>Then the final survey (e) might have appeared something like this: >30,46,38,11,9.9,29,5.9] Accounting for friction in the hypothetical touchweight (e - (b - c)): 27,49,38,11,9.9,29,5.9 I'm sure everyone caught that... https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/2007-February/201449.html a. original survey b. Reshape hammers/taper/re-arc tails c. move knuckles out 1mm on shank to 18.5mm d. move stack back 3mm e. alter FW to target 38 BW Survey of C4 UW DW BW F SW FW SBR a 32 60 46 14 10.9 32 6.4 b 26 52 39 13 9.9 32 6.3 c 24 44 34 10 9.9 32 5.8 d 22 38 30 8 9.9 32 5.4 e 30 46 38 8 9.9 24 5.4 Reasoning that the knuckle relocation (c) resulted in a BW & SBR reduction of 5 and a friction factor reduction of 3 (b - c), it's a safe bet that the outcome (e) would have reflected the loss of the gains from that procedure had knuckle relocation not been done. % So had I relocated the stack before relocating the knuckles, I might have been torn as to how far I wanted to get into it. I am happy with the results and probably would have move the knuckles anyway. I never let the thought of a little extra work stop me before. But knowing these results can influence your actions to achive the biggest-bang-for-the-buck. It's amazing what a little extra effort can do for an action and I never can think of a good answer when a customer asks, "Why wasn't it like that from the factory"? However my response to: "How did you do that"?? "Elfin Magic". -- Regards, Jon Page -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/20070205/0ca76df4/attachment.html
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC