Tuning Square Grands/Tuning Hammer - In theory

[Farrell]

Yeah, but how much torque is required to turn the average square grand tuning pin? Not much torque = not much flex = good accuracy!      :-)

Terry Farrell
  
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "phil frankenberg" <rinkyd@pacbell.net>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 4:26 PM
Subject: Re: Tuning Square Grands/Tuning Hammer - In theory


> Matt
> Your argument appears sound, but I have to agree with Joe's assessment. The
> longer the lever , the more flex. More flex, less accuracy.
> 
> Phil Frankenberg
> Chico, Ca.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matt Wynne" <ptuner@optonline.net>
> To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 3:13 PM
> Subject: Re: Tuning Square Grands/Tuning Hammer - In theory
> 
> 
> > At 11:23 AM 7/1/02 -0700, Joe wrote:
> > >. The longer the lever the greater the mechanical
> > >leverage AND the lesser is the accuracy!
> >
> > Hmm...Joe, wouldn't be the other way around?  Wouldn't it be greater
> accuracy?
> >
> > Let's view a tuning lever as the radius of a circle, and your hand is at a
> > point on the circumference of the circle.
> >
> > On a normal tuning lever where the radius is 12 inches or so, you may have
> > to move your hand, say, 1/4 inch along the circumference of that circle to
> > raise a note, say, 2 cents.
> >
> > When you switch to a longer tuning lever, the circumference is enlarged.
> >
> > To raise the same note the same 2 cents will require more distance, let's
> > say for the sake of argument: 1/2 inch.
> >
> > Therefore, if  the original 1/4 inch of motion will now raise the note 1
> > cent instead of 2, wouldn't you consider that a gain in accuracy?
> >
> > Food for thought.
> > -Matt
> >
>