Posts: 162
Threads: 9
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation:
0
Don't know where the attachment went. Trying again
[attachment]Pompeii Blades A1.pdf[/attachment]
Attachments driving me mad lol
Posts: 6,734
Threads: 489
Joined: Mar 2001
Reputation:
27
Hi Jim
Did you try uploading the PDFs (not the most obvious choice for images?) from your harddrive, or from that media sharing site?
Posts: 162
Threads: 9
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation:
0
Uploaded from my hard drive. always returns with "file not found" even though I located it on the drive and it linked. Chrome crashed on me so had trouble with these links as well.... gawd
Used the links above and they do work though it takes a long time to finish. I had to be very patient. Try them and see if they open for you please sir.
Posts: 6,734
Threads: 489
Joined: Mar 2001
Reputation:
27
Well, the links work perfectly fine. If you want to try again, save the images as Jpgs (somewhat compressed) and try to attach those.
Posts: 162
Threads: 9
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation:
0
In my experience trying to save PDF or CAD drawings as jpegs turns them into total pixelised rubbish. I can put out the actual CAD drawings but not everyone can open those where most people can open and print PDF. Glad to see the links are working at least. I hope someone can give them a read and see if they need fixing
Posts: 113
Threads: 8
Joined: May 2012
Reputation:
0
Keep trying Jim. I want to see those drawings.
Manius Acilius Italicus
Posts: 162
Threads: 9
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation:
0
Hi Robert. The PDF file links above are working if you want to try opening them and have a look.
These are incomplete really as I hope to add the hardware as well in the future.
Posts: 3,607
Threads: 226
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation:
5
Hi!
- I wouldn´t mix measurement systems on one page. (mm fr the drawings and inches in description)
- Your blades are way too thick (6mm). Such a maximum thickness would be at the tip only, but not along the blade.
Cheers! C.
Christian K.
No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.
Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
Posts: 3,559
Threads: 275
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation:
10
Hi Jim!
The triangular tip of the pompeii type gladius is a bit too short, they were usually a bit longer...
Virilis / Jyrki Halme
PHILODOX
Moderator
Posts: 2,012
Threads: 52
Joined: Sep 2006
Reputation:
14
Although Miks is NOT very informative on blade thickness, Matt Lukes is very convinced a spine thickness of 6 mm or more is correct. Also, this is supported by the cross section drawings in Miks. But I have also seen much less thick ones, so there is not really an absolute truth in this.
Posts: 162
Threads: 9
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation:
0
Thanks for all the input. I guess I need to explain some of my reasonings.
Many of the the measurements I have made are from multiple sources and where possible I have tried to make an average. I know that finds vary greatly so while a dimensions is so-and-so on one find it may be different on another. I agree caiusbeerquitius that I need one set of measurements just haven't done it yet as millimeters are easier to work with so I will convert everything to millimeters most likely.
Blade length is optional as stated from 18-23 inches.
Blade width for a gladius approximately 2 inches.
Blade thickness I have read many places to be roughly 1/4 inch on a Pompeii and Mainz so that would be about 6mm. were they commonly thinner? I didn't make the compound point found on some samples.
The blade point length I put on the Pompeii is similar to what is on my own and very like my Deepeeka.
Would a longer point shorter than a Fullham be more common?
The actual tang design I have found to vary greatly so just came up with some that will work (in my general opinion) How do these look to you?
Also the shape of my Mainz is what I estimated from images and descriptions. Any opinions on the overall size and shape of this blade? I happen to be doing this one as my next project.
again thanks greatly for the input from all of you
Jim