Weapons Gauge

[walrus418]

USFA Fencing Rules has a "weapons gauge" in it , purported to be used to check weapons for legality (Figure 16 on page 59 of the September 2005 USFA Rule Book). Has anyone ever seen one in use or built one? Does anyone make them for sale?

[Purple Fencer]

I believe you're referring to the gabarit. I know Dan DeChaine has one. It's a rather large affair...a little over a meter long. You can get one from Uhlmann.

It checks several things...diameter of the guards, length of the weapon, amount of flex in the blade, etc. I have never seen one in use, although I'm sure the more internationally experienced among us has.

[SJCFU#2]

Most major manufacturers make them but they aren't cheap (Uhlmann's sells for about 1,000 euros).

The frame itself isn't that expensive -you could probably build that yourself. From what I understand the cylinders are the expensive part. They must be made of materials that will resist wear and are machined to fine tolerances.

[yeoldearmourer]

They are not cheap at all I have one myself. Sam I am surpise you all didnt get a lesson onit at armourer Colleage

[Purple Fencer]

They are not cheap at all I have one myself. Sam I am surpise you all didnt get a lesson onit at armourer Colleage

We played with Dan's gabarit...but I've never seen one at an actual competition.

[Smyles]

What makes them so expensive? Surely it's something that you could make yourself at home, no? Does anyone have a picture of one that they could post, I've never actually seen one... maybe I'm thinking of something way too simplistic!!

[KD5MDK]

Highly limited demand, I'd imagine. The complete details on it are in the FIE rulebook (materials section) I believe.

[yeoldearmourer]

It the gauges itself that is expensive part of it It basicly made out of plywood

[keropie]

I'm sure someone can make one themselves... as long as they can make cylinders that are 120mm by 150mm +/- 2mm (I think that's right) out of a rigid enough material and such... I imagine that it would be a very poor home construction project to make one that actually meets FIE requirements, and moreso I imagine that if you did, you'd have to somehow have it qualified to use for FIE purposes. And if it's not for FIE purposes, why bother? When was the last time you saw a weapon checked to make sure the whole weapon would pass through the appropriate cylinder? Or even have the flex test done?

My thoughts...

[bigdawg2121]

I've seen cases where they've taken a table with the appropriately dimensioned guages drawn out and kind of indented into the table, and then more or less estimated that the weapons would pass as long as they didn't look overly extreme. That's about the closest I've come.

[rsy]

Does anyone have a picture of one that they could post, I've never actually seen one... maybe I'm thinking of something way too simplistic!!

See it here http://www.uhlmann-fechtsport.de/bilder/pruef/13605.jpg

-r

[DHCJr]

I'm sure someone can make one themselves... as long as they can make cylinders that are 120mm by 150mm +/- 2mm (I think that's right) out of a rigid enough material and such... I imagine that it would be a very poor home construction project to make one that actually meets FIE requirements, and moreso I imagine that if you did, you'd have to somehow have it qualified to use for FIE purposes. And if it's not for FIE purposes, why bother? When was the last time you saw a weapon checked to make sure the whole weapon would pass through the appropriate cylinder? Or even have the flex test done?

My thoughts...

There are actually 3 cylinders with inside diameter of 120mm, 135mm and a 140mm by 150mm rectangle. All are 150mm high. Where did you get the tolerances. These are standards and are supposed to be exact.

For the '84 games we did not use one of the 12 gabarits because it was 1mm off in the overall length of the Epee/Foil.

[yeoldearmourer]

I use to carry my with me to NAC in case of a question if the weapon was legal or not. Plus some epeeist will cant there handles where they were illegal to used.

[DHCJr]

Carl Oberg made a portable one for when he went with the team and Dan made a measuring device that checks most of the other mechanical measurements.

[keropie]

There are actually 3 cylinders with inside diameter of 120mm, 135mm and a 140mm by 150mm rectangle. All are 150mm high. Where did you get the tolerances. These are standards and are supposed to be exact.

For the '84 games we did not use one of the 12 gabarits because it was 1mm off in the overall length of the Epee/Foil.

It was just something I'd thought I'd heard... besides, the scientist in me doesn't believe in 'exact' measurement (quantum theory precludes it, after all), so any measurement I see as '120mm' without error bars is meaningless in a real sense. So I just assumed the FIE had something in mind. Now, it is (at least i the 84 olympics was judged to be) less than +/- 2mm, maybe it's like +/- .1mm. Though of course then I'd be mad at them for incorrect significant figures ><

[EPEEDAD]

Here's a company that supplies a 120mm ID tube:

http://mdmetric.com/steel/metcat15.htm

Two sizes-

160 mm Outside Diameter x 20mm wall thickness-

140mm Outside Diameter x 10mm wall thickness-


120mm +/- .8 or .7 mm tolerance depending on type of seamless or welded seam.

Usually a minimum order of 100 to 250 bucks at any tubing supplier.

stocked item maybe problem.

A machine shop would probably charge a similar cost by the time he was finished if made out of "delrin plastic or aluminum 6061 solid stock??

The rectangular tubing maybe easier made by welded plates to spec?

Other places- search for metric tubing suppliers, metric extrusions...etc

Hope this helps?

[Mergs]

Actually, Dan also showed us a portable one that Joe Byrnes made for measuring flexibility and that Rocky Sorenson made for the rest of the measurements. I made a drawing of it and am considering sending it to a water-knife place to have several made. Provided there is enough interest, perhaps my partner in crime might want to sell them. Hmmmm?

[DHCJr]

It was just something I'd thought I'd heard... besides, the scientist in me doesn't believe in 'exact' measurement (quantum theory precludes it, after all), so any measurement I see as '120mm' without error bars is meaningless in a real sense. So I just assumed the FIE had something in mind. Now, it is (at least i the 84 olympics was judged to be) less than +/- 2mm, maybe it's like +/- .1mm. Though of course then I'd be mad at them for incorrect significant figures ><

The FIE is trying to make you think their like the standards that are held by the U.S. Government that everything else is supposed to be based on.

A Gabarit that minus 2mm on the length of Epee/Foil would probably fail around 90% of the Epees submitted at a World Championship. The times I have gone with the team and we use an accurate Gabarit, we had to shorten about 1/3 of the U.S. team Epees before they were submitted.

[Purple Fencer]

Actually, Dan also showed us a portable one that Joe Byrnes made for measuring flexibility and that Rocky Sorenson made for the rest of the measurements. I made a drawing of it and am considering sending it to a water-knife place to have several made. Provided there is enough interest, perhaps my partner in crime might want to sell them. Hmmmm?

Works fer me!!!! Better clear it with Rocky first, tho...he may want (and be entitled to) some level of compesation, since it's his design.

[KD5MDK]

The question is what margin of error is acceptable? 2mm may be too much, but what if it is .1mm off? Is that unacceptable?

I can think of 3 places a margin of error is defined in the rules. (Test weight, thin shim, and bend in blade. Blade in so much as it is to be "straight, +-1cm, or 4cm for sabre)