<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial" bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document face=Arial color=#000000 size=2> <DIV> <DIV>Ron Wrote</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Yes, non linear. Beam deflection is linear. Twice the load on <BR>a beam produces twice the deflection. Panel compression makes <BR>the system non linear so twice the load produces less than <BR>twice the deflection. The spring rate increases as it's <BR>loaded. A purely compression crowned board has a much faster <BR>rate of increasing spring rate than a rib crowned assembly <BR>with only mild panel compression.<BR><BR><BR>> *       Yes and perhaps assumptions are being made in my case too.  I've <BR>> been ribbing at about 6% lately so my evolutionary process continues. <BR><BR><U>Ah, then you're getting down into super soft hammer country <BR>where you'll be adding lots more ribs very soon now.</U></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV> <DIV></DIV> <DIV>   Ron... Are you saying that in Something like a Steinway A (or other) which in my opinion has a pretty good rib scale as far as mechnanical support goes that increasing the beam strength on the original 12 ribs isn't enough stiffness to support bearing without adding more ribs?  </DIV> <DIV>  Dale</DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>