bars.

[jolly roger]

Hi Ed, 
          At that diameter I would have been sure the rod was supposed to
under tension. It's too thin to take much compression. That being said, the
extreme inconsistency in diamentions of Kelly plates you may be dealing
with an odd ball plate.
Maybe it's there to help compensate for poor mfg of plates as a safety
margin. In which case DO NOT remove it.
I don't have the experience on D's that others have, but I have seen the
results of measuring Kelly plates from the foundry. They varied as much as
1/8" in a batch of 12 baldwin L plates from the same production run. This
was the primary reason Baldwin entered a Joint venture with a supplier that
could manufacture consistent plates.  Modern manufacturing methods demands
consistency in this critical area.
Probably the single biggest improvement in the new Baldwin line line has
resulted from the new plate supplier.
Plate, board, bridge, and block is now within very acceptable tolerences.
All measurements within the piano tend to move outwards from the plate. I
know that's a big general statement. Don't get picky.
I think Del had problems with the quality of these plates back in the 80's,
and was the first to try to get some QC in this area. All in vain I might add.
>From an engineering view point, it only seems to make structural sense if
the rod is under tension. At that diameter it will not bear much in the way
of compression or shock loading.
>From the design point of view, it definitely looks like a retro fit, or
after thought, to save on the cost of making new plate patterns. Is the
long strut that weak?????? Or is the plate horn so far to the right that it
is not sharing the load????? I don't know.
My best guess is that it is just a safety margin feature, added because of
some failed plates early in history, and has now been shrouded in mythology.
I would not gamble.
Roger




At 06:21 AM 2/2/01 -0500, you wrote:
>Roger writes: 
><<The rod is a tensioning rod, and is not under
>compression. same principle as the thin cross slats that go between the 
>beams.>>
>
>Umm,.  Roger?  I have to take issue with you here,  the rods are under 
>compression in these two pianos, (Ihave had the strings off of both of them 
>in the past).  I don't think I will be able to get them back in with string 
>tension on the plate, that is why I am considering telling them it would be 
>cheaper to move piano in that take a bar out.  
>Regards, 
>Ed
> 
>