soundboardinstal again

David M. Porritt dm.porritt@verizon.net
Mon, 21 Jul 2003 09:52:27 -0500


Ron:

It looks like Mason & Hamlin did a fantastic marketing job with that
little strip of spruce on the fixture with the business card!  

dave

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 7/21/2003 at 9:15 AM Ron Nossaman wrote:

>>Ron,
>>
>>Me think (may be wrongly) that on the opposite, the fact that a so
>>small dimension is involved show us the importance of a better
joint
>>(last news from the day !)
>
>It doesn't work that way.
>
>
>>The inserting under tension of the soundboard seem the only way to
>>have some tension in the panel, in the rib direction (across grain)
>>the modulus of elasticity is said to be 3 Kg cm2 vs. 100 Kg cm2 in
>>direction of grain.
>>So if we wish to have some tension in the panel that looks like a
>>convenient method, more than compression crowning.
>
>Again, it doesn't work that way. It's not tension you're putting in
the 
>panel, it's compression. Modulus of elasticity and compression
resistance 
>are not the same thing, and MOE is meaningless in this context.
Soundboard 
>crown is still not an end supported arch, so buttressing the edges
will 
>have no significant effect on the crown. In the example rib I used,
of 36" 
>(915mm) and 60' (22M) radius, the outward thrust of the "arch" will
be 40 
>times the load it carries. This means that at 580psi fiber stress 
>proportional limit of cross grain compression of Sitka spruce, that
rib
>can 
>only hold up to 14.5 pounds load before the wood is crushed. It gets
much 
>worse with shorter ribs. Once again, the rim has nearly nothing
whatsoever 
>to do with the maintenance of crown, nor the retention of
compression in 
>the panel. The ribs do that all by themselves.
>
>>Stephen have forced back some boards with shims on the straight
side
>>with good results he say, when we see the dimensions involved, that
>>looks like a possibility.
>
>Yes, I have also heard (or heard of) all sorts of folks saying all
sorts
>of 
>things. The physical fact is that this doesn't work. The physical 
>structural limits of the materials just don't make it possible.
>
>
>>But I seem to understand that in the actual conception in the USA
the
>>soundboard assembly is viewed as an auto supported device is not it
?
>
>Yes, but it's not a view. It's a fact, as is easily demonstrated
that a 
>soundboard assembly has crown, and will support a full load without
being 
>anywhere near a rim.
>
>Ron N
>
>_______________________________________________
>pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives

**************** END MESSAGE FROM  Ron Nossaman *********************
_____________________________
David M. Porritt
dporritt@mail.smu.edu
Meadows School of the Arts
Southern Methodist University
Dallas, TX 75275
_____________________________



This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC