Comment

Oh wow, that is very strange. I checked if 23.22mm was anything in inches, and it’s 0.914 and change, so it’s not an imperial thing. I wonder if it just comes from people eyeballing it with no real dimensions or something?

Well, as you were I guess. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

source

Sort:hotnew top

remotelove@lemmy.ca ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
The mold was likely 24mm. There could be some shrinkage or a the shot of plastic was a bit light for that set.

Or, it was actually 23.22mm and the dimensions were calculated from another reference point, like PCB or LCD size. If anything, .22mm was supposed to be .25mm tolerance.

Translating CAD into plastic can be a very strange thing sometimes.

source
IMALlama@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
I appreciate the detailed reply! If anything, someone reading it will learn something. It’s always amusing trying to make nice fitting sockets for random electrical parts. Sometimes the dimensions make a lot of sense. Other times they feel very random, which is surprising given that basically all these parts are probably modeled in CAD.

source
- Excrubulent@slrpnk.net ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  I appreciate you not being defensive and just explaining your process in so much detail. I learned something about how finnicky some of these parts can be. I wonder if another strategy would be to trace the part onto paper and scan it, to get an undistorted shape?
  
  And I don’t mind explaining things, it’s someting I sort of can’t help to be honest. I hope it’s useful to someone.
  
  source
  - IMALlama@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Tracing can work, but it’s a little fickle too. In this case the part had a small radius on its face. There’s also the whole pencil lead has width thing, but it can work OK if you’re very intentional at keeping the pencil tip pointing at the part in question.
    
    Flatbed scanners also work fairly well, but they’re focused at the glass height and you quickly lose detail if the parts have a radius on them.
    
    source