If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Does shortening necklace chains make them weaker?
Hi. Does anyone know if shortening a white gold necklace chain from
18" to 16" will make it weaker and more susceptible to break later on? Thanks much for help. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"ipink" wrote in message ... Hi. Does anyone know if shortening a white gold necklace chain from 18" to 16" will make it weaker and more susceptible to break later on? Thanks much for help. No, well not if you solder your clasp back on properly anyway. -- William Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Excellent point - to which I would add it is lighter, reducing
(slightly) the force on links higher up and ,perhaps, slightly less likely to 'catch' on something when leaning over. Carl Sarit Wolfus wrote: (ipink) wrote in message . .. Hi. Does anyone know if shortening a white gold necklace chain from 18" to 16" will make it weaker and more susceptible to break later on? Thanks much for help. I don't see a reason for chain weakening. On the contrary, simple logic suggests that chain's strength increases with decreasing length. For any chain type, we have a certain defects/weak links probability per given length. A short chain would then contain less weak points than a long chain. Sarit. Sarit Wolfus - Silver, Gold and Gemstones, handcrafted jewelry. http://sarit-jewelry.com -- to reply, change ( .not) to ( .net) |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Sarit Wolfus wrote:
(ipink) wrote in message . .. Hi. Does anyone know if shortening a white gold necklace chain from 18" to 16" will make it weaker and more susceptible to break later on? Thanks much for help. I don't see a reason for chain weakening. On the contrary, simple logic suggests that chain's strength increases with decreasing length. For any chain type, we have a certain defects/weak links probability per given length. A short chain would then contain less weak points than a long chain. Almost. Every chain has a weakest link. The shortened chain still has a weakest link, there is a chance (the ratio of length removed to total length) that this weakest link is not the same one as when the chain was long, in that case the chain is as much stronger as the new weakest link is stronger than the old. Likely a very small change. Carl1LuckyTexan's points are well taken though. But, if well done, shortening it won't make the chain weaker. -- Carl West http://carl.west.home.comcast.net change the 'DOT' to '.' to email me "Clutter"? This is an object-rich environment. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Carl West wrote in message news:
Almost. Every chain has a weakest link. The shortened chain still has a weakest link, there is a chance (the ratio of length removed to total length) that this weakest link is not the same one as when the chain was long, in that case the chain is as much stronger as the new weakest link is stronger than the old. Likely a very small change. Carl1LuckyTexan's points are well taken though. But, if well done, shortening it won't make the chain weaker. Lets look at a simple example: Suppose that the weakest invisible (allowed) defect can hold a load of 0.5 kg. Now, lets assume that the probability of having such a defect is 0.2/m (i.e. 1 defect per 5m chain). A 16" chain (0.406m) would have 0.081 defect probability (8%) and an 18" (0.457m) would have 0.091 (9%) probability. In other words, 8 out of 100 16" chains and 9 out of 100 18" chains would contain such a defect. Real numbers depend on many factors like manufacturer, chain type, material, etc. However, the basic argument remains: short chains are likely to contain less defects than long chain. Sarit. Sarit Wolfus - Silver, Gold and Gemstones, handcrafted jewelry http://sarit-jewelry.com |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Sarit Wolfus wrote:
Carl West wrote in message news: Almost. Every chain has a weakest link. The shortened chain still has a weakest link, there is a chance (the ratio of length removed to total length) that this weakest link is not the same one as when the chain was long, in that case the chain is as much stronger as the new weakest link is stronger than the old. Likely a very small change. Carl1LuckyTexan's points are well taken though. But, if well done, shortening it won't make the chain weaker. Lets look at a simple example: Suppose that the weakest invisible (allowed) defect can hold a load of 0.5 kg. Now, lets assume that the probability of having such a defect is 0.2/m (i.e. 1 defect per 5m chain). A 16" chain (0.406m) would have 0.081 defect probability (8%) and an 18" (0.457m) would have 0.091 (9%) probability. In other words, 8 out of 100 16" chains and 9 out of 100 18" chains would contain such a defect. Real numbers depend on many factors like manufacturer, chain type, material, etc. However, the basic argument remains: short chains are likely to contain less defects than long chain. OK. _Assuming_ that all the other links hold 1kg and the few flawed links hold .5kg and are fairly evenly distributed... Using your numbers: An 18" chain has a 9% chance of having a flawed link. There is an 11% chance that it is in the 2" removed to make it a 16" chain. That makes a 1% chance that shortening the chain will make it 100% stronger. I contend that the above assumption is flawed, and that each of the links in the chain has a different strength and that charted out they will produce a bell-curve with most of the links very close to 1kg, but some more or less stronger and some more or less weaker. If the frequency of .5kg links is 1/5m, the frequency of .6kg links will be higher, say something like 1/4m, and .7kg links at 1/3m and so on... So, there's a 1% chance that removing 2" will remove a .5 kg link in the 18" chain. The shortened chain will have a 10% chance of having a .6kg link in it which would leave it only 20% stronger, and a 13% chance there's a .7kg link in it making it only 40% stronger... There's 13% chance that the weakest link in 18" is a .6kg link and an 11% chance of removing it in the 2" so there's ... Aw hell, it's late and I'm out of my depth, my degree is in Sculpture. Is there a statistician in the house? I suspect this is a calculus problem. And probably a classic. -- Carl West http://carl.west.home.comcast.net change the 'DOT' to '.' to email me "Clutter"? This is an object-rich environment. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
OK. _Assuming_ that all the other links hold 1kg and the few flawed
links hold .5kg and are fairly evenly distributed... Using your numbers: An 18" chain has a 9% chance of having a flawed link. There is an 11% chance that it is in the 2" removed to make it a 16" chain. That makes a 1% chance that shortening the chain will make it 100% stronger. I contend that the above assumption is flawed, and that each of the links in the chain has a different strength and that charted out they will produce a bell-curve with most of the links very close to 1kg, but some more or less stronger and some more or less weaker. If the frequency of .5kg links is 1/5m, the frequency of .6kg links will be higher, say something like 1/4m, and .7kg links at 1/3m and so on... So, there's a 1% chance that removing 2" will remove a .5 kg link in the 18" chain. The shortened chain will have a 10% chance of having a .6kg link in it which would leave it only 20% stronger, and a 13% chance there's a .7kg link in it making it only 40% stronger... There's 13% chance that the weakest link in 18" is a .6kg link and an 11% chance of removing it in the 2" so there's ... Aw hell, it's late and I'm out of my depth, my degree is in Sculpture. Is there a statistician in the house? I suspect this is a calculus problem. And probably a classic. Hi Carl, I perfectly agree with you. The real picture is more complicated and defects probability curve would have some kind of a bell shape. I used an over simplified example just to support my point. Whatever statistics we use we both agree on one point: Shortening the chain would not weaken it. If any affect is observed, it'd be to strengthen the chain. I suggest we stop here.... Best regards, Sarit. Sarit Wolfus - Silver, Gold and Gemstones, handcrafted jewelry http://sarit-jewelry.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Question : Catholic necklace - what is appropriate? | Marisa2 | Beads | 33 | June 13th 04 06:56 AM |
How To Make Ebay Work For You - for beadmakers | Kandice Seeber | Beads | 63 | February 22nd 04 05:45 PM |