LaserDisc shape specifications...

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

This is a little weird question, but I'm looking for the LD shape
specifications. Particulary I'm looking for the precise size of the inner hole
diameter. And I can't seem to find it on internet. I measured it to be 1 and
3/8 inches, but I want to make sure it is the precise figure.

The reason I need it is that I bought KAB EV-1 EXTERNAL VACUUM RECORD CLEANER
from http://www.kabusa.com/frameset.htm?/index.htm. This is for cleaning of
the vinyl records. I figured that it is a cool idea to make and adapter and
to use it for cleaning the LaserDiscs from dust.

Thanks in advance.

--Leonid
22 answers Last reply
More about laserdisc shape specifications
  1. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    Leonid,

    I will dig out my calipers and get you an exact measure later today
    ok.


    Best regards,
    Ed


    On 23 May 2005 03:14:38 GMT, Leonid Makarovsky <venom@csa2.bu.edu>
    wrote:

    >This is a little weird question, but I'm looking for the LD shape
    >specifications. Particulary I'm looking for the precise size of the inner hole
    >diameter. And I can't seem to find it on internet. I measured it to be 1 and
    >3/8 inches, but I want to make sure it is the precise figure.
    >
    >The reason I need it is that I bought KAB EV-1 EXTERNAL VACUUM RECORD CLEANER
    >from http://www.kabusa.com/frameset.htm?/index.htm. This is for cleaning of
    >the vinyl records. I figured that it is a cool idea to make and adapter and
    >to use it for cleaning the LaserDiscs from dust.
    >
    >Thanks in advance.
    >
    >--Leonid
  2. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    Leonid Makarovsky wrote:
    || This is a little weird question, but I'm looking for the LD shape
    || specifications. Particulary I'm looking for the precise size of the
    || inner hole diameter. And I can't seem to find it on internet. I
    || measured it to be 1 and 3/8 inches, but I want to make sure it is
    || the precise figure.
    ||
    || The reason I need it is that I bought KAB EV-1 EXTERNAL VACUUM
    || RECORD CLEANER from http://www.kabusa.com/frameset.htm?/index.htm.
    || This is for cleaning of the vinyl records. I figured that it is a
    || cool idea to make and adapter and to use it for cleaning the
    || LaserDiscs from dust.
    ||
    || Thanks in advance.
    ||
    || --Leonid

    Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious, but every instruction I've ever seen
    for laserdisc and CD cleaning emphasises the importance of using *radial*
    movements - ie a straight line from the label area to the edge of the disc,
    and _not_ wiping around the disc, as you would with an LP record.

    If the cleaning introduces any microscopic scratches, you want them _across_
    the track, not _along_ it, where they could throw the laser off track.....

    paul
  3. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    On Mon, 23 May 2005 11:46:58 +0100, "P Pron"
    <paulatspambegone.pron@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

    >Leonid Makarovsky wrote:
    >|| This is a little weird question, but I'm looking for the LD shape
    >|| specifications. Particulary I'm looking for the precise size of the
    >|| inner hole diameter. And I can't seem to find it on internet. I
    >|| measured it to be 1 and 3/8 inches, but I want to make sure it is
    >|| the precise figure.
    >||
    >|| The reason I need it is that I bought KAB EV-1 EXTERNAL VACUUM
    >|| RECORD CLEANER from http://www.kabusa.com/frameset.htm?/index.htm.
    >|| This is for cleaning of the vinyl records. I figured that it is a
    >|| cool idea to make and adapter and to use it for cleaning the
    >|| LaserDiscs from dust.
    >||
    >|| Thanks in advance.
    >||
    >|| --Leonid
    >
    >Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious, but every instruction I've ever seen
    >for laserdisc and CD cleaning emphasises the importance of using *radial*
    >movements - ie a straight line from the label area to the edge of the disc,
    >and _not_ wiping around the disc, as you would with an LP record.
    >
    >If the cleaning introduces any microscopic scratches, you want them _across_
    >the track, not _along_ it, where they could throw the laser off track.....
    >
    >paul

    I have to agree. On a record, microsocopic dust that settles into the
    groove is then subsequently embedded into the walls and base of the
    groove by the passage of the stylus, at something like one or two Lbs
    of pressure at the contact point of the tip. A record cleaner uses
    air pressure and maybe a liquid to dig the dust out of the impressions
    while following the groove. For LD and DVD there is no force to embed
    dust into the surface. Dust can just be wiped off with a light swipe
    of a lint-free cloth. Scratches are a different matter but there are
    buffing tools to deal with that. In no way does a record cleaning
    system have any benefit for an LD.

    ... Steve ..
    >
  4. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    The hole is exactly the same as on any cd or dvd...


    "Leonid Makarovsky" <venom@csa2.bu.edu> wrote in message
    news:d6rhqu$kiu$1@news3.bu.edu...
    > This is a little weird question, but I'm looking for the LD shape
    > specifications. Particulary I'm looking for the precise size of the inner
    hole
    > diameter. And I can't seem to find it on internet. I measured it to be 1
    and
    > 3/8 inches, but I want to make sure it is the precise figure.
    >
    > The reason I need it is that I bought KAB EV-1 EXTERNAL VACUUM RECORD
    CLEANER
    > from http://www.kabusa.com/frameset.htm?/index.htm. This is for cleaning
    of
    > the vinyl records. I figured that it is a cool idea to make and adapter
    and
    > to use it for cleaning the LaserDiscs from dust.
    >
    > Thanks in advance.
    >
    > --Leonid
  5. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    Biz wrote:
    || "Leonid Makarovsky" <venom@csa2.bu.edu> wrote in message
    || news:d6rhqu$kiu$1@news3.bu.edu...
    ||| This is a little weird question, but I'm looking for the LD shape
    ||| specifications. Particulary I'm looking for the precise size of the
    ||| inner hole diameter. And I can't seem to find it on internet. I
    ||| measured it to be 1 and 3/8 inches, but I want to make sure it is
    ||| the precise figure.
    <SNIP>

    || The hole is exactly the same as on any cd or dvd...

    Er - have you actually _seen_ a CD or DVD?

    paul
  6. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    my bad, I completely spaced on that one... I have hundreds of each, but in
    my mind, I just thought the center was identical due to clamping issues that
    would possibly come up in combos...


    "P Pron" <paulatspambegone.pron@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:3femppF7fjq2U1@individual.net...
    > Biz wrote:
    > || "Leonid Makarovsky" <venom@csa2.bu.edu> wrote in message
    > || news:d6rhqu$kiu$1@news3.bu.edu...
    > ||| This is a little weird question, but I'm looking for the LD shape
    > ||| specifications. Particulary I'm looking for the precise size of the
    > ||| inner hole diameter. And I can't seem to find it on internet. I
    > ||| measured it to be 1 and 3/8 inches, but I want to make sure it is
    > ||| the precise figure.
    > <SNIP>
    >
    > || The hole is exactly the same as on any cd or dvd...
    >
    > Er - have you actually _seen_ a CD or DVD?
    >
    > paul
    >
    >
    >
  7. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    YOu dont want to clean any opical disk like a record. They should be
    cleaned radially, NOT by any circumferential method...
    "Leonid Makarovsky" <venom@csa2.bu.edu> wrote in message
    news:d6rhqu$kiu$1@news3.bu.edu...
    > This is a little weird question, but I'm looking for the LD shape
    > specifications. Particulary I'm looking for the precise size of the inner
    hole
    > diameter. And I can't seem to find it on internet. I measured it to be 1
    and
    > 3/8 inches, but I want to make sure it is the precise figure.
    >
    > The reason I need it is that I bought KAB EV-1 EXTERNAL VACUUM RECORD
    CLEANER
    > from http://www.kabusa.com/frameset.htm?/index.htm. This is for cleaning
    of
    > the vinyl records. I figured that it is a cool idea to make and adapter
    and
    > to use it for cleaning the LaserDiscs from dust.
    >
    > Thanks in advance.
    >
    > --Leonid
  8. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    P Pron <paulatspambegone.pron@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
    : Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious, but every instruction I've ever seen
    : for laserdisc and CD cleaning emphasises the importance of using *radial*
    : movements - ie a straight line from the label area to the edge of the disc,
    : and _not_ wiping around the disc, as you would with an LP record.
    : If the cleaning introduces any microscopic scratches, you want them _across_
    : the track, not _along_ it, where they could throw the laser off track.....

    I guess good thing I stated the reason why I needed the dimensions of a hole.
    But then can anyone give me an advise as how to clean LaserDiscs so that
    no dust is left. What should the cloth be made of? I thought that cleaning
    system for the vinyl records doesn't introduce any scratches and the vacuum
    system is the most effective one. Thanks.

    --Leonid
  9. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    Hello Leonid,

    This is the method I use.

    http://www.laserdiscarchive.co.uk/laserdisc_archive/novus_cleaning/cleaning_laserdiscs.htm

    Mike


    "Leonid Makarovsky" <venom@csa2.bu.edu> wrote in message
    news:d6tif2$hnn$1@news3.bu.edu...
    > P Pron <paulatspambegone.pron@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
    > : Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious, but every instruction I've ever
    seen
    > : for laserdisc and CD cleaning emphasises the importance of using
    *radial*
    > : movements - ie a straight line from the label area to the edge of the
    disc,
    > : and _not_ wiping around the disc, as you would with an LP record.
    > : If the cleaning introduces any microscopic scratches, you want them
    _across_
    > : the track, not _along_ it, where they could throw the laser off
    track.....
    >
    > I guess good thing I stated the reason why I needed the dimensions of a
    hole.
    > But then can anyone give me an advise as how to clean LaserDiscs so that
    > no dust is left. What should the cloth be made of? I thought that cleaning
    > system for the vinyl records doesn't introduce any scratches and the
    vacuum
    > system is the most effective one. Thanks.
    >
    > --Leonid
  10. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    In article <p4m39190nf64prbuehh3s4or2rj3au13qn@4ax.com>,
    Steve(JazzHunter) <jazzhunterNotHere@internet.com> wrote:
    >On Mon, 23 May 2005 11:46:58 +0100, "P Pron"
    ><paulatspambegone.pron@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
    >
    >>Leonid Makarovsky wrote:
    >>|| This is a little weird question, but I'm looking for the LD shape
    >>|| specifications. Particulary I'm looking for the precise size of the
    >>|| inner hole diameter. And I can't seem to find it on internet. I
    >>|| measured it to be 1 and 3/8 inches, but I want to make sure it is
    >>|| the precise figure.
    >>||
    >>|| The reason I need it is that I bought KAB EV-1 EXTERNAL VACUUM
    >>|| RECORD CLEANER from http://www.kabusa.com/frameset.htm?/index.htm.
    >>|| This is for cleaning of the vinyl records. I figured that it is a
    >>|| cool idea to make and adapter and to use it for cleaning the
    >>|| LaserDiscs from dust.
    >>||
    >>|| Thanks in advance.
    >>||
    >>|| --Leonid

    >>Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious, but every instruction I've ever seen
    >>for laserdisc and CD cleaning emphasises the importance of using *radial*
    >>movements - ie a straight line from the label area to the edge of the disc,
    >>and _not_ wiping around the disc, as you would with an LP record.
    >>
    >>If the cleaning introduces any microscopic scratches, you want them _across_
    >>the track, not _along_ it, where they could throw the laser off track.....
    >>
    >>paul

    >I have to agree. On a record, microsocopic dust that settles into the
    >groove is then subsequently embedded into the walls and base of the
    >groove by the passage of the stylus, at something like one or two Lbs
    >of pressure at the contact point of the tip.

    You have to be way off on those calculations. Figure the standard
    LP tips standardized on .7 mil though when the LP came out in
    1949 1 mil was the tip. High-end cartridges tracked at around
    1.5 grams, standard home players tracked heavier. If you do the
    math on a .7 mil diameter at 1.5 grams, and calculate that
    in force per square inch you'll probably be past 100 pounds per
    square inch. [My math skills have deterioted over the years but
    someone can probably come up with the exact calculations.]

    Add the pressure to the heat rise at point of contact and you can
    easily embed things in the groove.

    >A record cleaner uses air pressure and maybe a liquid to dig the
    >dust out of the impressions while following the groove.

    Pressure is not good. It could force things in. You want vacuum.

    >For LD and DVD there is no force to embed
    >dust into the surface. Dust can just be wiped off with a light swipe
    >of a lint-free cloth. Scratches are a different matter but there are
    >buffing tools to deal with that. In no way does a record cleaning
    >system have any benefit for an LD.

    The converse is probably most accurate. I'd never put my LDs
    in touch with my vacuum/liquid LP cleaner.

    Bill
    --
    Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
  11. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    In article <d6tif2$hnn$1@news3.bu.edu>,
    Leonid Makarovsky <venom@csa2.bu.edu> wrote:
    >P Pron <paulatspambegone.pron@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
    >: Forgive me if I'm stating the obvious, but every instruction I've ever seen
    >: for laserdisc and CD cleaning emphasises the importance of using *radial*
    >: movements - ie a straight line from the label area to the edge of the disc,
    >: and _not_ wiping around the disc, as you would with an LP record.
    >: If the cleaning introduces any microscopic scratches, you want them _across_
    >: the track, not _along_ it, where they could throw the laser off track.....

    >I guess good thing I stated the reason why I needed the
    >dimensions of a hole. But then can anyone give me an advise as
    >how to clean LaserDiscs so that no dust is left. What should the
    >cloth be made of? I thought that cleaning system for the vinyl
    >records doesn't introduce any scratches and the vacuum system is
    >the most effective one. Thanks.

    Light dust should not hurt playback at all.

    And in the early days of LP I saw one shuck and jive HIFI salesman
    [using that word with as much derision as possbile in typed format]
    demonstrate how rugged LDs were.

    He took a ball point pen and scribbled all over the disk, and then
    put it on the floor and stepped on the disk. Then he proceeded to
    put the disk in the machine and play it, and then told the customer
    how rugged they were.

    Customers in that era of course were only used to LPs and did not
    know that LD's played from the bottom - the side he did not mark
    up.

    You can always trust a HI-FI salesman. You can trust him to say
    anything to make a sale and steer you to the itmes he gets spiffed
    on.

    I'm glad those days are pretty much gone. I tended to wander
    around and listen to salemen talking to each other or bs'ing
    customers.

    I heard one salesman talking about how he could re-package the
    $100+ phono cartridges so you could not tell it had been opened.
    That meant that if someone bought one and returned it, you could
    get a cartridge that wasn't working 'right' because the original
    buyer may have gone so far to chip the cartridge.

    Another store always opened the cartons from the bottom. A friend
    bought a system from them, and had the boxes in his office, and I
    notied the box and said "You bought that at XXX didn't you".

    He was surprised and said yes. The always opened the cartons
    carefully on the bottom so they could put the items on display.
    When someone wanted to buy one they would get a display unit - that
    may have been abused by customers 'looking', and then carefully
    repacked. The top seal was never touched and they talked about
    selling all their merchandise in 'factory sealed cartons'.

    A local LD store had their LDs on shelves and if you picked one off
    the shelf and took it to the counter to check it out, they would
    say "Let me get a new one from the back room so I don't have to
    make a new price sticker to put one on the shelf".

    What happened when they went to the back room was to take one of
    the LDs they were renting, and re-shrink it and sell it as new.

    A few months later I ran into an ex-saleman from that store and
    told him why I didn't buy any more disks from them. [One I had
    bought had a barely visible razor cut in the cover where they had
    slit it open to be able to rent it and then re-shrink it.

    The saleman couldn't see anything wrong with renting a disk and
    then selling it as new because "a laser disk doesn't wear out like
    an LP so it's just like new".

    I don't care for business practices that do such things - but you
    saw them everywhere >IF< you kept your eyes and ears open.

    Sorry for the drift - but some people may not be aware of practices
    like that and need to be careful when buying 'factory packed'
    merchandise that has been opened and used.

    Bill


    --
    Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
  12. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    In article <3femppF7fjq2U1@individual.net>,
    P Pron <paulatspambegone.pron@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
    >Biz wrote:
    >|| "Leonid Makarovsky" <venom@csa2.bu.edu> wrote in message
    >|| news:d6rhqu$kiu$1@news3.bu.edu...
    >||| This is a little weird question, but I'm looking for the LD shape
    >||| specifications. Particulary I'm looking for the precise size of the
    >||| inner hole diameter. And I can't seem to find it on internet. I
    >||| measured it to be 1 and 3/8 inches, but I want to make sure it is
    >||| the precise figure.
    ><SNIP>
    >
    >|| The hole is exactly the same as on any cd or dvd...

    >Er - have you actually _seen_ a CD or DVD?

    Just looking at the hole on a DVD this very instant, it strikes
    me as being close to the size of the hold in an old Edison vertical
    cut 78 [approx] RPM record. Hm. I'll have to measure it, but my
    console Edison is under a stack of things.

    Bill
    --
    Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
  13. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    In article
    <xwrke.243656$cg1.84020@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, Biz
    <biznospam@notatt.net> wrote:

    >my bad, I completely spaced on that one... I have hundreds of
    >each, but in my mind, I just thought the center was identical due
    >to clamping issues that would possibly come up in combos...

    Well it is in the center. And except for defective disks the hole
    is on both sides.


    --
    Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
  14. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    On Fri, 27 May 2005 02:45:01 GMT, bv@wjv.com (Bill Vermillion) wrote:

    >If you do the
    >math on a .7 mil diameter at 1.5 grams, and calculate that
    >in force per square inch you'll probably be past 100 pounds per
    >square inch. [My math skills have deterioted over the years but
    >someone can probably come up with the exact calculations.]

    Are you talking 0.7 mm, or 0.7 mil? Because they're not the same.

    One mil is 0.001", or 0.0254 mm.

    Unless I've screwed up big-time (it is 7am on a Saturday), 1.5 g on a
    0.7 mm diameter area is about 5.5 psi. 1.5 g on a 0.7 mil diameter
    area is about 3500 psi.
  15. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    "Karyudo" <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote in message
    news:g8ug91h0cq039suv2r7mib0ep5jtd4m2iu@4ax.com...
    > On Fri, 27 May 2005 02:45:01 GMT, bv@wjv.com (Bill Vermillion) wrote:
    >
    > >If you do the
    > >math on a .7 mil diameter at 1.5 grams, and calculate that
    > >in force per square inch you'll probably be past 100 pounds per
    > >square inch. [My math skills have deterioted over the years but
    > >someone can probably come up with the exact calculations.]
    >
    > Are you talking 0.7 mm, or 0.7 mil? Because they're not the same.
    >
    > One mil is 0.001", or 0.0254 mm.
    >
    > Unless I've screwed up big-time (it is 7am on a Saturday), 1.5 g on a
    > 0.7 mm diameter area is about 5.5 psi. 1.5 g on a 0.7 mil diameter
    > area is about 3500 psi.

    It will be milligrams.

    Tip pressure on the record can be as high as several tons.
  16. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    Bill Vermillion <bv@wjv.com> wrote:
    : The converse is probably most accurate. I'd never put my LDs
    : in touch with my vacuum/liquid LP cleaner.

    I wasn't going to put my LDs in touch with liquid LP cleaner. I was going to
    have dry vacuum.

    --Leonid
  17. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    On Sun, 29 May 2005 04:27:59 GMT, "Hugh Candlin" <No@MeansNo.Com>
    wrote:

    >"Karyudo" <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote:

    >> Unless I've screwed up big-time (it is 7am on a Saturday), 1.5 g on a
    >> 0.7 mm diameter area is about 5.5 psi. 1.5 g on a 0.7 mil diameter
    >> area is about 3500 psi.
    >
    >It will be milligrams.

    Uhh... what will be milligrams? Neither of the two possible diameters
    (0.7 mm or 0.7 mils) is measurable in units of mass.

    >Tip pressure on the record can be as high as several tons.

    "Tons" is not a unit of pressure. Tons is a unit of weight. PSI is a
    unit of pressure. And actually, I did make a mistake: turns out that
    1.5 g on a 0.7 mil (= 0.0007") diameter area is closer to 8500 psi.
    Or, if you prefer, 8.5 tons per square inch. That's some hellacious
    specific pressure, even if the actual force is low...
  18. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    "Karyudo" <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote in message
    news:7c3o91h4vqs7b084ohljm6e2lqf0h18ksq@4ax.com...
    > On Sun, 29 May 2005 04:27:59 GMT, "Hugh Candlin" <No@MeansNo.Com>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >"Karyudo" <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote:
    >
    > >> Unless I've screwed up big-time (it is 7am on a Saturday), 1.5 g on a
    > >> 0.7 mm diameter area is about 5.5 psi. 1.5 g on a 0.7 mil diameter
    > >> area is about 3500 psi.
    > >
    > >It will be milligrams.
    >
    > Uhh... what will be milligrams?

    The choice between mm and mil that you were mulling over.

    > Neither of the two possible diameters
    > (0.7 mm or 0.7 mils) is measurable in units of mass.
    >
    > >Tip pressure on the record can be as high as several tons.

    How about
    "Tip pressure on the record can be as high as several tons PSI?".
    >
    > "Tons" is not a unit of pressure. Tons is a unit of weight. PSI is a
    > unit of pressure. And actually, I did make a mistake:

    I know. I just didn't point it out.

    > turns out that
    > 1.5 g on a 0.7 mil (= 0.0007") diameter area is closer to 8500 psi.
    > Or, if you prefer, 8.5 tons per square inch. That's some hellacious
    > specific pressure, even if the actual force is low...

    Which is what I said, only more concisely.
  19. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    8500psi is 4.25 tons per square inch on the planet I live on based on teh
    fact that 1 ton=2000lbs


    "Karyudo" <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote in message
    news:7c3o91h4vqs7b084ohljm6e2lqf0h18ksq@4ax.com...
    > On Sun, 29 May 2005 04:27:59 GMT, "Hugh Candlin" <No@MeansNo.Com>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >"Karyudo" <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote:
    >
    > >> Unless I've screwed up big-time (it is 7am on a Saturday), 1.5 g on a
    > >> 0.7 mm diameter area is about 5.5 psi. 1.5 g on a 0.7 mil diameter
    > >> area is about 3500 psi.
    > >
    > >It will be milligrams.
    >
    > Uhh... what will be milligrams? Neither of the two possible diameters
    > (0.7 mm or 0.7 mils) is measurable in units of mass.
    >
    > >Tip pressure on the record can be as high as several tons.
    >
    > "Tons" is not a unit of pressure. Tons is a unit of weight. PSI is a
    > unit of pressure. And actually, I did make a mistake: turns out that
    > 1.5 g on a 0.7 mil (= 0.0007") diameter area is closer to 8500 psi.
    > Or, if you prefer, 8.5 tons per square inch. That's some hellacious
    > specific pressure, even if the actual force is low...
    >
  20. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    On Tue, 31 May 2005 16:16:37 GMT, "Biz" <biznospam@notatt.net> wrote:

    >8500psi is 4.25 tons per square inch on the planet I live on based on teh
    >fact that 1 ton=2000lbs

    Damn those goofy non-metric units. Of course you're right. 1000kg = 1
    tonne is so much nicer.
  21. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    In article <7c3o91h4vqs7b084ohljm6e2lqf0h18ksq@4ax.com>,
    Karyudo <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote:
    >On Sun, 29 May 2005 04:27:59 GMT, "Hugh Candlin" <No@MeansNo.Com>
    >wrote:
    >
    >>"Karyudo" <karyudo_usenet@yahoo.com.remove.me> wrote:
    >
    >>> Unless I've screwed up big-time (it is 7am on a Saturday), 1.5 g on a
    >>> 0.7 mm diameter area is about 5.5 psi. 1.5 g on a 0.7 mil diameter
    >>> area is about 3500 psi.
    >>
    >>It will be milligrams.
    >
    >Uhh... what will be milligrams? Neither of the two possible diameters
    >(0.7 mm or 0.7 mils) is measurable in units of mass.
    >
    >>Tip pressure on the record can be as high as several tons.
    >
    >"Tons" is not a unit of pressure. Tons is a unit of weight. PSI is a
    >unit of pressure. And actually, I did make a mistake: turns out that
    >1.5 g on a 0.7 mil (= 0.0007") diameter area is closer to 8500 psi.
    >Or, if you prefer, 8.5 tons per square inch. That's some hellacious
    >specific pressure, even if the actual force is low...

    Actually wouldn't that be 4.25 tons per square inch? :-)

    I remember reading a long time ago about the forces of a stilleto
    heel on women's shoes and the damage they do to asphalt based
    flooring - linoleum or tile - because of the concentrated area.

    Bill


    --
    Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
  22. Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

    "Bill Vermillion" <bv@wjv.com> skrev i en meddelelse
    news:IIEpJt.93B@wjv.com...
    > I remember reading a long time ago about the forces of a stilleto
    > heel on women's shoes and the damage they do to asphalt based
    > flooring - linoleum or tile - because of the concentrated area.

    It depends on how big the heel is but it is not unusual that
    the pressure is around 1600psi with an 100lb woman.

    A 8000lb. elephant is about 100psi but they of course have
    bigger feet :)

    /Kenneth Iversen
Ask a new question

Read More

Laser Disc Players Video