Mi mujer esta en Tokio ahora mismo and there was
no Kamakura business.
I must be going mad!, I must be! Take a look at the
following photo.
This image is showing you, side by side, two prototype
containers. The brown one contains 175 mm and very
thin chopstics for eating pretty in quiet office
corners. Shown right bellow is the thing.
OK, these were purpose built for eating pretty and therefore
need very small containers. My contentions was this.
If you are out in a restaurant out in town with your own
"My chopstics" you may well be in a battle field for what
you want to secure, perhaps in the presence of your colleagues.
So, I increased the mamimum dimension from 4 mm to 6 mm and
the length also increaed from 175 mm to 190 mm.
Nevertheless, the larger one, containing 6 mm maximum (at the holding end) chopstics looks so much inflated, volumewise!
There are still half a dozen issues to be looked at,
before mass production gets under way. Take a look at this.
B refers to the coincidental agreement of the diameters of
the two bits I use. Rooter bit is for forming trenches and
ruby bit for cleaning up the mess left by the rooter bit.
My problem is this. They are both 12 mm diameter bits.
Why the hell do you need them for 6 mm max. chopstics!
This is madness #1! They can be much narrower!
Madness #2 is the depth of the trenches. Realistically,
I only need 8 mm deep trenches, plus the bottom thickness of,
perhaps 3 mm.
Taking a pair of chopstics we are talking about approx.
22 mm. What you have seen are at 28 mm!
Now, A in the illustration is talking about the
precision in making holes. Frankly, you cannot be precise.
The end result, with the pegs inserted in counterpart
holes, may well be that members of the container are
at angles, as shown. The reason is shown in the following
illustaration.
If the holes are made offset from the centre line (
and there is not such line intrinsic in the system!)
what happens is shown as A in the earlier illustration.
However, this is not a very serious problem, because I
can sand off protrusions fairly easily.
More of a problem is the positioning of the holes
along the length. My solution to this problem was to elongate
one of the holes, as shown in A.
Naturally, there are other minor issue, but I do not go into
those. Suffice to show you the following image.
This is to do with doing the outer surface of the
container. You must close both lids with pegs like these, and
then rough out the edges, then smoothe out them further.
This is because, at the end of the day, both lids must
stick completely together, no part sticking out!
The only way to ensure that kind of integrity is
to work with the whole pieces together at the
sanding stages! So, folks, you now know the
nitty-gritty of things!
no Kamakura business.
I must be going mad!, I must be! Take a look at the
following photo.
This image is showing you, side by side, two prototype
containers. The brown one contains 175 mm and very
thin chopstics for eating pretty in quiet office
corners. Shown right bellow is the thing.
OK, these were purpose built for eating pretty and therefore
need very small containers. My contentions was this.
If you are out in a restaurant out in town with your own
"My chopstics" you may well be in a battle field for what
you want to secure, perhaps in the presence of your colleagues.
So, I increased the mamimum dimension from 4 mm to 6 mm and
the length also increaed from 175 mm to 190 mm.
Nevertheless, the larger one, containing 6 mm maximum (at the holding end) chopstics looks so much inflated, volumewise!
There are still half a dozen issues to be looked at,
before mass production gets under way. Take a look at this.
B refers to the coincidental agreement of the diameters of
the two bits I use. Rooter bit is for forming trenches and
ruby bit for cleaning up the mess left by the rooter bit.
My problem is this. They are both 12 mm diameter bits.
Why the hell do you need them for 6 mm max. chopstics!
This is madness #1! They can be much narrower!
Madness #2 is the depth of the trenches. Realistically,
I only need 8 mm deep trenches, plus the bottom thickness of,
perhaps 3 mm.
Taking a pair of chopstics we are talking about approx.
22 mm. What you have seen are at 28 mm!
Now, A in the illustration is talking about the
precision in making holes. Frankly, you cannot be precise.
The end result, with the pegs inserted in counterpart
holes, may well be that members of the container are
at angles, as shown. The reason is shown in the following
illustaration.
If the holes are made offset from the centre line (
and there is not such line intrinsic in the system!)
what happens is shown as A in the earlier illustration.
However, this is not a very serious problem, because I
can sand off protrusions fairly easily.
More of a problem is the positioning of the holes
along the length. My solution to this problem was to elongate
one of the holes, as shown in A.
Naturally, there are other minor issue, but I do not go into
those. Suffice to show you the following image.
This is to do with doing the outer surface of the
container. You must close both lids with pegs like these, and
then rough out the edges, then smoothe out them further.
This is because, at the end of the day, both lids must
stick completely together, no part sticking out!
The only way to ensure that kind of integrity is
to work with the whole pieces together at the
sanding stages! So, folks, you now know the
nitty-gritty of things!
