---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
At 11:34 PM +0000 6/11/03, Michael Gamble wrote:
>
>What an elegant design! I have been looking at your new Overs Action
>(patent pending) and comparing it with S&S and Langer. I find your
>jack spring very interesting - a form of single-winged - but it must
>be very strong to give the required hammer-rise: how thick is the
>brass wire for this?
The spring pressure required is less than that required for lifting
an equivalent weight hammer with a standard double wing spring type
action. The wire for making the bass section springs is 0.7 mm
diameter phosphor bronze.
> And your jack toe (tail) which should roll on the button and not rub.
Indeed it does roll across the lett off button, and is one of the
patent claims. If you are interested in further information, there's
a detailed article in the Technical Stuff section of our website
which describes the function of the action in detail.
>One thing I think is due for further thought (though I am sure you
>have considered every possibility!) is the access to the jack
>regulation screw. This type of through-the-let-off button is darned
>difficult to access.
Indeed, easy adjustment of the jack position was something that I was
also mindful of when designing the action. This is why the let-off
button screws are fitted directly into the hammer rail, without
mounting them on a separate wooden rail. This, coupled with the
deliberate positioning of the jack adjuster as high as practical on
the jack, allows for a relatively easy adjustment of the jack
position.
> . . . The angle of the capstan is also an excellent idea. It
>conforms to the radial movement of the lever (whippen) and
>presumably the lever bearing block is aeriated for strength and
>lightness.
Yes, in the prototypes we drilled the black note wippen heels, which
are made deeper than the white note heels in our action, to allow the
capstan/heel to meet the on line of centres at half key dip for both
white and black notes.
> Are the rails of wood or extruded alloy?
The rails are currently of laminated wooden construction. Although I
can't see any reason why a licensing manufacturer couldn't use
extruded aluminium
> Are the action parts other than wood?
At this time all of the action parts are made from hornbeam. I
believe there is a good case for making the repetition lever, at
least, from one of the high performance engineering plastics. But at
this point in time there is considerable unjustified opposition to
synthetic parts. I therefore will wait a while until our action is
better accepted by technicians and the buying public before
incorporating synthetic parts.
>Is there a third drawing which shows the action in the "drop"
>position - ready for repetition?
Yes, the action was developed (prior to manufacturing precise models)
using five separate drawings to show the action at various points of
the key stroke. At this time, only two are publicly available on the
website.
>I wonder how your action compares to Signor Fazioli's - which I have
>never seen.
Paolo Fazioli is using Renner actions for his production pianos at
the present time. He has had one of my actions under test since
earlier this year. However, I haven't heard a report from him as yet.
Best,
Ron O.
--
OVERS PIANOS - SYDNEY
Grand Piano Manufacturers
_______________________
Web http://overspianos.com.au
mailto:info@overspianos.com.au
_______________________
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/7b/2c/76/18/attachment.htm
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC