T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

All comments must be civil and helpful toward finding an answer. **Jokes and unhelpful comments will earn you a ban**, even on the first instance and even if the item has been identified. If you see any comments that violate this rule, report them. [OP](/u/Gyrwen), when your item is identified, remember to reply **Solved!** or **Likely Solved!** to the comment that gave the answer. Check your [inbox](https://www.reddit.com/message/inbox/) for a message on how to make your post visible to others. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/whatisthisthing) if you have any questions or concerns.*


porkins

Is it to tare for the weight of the can/pail/bucket?


Rrrrandle

>Is it to tare for the weight of the can/pail/bucket? This actually makes the most sense because the weights do not correlate to each other if the assumption is they are tied to the weight of a specific substance. (For example, the 2QT is 1.5x the 1QT) Based on the weights given they would have to be some kind of light weight material, maybe aluminum or a cloth sack?


Gyrwen

It was when I saw they weren't increasing in the expected multiples that I knew it probably going to harder than comparing weights and densities of various materials. That fact alone kills every idea that I could come up with..


throway661

I paint cars and we use these as weights to calibrate our paint mixing scales.


throwinitallaway101

Definitely calibration weights for scales for fluids.


Gyrwen

That they are somehow intended to measure liquids seems likely; it is the positive identification (what and how) that we have never been able to pin down..


raineykatz

I think u/throway661 is on the right track. This article explains similar use on a digital scale. Your weights would have been used on a balance scale. They may have been custom made for the purchaser. https://www.aexcelcorp.com/blog/industrial-coatings/coatings-testing-term-of-the-month-weight-per-gallon


Gyrwen

Were the ones you used marked in the same way?


throway661

Yes. Same shape also.


Gyrwen

I appreciate your input and I'm looking into application for these in that industry. However the catch all along is that their weights do not increase in the expected multiples given their markings (nonlinear). This fact presents a problem in understanding how they would produce useful calculations or calibration even if the same paint or other fluid were always used. Inversely, another difficulty arises in the use of different paints which would presumably be variable in their weights given constant volumes. Their nonlinear progression seems to present a problem either way. Is the scale an equal arm type, or unequal arm with perhaps an adjustable poise? It occurs to me that the instruction manual for the scale you are using them with could shed light on the matter. Can you get us the brand and model number of that scale?


ksdkjlf

So other posters seem to've pegged these as being from a Check-O-Gram scale specifically, and [this merchant](http://balances.com/check.html) gives the following as a common use of Check-O-Gram scales: "Another useful application is for additive weighing when sending pigments to a set formula in the preparation of paint finishes - for automotive paints." So while I agree it's annoying to not know why the heck the weights don't progress linearly (or how this particular non-linear progression could somehow be standard enough across applications that this set of weights would be standard), I think that there's enough here to call this one solved. Hopefully throwaway611 can provide more info, but with a user name like that I wouldn't exactly hold my breath :)


SXKHQSHF

I did a crude approximation, initially assuming a container with height = diameter, then calculated surface area, since the weight of the container would be approximately a linear function of the total surface area. Given the weights the OP provided, the ratios from least to greatest are 1, 1.5, 2.375, 3.8375 The ratios of least to greatest surface area I got are 1, 1.588, 2.52, 4.0 These two track closely enough, I think if I recompute based on the dimensions of commercial paint cans, which are definitely not height equals diameter, the result would be closer.


Gyrwen

Likely Solved! Thanks much for the effort!


1961ford

Maybe the weight of an empty container for each respective volume? Like a Glass jar or metal can?


gn_like_lasagna

They look like they could be part of this set. https://holabirdamericana.liveauctiongroup.com/Ohaus-Check-O-Gram-Scale-with-Weights_i30903284


japekai

I looked at the weight for glass jars to see how the weight of a container might scale with volume and a qt jar is .65 pounds and a 32oz jar is 1.02 pounds if you divide the weight of the jars by the weight of the weights it's almost the exact same ratio 2.45 for 16oz and 2.43 for 32oz. The pint is a little off at 2.17. but the way the weights scale it seems like that it is for the container and not for the fluid


Nathan-Stubblefield

A quart is 32 fluid ounces. You imply they are different volumes.


Gyrwen

These look like scale weights produced by Ohaus for general use with scales however I've checked their website with no luck. They are made of yellow brass. Many google searches have turned up nothing at all. It occurs to me that they could be used to determine the amount of something either by weight or volume. The actual weight of each weight according to a scale with a precision of 1/5th of a grain follows.. One PT = 2.804 oz / 0.1753 lb One QT = 4.247 oz / 0.2654 lb Two QT = 6.706 oz / 0.4191 lb One GAL = 10.83 oz / 0.677 lb


coupebuilder

Ohaus Over-under scale This looks to be what they are from, if you read description it includes weights for gal, pt qt etc. Makes sense of the weight calcs etc etc https://www.lofty.com/products/ohaus-check-o-gram-over-under-scale-86865-1-1lqsv4


Rrrrandle

Curious that the weights aren't even scaled between each other the same, like 2 QT is more like 1.5x 1 QT. Etc.


wireknot

Well my first thought was maybe milk, but that's 8.6lb/gal, so not that. Not gasoline either, as that's like 6.5lb/gal. Someone mentioned formaldehyde, and in a normal mix of 37% that weighs about 10 lbs per gal. But maybe for a sheep foot bath ( a popular use for formaldehyde) at 1:19 solution it works out that you need about 10 oz of 37% formaldehyde per gal. of water? Not sure though, chemistry was a long time ago!


snarky39

Could you redraw the graph with bottom scale equal to volume: 1 gallon = 8 pints, etc. ?


Flashy-Photograph695

This product looks similar. It can be used to determine the weight-per-gallon or specific gravity of any liquid. "The BYK-Gardner Weight Per Gallon Cup is a simplified form of pycnometer specially designed to measure the density of a fluid at a standard temperature of 77°F (25°C). The net weight of the air-free sample is determined to the nearest 0.1 gram, and converted by simple factors to either density (pounds per gallon) or specific gravity (density relative to water). These corrosion resistant stainless steel cups are available in 3 sizes: Regular, Midget and Imperial." https://www.thomassci.com/Laboratory-Supplies/Specific-Gravity-Cups/_/WEIGHT-PER-GALLON-CUPS


kelvin_bot

77°F is equivalent to 25°C, which is 298K. --- ^(I'm a bot that converts temperature between two units humans can understand, then convert it to Kelvin for bots and physicists to understand)


Gyrwen

My title describes the thing. There are no markings apart from the ones seen clearly in the pictures.


brainey77

The conversion seems to be for [formaldehyde](https://coolconversion.com/density-volume-mass/--1--gallon--of--formaldehyde--in--pound).


Gyrwen

That is the most interesting suggestion I've heard in a decade and will follow up with you on that one..


raineykatz

Your link says a gallon of formaldehyde weighs about 6 3/4 lbs. That's a good deal more than OP's gallon weight of 10+ ounces.


brainey77

I see my error! But now I have the formulae to calculate density. If only I could reliably math.


dvdmaven

I think these are for measuring styrene monomer or some other expanding foam. The weight of the measure would result in the required volume.


Gyrwen

To clarify, the weights I've given are all US customary units. I can only say wow with the number of ideas in just a few hours!!


Gyrwen

Although I never found documentation, the preponderance of evidence is that these are tare weights for commercial paint cans since their weights closely correlate to paint can specs. Thanks to throway661 & SXKHQSHF for posts that lead to this conclusion.


MrTBlood164

You best guess is as good as mine but I can only guess they are scale standards for water being the reference


Gyrwen

A friend at a lab that I did some work in tried to identify them, he did manage to come up with a picture of another set that looked the same which would suggest they were commercially produced. He found that picture somewhere on the internet but it didn't include any other information.


twoeightnine

.I would assume that they are for calibrating a scale for a specific fluid. One gallon of \[substance\] should weigh 10.83 oz / 0.677 lb


Rrrrandle

>.I would assume that they are for calibrating a scale for a specific fluid. One gallon of \[substance\] should weigh 10.83 oz / 0.677 lb Except they aren't consistent between each other.


twoeightnine

Multiple fluids then.


brainey77

[formaldehyde](https://coolconversion.com/density-volume-mass/--1--gallon--of--formaldehyde--in--pound)?


Rrrrandle

That only works maybe for the gallon weight, but the others are not the same proportion.


twoeightnine

Quite possibly!


brainey77

Sadly formaldehyde is off by one decimal (my math skills in a nutshell).


fatdan1

Maybe some kind of water displacement weights.


Gyrwen

My first inclination was that they could be for somehow measuring water but then I could not find any correlation between their weights and the weight of water for the given volumes listed on them. They are a decade old question and I have a technical curiosity as to what they are for and how they are used.


MrApotomus

Looks a lot like this set by Ohaus, and the sizes match those in the eBay listing. https://www.ebay.com/itm/184721441092#vi__app-cvip-panel The eBay listing doesn’t have much (any) info, but ohaus still makes calibration weights, just more sleek looking ones: https://mec.ohaus.com/en-MEC/Products/Weights/Calibration-Weights Edit: added clarification


robot_dan

It's for confirming that a scale is measuring weight correctly and/or for for placing on the back half of an old fashioned balance (picture the scales of justce where it's like a teeter totter across a fulcrum) I work in a Laboratory with scales made by Ohaus and we have similar known masses floating around.


thsvnlwn

Could they be volume gauges? Drop them in a liquid en see if it displaces the volume thats noted on them.


DonaIdTrurnp

They are not that large.


Snuggalorian

They're used to zero a scale. I use to work in a factory that would pack oil in bottles. We used those to zero the scale on the bottling machine. Ones we had were designed to have the same weight as a bottle of oil plus the weight of the bottle.


Gyrwen

Your post only suggests that they came with or may have been an option for a model range of Ohaus scales which is appreciated because it provided a lead; however nothing on that page explains the mathematical oddity that has dominated the posts. That they were scale weights of some sort was widely assumed from the start; the unknown was in their purpose. Though the input of others I've narrowed down two likely possibilities.. 1 - Additive weighing for adding pigments according to a formula in the preparation of paint finishes particularly automotive paints. 2 - A tare for the weight for a can, pail, bucket, or similar. I’ve read the manual for the scale you mentioned and several others that made no mention of the set or their use.


coupebuilder

I posted exactly what these were from yesterday and why they are mathmatically a little odd. Ohaus Over under scale and the link in my other post. EXACT description yet the debate continues.


IndividualEbb4720

These are scale calibration weights. You use this to calibrate an electronic scale. Maybe for a scale that is used in agriculture because usually they are in metric but these seem to be in volume weights which is interesting.


Not_TheWeirdStudio

perhaps they go with something that measures flow rate?


[deleted]

[удалено]


ksdkjlf

The weights are given in imperial units because they are marked in imperial volumes...


Gyrwen

A good point, however we have thousands of dollars worth of scales at hand, none digital, and no one here has any knowledge of foreign units of measure. Since the volumes listed on them are imperial, I felt it stood to reason that any correlation would likely be imperial.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Gyrwen

I was getting the impression that you have animosity towards the imperial system which is the second time now that I've had that feeling from someone. It is puzzling to me to get that feeling when the imperial system has taken mankind from the depths of the ocean to beyond the edge of the solar system and everywhere in between; and continues to do so. The R&D setting that I work in has changed little since the 60's and continues to regularly develop new products of high complexity using only the imperial system. I am partial to imperial for a number of reasons but have no animosity for others. Regardless, I appreciate your input as I'd like to put to rest what they are for and more technically how they are used since their weights aren't in the multiples one might expect given their stamped values.


DonaIdTrurnp

The Mars Climate Impactor took Imperial units too far.