Bob Cleek

You're absolutely correct! I wasn't very clear, was I? It's all Druxey's fault. His post got me all flabunged..    
 
I edited my post to stater it more clearly. The easiest way to remember it is "like the scales on a fish."
 
In fact, Druxey and I were "talking about apples and oranges." The "apples being the order of applying the plates and the "oranges" being the manner of overlapping the plates. The historical research indicates that the process of applying the copper plates was, as Druxey stated more eloquently than I did: "On British Naval ships, plating began at the keel upward and from aft forward. Upper and aft edges of the plates gave the overlap."  That said, it turns out there were a variety of sheathing pattern methods that evolved over time for reasons of economy and ease of application. The "keel upward, aft forward" process was apparently the earlier. Later plate application patterns were all over the map. Some did apply plates ub belts from the waterline down. Others applied them in belts from both the waterline and the keel simultaneously.  Some applied the plates in bands. Other patterns applied the plates diagonally. 
 
So... the "rivet counters" have not only the plate overlaps to obsess over but also the various plating patterns used at various times on particular ships!
 
This article on the most recent re-coppering of USS Constitution discusses the various copper sheathing patterns used on that ship over the years in a fair amount of detail: New Copper Sheathing - USS Constitution Museum (Partial excerpt follows: US Navy publication.)
 
When coppered in the summer of 1797, Constitution‘s lower hull required “12,000 feet of sheet copper” and thousands of copper nails. There is no 18th century plan of the layout of the copper sheathing, but it is probable that the workers at Edmund Hartt’s shipyard began at Constitution‘s stern, down at the keel, and worked their way both forward and upward with row upon row of copper. Each sheet would have overlapped one inch on all sides, with the vertical joints between the sheets facing aft. This created a smooth “fish scale” affect to the hull, thereby preventing the sheets from being lifted by the action of the water. It is understood that the Royal Navy laid its warship copper with the horizontal joints facing upwards and it is possible that Constitution‘s copper was so installed, as depicted in the illustration below.
 

 
Illustration by Stephen Biesty showing a shipyard worker installing USS Constitution‘s first copper sheathing in the summer of 1797.  [USS Constitution Museum Collection. © Stephen Biesty, 2015.]
 
Two mid-to-late 19th century photographs of Constitution, hauled out of the water, offer the rare opportunity to observe, at close hand, the layout of her copper sheathing. Both the 1858 Portsmouth Navy Yard and the 1875 Philadelphia Navy Yard photos clearly show the “no belt” pattern to Constitution‘s copper.
 

 
Salt paper photographic print of Constitution at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in 1858. Note the jagged edge of the unfinished copper sheathing. [USS Constitution Museum Collection]
 

 
USS Constitution in a sectional dock at the Philadelphia Navy Yard, ca. 1875. This photo shows the angle of the ship’s copper and a portion of the hull planking. [Courtesy Naval History & Heritage Command Detachment Boston]
 
As described by Mark Staniforth in his article “The Introduction and Use of Copper Sheathing – A History,” the “‘no belt’ copper pattern resulted from the greater distance from the keel to the waterline amidships than at either bow or stern. This resulted in a ‘bowed’ pattern where there were more rows of copper sheathing amidships and the rows curved sharply upwards at the bow and stern.” [From The Bulletin of the Australian Institute for Maritime Archaeology, Vol. 9, No. 1 of 2, 1985, 30]
 
For the 1927 restoration, a plan was drawn of the proposed layout for the new copper sheathing. Lieutenant John A. Lord’s “U.S. Frigate Constitution Copper Plan,” #25002, dated December 12, 1929, shows an outboard profile of the ship with perfectly straight lines superimposed on the lower hull, representing the lines of copper sheathing. Given the extreme curves to Constitution‘s lower hull, it is nearly impossible to lay the sheathing in perfectly parallel rows.
 

 
“U.S. Frigate Constitution Copper Plan”, #25002, December 12, 1929. [Courtesy Naval History & Heritage Command Detachment Boston]
 
USS Constitution was re-coppered in the 1973-1974 dry docking and again in the 1992 restoration. Each time, the pattern of laying the sheathing on the ship’s lower hull has essentially followed the “goring belt” method established in the 1927 restoration. And, at least since the 1973-1974 re-coppering, the uppermost two rows or so of copper have been covered with red anti-fouling paint, to prevent any marine growth right at the ship’s waterline.

You're absolutely correct! I wasn't very clear, was I? It's all Druxey's fault. His post got me all flabunged..    
 
I edited my post to stater it more clearly. The easiest way to remember it is "like the scales on a fish."
 
In fact, Druxey and I were "talking about apples and oranges." The "apples being the order of applying the plates and the "oranges" being the manner of overlapping the plates. The historical research indicates that the process of applying the copper plates was, as Druxey stated more eloquently than I did: "On British Naval ships, plating began at the keel upward and from aft forward. Upper and aft edges of the plates gave the overlap."  That said, it turns out there were a variety of sheathing pattern methods that evolved over time for reasons of economy and ease of application. The "keel upward, aft forward" process was apparently the earlier. Later plate application patterns were all over the map. Some did apply plates ub belts from the waterline down. Others applied them in belts from both the waterline and the keel simultaneously.  Some applied the plates in bands. Other patterns applied the plates diagonally. 
 
So... the "rivet counters" have not only the plate overlaps to obsess over but also the various plating patterns used at various times on particular ships!
 
This article on the most recent re-coppering of USS Constitution discusses the various copper sheathing patterns used on that ship over the years in a fair amount of detail: New Copper Sheathing - USS Constitution Museum (Partial excerpt follows: US Navy publication.)
 
When coppered in the summer of 1797, Constitution‘s lower hull required “12,000 feet of sheet copper” and thousands of copper nails. There is no 18th century plan of the layout of the copper sheathing, but it is probable that the workers at Edmund Hartt’s shipyard began at Constitution‘s stern, down at the keel, and worked their way both forward and upward with row upon row of copper. Each sheet would have overlapped one inch on all sides, with the vertical joints between the sheets facing aft. This created a smooth “fish scale” affect to the hull, thereby preventing the sheets from being lifted by the action of the water. It is understood that the Royal Navy laid its warship copper with the horizontal joints facing upwards and it is possible that Constitution‘s copper was so installed, as depicted in the illustration below.
 

 
Illustration by Stephen Biesty showing a shipyard worker installing USS Constitution‘s first copper sheathing in the summer of 1797.  [USS Constitution Museum Collection. © Stephen Biesty, 2015.]
 
Two mid-to-late 19th century photographs of Constitution, hauled out of the water, offer the rare opportunity to observe, at close hand, the layout of her copper sheathing. Both the 1858 Portsmouth Navy Yard and the 1875 Philadelphia Navy Yard photos clearly show the “no belt” pattern to Constitution‘s copper.
 

 
Salt paper photographic print of Constitution at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in 1858. Note the jagged edge of the unfinished copper sheathing. [USS Constitution Museum Collection]
 

 
USS Constitution in a sectional dock at the Philadelphia Navy Yard, ca. 1875. This photo shows the angle of the ship’s copper and a portion of the hull planking. [Courtesy Naval History & Heritage Command Detachment Boston]
 
As described by Mark Staniforth in his article “The Introduction and Use of Copper Sheathing – A History,” the “‘no belt’ copper pattern resulted from the greater distance from the keel to the waterline amidships than at either bow or stern. This resulted in a ‘bowed’ pattern where there were more rows of copper sheathing amidships and the rows curved sharply upwards at the bow and stern.” [From The Bulletin of the Australian Institute for Maritime Archaeology, Vol. 9, No. 1 of 2, 1985, 30]
 
For the 1927 restoration, a plan was drawn of the proposed layout for the new copper sheathing. Lieutenant John A. Lord’s “U.S. Frigate Constitution Copper Plan,” #25002, dated December 12, 1929, shows an outboard profile of the ship with perfectly straight lines superimposed on the lower hull, representing the lines of copper sheathing. Given the extreme curves to Constitution‘s lower hull, it is nearly impossible to lay the sheathing in perfectly parallel rows.
 

 
“U.S. Frigate Constitution Copper Plan”, #25002, December 12, 1929. [Courtesy Naval History & Heritage Command Detachment Boston]
 
USS Constitution was re-coppered in the 1973-1974 dry docking and again in the 1992 restoration. Each time, the pattern of laying the sheathing on the ship’s lower hull has essentially followed the “goring belt” method established in the 1927 restoration. And, at least since the 1973-1974 re-coppering, the uppermost two rows or so of copper have been covered with red anti-fouling paint, to prevent any marine growth right at the ship’s waterline.

Being that a machinist's lathe is about the most versatile machine there is, there's a tremendous amount that can be learned about operating one. As a self-teaching lathe operator who has only scratched the surface of what can be known, the best advice anyone ever gave me about leaning to run my 12" Atlas-Craftsman lathe was to get a copy of The Manual of Lathe Operation & Machinists Tables published by the Atlas Press Co., maker of the Atlas-Craftsman lathes. It is not only specific to the Atlas-Craftsman lathes, but to all machinist's lathes in general and has all the information one could need. Fortunately, the 23rd Edition (which I think was the last) published in 1967 is available as a free PDF download from VintageMachinery.org. See: Atlas Press Co. - Publication Reprints - Manual of Lathe Operation & Machinists Tables (MOLO) 23rd Edition | VintageMachinery.org  Just below the lower left hand corner of th picture of the front of the book ("Publication Preview") is a link: "View PDF" in blue printing. Click on that and the whole book should come up on your screen. It may take a few seconds because it's a long 273 page download. Scroll down to read it. 
 
There are also some excellent U.S. military training manuals which are available as free PDF's you can google up. I found those very helpful because the military does an excellent job of teaching the average idiot like me who knows nothing about a subject how to do highly technical things. 

More often than not, water moves past a hull from bow to stern, so that sheets forward should overlap the ones aft.  The same basic principle as the shingles on the roof of your house.
In the vertical is another matter, as ship's roll, there really isn't a general flow of water.  It could be argued that pitching causes higher water pressure moving up the hull, and why you might want to copper top-down.   An argument for bottom-up coppering is the sheets closest to the waterline are the most likely to be damaged; over-zealous cleaning, rubbing against the dock, ice, etc.  While either format can be repaired, the bottom-up would be a little easier to repair.
Bottom-up coppering also covers the points and narrow ends of cut sheets better than the other way, which leaves them exposed and prone to catch stuff, like seaweed, and get pulled loose.
Every photo of a coppered ship, out of the water, that I've seen, the copper was applied bottom-up.  Before photography is anyone's guess, since every source I've seen contradicts every other source I've seen, like Lavery and Longridge.

On that note; copper was nailed with flat headed nails, counter sunk in pre-punched holes, so the nail heads were flush with the sheet's surface.  If your coppering looks like they used the Titannic's rivets, it doesn't matter how they overlap.

The engineering thinking being that the "from aft forward" "forward plate's aft vertical edge overlapping the adjacent after plate's forward vertical edge" reduces drag and reduces the chances of plates being torn off if abraded by anything (e.g., flotsam) that might be struck. Similarly, the "bottom to top" "lower plate's upper horizontal edge overlapping the adjacent upper plate's lower edge" reduces the chances of plates being torn off if abraded by anything if the ship takes the bottom at low tide. (Of course, if the ship takes the bottom for any other reason, the copper sheathing will probably be the least of her problems!  )

The Guterman linen thread seems to only be offered in No. 30 thickness and from their product description is a rather large thread used "for sewing heavy and strong fabrics such as leather and canvas tarpaulins."  It might possibly be suitable for ship models, but with only one size of thread, one would have a hard time getting much of a range of scale sizes out of it. It's also apparently out of stock at the moment, through Amazon, at least. See:  Linen thread from Gütermann creativ | Linen thread (guetermann.com) 
 
Hemp thread should be an interesting alternative to explore. I've read that hemp and flax (linen) fibers are virtually indistinguishable with hemp being preferred for rope making. There are various grades of thread, though, and any particular product will have to be examined for its suitability. Lower grades of linen thread, for example, can be "lumpy" and not of uniform diameter, which will not yield good rigging rope. 
 
I'm sorry if your "A" has a "P" in it at the moment, but it's only begun to ache.  You're almost certainly barking up the wrong tree if you are looking to buy thread in your local Joann's Fabrics or the equivalent home-sewing store. I'll try to give you the very basics and then a link to make your life much easier.  
 
Due to the unavailability of suitable linen thread on the world market, some highly respected European museum curators have given their blessing to the use of "microcore spun polyester" thread in ship model restoration work. For that reason alone, I wouldn't look any farther than that. Like everybody else, I've looked high and low on the internet for linen thread without success, at least as far as suitable size and quality for ship model rope making is concerned. The brand of thread now being recommended for making ship model rigging is "Gutermann Mara." That's just enough information to get you into real trouble because there are actually two sources for Gutermann Mara thread and they each sell different ranges of it. Stay with me now...
 
Because ship modelers rig small scale models with varying sizes, or "weights," of thread, as they're called in the trade, or spin varying sizes of thread into scale rope, where thread of different weights can be found. Retail home-sewing stores will only carry Gutermann Mara thread in a single weight and on spools to fit home sewing machines, and not in the whole range of thread weights we need to make ship model rigging cordage of varying scale sizes. Don't waste your time looking for it at Joann's or Beverley Fabrics. The Gutermann Mara thread we need in a wide range of sizes is sold to their industrial distributors by Gutermann's industrial division in cases of spools of a single color or wound on large "cones" of thread used on industrial sewing machines. Ship modelers have to buy their Gutermann Mara thread from Gutermann's industrial distributors which service commercial customers. It won't be found at a retail home-sewing and fabrics store. 
 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is the "inside dope" from Gutermann's National Sales Manager on this end of the thread business:
 
The difference between Mara from the Retail segment of Gutermann compared to the Industrial segment of Gutermann

"Most fabric stores carry Gutermann Sew All which is a Mara thread and the most common size is Tex 30. Mara is a MicroCore Spun Polyester thread and Tex 30 is the most popular Tex size sold in the home-sewing market.

The spool sizes are smaller, have a different 'weight' per cone and are more suited to domestic machines.

Mara from the Industrial division is the same thread construction, MicroCore Polyester, but the Industrial segment has Tex 19, 25, 30, 40, 60, 100, 200 265 and 400. The spool is different, and the Tex sizes are produced for various fabric weights, stitch types and seaming requirements. The Industrial products are made for use on Industrial machines and often the cones will not run correctly on a domestic or home machine. Industrial Distributors are set up to service small manufacturers, designers, and workrooms who buy a variety of thread types and need a variety of colors - while the Industrial Division of Gutermann sells only by the box of a color or in larger cone sizes compared to the Retail Division.

In some cases there are similar products available from both divisions but in general, the Industrial Division is supplying the manufacturing segment of the business."
 
Difference Between Gutermann and Mara Thread sewing discussion topic @ PatternReview.com
 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 
The thread industry uses a rather confusing system of different thread sizing systems to designate the size of their thread. Some even use one sizing system for natural fiber thread sizing and another system for sizing synthetic fiber thread. Gutermann uses one of the more common thread sizing systems, so as long as you are buying Gutermann thread, the "Tex" system is the only one you need to worry about. Just remember, the higher the Tex number, the thicker the thread size. (Important! Don't confuse Gutermann's in-house "Mara product number" weight grading system with the Tex grading system! The Gutermann "Mara number" system is the reverse of the Tex system. The higher the "Mara product number," the lighter or thinner the thread.) 
 
 Fortunately for us, the Wawak Sewing Supply Company, in New Jersey, I believe, sells the entire range of standard colors and weights of Gutermann Mara poly wrapped poly core thread in eleven graduated thread "weights" (sizes) online. Their service is great and their prices reasonable. (Tip: order a range of thread weights at the same time, based on your desired size scale rigging cordage and pay only their one shipping charge per order.) See: Gutermann Mara 100 Poly Wrapped Poly Core Thread - Tex 30 - WAWAK Sewing Supplies
 
Review all the threads stored at Discussions about Rope Making - Model Ship World™ to find a "cookbook" full of specific "recipes" for spinning specific scale sizes of model ship cordage from specific sizes of thread as well as a collection of rope making "tricks of the trade." There will be instructions on the sizes of Gutermann Mara thread to buy, and a selection of Gutermann color code numbers for standing and running rigging. Everything you need to know is to be found in this MSW forum sub-topic. 
 
 
 
 
 
 

On British Naval ships, plating began at the keel upward and from aft forward. Upper and aft edges of the plates gave the overlap. 

Yes. As explained in the old post below, the signals lockers are on the signals bridge and the lockers, port and starboard, will always be found on any ship by following the signal halyards down from the signals mast to the deck.
 
 

Exactamente! And I believe that the threads on the spindle above the Jacobs chuck accommodate a threaded collet holder for your milling bits. A Morse or Jacobs taper arbor would likely not hold the tapered arbor when side-loaded by milling forces and the arbor and chuck would fall out of the spindle at speed, which might not be pretty. The Jacobs chuck is for vertical drilling, not milling processes.
 
You will have to purchase wedges to match the size of your Jacobs chuck. 

Some machines are designed that if you retract it completely it will self dislodge. That is how the spindle on most lathes work.

If they are ball bearings they are not designed for a side force. As the spindle is vertical I'd suspect they are tapered roller bearings that will take side loading by design so light taps with a soft hammer/mallet should dislodge it.
If not tapered roller bearings then the machine is a poor design mechanically speaking.
 
If you use the long threaded bolt you might damage the threads. The rod should be a larger diameter so as not to engage or contact the threads at all.

Exactamente! And I believe that the threads on the spindle above the Jacobs chuck accommodate a threaded collet holder for your milling bits. A Morse or Jacobs taper arbor would likely not hold the tapered arbor when side-loaded by milling forces and the arbor and chuck would fall out of the spindle at speed, which might not be pretty. The Jacobs chuck is for vertical drilling, not milling processes.
 
You will have to purchase wedges to match the size of your Jacobs chuck. 

Please do not use any hammer on the top of your spindle. The bearings will not like it.
 
You will notice there is a small gap between the top of the chuck and the spindle. They make wedges specifically to separate Jacobs tapers.
 
http://www.jacobschuck.com/Wedge-Set/52.html

When you buy something from Sherline that fits into a Morse Taper it usually comes with a steel pin to tap it out of the tapered socket.  The threaded bolt is to be used for drawing it into the taper, not driving it out.  A piece of steel round stock larger than the hole in the tapered tail of the chuck with the two ends machined or filed square is the correct tool to use.  I believe that the pin supplied with my Jacobs Chuck is 1/2in dia.  A good hard smack should dislodge it.  Keep in mind that since it’s tapered, as soon as it starts to move it should drop out.
 
Roger

No trouble. Google is my friend.  Whenever I look up something like that, I always learn something new along the way, so whatever time I spend is time well spent.
 
Have you considered simply using some square metal bar stock, AKA "key stock?" It comes in many dimensions and types of metal and it shouldn't be  expensive if you go to a local machine shop and ask them to cut you six or eight inches of whatever size you want off of some they should have in stock. They might even let you just scrounge through their off-cuts scrap bin for a few bucks worth. All you'd have to do then was to fashion a handle for them or even just dip one end in some of that "dip and grip" plastic handle coating stuff. 

Current post on the Model Machines website:
 
We are in the process of personal and corporate recovery after the loss of Jim ...
We will not be accepting orders for machines until further notice, but you may still order accessories. We need to complete an inventory and business reorganization, which we hope to accomplish in the next few weeks.
Thank you for your understanding and continued support ...
Donna Byrnes
 
Word on the MSW forum also reported a conversation with Donna Byrnes confirming they would be back to filling orders shortly. Keep an eye on their website for a formal announcement. 

Thank you Keith!
Don't pay attention to the incorrect terms. These are distortions from Google Translate.  

I know that this is picky but correct terminology can sometimes help to understand what one is looking at.
 
The photo in post #157 above does not show  “Rivet Heads.”  These are the “points” of the rivets (the end of the rivet without the head) that have been “closed” hammered while hot to fill the slightly tapered hole in the shell plating. The actual trapezoidal shaped rivet head is on the inside of the shell plating.
 
Roger

Bingo! Ironically, when I first saw your question, this set immediately came to mind. I have had one for a long time and use them quite regularly, usually to set up the fence on table saws I want to rip to their dimensions, or multiples thereof. However, i mistakenly thought you were looking for something longer to replicate the length of the round ones with handles that you'd posted a photo of. At least now I have a collection of links to "brass bar stock" in my "favorites" file!  

Gregory's comment is spot on. Not all polyester threads are necessarily the same for purposes of spinning scale cordage!
 
I want to be sure I have not misled you when I said in my post #18 that, "As mentioned, the museum curators who care for the finest museum models in Europe say that Gutermann Mara MicroCore Spun Polyester thread passed their tests for archival quality. Any decent quality spun polyester thread should be a reasonable choice if you are impatient, but the price of impatience could be the inability to get what you want in the colors and weights you want from a home-sewing store." That statement was in response to your question at post #17, "all great info friends. but the question is what can i use that is available at the simple joanns that has logevity? im stuck here. cotton over polyester or nylon?" It was not my intention to convey simply that "Any decent quality spun polyester thread should be a reasonable choice..." Rather, in the context of your question, "...what can i use that is available at the simple joanns that has logevity? im stuck here. cotton over polyester or nylon?" my statement was qualified: 1) "As mentioned, the museum curators who care for the finest museum models in Europe say that Gutermann Mara MicroCore Spun Polyester thread passed their tests for archival quality." and "Any decent quality spun polyester thread should be a reasonable choice if you are impatient, but the price of impatience could be the inability to get what you want in the colors and weights you want from a home-sewing store."
  
Perhaps I should have answered your question more clearly, by saying, "If for some reason you cannot obtain from the Wawak Sewing Company the Gutermann Mara MicroCore Spun Polyester thread discussed in the forum's Discussions about Rope Making - Model Ship World™ section, any other decent quality spun polyester thread should be chosen as a reasonable substitute ahead of any thread made of any other currently available material."  
 
You can rig your model with whatever thread you wish, obtained from wherever you wish. If you're asking which currently readily available thread has the best archival qualities and where it can be obtained, the best answer I can give you are those to be found at Discussions about Rope Making - Model Ship World™. 

Very interesting, and many thanks. Can I say first that, as other have said, that a problem with Gutermann thread is that it’s very hard to get hold of all the colours that are on their charts.
Now, Steel. The quote I gave is a bit puzzling, as it contrasts ‘cables’ with ‘hawser-laid ropes’. ‘Cables’ here probably does indeed mean anchor cables, but could be interpreted as ‘cable-laid’, which is not quite the same thing. There are a couple of other relevant quotes about tarring from Steel: ‘All cables and cordage to be tarred with good Stockholm tar, without mixture of any other, except about one-third part, which may be of Russia tar.’ And ‘bolt-rope is slack-laid, made white, and stoved and tarred by the sail-maker when used.’ He also explains that  ‘Ropes, from 2 inches to the largest size, for running rigging, are hawser-laid’. Cable-laid rope, particularly if well-tarred, would have made no sense for running rigging, as it would have been too stiff to run through blocks. I was unaware till now of the full complexities of ‘cable laid’ and ‘hawser laid’. I see that there was some controversy about the 27 miles of rope supplied for the Master and Commander film, with suggestions that the right-handed lay was anachronistic, which it was not (Harland in Mariner’s Mirror, 2014, issue 1). A note by Harland (Mariner’s Mirror 2005, issue 3) explains the differences between British and American usage, cable-laid and hawser-laid apparently being synonymous in America, but not in Britain, where, somewhat confusingly, hawsers were cable-laid. Incidentally, I’ve used the online version of Steel at https://www.maritime.org/doc/steel/index.php, which is unexpurgated (but don’t expect to find it titillating). This is easier to read than the  scan of the original edition at archive.org.

Bingo! Ironically, when I first saw your question, this set immediately came to mind. I have had one for a long time and use them quite regularly, usually to set up the fence on table saws I want to rip to their dimensions, or multiples thereof. However, i mistakenly thought you were looking for something longer to replicate the length of the round ones with handles that you'd posted a photo of. At least now I have a collection of links to "brass bar stock" in my "favorites" file!  

Square key stock in various lengths and assorted sizes is available at Brass Key Stock - Grainger Industrial Supply
 
Additional square bar stock, all types and cut to length at Buy Square Bar Online (onlinemetals.com)
 
This material is usually sold in one foot lengths from which lengths are cut off as needed, so I expect most any machine shop would have a supply of various sizes on hand and would cut you off a length priced by the inch. 

Bingo! Ironically, when I first saw your question, this set immediately came to mind. I have had one for a long time and use them quite regularly, usually to set up the fence on table saws I want to rip to their dimensions, or multiples thereof. However, i mistakenly thought you were looking for something longer to replicate the length of the round ones with handles that you'd posted a photo of. At least now I have a collection of links to "brass bar stock" in my "favorites" file!