[pianotech] Pin Driving Fluid Search

[Al Guecia/AlliedPianoCraft]

Thanks David, that sounds easy enough.

Al -
High Point, NC

--------------------------------------------------
From: "David Love" <davidlovepianos at comcast.net>
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 9:20 AM
To: <pianotech at ptg.org>
Subject: Re: [pianotech] Pin Driving Fluid Search

> That should read dip a 3/16" hammer shank...--too early.
>
> David Love
> www.davidlovepianos.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On 
> Behalf
> Of David Love
> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 6:19 AM
> To: pianotech at ptg.org
> Subject: Re: [pianotech] Pin Driving Fluid Search
>
> Pour a small amount it into a small cup (about 1/2" - 3/4" deep.  Dip a
> 3/16" and swab the hole lightly.  You don't need that much.  Don't work 
> too
> far ahead.  I swab two unisons at a time.
>
> David Love
> www.davidlovepianos.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On 
> Behalf
> Of Al Guecia/AlliedPianoCraft
> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 4:35 AM
> To: pianotech at ptg.org
> Subject: Re: [pianotech] Pin Driving Fluid Search
>
> Ron, thanks for taking the time and posting the results. I have been 
> curious
>
> about the use of PDF's.
>
> My question to those using PDF is, how do you use it, without making a 
> mess
> of the plate and yourself? Not seeing this done, I can't picture to 
> process.
>
> Al -
> High Point, NC
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Ron Nossaman" <rnossaman at cox.net>
> Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 9:26 PM
> To: <pianotech at ptg.org>
> Subject: Re: [pianotech] Pin Driving Fluid Search
>
>> jimialeggio wrote:
>>> I'm interested in experimenting with pin driving fluid.
>>
>> I was curious too, so I did. A couple of months ago, I took a cutoff from
>> one of my hybrid blocks, double-drilled four sets of three holes in it,
>> and tried three arbitrary pin driving fluids. The first row of dry driven
>> pins (the control) were at around 175lbs initially. All the fluid driven
>> pins were considerably lower initially.
>>
>> The dry driven pins are still in the 170-175 range.
>>
>> The second row, which was lacquer sanding sealer, are the lowest, at
>> around 100.
>>
>> The third row, which was Danish oil, started out with very low torque,
>> snapping uncontrollably when moved. This was expected, but I wanted to 
>> see
>
>> where it would end up. Today, it's in the 170-175 range and all pins turn
>> quite nicely. Functionally similar to the dry driven, which surprised me.
>>
>> The forth row was a solution of fresh mixed shellac and rosin (sports
>> supply). It started out fairly low in torque, but now it's in the 170-190
>> range, and turns quite nicely. The readings actually got higher than the
>> dry driven, which also surprised me.
>>
>> So everything I tried (so far) worked about like everything else, in 
>> spite
>
>> of the rather more wide than usual criteria for choice of fluid types. 
>> The
>
>> big difference (so far) is the "settle in" torque range.
>>
>> So it seems to me (so far) that there's an awful lot of smoke being
>> generated in pin driving fluid Neverland. This does *not* surprise me.
>> Maybe 37.2154 years from now, everything but the mythological and
>> universally unobtainable ("Shoulda been here last year. We had TONS of 
>> the
>
>> stuff, but you can't get it now") elixir of torque will spontaneously
>> dissolve the block. It would be fun to be around and see it not happen,
>> except that no one would either notice or care.
>>
>> So my conclusion (so far) is that any sort of sheep dip you can find that
>> isn't obviously or logically outright destructive will probably work 
>> about
>
>> like any to-die-for, unenlightened not eligible, secret handshake, glow 
>> in
>
>> the dark, heal the sick, raise the dead, payable in blood nostrum that
>> unobtainably remains eternally shimmering at the edge of reality like the
>> peripheral Boojums that dart past the doorway when you are looking
>> elsewhere.
>>
>> But that could change.
>> Ron N
>>
>
>