gordon stelter wrote: >If the ribs are firmly suported on the ends they will >not be trying to straighten the board out, as they >will be kept in an upward arch independent of board >crowning or gluing. > Thump > > > The more I hear this "the ribs are doing nothing but trying to straighten out the panel" the less it makes sense. Ok so the ribs are bent as part of the crowning process... so is the panel.. but nobody talks about the panel trying to staighten out ribs... yet you could just as well turn the whole "lets blame the panels expansion" argumentation on the ribs. I would suggest that the ribs are not bent simply because the panel is taking on moisture... but because they are made to resist any panel expansion at the interface between ribs and panel. It seems only half a truth and one that easily leads to less then half truths to simply say the ribs are bent by the panel, and do nothing more then resist crown. No doubt the bend in both panel and rib seen as isolated component forces will exert a force that works against crown. Funny how tho the net effect is plenty of crown and plenty strength. Also.... this thread has hinted at a difference between the CC panel and RC panel yet to be brought to light... one that has quite probably significant performance ramifications. This matter of increased stiffness when downbearing is applied to the one, vs constant stiffness for the other. Curious indeed :) Cheers RicB
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC