Mark Davidson wrote: > Richard Brekne wrote: > >Hmmm... are you sure moving the knuckle to yeild same SWR will >bring the > >hammers velocity and distance back to the same for same key >front travel > >?? How did you figure this ? Curious. > > No not sure. But I would hope action ratio and SWR > are at least related. Oh yes... why wouldnt they be ?? This one keeps coming up and I suppose I understand why it confuses so easily... but leverage is... always... one way or the other... leverage. Any ratio expressed in terms of force can be expressed by its corresponding dimensions. Levers have real arms... and effective arms. Everything can always be broken down and related to its horizontal and vertical components. The formula d1 x W1 = d2 x W2 is never in conflict with any of its more complete variants... as long as you keep your vector math straight one can always be translated into another.... I mean really... thats how they extrapolated them all in the first place eh ?? Thats the basis of my claim that the only difference between the Stanwood ratio and the one Overs gives is the perspective. Both can be translated to the other and thus there is no real meaning to the idea that one way is more or less "correct" then the other... which some seem to get hung up on. > Once you start moving knuckles, > friction, compression, flexing, and those sorts of > things are probably more significant than whether you > move a wippen an extra .1 mm anyway. They may be... next part of the discussion... or next round. > > Anyway, I have convinced myself that key, wippen > and hammer acceleration cannot be taken as a simple > sum of inertias per my example. Another spherical cow > slain. > > -Mark > I suspect you're right. Cheers RicB -- Richard Brekne RPT, N.P.T.F. UiB, Bergen, Norway mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html http://www.hf.uib.no/grieg/personer/cv_RB.html
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC