Instability puzzler

[Ron Nossaman]

>> What is it that you suppose is compromised by open end grain 
>> at the doglegs? 
> 
> What do YOU suppose makes a vertically laminated bridge superior to a cut bridge?  

Where the hell did that come from? I don't suppose any such 
thing, and have never said anything to indicate that, that I'm 
aware of.


>(Your cronies can insert there jokes here, about magic cups to catch the sound that leaks out of the end-grain.)  

I don't have cronies. I speak for myself, as directly as I'm able.


>IMO, it's not so much about exposed end grain, as continuity of grain along the entire length of the bridge.  

Fine, so why is continuity of grain along the length of the 
bridge so vitally important, though not clearly apparent in 
practice?


A cut bridge has no continuity, a laminated bridge does, and a 
laminated then cut bridge has some, but not as much.

Fascinating, really. Does this mean anything from a practical 
real world engineering performance standpoint? If so, what?


>> I do this routinely, and am very pleased with 
>> the result. I see only benefits.
> 
> I am not impressed with such testimonials.  

I couldn't care less about your impressions unless you can 
give me sensible reasons for them. I get the impression I'm 
apparently supposed to intuitively sense the necessity and 
superiority of grain continuity along the bridge and accept 
that as an immutable truth. In truth, personal experience has 
indicated to me that it isn't a factor worth the concern it's 
typically afforded. But I'm always willing to be educated. 
Tell me why, not that, I'm wrong.


>To say you get good, or even excellent results does not mean that there might not be an even better way.

As also applies to your approach, doesn't it? Tell me why what 
I'm doing is wrong, and why your way is the only correct way 
to do it. I'd love to know the real stuff.
Ron N