[CAUT] Checking

[Alan McCoy]

Regarding the S&S recommended tapered height of backchecks, I think it is
simply to allow closer checking in the treble without needing to move the
backchecks closer to the tails. At least that is my supposition, and dim
recollection from my time at S&S 18 yrs ago.

Attached is a pdf from Bill Spurlock's site on tail arcing. Pretty basic
info here, but clearly written as usual from Bill. He talks about
calculating length of tail from the established backcheck height, but
doesn't discuss backcheck height definitively.

Alan 


> From: Jon Page <jonpage at comcast.net>
> Reply-To: "College and University Technicians <caut at ptg.org>" <caut at ptg.org>
> Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 08:07:47 -0500
> To: <caut at ptg.org>
> Subject: [CAUT]  Checking
> 
>>  Any chance of including some pictures illustrating your points,
>> below?  (resized :-)
> 
> Here's a photo of an eased tail with a 3" arc.  A sharp, squared edge
> can wear the
> buckskin faster and could cause an impact ridge on the surface. I
> have a file with
> rough on one side and fine on the other, that was a good find at a
> woodworker's store.
> I don't checker the tails because of the increased noise.
> -- 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Jon Page

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: arcingjig.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 255374 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20061228/9d899c72/attachment-0001.pdf