>>863221 use a steel rod - a hand-cranked rod of steel lets you wind a hundred links at a time. Dont use a power drill - its asking for a finger to get caught in it. google "degloving injury" if you really want to know what it does.
>>863224 historically, the vast majority of mail from roman and medieval archaeological contexts is low-carbon wrought wire, or stamped sheet, also from wrought.
hardened steel is a nightmare to draw for that sort of use.
also, of course, unless you're doing japanese 6-in-1 sewn to a silk backing, historical mail from europe, india or persia is 99% riveted link, not butted. I honestly cant think of a single known example of butted medieval-dated european mail.
I had a pretty sturdy pair of straight cut tin snips, if you get a shitty set it will be suffering still though. I was only cutting softer steel though and even then it's a lot of strain on your wrist if you are going to cut a shitload of rings.
>>863190 >I am looking for a nice (preferably free) pattern for a dragonscale tie with small ring diameter. >Does anyone know a good one ?
Dragon scale is best sized with rings that are AR 4.0 & 6.1 if both rings are they same wire diameter. If you use different wire diameters the basic rule of thumb is that the small rings need an inner diameter that is at least 4 times that of the wire diameter of the larger rings. And the larger rings need an inner diameter that is slightly larger than the ID of the smaller ring plus twice the wire diameter of the small ring.
I prefer using a gauge size smaller for the inner rings to add more dimension.
Start assembling your dragonscale and size it to width of a tie that you like. Get it to the right length. Stitch up the two sides near the top using a basic e4-1 weave.
Make a chain to hang the tie around your neck using an adjustable clasp. It will be under your collar so nothing fancy.
Next stitch up another dragonscale patch to act as teh knot that wraps around teh hanging portion of the tie and the chain
You would think that /diy/ would come up with a fancy press that cuts their wire for them. Maybe even make a fancy attachment that presses their wires into a sine wave that they can cut in half. Or turns wire into coil that gets chopped off at intervals to be pressed.
>>863257 >>863216 My snips are only good for something like 0.8mm sheet, something ridiculous. I don't know quite how blunt they, but they were dead cheap.
Anyway, here's my bolt cutter. It just doesn't cut it. It was actually rated for 2mm or something, but it fails to cut rings cut from the 16 wire next to it. It can cut the wire, with some effort. I also noticed the jaws aren't touching at max grip, which strikes me as a defect, even though I unlocked the jaws all the way. The rings also don't fit all the way in, obviously, but it takes an unreal amount of force to simply make a dent in the ring towards the edge of the jaw, and I can't get it to the inner bit where there'd be more force because of the shape of the jaw.
Should I buy another, higher rated one, or what? I've got a hack saw, and some G clamps, but this oak desk isn't going to be a good substitute for a woodbench, and it's certainly not going to secure the rings somehow for hacksawing. I think I've only got wood blades anyway, so
>>864910 It depends you should test it with a small (10*10 cm) patch. A file should be able to remove a thorn from the rings when you feel one.
The easiest solution would be to wear a black or brown shirt underneath that you only use with that mail. That is needed anyway since galvanized wire leaves stains. Some people even claim that the zinc can be absorbed trough the skin. After looing into some medical papers that seems to be impossible unless it has been cleaned with vinegar or lemon juice.
I would suggest looking around on some of the sites I mentioned before.They have some other solutions ranging from tumblers with sand to ways of breaking the rings instead of using wire cutters.
I have not that much experience with this since I have only made jewelry mail before. It is a lot cheaper to but your rings for jewelry pre-cut.
I have about 100 chrome plated rings of AR 6 left over from a Persian chain I made for someone. Does anyone know a fun object for a keychain that I could make with them?
>>865478 This is primary school tier, though. On the same level as cardboard plate. A strong breeze will make it fall apart.
>>865483 >will give you diabetes. >you will buy more cans According to Youtube, kids and fat people make them. That is to say, people who already either have diabetes, have a surplus of empty cans, or both.
Anyway, I imagine a number of scenarios where wearing this (as in, not simply hiding it somewhere) lends itself to breaking. Some guy comes over to congratulate you, because he's also retarded, and BAM, just as he places his hand on your shoulder, the whole thing falls apart.
Or, you go to a bar after LARPing or whatever, and one of your friends throws a can at the bin, misses, and hits you instead. Critical damage! The whole suit falls apart. The chair you're sat on falls apart. The earth crumbles around you. The apocalypse is nigh, all because you made some shitty "green" chainmail that's completely dysfunctional and looks horrible.
What will really happen, if anyone other than social media cuddly toys or Youtube cuddlers see it, is you'll get funny looks and hear whispers of "Is that guy wearing can fobs?", "Dude, gross." and "I bet he sold his ass on Craigslist to get those tabs."
>>864910 If you want nicer seams than you'll get from pinch-cut rings, try cutting just 1/4 to 1/2 of the way through the ring then wiggle it back and forth with a pair of pliers so that it shears off fairly flat. Pic related.
>>866265 >>866494 Here's that AR=5.6 weave, although this uses 5.2 (16 swg, 5/16") and is rigid. You can try it with AR=6 if you can figure the weave out. There are no tutorials for it however I can guide you through it if you'd like.
>>866495 Basically, yes. The type of material you use will greatly affect how they break and how far into them you need to cut. Those rings were aluminum which snaps off very easily with a 1/4-depth cut whereas brass or steel may take a few prying motions with a 1/2-depth cut. They take slightly longer to cut this way, however if you get a good rhythm going you can work about 90% as fast as fast as you could pinch-cutting. They never break anywhere but the at the score, however if the score was not deep enough you might get some warped wire near the ends of your rings. It takes practice but it's worth it in the long run for sure.
>>867044 I'm working on some 14ga steel gauntlets now. I tried riveted mail, but my whitney punch head is shitty soft chinese steel. I also don't have a decent set of rivet tongs so I'm just kind of blowtorching the rivets then mashing them with pliers
>>867081 It depends what type of chainmail do you want to make?
The diameter alone is not that important, just the ratio between the wire diameter and the inner diameter of the ring is. This ratio is known as the aspect ratio and is calculated like this : AR = ID(inner diameter) /WD (wire diameter) Keep in mind that the ID and WD need to be in the same unit both mm or inch. If you use the gauge for the WD and inch for ID you will get the wrong AR.
Each chainmail weave has a specific range of AR in which it works. For some that range is very small for some you can use almost anything as long as its a ring.
for euro 4-in-1 an AR of 4-5 is good for armor, you can go as low as 2.8 but you will end up with a very stiff sheet of mail. There is no real upper limit for this weave but once you get a high AR you will have so much air in between that it just looks silly. If you would like to reduce the weigh you can go for 5.5 or 6 but it may look a little "off".
>>867081 That's a great size for European 4 in 1. Different weaves will require different aspect ratios though. The most important thing is how many rings you want to have to weave to make a complete piece. Pic is 14 swg, 7/16" brass and took less than a week to make.
>>867317 where did you buy the stainless steel ? Did you buy rings or wire? Is it a lot harder to work with then iron/galv steel? how easy is it do bend them closed. What type of stainless steel do you use.
>>868925 I bought the rings from theringlord.com. I do not recommend coiling stainless yourself because the springback can be very dangerous compared to softer metals like aluminum and galvanized steel, not to mention that it's significantly harder to cut through. Typically I make every ring I use from wire except for stainless.
The rings in that pic are only 20 awg so they are very easy to open with the right pliers. This piece uses 14 swg, 5/16" rings and these are actually quite difficult to open and close depending on the weave.
I think the kind of steel changes depending on the size of the ring. I can't find the exact alloys on the Ring Lord's website but they also have spring-temper rings available which are even stronger.
>>863066 Okay, Besides patterns. what are the best Materials to use for chain mail?.. For example out of this list below what would be the better ones? has anyone worked with them? how do they preform? assuming they are all the same gauge. [there's some ones I know that prob wouldn't be very good but there in there for jewelry proposes to obtain more information on them and how well they are DIY'd together from wire stock.]
>>869148 >Mild Steel wire Will rust badly. Use only for strict historical work where galvanized won't be close enough. >Stainless steel wire. Best material there is for hobby work. Probably nigh impossible to rivet though if you'd planned on doing that. >Brass wire. Great for trim but very heavy and expensive as a main material. >Ni-AI-aluminum wire. Great for pieces with no strength requirements due to light weight and low cost. Over time a grey oxide will form and rub off onto clothes and skin. Not durable enough to make heavy pieces. >Galvanized steel wire. Great starting material. Easy to obtain and work with, cheap, and relatively strong and passable for period pieces. >Copper wire. Great for trim but very heavy and expensive as a main material. >Titanium wire. Very strong but not much stronger than stainless at about 1/2 the weight of steel. Very expensive. >Nickel wire. Somewhere between copper and galvanized steel in strength, interesting pale gold color. Good for trim, probably not good as a main material but I could be wrong. >Bronze wire. >Silicone bronze wire. >Hard Silver wire. >Platinum Wire. >Case Hardened "steel" wire? >Gold wire. i have no experience with these.
>>869201 theringlord.com has some of those materials in 12 swg, but I'd highly recommend against going any bigger than that unless you have a very specific purpose in mind, a very strong grip, and enough experience with chain mail to know if you'll actually want to finish a piece in that size. Pic is a small patch of 8 swg, 2" copper rings. I doubt I would have been able to work with them at all had they been steel. 14 or 16 swg are the typical sizes people use.
Although 12 awg = 14 swg and 10 awg = 12 swg so I'm not quite sure which one you meant.
>>869292 Be aware that there is also spring-temper stainless which is even stronger than regular stainless. I broke a pair of wire cutters trying to cut a piece of 12 swg spring.
>>869554 Try 16 swg, 5/16" rings in Euopean 4-1. The aspect ratio is a little big, but since you're using bronze wire the large AR should keep the weight down. Ideally you'd use 20 awg, 1/8" but it would take a very long time.
Alternatively you could use bronze-colored anodized aluminum in 14 swg, 5/16" which would be quite light and would have a better aspect ratio than the 16 swg, 5/16". The downside is that the color will rub off and fade over time.
Approximate the square footage required by measuring a tube around the cat and from the neck to the base of the tail, then make a small patch of whatever material you want to use and weigh it. Then calculate the total weight of the project. I'd try to keep it under 5 lbs total but the absolute maximum would be the weight of the cat itself.
>>869582 Well I can measure the fabric pattern for the cat. to get the square footage. I don't want the rings grabbing the cats fur as it moves around, and im not gonna keep it on my cat, just gonna shitpost on /b/ with it.
I also thought about aluminum but I'd just use it raw instead of anodized.
But how do I determine how much wire I need?
I have a 10mm diameter rod with holes already drilled for twisting wire. that should give a circumference of 31.4mm and using 16 swg [1.6mm thick] that would make the wires OD 11.6mm. and the finally circumference of 36.5mm.
now from here how do determine how much wire I need? Assuming each ring is going to be about 36.5mm long.
where do I go from here math wise to find out how much I need?
>>869591 You can find approximate rings per square foot on the Ring Lord's website under the "rings" category. http://theringlord.com/cart/shopdisplayproducts.asp?id=16&cat=Machine+Cut+Bright+Aluminum+Jump+Rings
14 swg, 10mm rings would be great for this project if you use aluminum. From the link above you can find 14 swg, 3/8" (~9.91 mm) rings which indicates 1272 rings per square foot. Do some math, round up for safety, 164 feet or so per square foot. 1 lb of aluminum wire from TRL is about 180 feet, so you shouldn't need more than 2 lbs unless your cat is extremely large.
>>869621 cool nice to know, I think I'm gonna go try to find a 5mm steel rod tomorrow. Just rolled some 10mm rings and they look way too large for my cats size. lol I should need a max of 3 sq feet of ring material too. that's with allowance.
>>869628 Shoot for 6.5 - 7mm with 16 swg wire. You're going to want an AR of 4 for nice-looking Euro 4-1. 5mm would put you barely over AR 3 which will be hell to weave. You could go with 5mm if you use 18 swg wire instead.
Make sure you check the rings per square foot for the size you'll be using and calculate the right amount of wire to buy at that size.
I don't want to shit on this or anything but I really can't stand measuring stuff in inches, 1/8", 4/16", 32/84 etc. It's the same in archery and it's impossible to get a good guess how frickin much it is in mm. Using google to convert it to 8.32mm or what have you odd number isn't helping either.
those are the most common ones. not accurate, but close enough.
you should never see 4/16ths, because its reductable fraction, and a measurement is always reduced to the lowest fractional number. - 4 16s is the same as 2 8s, which is the same as 1 4th. so you'll always see it as 1/4, unless the person's an idiot.
as I say, close enough that it'll work for general getting a measure on how big someone's talking. Unfortunately, there's three countries in the world which have still to adopt SI, and one is one of the most vocal on the internet...
>>870211 It'd be best to acquaint yourself with the standard for this hobby if you wish to pursue it, however approximate metric equivalents are often provided in some resources but you'll still find yourself having to convert on your own. I had to learn kilograms when I started lifting weights otherwise half of what /fit/ had to say was nonsense to me. The easiest approximation I found for that was 0.45 kilos = 1 lb, and likewise 2.54 cm = 1 inch for this. Another helpful tip I can offer is that the length of the last segment of your index finger, from the tip to the knuckle, is approximately one inch.
>>870221 > with the standard for this hobby if you wish to pursue
The standard in one country: America.
getting mail made by in the Ukraine by reenactors? Metric. Wedge-riveted mail links by Cap-a-pie in the UK? Metric. Czech spring butted? Metric. Indian galvanised? Metric. Japanese 6-in-1 sewn to a silk backing? Metric.
Imperial measurements, used by Myanmar, Liberia, and the US, are not the "standard". The american insistence on the use of imperial is the anomaly.
Alright, so I've been thinking about making some "historical" maille with riveted and solid links from spring steel. I can do all of this, but I would like to have it chrome plated to ward off any rust. Would this potentially lead to a problem, such as chromium poisoning if I were to wear it on a daily basis, or at all for that matter?
>>873932 Not likely, unless you shower with it on and eat off it and shit. Anything that would've leeched into your skin will be stopped by the gambeson underneath. Unless you're and idiot and decide to wear it without anything underneath.
I'd be more concerned with the rings not plating evenly if you do it with them connected.
>>873978 I would be using spring steel that is similar to what is in a leaf spring, therefore it is not entirely stainless, and It's not truly historical, as it isn't mild steel. The intention that I have is to make a nigh indestructible piece of fully functioning armor with has pretty much zero maintenance.
If I could achieve this with stainless I'd be wiling to do so, but I would imagine that spring steel that has been properly tempered is stronger than stainless.
>>874551 Unless you're welding or riveting your rings you will never get anywhere near indestructible. Stainless will give you a no-maintenance product and the spring steel rings The Ring Lord sells are a stainless alloy. If you plan on making your own rings form your chosen alloy that's fine, but be aware that it may take a degree of treatment to protect against corrosion and there's no guarantee it'll be as resistant as stainless.
In general though I'd say that the hypothetical marginal increase in strength between stainless and spring steel is not worth the extra effort needed to prevent rust.
I'm working on my first haubergeon/hauberk and I was planning on adding sleeves tapered with hole-row contractions. However, my mobility is hindered by what I have now. The shoulder part of the shirt where the sleeve should star hangs down over my biceps. and if I try and raise my arm up further than 90 degrees the shirt sort of gets in the way and digs in to my arm. I can post a picture later, but just from the information available, what would you recommend? Such as, making the sleeve-holes smaller, decreasing the actual width of the shirt, or something else?
>>876295 The choice of cutter isn't all that important as long as you can get through your wire and actually reach the jaws where you need them in a coil. I use the same pair for everything from 8g, 2" rings to 20g, 1/8".
>>876304 For the best results you don't actually want to cut all the way through the wire, but just halfway then shear the ring off the coil by twisting it. This will give you a more square seam that will grab hair less and be less noticeable.
>>876310 This is why I always recommend against winding your own stainless.
Just get a simple pair of cutters. Compound action like you have is more trouble that it's worth in my experience. I've been using pic related for 10 years.
>>876319 I've never welded mail myself, but I imagine you'd go around and arc-weld every ring. Ideally though you would have woven in solid rings as you made the piece, halving the number of rings to be welded.
There are a number of treatments you can do to prevent corrosion.
>>876322 At that size, butted? Not at all. Depending on the alloy of brass it could be anywhere from marginally effective to absolute trash, assuming it's made in the correct size and welded, and treated against tarnishing. All in all I don't recommend it.
That's actually very cool, it would halve the time it takes to make a coat.
What about the other half? Will it look strange making half the shirt from wire?
Can you heat treat wire maille to make it stronger?
Are riveted maille rings stronger than welded? I thought welds were stronger bonds. The German battleship Tirpitz was welded instead of riveted to save weight for more armor, and because the connection was stronger.
>>876516 A friend of mine actually just finished a shirt with a mix of solid and wire rings. In his case he chose flattened solid rings to present more of a contrast against the wire rings, but you could probably find solid rings that look similar to the wire.
You can presumably temper mail to make it stronger although I've never done it.
The riveted question is kind of tough, because a weld will generally be stronger than a rivet, however riveted rings are also flattened in such a way that they resist opening more than a round-wire, welded ring would. If you flattened and then welded the rings it would be stronger for sure, but comparing flattened, riveted rings to unflattened, welded rings does not yield a definite winner as far as I know.
I used 8 inch bolt cutters, and yeah I used a power drill/2x4 rig, wore a thick leather glove and kept it way the fuck away from where the wire met the rod. Worked pretty well, only had the wire whiplash me twice while making 15,000 rings. Galvinized steel, .08in thick and 5/16 diameter.
Anyone have good tips for the arm pits? A year later and I still can't come up with a decent way to close them that doesn't grind against my armpit/bicep/side.
>>876685 I built my own chainmail armor a few years ago, 14 gauge galvanized steel fencing wire, sleeves reaching down to the wrists and the bottom going past my knees. If I recall correctly, the easiest way to do the armpits is to turn it inside out and connect them up that way.
But this may not be accurate. My design was such that connecting the sleeves with the vest area at the shoulders was the part where I needed to innovate.
>>876946 The way this guy does it seems to be different from how I've done it. You notice that the lines, the "chains" of the arm and the chest are parallel. I don't like this method. There are two ways of orienting chainmail, either in the method I used where the weight of the armor actually pulls it closer together, looking much neater, tighter, etc, and where the weight pulls the rings apart. The way he does it, when the arms are at the sides the mail on the arms is being pulled apart by the weight, does not look very good.
A better method is to continue the "chains" up through the arms, making the armpit and arms just an extension of the torso area. Then the issue is how to connect the shoulder parts together, which isn't so difficult.
But then again all this is dependent upon the lengths you are using for the mail. If it terminates just past the shoulder, the orientation of the chains shouldn't be a big deal aesthetically or practically.
>>876685 You're going to want to make a gusset. Basically you'll build a triangular piece up from the the barrel section of your shirt where the armpits will be, then join this triangular patch to the sleeves with 45° seams.
He covered both orientations and what we said and showed was that with one orientation, the chains are all equally spaced but with the other they are not equally spaced and you get areas with less coverage and areas with more coverage, and the vast majority of people probably aren't skilled enough to put restrictions in the right places.
>>877434 >>877393 Well, granted, the guy with the really good looking brass suit is probably fucked, because it's brass.
But even unriveted mail will withstand a slash or even a stab. That's why it was occasionally used historically. Repeated, frenzied attacks? Not for long. Of course, riveted is better and preferable. That doesn't make unriveted "wrong".
Fuck, why don't you actually make something before you come here and tell us our business?
>>877393 >it's not mail if it's not riveted Okay, retard.
>it's not woodworking if you don't use screws >it's not lapidary if you don't carve gemstones >it's not cooking if you don't serve meat
>>877437 Actually butted mail was almost never used in combat because it doesn't hold up at all compared to riveted. The brass shirt isn't useless as armor because it's brass, but because it's not riveted or welded.
I actually had a swordsmith take a swing at >>869134 at a renfaire a while back and he destroyed it. 14 swg stainless steel, 5/16", butted.
>>877450 >Actually butted mail was almost never used in combat No, it wasn't uncommon. Riveting takes a long time, after all. As an example, the Japanese used butted and twisted links in combat.
>The brass shirt isn't useless as armor because it's brass, but because it's not riveted or welded. Butted links aren't strong, but they aren't made out of paper. If that guy's stabbed hard in that, there's a good chance the brass will break rather than the links, if not both. Brass is soft.
>and he destroyed it. I find that hard to believe. What was your methodology? Did you hold it out taut for him to slash? That's what it sounds like happened.
>>877458 >No, it wasn't uncommon. Riveting takes a long time, after all. As an example, the Japanese used butted and twisted links in combat. I meant European mail, mostly.
>Butted links aren't strong, but they aren't made out of paper. If that guy's stabbed hard in that, there's a good chance the brass will break rather than the links, if not both. Brass is soft. I made that shirt and while it might be good in a knife fight, a sword can easily generate enough power to wreck it.
>I find that hard to believe. What was your methodology? Did you hold it out taut for him to slash? That's what it sounds like happened. Placed on a wooden platform and stabbed: went right through, cutting through several rings and bending many more out of place. Placed on wooden log and slashed: sent many rings flying and left a sizable hole.
>did you hold it out taught for him to slash God no. That's a great way to lose all my fingers.
To be fair the sword he used is advertised as being able to cut a dishwasher into many pieces without losing very much of its edge, so a lower-quality weapon would probably be less effective.
It was in the first video link. Those are a good watch, the other two links are basically he started recording again immediately after he stopped because he's a little absent minded lol I guess he doesn't script his videos :)
>>877458 >No, it wasn't uncommon. Riveting takes a long time, after all. As an example, the Japanese used butted and twisted links in combat.
As a professional historian, I have handled mail from, at a rough guess, roman and viking, medieval and early renaissance eras, in at least a dozen museums. I've studied other samples through cases in 20-30 other museums, as well as that I've actually had my hands on. The stuff I've held and studied under magnifying glasess includes about a dozen sections of roman era stuff, (often as small as 5mm internal diameter), full shirts with Nuremberg armoury marked rings, etc.
Of those of western origin, not one single example consisted of butted links.
the only example of that in european mail I know is 16th century, from the Mary Rose, where a surviving shirt contained riveted links, and a small number of links made from wire, twisted shut - most likely field repairs.
>>877586 >Brass is softer than steel but it's still not soft. It would still protect you much better than no armor. Actually that particular brass shirt contains two different alloys of brass since my supplier changed their stock on me. The first alloy, used for the upper torso area, is quite strong and was probably comparable to galvanized steel with a great deal more springback. The second alloy is almost identical to copper in every respect except corrosion. This alloy was used for the sleeves and lower torso. If the whole shirt had been made form the first alloy I'd be a lot more confident in its protective potential.
My uncentered 8" bolt cutter didn't cut it. It cut a piece of brass wire, albeit with me twisting it off, but couldn't handle the coil at all. It went all irregular and moved out of shape whenever I applied force.
>>876315 >http://www.zoro.com/channellock-diagonal-cutters-8-in-338/i/G2136005/ I'll buy that as soon as I can find a UK supplier and I get my pay.
>>863210 This probably won't help but could you tell me where you got your wire from? I'm also in the UK, and most of the good providers are based outside. If you could tell me where you got your wire I could have a think about what I cut mine with...
>>863226 How did the average wealth of an armoured soldier change over time? I was reading Joan of arc testimony and she was practically a millionaire with a full stable, several sets of armour and weapons. But she downplayed it heavily, saying that it was just standard, every professional knight had several war horses, backup armour ect.
Did they ever sell their shit when they retired and live comfortably on that?
>>865483 I made a few yards of chainmail with soda can tabs. I just wandered my campus around 5pm when it was nearly deserted and poached tabs from the recycling bins. Take can out, remove tab, put can back. Janitors saw me and never cared, assumed it was for an art thing.
UCF has 60k students, like 500 bins. It took me a a few hours for a week to get a paper-bag's worth.
>>879982 My understanding is that as the medieval age went on armour and great became more and more specialised (duh). While för example a horse would at all times be expensive it got much more so during the latter middle ages when the full heavy armours would more or less require specially bread horses whose cost would be comparable to the most expensive of cars today or even more.
>>881411 >I can post a picture later, but just from the information available, what would you recommend? I have no idea what you're trying to describe as there are many possibly problems that can arise from sleeves. Post a picture.
>>881841 >>881845 >>881849 It looks like you're staring your contractions too close to your body. That's building a lot of tension and reducing your mobility because it's basically just pulling the sleeve downward. I'd recommend just building the sleeve straight out from the body without any contractions. I know you're trying to match the contour of your shoulder but that also reduces the range of motion in the other direction.
>>881895 The sleeve has no contractions it it yet. In fact there isn't a sleeve there. That's just how far down the shoulder hangs, and I want to know why, and how to fix it. Give me a second and I'll try to draw a slight diagram thing...
>>882222 The contractions at the shoulder I mean. You're tapering in the piece so that you cover your shoulders while also not being too baggy around your torso, but putting the contractions there does not just shrink the width of the area. It also causes everything beyond those contractions to pull downward. Every time you contract a row the next column will be lower. This is why it's digging into your arm when you raise it; because you've built the area to tend downward.
>>882432 I'm not sure about your design specifically as I've only ever freehanded my own shirts. I normally start with the head hole then build the torso, then add the sleeves. If I need extra room in the back I add a few columns to the back of the head hole or build expansions near there. Look at button-down shirts: that little folded area between the shoulder blades is basically an expansion. Instead of expanding near the arms where you'll pull the weave downward, expand in the area where you need the space, in the middle.
The ring size you've chosen will give you plenty of leeway in sizing as long as you don't try to make the piece form-fitting. That's, what, 16g 5/16? The AR looks to be around 5 - 5.5 anyway. This shirt >>867315 was made with no expansions or contractions, and with freeform sleeves at AR=5.6.
>the expansion/contraction at the shoulder needs to moved/removed. Right? Right. I wouldn't recommend articulating joints like that unless they only bend in one direction such as elbows or fingers.
There was a guy from the uni's LARP society who tried to tell me that greathelms weren't around in the 12th century. For some reason, he kept telling me they were a 14th century only item of armor. And he looked like a Jesus cosplayer.
Anyway, I bought a KNIPEX cobolt bolt cutter. Will that be good enough for cutting 2mm brass and galvanised steel wire springs?
>>884396 I feel sorry for Australian post men. In addition to the threat of being attacked by some chav's fighting dog, there's the threat of roos, spiders, snakes, crocodiles, Steve Irwin's ghost and god knows what else.
My cutter arrived, and holy shit, it cuts brass like soft toffee. I made my first 4 in 1 link. I can't seem to make a hole in my brass rod, though. I tried using the drill, but it skirted around it, as did my dremel.
I've made and cut another spring manually, but I think the jig is obviously ideal for this. Should I just buy a wooden rod, instead?
I made this with my bare hands, occasionally using the pliers to try and make some of the worse rings more circular.
I wound the wire manually around the rod, which wasn't a good idea. I assume it's slower than using a drill set up, the first thing I noticed was how the "spring" sort of telephone cable stretched out, making the rings slightly larger than if I had made a drill set up and made the coil much more coily.
The cutter is really good. Superior German engineering cutting British wire. Oh dear.
>>884786 >I can't seem to make a hole in my brass rod, though. I tried using the drill, but it skirted around it, as did my dremel. Drill press. Surely you know someone who knows someone who has one. >Should I just buy a wooden rod, instead? Absolutely not. You'll destroy the rod after one coil and that's assuming the wire won't dig into the rod and get stuck.
Depending on your choice of wire it's possible to use a power drill to coil, however it can be very dangerous. It's good for wire gauges below 16 swg and for softer metals like aluminum, mild steel, copper, and brass. Do not use a drill for stainless steel or titanium.
>>884845 I coiled that way for several years before getting a proper jig, and eventually you learn how to keep the coil tight without it stretching out. It's a decent method if you only need a handful of rings but it'll give you carpel tunnel very quickly if you're not careful. I only do it now for abnormal ring sizes for which I don't have a drilled rod. Pic related: I used one of those fat Crayola markers to make these rings because of their perfect structural AR.
I'd also recommend a smaller ring size for that size wire if you're weaving European 4-1.
>>884786 >I can't seem to make a hole in my brass rod, though. I tried using the drill, but it skirted around it, as did my dremel. Us e a hacksaw to cut a slot into the non-crank end such that you can still put wire into it when the rod is inside the jig. Like a 1.25" slot if 1" of the rod sits in the frame.
>>885147 >How much smaller would you recommend? That's 2mm brass wire.
This chart will give you an idea of what aspect ratio you'll get for a number of different rod diameters and wire sizes >>870221
Your actual sizes will vary depending on the material you choose because of springback. Stainless steel rings will be larger than copper rings when coiled on the same rod, for example, but for almost every application that chart will get you close enough.
For E4-1 the ideal AR is around 4.0, with 3.1 being the absolute minimum. For 2mm wire AR=4 is 8mm. Your rings look about 12mm (AR=6) which is more appropriate for Persian weaves or something else that requires more space between rings. That being said larger ARs can be used for costume purposes to reduce work time and weight, however for larger pieces the weight of the piece is more likely to bend the rings out of place if the AR is higher. If you're making a shirt out of that brass at AR=6 I can promise you will lose many rings over time.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at email@example.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.