Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Please dont laugh at me!

  1. #1
    Master OptiBoarder LENNY's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    BROOKLYNSK, NY USA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    4,351

    Confused Please dont laugh at me!

    I was at my friends shop today and played with his Kappa edger.
    What I noticed is the blocker measures the height of bifocal segment directly from the center of bifocal line to the eyewear rim dirrectly bellow it.
    I think when I went to school we used to measure the bifocal height to the lowest point of the eyewire!? My friend told me that he always measure bifocal height directly under pupil to the eyewire. And this is how his machine cuts!
    I am surprised?
    Please help!

  2. #2
    Bad address email on file
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Windsor, Canada
    Posts
    314
    Lenny


    You use the "box method" of measurement which I believe is the newer and more standard method.

    As far as I am concerned, you are right and the Kappa is wrong.

  3. #3
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Back in NYC.....Shenzhen, China and Hong Kong
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    1,155
    Lenny, your way is the correct way of taking measurements. However, some people do take measurements in the same manner as your friend. As long as all the work is being done internally then your friend will have no problem. If he were to order Rx lenses from his lab, I would be surprised if he didn't have a problem some of the time with the lenses he receives.

    Doc

  4. #4
    Pomposity! Spexvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    On my soapbox
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,760
    Quote Originally Posted by LENNY
    What I noticed is the blocker measures the height of bifocal segment directly from the center of bifocal line to the eyewear rim dirrectly bellow it.
    Please dont laugh at me!
    Hahahahahahahahaha (sorry, couldn't help myself :p ). DocinChina is correct, and so are you. Your lab probably sent you instructions, as mine did, that tells you the system they use. Check - it's very likely that they use the "seg line to lowest point in the frame" method.
    :cheers:
    ...Just ask me...

  5. #5
    Objection! OptiBoard Gold Supporter shanbaum's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Manchester, CT USA
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    2,976
    Quote Originally Posted by LENNY
    I was at my friends shop today and played with his Kappa edger.
    What I noticed is the blocker measures the height of bifocal segment directly from the center of bifocal line to the eyewear rim dirrectly bellow it.
    I think when I went to school we used to measure the bifocal height to the lowest point of the eyewire!? My friend told me that he always measure bifocal height directly under pupil to the eyewire. And this is how his machine cuts!
    I am surprised?
    Please help!
    There may be a setting on the Kappa that causes it to express the seg height the way you describe (center of seg down to eyewire), because a lot of Brits and some Aussies insist on doing it this way. It is indeed a preposterous way to do it; without a tracing, the number is meaningless.

    And the Kappa most definitely can be set to express heights according to the boxing method with which everyone (else) is familiar.

  6. #6
    Master OptiBoarder LENNY's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    BROOKLYNSK, NY USA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    4,351
    Thanks!

    I thought I was loooooossssisnnnnngggg it!

  7. #7
    Ophthalmic Optician
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    USSA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    12,591
    You may be losing it, but I agree w/ your method as well.

  8. #8
    Master OptiBoarder LENNY's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    BROOKLYNSK, NY USA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    4,351
    So we ARE loosing it together!

  9. #9
    OptiBoardaholic
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    238
    Quote Originally Posted by shanbaum
    There may be a setting on the Kappa that causes it to express the seg height the way you describe (center of seg down to eyewire), because a lot of Brits and some Aussies insist on doing it this way. It is indeed a preposterous way to do it; without a tracing, the number is meaningless.

    And the Kappa most definitely can be set to express heights according to the boxing method with which everyone (else) is familiar.
    Robert is right, some Aussies do use this method, and I agree with Robert's views on it. We are trying to convert those who have strayed from the path. and you can be sure it is not taught that way in their course.

    Regards
    David

  10. #10
    OptiBoard Apprentice Trevor D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Occupation
    Optical Retail
    Posts
    40

    Confused Seg heights

    Quote Originally Posted by David Wilson
    Robert is right, some Aussies do use this method, and I agree with Robert's views on it. We are trying to convert those who have strayed from the path. and you can be sure it is not taught that way in their course.
    David why is that? Every "younger" dispenser i've worked with or for does it this way. They all tell me I'm wrong to measure from the lowest part of the frame and not the PD. I show them the textbook but I never convert them. What happens when you get an aviator frame and different mono pd's? You will end up with differing segment heights. My previous manager avoided the debate with me about it and hated listening to alternate points of view. Besides, he never took a mono PD regardless of Rx or lens type.... :finger:

  11. #11
    Manuf. Lens Surface Treatments
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in Naples FL for the Winter months
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    23,240

    Dead Wroong..................

    Quote Originally Posted by LENNY
    So we ARE loosing it together!

    No Lenny, you are ALL right..................

  12. #12
    Master OptiBoarder Darryl Meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Kansas City, Kansas, United States
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    3,700
    I think the most obvious problem with the British approach is that there is no simple way of determining how far to drop the segment from the geometric center of the former / pattern for blocking and edging purposes (at least without a template of some sort, as Robert pointed out). It also makes it more difficult to verify the segment height (at least without spotting the PD first), since you have no fixed lower reference point. Their system of calculating decentration was equally confusing, though I guess they could at least cut their patterns differently (at the "datum" center instead of the more common geometric center) to compensate for this particular issue.
    Darryl J. Meister, ABOM

  13. #13
    Master OptiBoarder Darryl Meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Kansas City, Kansas, United States
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    3,700

    Ps

    It's also interesting to note that, in spite of the obvious inconsistencies of the British system, they actually had required a 0.5 mm tolerance on segment height, versus the 1.0 mm tolerance that we've been using in the US.
    Darryl J. Meister, ABOM

  14. #14
    RETIRED JRS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    862
    I think that was called the "Datum" method. And if I recall there was also a "British" method that related more to the "Datum" than to the "Box" system. Still have some old text books that describe measuring at 180 for the horizontal and straight down (under eye) for vertical. Included the British way too. I thought it had gone. However, as Robert noted, the machine could be quite capable of units either way. Sold in both US and abroad.
    J. R. Smith


  15. #15
    Master OptiBoarder Darryl Meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Kansas City, Kansas, United States
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    3,700
    Quote Originally Posted by JRS
    I think that was called the "Datum" method
    Yep. I'm not sure whether they still use it though.
    Darryl J. Meister, ABOM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Fear Poll
    By Pete Hanlin in forum Just Conversation
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 04-19-2005, 07:12 AM
  2. World Cup...
    By John R in forum Just Conversation
    Replies: 109
    Last Post: 06-30-2002, 05:09 PM
  3. Good For A Laugh
    By Cindy Hamlin in forum Just Conversation
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-23-2002, 01:09 PM
  4. The maria and john laugh at other nations subject
    By Maria in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 11-05-2000, 05:58 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •