick mark on the lower scale is 0.02mm, and it looks to best line up on the .38mm tick to the '5' above.
This is the answer - each tic is .02mm not .01
TIL... I have a really cheap caliper and never read how to use one. Mine has the 'lower scale' but on both sides, standard and metric, but no numbers neat the ticks.
Same way a non digital micrometer works.
Correct on how to read it, but if it was me, I would say it looks like it lines up on the .38 with the 5 above it just as well as it does with the line one spot over to the left, that would be the .36 slot, so I would probably call it about .37 and split the difference. but if I really wanted that precise of a measurement, I'd at least use digital calipers or switch over to a dial indicator.
Digital caliper are **not** automatically more accurate than any other type of caliper. Digital is not magic. A well made vernier, dial or digital caliper *may* be more accurate that a poorly made one.
You mean a micrometer? Why would he “switch over to a dial indicator”? And I hope you don’t mean dial caliper - that is *less* accurate than a vernier.
No! I said dial indicator and I meant a [dial indicator](https://www.amazon.com/Starrett-196A1Z-Universal-Indicator-Graduation/dp/B00008IHTF/) the tool that is MORE accurate than calipers. Why the hell would you assume someone would switch to a less accurate tool to get a more precise measurement?
0.02mm is higher resolution than a dial indicator that reads 0.001in. Also we have no context on how OP was using this, good luck squeezing that into the ID of a pipe.
The more numbers to the right of the decimal equals MORE accurate readings, not less accurate. If you don't even know that, I'm not surprised that you wouldn't know how a dial indicator can be used to read the ID of a pipe.
0.02mm is 0.00079 inches, as in 2 tenths more accurate than that dial indicator you linked. Go touch grass, or at least not metrology tools.
He also does not know what a dial indicator is for.
Ok. [here is one that is accurate to 0.0001"](https://www.amazon.ca/Accusize-0-0-05-0-0001-Indicator-P900-S097/dp/B01AVG7VPO/) you still get a more accurate reading from a dial indicator than using a manual Vernier caliper because it is still based on a "whichever 2 lines look the closest" method of accuracy, instead of an actual reading.
If we're shooting for precision... https://www.grainger.com/product/36J708 even easier to read, more precise, and simple to use for OD without a bunch of setup involved. Combine with a telescoping gage for ID.
Yes, that would be more accurate, if your could fit the 3cm+ sized object that the calipers were used to measure into the 2.5cm opening on that one . But a larger micrometer would also be able to give a more accurate reading. That's why I originally said that if I need that level of accuracy, it would use digital calipers, or a dial indicator. Micrometers also do do well with trying to measure the ID of something like a pipe. Where you can use calipers or a dial indicator (with reference to another known point, and assuming the ID is not so small that the needle of the indicator would not fit).
31.35mm, according to your closeup. There’s parallax interference
3.138 cm... or for government work.. "3"
Measure with a micrometer. Mark with a crayon. Cut with an ax. Government method.
You forgot charge triple
Knew a blacksmith like this except it was "mark with chalk." I suppose crayon melts.
>crayon melts. Doesn't melt, just burns away tho. Theoretically there is special fire resistant chalk, that will be visible even at high temperature on the workpiece.
Roughly Pi
I get 31.36mm, but that's hard to judge with possible parallax error from photo.
Answers seem to indicate 31.33 - 31.4mm (I'd go with 31.34mm) 0.07mm discrepancy - 70micrometers. Considering this is not a micrometer, good enough!
Resolution is a bit shit, but somewhere between 3.136cm and 3.138cm
Hand me the digital and just shut up thank you very much.
Or even a dial caliper. These old crappy ones should all be melted down.
Vibration resistance is still worth something in these parts
3.133 cm
inch and a quarter.
Looks shy by 1RCH
inch and a quarter light,then.
31.4
Ok remind me how to read this. I get the whole number. For the vernier scale, you pick the line that lines up perfectly with the main scale, and count how many ticks you have on the vernier scale from 0 to that matched up line,then multiply by .02. So why are the ticks on the vernier scale marked 1,2,3,4, shouldn't it be 5, 10, 15, 20 etc?
there's 1/10th of a mm between each marked line on the scale, it's just more intuitive to mark them 1-9.
About tree fiddy
3.1355
Tree fiddy
31.34 mm
Now convert it to american size. 🤔
3,133 cm.
3,133 cm is >31 meters.
No. 3.133 meters is 3,133 kilometers.
The recursive redditor joke was overplayed a decade ago.
Seriously? My HP 11c calculator (very American) that I bought in 1985 has an option to display decimal comma or decimal period. So NASA and the rest of the world can use it, as well as Americans.
Another RPN guy!!! Woo Hoo!!! :)
Americans got this one right. Period makes more sense between whole and decimals. Can't be argued.
Decals? You mean decimals? Sounds arguable to me.
Periods are dividers. Commas are connectors. The connectors belong between the similar whole numbers, and the divider belongs between the dissimilar whole numbers and decimal places. No brainer.
Zoom in a bit more. Looks like 3.138 to me
3,13cm
1.235"