Talk:Tap and die

message: Taps are normally listed with two dimensions, I can't see any explanation of this e.g. Hilka do a set with: "Sizes included: M3 x 0.5, M3 x 0.6, M4 x 0.7, M4 x 0.75....." what is the difference between M3 x 0.5 & M3 x 0.6? I think all the taps are tapered. Sorry for being blind if it is explained.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris J Evans (talk • contribs) 09:52, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Further research tells me the second figure relates to pitch. I know there are many threads metric, USC, USF, BSW etc. but thought each one specified a consistent pitch for each diameter especially metric! It would useful if someone who fully understands this adds a section explaining this even if it is brief and refer to the entry on screw threads for more information. Chris J Evans (talk) 10:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Second quoted tap size means what?

message: See Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Lowercase second and subsequent words for the official Wikipedia policy on capitalisation of article names. Andrewa 20:58, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Naming (2005)

message: Metric table needs expansion.  I would but I don't know how to do tables.  mores izes can be found here: http://www.engineersedge.com/tap_drill_chart.htm
If someone sends me a link to how to do tables I will be glad to expand it.
--Jkoether 15:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Expansion (2005)

message: * This article does not line up properly on the monitor. Why? Peter Horn 18:06, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Display problems (2005)

message: I was watching a woodworking show on PBS when I saw the host of the show pick up a large wooden block measuring a foot on a side - it may have been a whole cubic foot - and placing it into a vise, he drilled a 4 or 5 inch hole straight through it.  He was talking all the time he was doing this, but being a little hard of hearing, I missed out on what he was saying.  He then got out a very large tap to cut threads into the inner surface of the hole he drilled.
That done, he cut the block in half.  And he might have done the same thing to another block, but without a tap, and using something else for reference.  Then, when it was done, he put the two halves of the wooden block together, to make something (that for all practical purposes) was a big wooden nut.  What made this unusual, was the number of times the threading revolved around hole.  The helical cut was only once or twice around the block.  The block (essentially a huge nut) would fit on a wooden bolt, and turn once or twice as it was rotated to the point of seating the head of the bolt.  Since the wooden bolt had no head, it could continue all the way through the nut, simply by rotating it.
What is the name for that kind of a wooden block?  It has a big hole running through its middle, about 4 or 5 inches wide if the block itself was a foot to a side.  
I think the wooden block was intended for use as a mold in casting huge metal bolts at a uniform pitch, and at a constant angle, and having a continuous thread.  Just pour the metal in, let it cool, and then undo the two halves of the block.  If there are any straggling pieces of metal, just file or sand them off.
(Unsigned comment by 198.177.27.29, 02:26, 30 July 2006)
: Sounds a bit like Roy Underhill making a wood die.
: The wooden block couldn't have been used for metal casting: It would burn away too quickly.  However, it could have been used as a wax mold.  The wax could be coated with ceramic (sand).  The wax could then be melted out, metal poured in, and the sand broken off the metal threads. 
: However, I don't have a clue what the block is called. BitterGrey (talk) 05:46, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ...Or I could have checked the user an found out that he hasn't made an edit since March 2009... BitterGrey (talk) 05:50, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help Identify a Huge, Tapped, Wooden Block 

message: Its common to use a standard hex nut to clean up a damaged thread. This could do with inclusion. The article mentions something that sounds related, but not the same. Since the standard nut is the same hardness as the thread its clenaing up, 2 or 3 nuts are used when its necessary to reform the thread properly. One nut alone is usually enough to make it possible to get another nut on, but it will be very stiff due to remaining damage.
Tabby (talk) 11:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Hrm...sounds like a how-to, which Wikipedia policy doesn't allow. However, if you could word it in a non-how-to manner, then a reliable source would be required. If you can overcome these hurdles I would recommend the addition to threading (manufacturing), not this article. Wizard191 (talk) 14:24, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nuts 

message: Roll tap redirects to this page but nowhere on this page does the term "roll tap" show up.  Is roll tap the same as some other term?  There's no point in redirecting to this page if it leaves the reader hanging.  --Michael Daly (talk) 22:34, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I updated the redirect to Threading (manufacturing), which discusses roll taps. Thanks for the note. Wizard191 (talk) 17:50, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roll tap 

message: This term is used quite a bit but is never defined. I'm assuming it is the scrap that is being chewed out of the material during the tapping?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.54.1.35 (talk) 18:56, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup, you are correct. Another name for chips is "swarf" (you can click through to its article). I will go link the first mention of "chip" in this article. Thanks for your help in improving Wikipedia's quality. Regards, — ¾-10 23:06, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is "chip"? 

message: More detailed drawings here: http://www.kanabco.com/vms/cutting_tools_tap/cutting_tools_tap_06.html
Kender (talk) 19:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taper, Plug, Bottoming taps.  Serial taps. 

message: Given that the Thürmer paragraph appears in at least five places (http://uk.thurmer.dk/regado.jsp?type=page&id=116, http://chamber.com/eric-thrmer, http://www.linkedin.com/company/clou-th-rmer-a-s, http://dk.linkedin.com/company/clou-th-rmer-a-s?trk=ppro_cprof, http://br.linkedin.com/company/clou-th-rmer-a-s) it might have been released without copyright.  In that case, it would be OK, but we need to make sure that is the case first.
Also, it reads like a section from their resume because it literally is.  Their product might be a great deal better than all others, but the article needs to detail how it is different, not just that it is better. BitterGrey (talk) 01:12, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the IP adding the material resolves to Denmark, I'll include a link to our Conflict of Interest Policy and wikipedia:Best_practices_for_editors_with_conflicts_of_interest just in case. BitterGrey (talk) 01:29, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thürmer Paragraph 

message: Should it not refer to nut and BOLT threads? Screw threads are not cut like this  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.166.37 (talk) 08:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you please point out exactly where the errors are, because I'm not seeing them based on the above info. Wizard191 (talk) 13:30, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screw Threads 

message: Taps and dies are cutting tools etc.
Some of them are, form taps create threads by deformation. Form taps are discussed in the article "Threading". Perhaps that information should be moved here or the article title changed.
The article does not cover collapsing taps, machine taps with inserts or taps which have non helical paths (Emuge punch tap).AnnaComnemna (talk) 16:40, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite right about not only cutting types but also forming types. I changed the lede to reflect both. I don't think any article title changes are needed either at tap and die or at threading (manufacturing). Feel free to explain further about that point if I am missing something. As for your third paragraph: good points—things to be added when anyone gets time. — ¾-10 01:37, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambit and omissions 

message: The writeup on dies makes it appear that dies with adjusting screws are the norm.  Looking through my box of taps and dies, which includes dies I bought, dies my father bought, and dies my grandfather bought, not a single one of them has an adjusting screw.  All are made from a solid blank of tool steel, and all but one are intended for thread cutting, not chasing old threads to remove dings and rust.Douglas W. Jones (talk) 13:52, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adjusting screws 

message: The article contains a list of drill sizes to be used with particular taps.
It would be appropriate and useful to also include a chart showing the nominal rod sizes to be used with particular dies.  
(E.g., a 0.125" or 1/8" rod for use with a 5-40 die; etc.)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.89.176.249 (talk) 21:56, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rod size chart 

message: "When a wooden part broke, it usually snapped, ripped, or tore. With the splinters having been sanded off, the remaining parts were reassembled, encased in a makeshift mold of clay, and molten metal poured into the mold, so that an identical replacement could be made on the spot."
An identical replacement of a wooden part would necessarily itself be wooden. Someone else can tighten this sloppy language if they wish. Lewis Goudy (talk) 01:39, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  identity entails satisfaction of the same predicates