author3
18Instructables109,551Views78Comments
I'm a guy from Hungary. Musician, amateur astronomer, DIY-fan, airplane-fan, etc. My hobbies are important for me. In my home country the DIY-concept is an old tradition, so I became a fan in my early years.

Achievements

10K+ Views Earned a bronze medal
  • SIMPLE BUT PROFESSIONAL TELESCOPE FOR BEGINNER ASTRONOMERS

    Yes, all is clear:-)Sorry, I was perhaps too detailed before, I didn't know you have made it with the recommended lenses.To tell the truth, I'm not sure I know why your scope is so erratic; and, what a coincidence, yesterday I used just this scope I've builded when I wrote this issue above, and - as always - I wondered, how perfect image this small and simple scope has with these achromatic lenses. (Before, in my childhood I'd made a lot of scopes like this, but using simple lenses instead of achromats, and those images were terrible...)So, it must produce good and sharp projection, and I don't have too much ideas, what goes wrong. Some additional advice, I can recall:1. the two smaller lenses in the Ploessl eyepiece must be arranged with the convex sides towards each other. Never mind th…

    see more »

    Yes, all is clear:-)Sorry, I was perhaps too detailed before, I didn't know you have made it with the recommended lenses.To tell the truth, I'm not sure I know why your scope is so erratic; and, what a coincidence, yesterday I used just this scope I've builded when I wrote this issue above, and - as always - I wondered, how perfect image this small and simple scope has with these achromatic lenses. (Before, in my childhood I'd made a lot of scopes like this, but using simple lenses instead of achromats, and those images were terrible...)So, it must produce good and sharp projection, and I don't have too much ideas, what goes wrong. Some additional advice, I can recall:1. the two smaller lenses in the Ploessl eyepiece must be arranged with the convex sides towards each other. Never mind the small airspace between them; 1-2 mms are not important, with this modification only your magnification will change, but only with some percent with the sum focal lenght of the eyepiece. If you put them close, you get the half of their single focal lenght, and this method is OK.2. Avoid tilting the lenses (the large and the two smaller ones). The optical axis must be in line with the center of the lenses and the whole tube. 3. The objective lens must be arranged with its convex side towards the sky. These are the most important rules to get clear and sharp images with a Ploessl and an achromatic objective.4. And... there is something what may cause this error; if the inner surface of the tube is glossy or reflecting the inner light cone from the objective to the eyepiece. Roll a black photo cardboard or some other rough and dark sheet, and put in into the tube to cover its inner wall, or simply paint it black inside with mat black. 5. Try to observe dimmer stars and sharpen the focus on them. If the image is pinhole-like, small and sharp, then your optics is OK. Maybe the "red antenna" is too bright to get sharp image - just like Venus, I told you before. And try to observe Moon - it must be seen covered with craters and hills. The full Moon is not so spectacular throught telescopes, but today, tomorrow and after you can catch her all night long before she gets full:-) If even the Moon is fuzzy or has some halo around, the problem is with your optics...Try these, and don't give up! If you have experiences, share them with me here, I hope your scope will be functional soon.

    View Instructable »
  • SIMPLE BUT PROFESSIONAL TELESCOPE FOR BEGINNER ASTRONOMERS

    ... so, I send you my answer here:Sorry for delaying, now I have some time to answer:-)That effect you observe is both the spheric and chromatic aberration; I explain it above, just in some words, this is generally for the shape and the material of the objectiv lens. Never use plastic lenses - I think your scope's is made of plastic, or perhaps simple glass. With these type of lenses you never get normal, non-aberrated image from celestial objects. If you can't get enjoyable wiev even of Moon, that lenses are really low cost ones.Change the objective lenses (the larger one towards the sky) with an achromatic one (two components, green or blue surface when look at it from sides), the important part is the diameter (to fit it to the place of the old lens), and focus. The larger the focus, t…

    see more »

    ... so, I send you my answer here:Sorry for delaying, now I have some time to answer:-)That effect you observe is both the spheric and chromatic aberration; I explain it above, just in some words, this is generally for the shape and the material of the objectiv lens. Never use plastic lenses - I think your scope's is made of plastic, or perhaps simple glass. With these type of lenses you never get normal, non-aberrated image from celestial objects. If you can't get enjoyable wiev even of Moon, that lenses are really low cost ones.Change the objective lenses (the larger one towards the sky) with an achromatic one (two components, green or blue surface when look at it from sides), the important part is the diameter (to fit it to the place of the old lens), and focus. The larger the focus, the bigger the magnification. But never forget the focal point must be inside the original tube to reach it with the eyepiece. The focal lenght is measureable if you aim to a far light source (2-300 meters) and find the smallest size spot projecting its image. Compare the focal lenght this way, and measure the tube lenght, because the effective tube lenght will be added the focal lenght of the obj. and the eyepiece (for ex.: 500mm plus 10mm).This is the objective. The eyepiece is the other part - I recommend you to try it with the new objeective lens, this usually must be enough in the first round to get clearer images. If not, try to make a ploessl-eyepiece (see above), and never forget: use at least achromats for the enjoyable vision on the sky.Fhtang:-)

    View Instructable »
  • SIMPLE BUT PROFESSIONAL TELESCOPE FOR BEGINNER ASTRONOMERS

    The eyepiece can be the same, the magnification will be higher, using the common formula: Magn=Focal lenght of Objective / focal lenght of EyepieceWith this objective lens your scope will be a good accessory for stargazing!Fhtang:-)

    Ah, I see...The possible causes of these erratic phenomenons are:1. Yes, really, the unauthorized cleaning may cause this, but alcohol never does any damage when you use the swab carefully. But the plastic lenses may be damaged by alcohol, if it is not pure, or has any other ingredient (f.e.: some sort of diluents, paint thinner or benzol...) These materials solves the plastic. If your lenses are made of glass, and are coated optics, the coating is very damageable by rubbing. But the fuzzy spot made the optics with damaged surface is not so likely.2. Tilted optics. This may cause a very typical error; the lights sources are oval, the image is unsharp at the side. But some small tilted position with a longer focal lenght is not so visible.3. The orientation. This is a more difficult possi…

    see more »

    Ah, I see...The possible causes of these erratic phenomenons are:1. Yes, really, the unauthorized cleaning may cause this, but alcohol never does any damage when you use the swab carefully. But the plastic lenses may be damaged by alcohol, if it is not pure, or has any other ingredient (f.e.: some sort of diluents, paint thinner or benzol...) These materials solves the plastic. If your lenses are made of glass, and are coated optics, the coating is very damageable by rubbing. But the fuzzy spot made the optics with damaged surface is not so likely.2. Tilted optics. This may cause a very typical error; the lights sources are oval, the image is unsharp at the side. But some small tilted position with a longer focal lenght is not so visible.3. The orientation. This is a more difficult possibility; If you have a Fraunhofer-achromat (Two part of the lens, with a very thin air-space between them), NEVER take them apart! The original position of the parts is the only correct position, meaning even the rotating of them! I've seen some wrong assembled objectives with terrible image, while using its the original position the image should have been correct, sharp and anastigmatic and achromatic. So NEVER take apart any two or three parts optics!4. Close object. This is not important, the distance is not problem, because the image is always in the same virtual area in the eyepiece. If you can't recognize the correct shape of a ligth source via the scope, there is a serious projection error inside.As I mean, your scope has this serious problem; and this depends on the objective. IF this is a plastic or single glass version, the problem is common: the projection is poor because of the material of the lens. The visible image is colorized at the edges, the smaller bright objects are fuzzy, the sharpening is not possible. You can moderate this with a blende (a smaller free diameter, covering the objective lens with a cardboard lens cover, with a centered 1/2 diameter hole). This may decrease the errors, but the resolving capacity will be poor, too. The optimal solution is the exchange with a good achromat (the lens which is assembled by two parts with different refractive index.) The cheap one is an "achromat", this is often named "glued optics", because the parts are glued to each other. The image you can see with this is good enough for small scopes with long focal ratio (F8-f12). The better quality achromat is the mentioned Fraunhofer, with almost professional image, but it is not so cheap, and some frame or mounting is necessary for it.When an objectiv is put into the tube in inverse position, the image may be wrong - check this, the (of course assembled) objectiv must have a flatter and a more convex side; the convex side must looks towards the sky. If your objective is the one of these better optics, and the visible objects are poor like you state, so you should test your eyepiece. The plastic lenses are unuseable for scoping, but even with the normal glass ones you may get negative experiences. The better eyepiece is the following, if you can't try it, just take a look on it: there must be some color on the surface when you look at it from side. The blue is the common, the green is more sophisticated - so, if you look this color on an eyepiece, the image must be at least good using it. The plastic - as I mentioned - is good for the garbage, while the normal glass is perhaps good for a try. On the eyepieces you can find markings, some of them: coated or (full) multi coated means these are good optics enough, the "Plössl", "Kellner", or "Barium" is the normal entry level, but these are widely useful ones. The "H" or "R" menas Huygens and Ramsden type eyepieces - perhaps here you can find better ones, but these systems are very anachronistic, old stuff.Well, shortly: with plastic lenses don't wait any valuable images, and you get almost the same with the normal glass accessories. If so, try to swap to an achromat (see before). If the optics is an achromat, check it, if it's a Fraunfofer, and it in its correct position, and was never unassembled, or check the eyepiece. Fhtang:-)

    View Instructable »
  • SIMPLE BUT PROFESSIONAL TELESCOPE FOR BEGINNER ASTRONOMERS

    Hi!Unfortunately Venus is the one of the hardest object to observe via scopes, and this is because of its very strong light. (I have to fight for it with even professional scopes.) Its light is so strong, you can't get normal image of it, unless you don't use some accesories. The most simple one is a cap on the objectiv lens with a small hole on its center. Decrease the aperture of the objejtive lens radically to get lesser light, don't be afraid, perhaps you must go down just 5-10 mm. The planet will be dimmer, so you can sharpen the image better with the focuser, and you can behold its phases like a miniature Moon. But with this method the resolution of the seen image will decrease too, but never mind, Venus never will show you any surface plus behind its homogen cloud layer.The other…

    see more »

    Hi!Unfortunately Venus is the one of the hardest object to observe via scopes, and this is because of its very strong light. (I have to fight for it with even professional scopes.) Its light is so strong, you can't get normal image of it, unless you don't use some accesories. The most simple one is a cap on the objectiv lens with a small hole on its center. Decrease the aperture of the objejtive lens radically to get lesser light, don't be afraid, perhaps you must go down just 5-10 mm. The planet will be dimmer, so you can sharpen the image better with the focuser, and you can behold its phases like a miniature Moon. But with this method the resolution of the seen image will decrease too, but never mind, Venus never will show you any surface plus behind its homogen cloud layer.The other method is some filter, which is able to decrease the light, and this is a better way to save the original resolution rate, but these filters are special and are not too cheap. Perhaps some old sunglesses will help, if you creative enough - put it after the eyepiece. The most pro way is the polarization filter, which has option to change the "darkness" - you can make one using polarized 3D movie eyeglasses. Put two layer of its "glass" on each other, and as you set their position angle, the amount of the light will change it can absorb. This is can be put after the eyepiece.

    View Instructable »
  • SIMPLE BUT PROFESSIONAL TELESCOPE FOR BEGINNER ASTRONOMERS

    Sorry, Frr33spirit3d, I've replied for you that long issue, but I located wrong place:-)

    Sorry for delaying, now I have some time to answer:-)That effect you observe is both the spheric and chromatic aberration; I explain it above, just in some words, this is generally for the shape and the material of the objectiv lens. Never use plastic lenses - I think your scope's is made of plastic, or perhaps simple glass. With these type of lenses you never get normal, non-aberrated image from celestial objects. If you can't get enjoyable wiev even of Moon, that lenses are really low cost ones.Change the objective lenses (the larger one towards the sky) with an achromatic one (two components, green or blue surface when look at it from sides), the important part is the diameter (to fit it to the place of the old lens), and focus. The larger the focus, the bigger the magnification. But n…

    see more »

    Sorry for delaying, now I have some time to answer:-)That effect you observe is both the spheric and chromatic aberration; I explain it above, just in some words, this is generally for the shape and the material of the objectiv lens. Never use plastic lenses - I think your scope's is made of plastic, or perhaps simple glass. With these type of lenses you never get normal, non-aberrated image from celestial objects. If you can't get enjoyable wiev even of Moon, that lenses are really low cost ones.Change the objective lenses (the larger one towards the sky) with an achromatic one (two components, green or blue surface when look at it from sides), the important part is the diameter (to fit it to the place of the old lens), and focus. The larger the focus, the bigger the magnification. But never forget the focal point must be inside the original tube to reach it with the eyepiece. The focal lenght is measureable if you aim to a far light source (2-300 meters) and find the smallest size spot projecting its image. Compare the focal lenght this way, and measure the tube lenght, because the effective tube lenght will be added the focal lenght of the obj. and the eyepiece (for ex.: 500mm plus 10mm).This is the objective. The eyepiece is the other part - I recommend you to try it with the new objeective lens, this usually must be enough in the first round to get clearer images. If not, try to make a ploessl-eyepiece (see above), and never forget: use at least achromats for the enjoyable vision on the sky.Fhtang:-)

    View Instructable »
  • Say Hello With My Roommate Mouse With Arduino

    My favourite instructable story! Of course, it's a rat, but the author of this issue perhaps is the most symphatic fellow I have ever seen! Congrats the idea to say hello for this pretty rodent, and never give up your humanity and humour!Congrats!

    View Instructable »
  • Bocs, nem igazán néztem mostanában, mert egy idő óta idióta robotposztok és hülye fantomfelhasználók jönnek csak inboxba, és kicsit ráuntam, hogy mások idétlenségeit kerülgessem, de írtam neked vissza, itt is megadom az elérhetőségemet: blasius@tabulatura.hu, illetve www.scordatura.hu (itt is van mailcím, de a gmail-es postafiók rendre spamnek nézi a válaszaimat, inkább a blasiusra jelenkezz be.)A lencsére van megoldás. Menjünk át privátba.

    View Instructable »
  • Yeah, I've just noticed your question, sorry. Thanks, and, if you look for 'Bwana' on the 'cigarboxnation.com', well, it's me. I've made a CBG for a lot of years before, then registered there, so I may claim I' a cigar box guy, too:-)By the way, thanks for this help, the bone is o.k. for me now, a friend of mine gave one to me, but now I'm too lazy for bone carving:-)Small amps - my favourite project, I used to build a lot of them for CBG-s or other instruments, and, as the other beloved DIY-hobby, I often make fuzz boxes and overdrives, mixers, amps too. Unfortunately I play rock and blues rarely, because of my medieval ensemble. But thanx for the ideas.Fhtang:-)

    View Instructable »
  • BigCthulhu's instructable Easy Roulette With D6's weekly stats:
    • Easy Roulette With D6
      46 views
      2 favorites
      0 comments
  • Sorry, the joke of my lousy android tap screen... correctly: "more flexible" and "may be connected".

    Nice idea, and congrats. I've just finished an lm386 project, (not the first, in every year I build some...) and this ic is my favourite when building easy but good sound amps for indoor using. I'm a guitarist, and I can claim this amp in its state is perfect for guitarists as a practising indoor equipment. My mentioned project above was just a guitar amp, it's tried, works well. Just a tip to use it morelexible: the pin 8 and 1 may beconnected with a linear pot (5 kohm) to set the gain for other sources.Have a nice day!Fhtang!

    View Instructable »
  • I think, the oak frame with a thin wall will be stable enough, being it is hardwood, just perhaps if the thinness is too small, the instrument will not keep the correct tuning when using more strings (the authentical saxon lyre has five, I use nine), so you will tune it more times than normally would. But the mahogany cover and back is interesting a bit; as I've learned, at least the cover must be soft, light wooden material, like pinewood, to be able to react well the string sound energy via the bridge. That's why lutes (my main instruments between guitars and other plucked instruments on stage) have very light cover made of 1,5 mms pinewood. If you use plywood and mahogany, it may be too big mass because of its density to transmit enough energy from the string to sound loudly. But - of …

    see more »

    I think, the oak frame with a thin wall will be stable enough, being it is hardwood, just perhaps if the thinness is too small, the instrument will not keep the correct tuning when using more strings (the authentical saxon lyre has five, I use nine), so you will tune it more times than normally would. But the mahogany cover and back is interesting a bit; as I've learned, at least the cover must be soft, light wooden material, like pinewood, to be able to react well the string sound energy via the bridge. That's why lutes (my main instruments between guitars and other plucked instruments on stage) have very light cover made of 1,5 mms pinewood. If you use plywood and mahogany, it may be too big mass because of its density to transmit enough energy from the string to sound loudly. But - of course - it's an interesting project to do experiments. The clay and glass is funny:-) Although there are instruments made of clay - ocarina, its sound is pale, but nice. I think these high density and non-elastic materials absorb too many energy from the string when plucked. But an idea for some experiments: try the harder polyurethane foil sheet (people use it as floor-tiles, so it must resist the footsteps) covered 0,5 mm plywood on the both sides; with this plus material you gain a very light, very homogenous and friendly sheet to use as cover, the sound transmitting rate is excellent, and it is only your business what kind of plywood you use. This "composite" sheet may be thinner, about 4-6 mms, and is surprisingly elastic and stable. I don't say this without experiences - I've have had a renaissance guitar (vihuela) made of this experimental material, by my old luthiers master, its face was perfectly wooden look, and the sound was a dream! He made more instruments with this method, guitars and lutes, and the theory works. Just an idea...Won't the aluminium pegs be deformed when you tune? The string forces in it try to twist it; if the peg is not stable enough, you always will fight with the tuning and the correct frequencies. Use hardwood (as at violins or lutes), or iron screws removed the spiral from it, perhaps larger nails. The only part on my own lyre I didn't make myself was the peg; I was lucky , because my harpsichord maker friend gave me a dozen of harpsichord tuning pegs. These pegs are perfect, made of steel, with a hole and a flattened part on the outer end, and a rounded part on the inner. Its installing was not easy - it needed correct and accurate holes, and some soap on the pegs, and a hammer to fix them (the whole procedure is written above with measures and technics).The mahogany part is cca 1 cm thin - this is important for the stable inserting of the pegs. With hardwood frame you won't need any, just make holes into the oak, it is more better than mahogany - anyway, the original saxon lyre frames were made of hardwood, as I've mentioned it was my idea to make it by pinewood, because of my tools and the materials I had.The images about the finished one will make me happy. And the sound, too, please.Have nice days when you are building, and after, too, when playing on it.

    View Instructable »
  • Hello, Tangski, and thanks for your honourable mention of my work. I'm trying to answer your questions. Yo can see a block of pine at the beginning of my issue; the dimensions are cca.: 20x50x4 in centimeters. When cutting the frame try to plan a 2 cms frame side, but perhaps this may seem too thick, but never forget the pinewood is a very light wooden material, think about the deformatons of it when gets humidity from the air, and other influences; so don't let the sides too thin - although this frame will decrease the sound of the lyre. To make it louder use thin cover and back - 1,5-2 millimeters thin - and try to put a 2 mm diameter hardwood stick between the cover and back to connect them, under the point where the bridge presses the cover. This idea was not mentioned in the ible, be…

    see more »

    Hello, Tangski, and thanks for your honourable mention of my work. I'm trying to answer your questions. Yo can see a block of pine at the beginning of my issue; the dimensions are cca.: 20x50x4 in centimeters. When cutting the frame try to plan a 2 cms frame side, but perhaps this may seem too thick, but never forget the pinewood is a very light wooden material, think about the deformatons of it when gets humidity from the air, and other influences; so don't let the sides too thin - although this frame will decrease the sound of the lyre. To make it louder use thin cover and back - 1,5-2 millimeters thin - and try to put a 2 mm diameter hardwood stick between the cover and back to connect them, under the point where the bridge presses the cover. This idea was not mentioned in the ible, because it is not a tradition at lyres (but some similar part is seen on a celtic "crwth", although it starts from the upper leg of the bridge and goes throught the cover to reach the back. The method itself is used at violins at cellos; In Hungarian we call this hardwood stick "soul of the violin", and is a very good, but modern way to increase the loudnes of a stringed instrument. Luthiers use it from 16. century, so it was not available in he 7. c. when our lyre dated from:-) The antler. Thank you, very interesting, I have never worked with antler, I don't know anything of it: hardness, tools to work on it, density, others... but, if you made your own bridge, I'll honestly interested your experience, and I'd try it, if you can send me a small one - thanks for it. Anyway, you mention Nord; are you from there somewhere? The soundhole is locate above the bridge, but not to touch the soundbox upper edge, I didn't use any math, but 'm sure there would be formula for that (my good friend, the old instrument maker master uses formulae for everything, but in my opinion a saxonian soldier, who owned the original SuttonHoo lyre, didn't when made his instrument. So nor did I.)The tuner key is a hexagonal nut driver, including a proper size nut, with a gap in it. I cut it with a metal saw, the size is equal to the inner diameter of the nut. Cut it only the one side, and stress apart a bit before push it into the hollow, not to fall out when using.Well, I'm glad to see your interest about my lyre, thanks for offering the antler, and I hope you will make a lyre much better than mine. Fhtang:-)

    View Instructable »
  • I see! Thanks for the ible, because this method (with FeCl or other solution, with or without the dissolved resin) is the best way to make DIY semi professional PCB-s. The ironing and toner transferring is my favourite; I've tried some methods, and found this one perfect. Have a nice day, and warm greetings to India from Hungary!

    View Instructable »
  • Hi, UtkarshVerma,Thanks for it; you are perfectly right to promote the common materials in the DIY-projects! The good news are, these ingredients are very cheap and simple ones; the materials for the quick liquid is available at any hairdresser's shop and pharmacist for very low price, I got a litre of 33% HCl for about 1-2 eurs (or almost the same $) in a barber shop, and a bottle of 1 litre hydrogen-peroxide in 30% for some euros too, and this amount of ingredients have been using by me for 3-4 years. Not a big budget, at all. And the pure alcohol is more cheap in pharmacies, while the resin is also found with a little luck, when you have musician friends - I have, being a musician myself, too:-)When using, the recommended amount of these liquors are centiliters, so the price is even mo…

    see more »

    Hi, UtkarshVerma,Thanks for it; you are perfectly right to promote the common materials in the DIY-projects! The good news are, these ingredients are very cheap and simple ones; the materials for the quick liquid is available at any hairdresser's shop and pharmacist for very low price, I got a litre of 33% HCl for about 1-2 eurs (or almost the same $) in a barber shop, and a bottle of 1 litre hydrogen-peroxide in 30% for some euros too, and this amount of ingredients have been using by me for 3-4 years. Not a big budget, at all. And the pure alcohol is more cheap in pharmacies, while the resin is also found with a little luck, when you have musician friends - I have, being a musician myself, too:-)When using, the recommended amount of these liquors are centiliters, so the price is even more comfortable, because you don't need to buy them so often.The HCl is used as solution or primer detergent, while the hydrogen-peroxide is for making the hair blonde. It's my fault, I haven't mentioned that these ingredients are very widely available. Ah, well, and one more tip: when someone doesn't have at home a laser printer, print it by an inkjet, and ask a copy of it in a local Copy Shop, or in a copier at your school, college, etc. - all those copying machines are lasers, so you will have a laser printed copy of your PCB. And use glossy paper if you can, for the optimal result; that sheets transfer the lines when ironing.Have a nice day!

    View Instructable »
  • Hi! This is the best method to make perfect home made PCB-s.Some innovations I do for the safer and faster etching:1. I use so called "quick solution liquor" instead of FeCl, because the FeCl is very slow, and this is not too optimal when you are etching narrow lines on the PCB; they may corrode at te edge when a long time etching is done. My quick liquor is made of 3 ingredient: 1 units of water, 3 units of hydrogen-peroxide, and 2-3 units of HCl (hydrochloric acid). This fluid can etch a smaller PCB for about 1-2 minutes, but beware of the toxic gas, which is arising from the fluid. Try to move the panel in the bath, to make the procedure more quick. Use glover and some mask, and avoid the contact with the etching material.2. After the polishing I fill a small amount of alcoho…

    see more »

    Hi! This is the best method to make perfect home made PCB-s.Some innovations I do for the safer and faster etching:1. I use so called "quick solution liquor" instead of FeCl, because the FeCl is very slow, and this is not too optimal when you are etching narrow lines on the PCB; they may corrode at te edge when a long time etching is done. My quick liquor is made of 3 ingredient: 1 units of water, 3 units of hydrogen-peroxide, and 2-3 units of HCl (hydrochloric acid). This fluid can etch a smaller PCB for about 1-2 minutes, but beware of the toxic gas, which is arising from the fluid. Try to move the panel in the bath, to make the procedure more quick. Use glover and some mask, and avoid the contact with the etching material.2. After the polishing I fill a small amount of alcohol into a tiny bottle or a larger plastic syringue, and dissolve some scraps of resin in it. (The resin is good when you solder to remove the copper oxyde, and the simplest way to get it to ask some used ones from a violinist; they use it always, and they have a lot of debris in their instrument case. That amount is enough for this procedure.)Get some drops of this tincture on a tissue, and polish the coppered surface with it. This removes any fat from it, and cover it with an anti-oxidation layer, but during the soldering even the tin will "run" perfectly on the surface. No pre-tinning is necessary using this method. Try it.Fhtang

    View Instructable »
  • BigCthulhu commented on Covo's instructable SIMPLE Dice Battle Game

    Congrats!I've made a lot of dice-card-battle games before, simple and sophisticated, quick and all evening epic ones, but this is a real gem. I'll adopt it - if possible - in camps and activities I'll organize for children. Thanks! And, if you are interested the fantasy games like this, I send you a very amusing one made by Ray O'Bannon, one of my favourite paper game inventor. Here it is: http://ravensblight.com/ToothAndClaw.htmlFhtang!

    View Instructable »
  • Nice trick, I like that you made invisible the whole video with that "Private video" spell:-)Fhtang!

    View Instructable »
  • BigCthulhu commented on randomtower's instructable Anglo-Saxon Lyre

    Congrats, I've seen your video. If I weren't so lazy, I should had been share one too about my own lyre...:-)Fhtang!

    View Instructable »
  • I'm so happy to meet the one of my favourite soup here:-) Will perhaps the next issue be: "How to make the famous Hungarian 'Túrós csusza pörccel'?" (We made it for our Polish friend last year, they didn't believe that it was possible to make a food with those ingredients:-)Erős Pista RULEZ! (there is a bigger brother name Haragos Pista (Steve, the Furious) - that is more hot than any kind of normal chilli...)There is life beyond the BurgerKing!Congrat, dear, and for your mom in law too from Hungary! És magyarul is: Nagyon örülök, hogy az egyik kedvenc levesemmel talákoztam itt. Lehet, hogy legközelebbi cikk a túrós csuszát mutatja be? (Tavaly a lengyel barátainknak csináltuk meg, és …

    see more »

    I'm so happy to meet the one of my favourite soup here:-) Will perhaps the next issue be: "How to make the famous Hungarian 'Túrós csusza pörccel'?" (We made it for our Polish friend last year, they didn't believe that it was possible to make a food with those ingredients:-)Erős Pista RULEZ! (there is a bigger brother name Haragos Pista (Steve, the Furious) - that is more hot than any kind of normal chilli...)There is life beyond the BurgerKing!Congrat, dear, and for your mom in law too from Hungary! És magyarul is: Nagyon örülök, hogy az egyik kedvenc levesemmel talákoztam itt. Lehet, hogy legközelebbi cikk a túrós csuszát mutatja be? (Tavaly a lengyel barátainknak csináltuk meg, és nem akarták elhinni, hogy ezekből a hozzávalókból is lehet kaját csinálni.:-)Az Erős Pista tényleg RULEZ, de most már lett egy nagy tesó is, a Haragos Pista - bármelyik csilinél is durvábban erős:-)Van élet a Burger Kingen túl is!Szívből gratulálok, a kedves mamának is, innen Magyarországról!Fhtang!

    View Instructable »
  • Thank you, Daraen, I'm very glad to read this. I've seen your deviant page, but how to jump forward?Unfortunately, I can only read the page with those paper templates. Or is this project in progress with continuous advance, as a blog?I'm really interested of your work! And thanks for the post it here!

    View Instructable »
  • Dear simhareddy7521,I'm very glad for you want to build this scope; to tell the truth I haven't too much ideas how to do shipping from this German Company to India, but try order from their English shop: http://astromediashop.co.uk/Components.html , they claim they do shipping worldwide. If you want to build my scope exactly, use the correct list numbers of the lenses, (Art.Nr.: 569.OAL, and Art.Nr.: 551.OAL) but you can find a package with these lenses, a small manual and some cardboard elements to build this scope into a normal plastic tube you can buy in any DIY shops as some plumber pipe. Its name is "The Plumber’s Telescope" here: http://astromediashop.co.uk/Telescopes.htmlDon't order any acrylic lenses! This scope I recommend has a very clear and sharp, good image be…

    see more »

    Dear simhareddy7521,I'm very glad for you want to build this scope; to tell the truth I haven't too much ideas how to do shipping from this German Company to India, but try order from their English shop: http://astromediashop.co.uk/Components.html , they claim they do shipping worldwide. If you want to build my scope exactly, use the correct list numbers of the lenses, (Art.Nr.: 569.OAL, and Art.Nr.: 551.OAL) but you can find a package with these lenses, a small manual and some cardboard elements to build this scope into a normal plastic tube you can buy in any DIY shops as some plumber pipe. Its name is "The Plumber’s Telescope" here: http://astromediashop.co.uk/Telescopes.htmlDon't order any acrylic lenses! This scope I recommend has a very clear and sharp, good image because uses acromatic dual glass lenses. This is the most important part of it.Don't give up! Clear sky for you, and I hope they will send you a package. If not, try to find acromaths with this or similar parameters, (about a 10 ratio between the diameter and focal lenght) - if the eyepiece lenses are not achromats or they are at least glass made ones, the image of the scope may be correct. But the objective lens must be achromat, if you want a good scope.Fhtang:-)

    View Instructable »
  • Excellent!And you can replace the other dice like D8, D12 up to D100 with some more coins. I'll improve this method with coloured plastic coins with 0-s and 1-s on their sides. Colours for the order, 0-s or 1-s for the binary value.Congrats and Fhtang:-)!

    View Instructable »
    • Build Stork, the Easy But Amazing Flying Wing!
      2,027 views
      81 favorites
      2 comments
  • Hi, mohanbhai! The formula is simple: if you know the focal lenght of the objective lens (the bigger one toward the sky) and the eyepiece (at your eye when observing) you should do a simple distraction: F obj / F epc = Magn.The diameters are not so interesting when counting magnifications, but the diameter of the objective lens determines the resolution of your scope - the bigger diameter increases the resolution and light gathering ability with a quadrant ratio (sorry, I'm not a native in English, too:-)) - that means the 2x diameter gives 4x resolution and light gathering. The magnification depends only on the focal lenght of the obj. and the eyepiece with their ratio in a telescope.If you have a telescope that you want to determine, and there is not any given value on its case or body …

    see more »

    Hi, mohanbhai! The formula is simple: if you know the focal lenght of the objective lens (the bigger one toward the sky) and the eyepiece (at your eye when observing) you should do a simple distraction: F obj / F epc = Magn.The diameters are not so interesting when counting magnifications, but the diameter of the objective lens determines the resolution of your scope - the bigger diameter increases the resolution and light gathering ability with a quadrant ratio (sorry, I'm not a native in English, too:-)) - that means the 2x diameter gives 4x resolution and light gathering. The magnification depends only on the focal lenght of the obj. and the eyepiece with their ratio in a telescope.If you have a telescope that you want to determine, and there is not any given value on its case or body about the focal lenghts, you can use the "poor man's way" to get the magnification: look in the scope, and find an object to estimate the field of view; a roof with tiles, a distant fence, a brickwall, or any multiplicated object which is repeated periodically. Now count or estimate the number of the parts (bricks, tiles, fence rods, etc.), which are seen at the diameter of your field of angle, and turn your scope, look in it from the larger objective lens, to see a small light circle with a very small image at the end of it. Now you should estimate again the number of the parts, (the bricks or tiles), in this circle. This is the all, the ratio of the two numbers gives the magnification: for example you can see 32 fence rods or roof tiles in the scope at the diameter line of the f.o.v., and 3 rods looking from the other side, then your scope has cca. 10x magnification. For a more exact result try to use a stativ or tripod to avoid the errors causing the hand holding moves.Fhtang!

    View Instructable »
  • BigCthulhu commented on 103366's instructable Super Simple Card Trick

    And if you can perform it well, you are better than the Masked Magician, who has failed this trick in a live tv-show. https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=j8tQgHiMGGU

    View Instructable »
  • BigCthulhu commented on Dragwyr's instructable Magic Spell Book

    I made it! Some improvements I recommend: I made a smaller book, with this size my thumb must move smaller (as seen on the pictures), and this is hardly noticeable. I trimmed the edges at the spine from top to bottom, and with this method the rolling edges kept their line, only the angle was changed a bit. And I printed the sheets with ancient fashioned worn and darkened edges, because this may cover the differences between the odd and even pages. When using, I don't roll it at the corners; it's enough to roll the pages with somewhere at the center, upper or lower a bit - nobody can even notice the difference. And my story is the next: the Necronomicon is the most dangerous and demonic tome ever, and nobody can read from it out of a pentagram - I roll the empty pages to DEMONstrate :-) - …

    see more »

    I made it! Some improvements I recommend: I made a smaller book, with this size my thumb must move smaller (as seen on the pictures), and this is hardly noticeable. I trimmed the edges at the spine from top to bottom, and with this method the rolling edges kept their line, only the angle was changed a bit. And I printed the sheets with ancient fashioned worn and darkened edges, because this may cover the differences between the odd and even pages. When using, I don't roll it at the corners; it's enough to roll the pages with somewhere at the center, upper or lower a bit - nobody can even notice the difference. And my story is the next: the Necronomicon is the most dangerous and demonic tome ever, and nobody can read from it out of a pentagram - I roll the empty pages to DEMONstrate :-) - and after draw a pentagram with chalk, perhaps light a magic candle, and roll the pages in this safety circle to show the written pages.Thanks for the idea! Fhtang!:-)

    View Instructable »
  • BigCthulhu commented on Dragwyr's instructable Magic Spell Book

    Nice idea, I'll make this book. Thanks for it!Fhtang!

    View Instructable »
  • Thanks for the serious and long comment. In my country the telescope maker Kulin Gyorgy, "the hungarian John Dobson" said that every student and the adults might look in a telescope at least once in their life, to see what Galileo has seen. He called this moment "Galileo-experience" - no serious observations, but a moment when the outsiders can see a small planet disk, some diffuse spots, and recognizing the naked eye star-like, or invisible objects with them (Jupiter, M13, M31, Orion-belt, etc.). With this concept people may turn towards the astronomy, as more other people turn towards the biology when look through a microscope lens observing the so interesting and weird small beings.My scope is for this "experience" - yes, the magnification is about the sa…

    see more »

    Thanks for the serious and long comment. In my country the telescope maker Kulin Gyorgy, "the hungarian John Dobson" said that every student and the adults might look in a telescope at least once in their life, to see what Galileo has seen. He called this moment "Galileo-experience" - no serious observations, but a moment when the outsiders can see a small planet disk, some diffuse spots, and recognizing the naked eye star-like, or invisible objects with them (Jupiter, M13, M31, Orion-belt, etc.). With this concept people may turn towards the astronomy, as more other people turn towards the biology when look through a microscope lens observing the so interesting and weird small beings.My scope is for this "experience" - yes, the magnification is about the same, but the design - achromatic Kepler-system - is better - wide observing field, and - the most important benefit: no chromatic aberration, sharp and well balanced projection without noticable blue and orange edges around the objects.The contemporary scopes were made with poor optical lenses. A Galilean scope survived the centuries, but its main lens was broken - the examinations revealed its curves and the reconstructed image projection - and they found its optics poor. We may build a replica for some euros using cardboard and the replica lenses - these are normal simple glass lenses, like Galileo's ones - and can try the real Galileo-experience.[http://www.teleskop-austria.at/index.php?produkt=AM-232-HGT]I did, and I can claim its image is enough for the Galileo-experiance. Jovian moons, the disk of Jupiter, the Saturn and its rings - of course not really visible, but something at the disk edges, Mars, Venus phases, and some of easiest binaries... This is the Galileo-replica.By the way, as I remember, in Galileo's observer notes there is a sketch with a planet disk and two smaller disks at the sides of the main disk, and a cyphered note, which says: "I noticed the most outer planet as a three-elements system". This is Saturn, the last of the naked eye visible planets, and his small magnification and poor lenses projected it as a deformed, symmetric thing with "ears" at the edges. The observer couldn't recognize them as a an oval phenomena or ring,With my Kepler-system scope you can recognize the rings, but, to do this a very stable tripod is recommended. No move, no jump for the good observing. But this works only with the double lenses Ploessl eyepiece, with the simple eyepiece the magnification is insufficient for it.The Galilio-story is exaggerated a bit; he was punished not axactly for the theories he spreaded, but for a small but serious mistake: writting his dialogue-form essay about the theory, he personalized the dumb conversator, Simplicius (Simple Man) as the Pope. And, although they were friends and Galileo was a famous person, Vatican had to punish him - there wasn't torture, nor any serious terror, just a cancelling statement (and the ""Eppur si muove!", or "But it moves!" -legend is only the romantic part of the Galileo-legendary) and the house arrest. Other people would be executed for this sin - for example Giordano Bruno, who was burned by the catholicians. Galileo as a pensioner lived in the house arrest, there were friends and pupils around him, he was an old man in this time, and nobody wanted to kill him for his theories.You find Jupiter to be a bright white orb without any detail at all; perhaps one or two darker line is visible as a belt on the disk, when you can sharpen well with the eyepiece. And the moons (or satellits) of it is always visible even in a 4 cm diameter scope."Some amateur planet watchers construct very long focal length (low "f" number) reflectors to reduce the glare and increase magnification." - you say. Yes, but there is an other purpose of this design - with this long focal distance they could decrease the chromatic aberration of the simple lenses. This aberration I mentioned my issue is a very disturbing error of the simple lenses, that's why I always recommend the achromats for any scopes.Fhtang

    View Instructable »