Official Luthiers Forum! http://luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
Bracing tops that are less stiff http://luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10101&t=40437 |
Page 1 of 1 |
Author: | SKBarbour [ Wed May 22, 2013 5:29 am ] |
Post subject: | Bracing tops that are less stiff |
In another thread Todd had mentioned that figured redwood can be good given some allowances for bracing and top thickness. I did't want to throw that thread off track, so I'll ask here. Todd can you give a little detail on the allowances you are talking about? I assume you mean leaving the top a little thicker and thinning the braces out a little. Am I correct? I wouldn't mind feed back from others as well. Thanks |
Author: | B. Howard [ Wed May 22, 2013 8:14 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Allowances for figured redwood |
I have seen a few custom Breedlove guitars in the past few weeks and all of them have had noticeable and almost scary depressions in front of the bridge. The bridge roll looked to be on the order of 4 degrees or so. |
Author: | SKBarbour [ Wed May 22, 2013 8:46 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Allowances for figured redwood |
Thanks for the answer Todd. Do you think bracing with adi, which from what I understand is stiffer, would help? Along with going a little heavy on the x brace and bridge plate? Brian, you didn't indicate but I assume these Breedloves were figured redwood tops? |
Author: | SKBarbour [ Wed May 22, 2013 10:07 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Bracing tops that are less stiff |
Thanks for all the info Todd. I'm going to be bracing a top in the next month and this is valuable information going into it. One of these days I hope to get the time to drive out to Germantown and meet you and some of the folks that hang out. |
Author: | James Orr [ Wed May 22, 2013 10:11 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Bracing tops that are less stiff |
Kyle, how are you measuring stiffness, and are you measuring the stiffness of your brace stock? |
Author: | SKBarbour [ Wed May 22, 2013 10:52 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Bracing tops that are less stiff |
No, I've never tested brace stock. To be quite honest the last guitar I did, which was my third, was the first that I did any deflection testing on the top. From what I understand of deflection testing, it's a comparison of recorded data. Unfortunately my data consist of one Sitka top, being fairly new to guitar building. When you are testing your brace stock are you getting it to rough dimensions ( 1/4" x 3/4") then testing? The thought never occurred to test brace stock but makes complete sense. |
Author: | SKBarbour [ Wed May 22, 2013 10:57 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Bracing tops that are less stiff |
Sounds like a good time. |
Author: | meddlingfool [ Wed May 22, 2013 12:11 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Bracing tops that are less stiff |
That's the cool thing about deflection testing. Once you have established stiffness parameters that work for you, they should translate into any species of top wood you choose to go with. The only thing I wonder in regards to that is if different woods have different amounts of cold creep.... |
Author: | Link Van Cleave [ Wed May 22, 2013 12:28 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Allowances for figured redwood |
Todd Stock wrote: You might consider reposting with a more general question: how does one handle top woods with lower stiffness than what might be the norm? I use them on smaller guitars. L. |
Author: | DennisK [ Wed May 22, 2013 6:14 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Allowances for figured redwood |
SKBarbour wrote: Thanks for the answer Todd. Do you think bracing with adi, which from what I understand is stiffer, would help? Along with going a little heavy on the x brace and bridge plate? Brian, you didn't indicate but I assume these Breedloves were figured redwood tops? Adi will indeed generally be stiffer at a given size, but you can also just leave the braces a little taller to get the same stiffness increase with sitka or lutz or whatever. I'd also go on the large side for glue area, like 5/16" X brace, since you're gluing to a lot of endgrain. I suspect dealing with the low stiffness would be somewhat similar to my quest to make rosewood topped guitars... except instead of going super thin to get the weight to just a little above normal and ending up with lower stiffness that way, you go thicker and end up with the weight a little above normal but still lower stiffness due to the runout ![]() Here are the tricks I've developed so far to deal with it: 1. Use more braces. 3 fingers, for example, so the unsupported spans of top are smaller and thus not so squishy. 2. Notch braces into eachother, so you can control the stiffness at the junctions rather than having it be purely defined by the stiffness of the plate. 3. Support behind the bridge. Either make the bridge plate much larger, or use a pattern like lattice or fan braces in the lower quadrant. I'm currently liking 5 fans. 4. Strong upper bout structure is a must. I like the L shaped headblock style, glued to the upper transverse brace, not just coming close to it. A-frame should be fine too, if sufficiently tall and notched into the headblock and UTB (again, don't leave high flexibility points at brace junctions). Here's the latest incarnation, although used with super stiff straight grained redwood on my harp guitar: Attachment: Bracing8.jpg It's about .100" thick and still quite stiff by itself, but with 300lbs of tension on it so relative to that it's pretty thin. I probably could have gotten away with 2 fingers since it's stiff enough that it wouldn't be squishy between them, but I think 3 taller fans would show more localized distortion around them than these 5 shorter fans, and the 3 fingers make it all nice and even. I've had strings on it since Friday and it's holding up like a champ, and sounds pretty darn good. I'll be using this exact pattern on my next rosewood top (adjusting for differences in body shape and bridge position, of course), and would most likely do the same for curly redwood. |
Author: | John A [ Thu May 23, 2013 8:00 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Bracing tops that are less stiff |
Quote: and feel free to drop by if you get over this way...we'll round up Chris, Jeff, Filippo, Rach, and a decent bottle of scotch. SKBarbour wrote: Sounds like a good time. Let's go ! (schedule permitting). I will bring some of the Everclear I have sitting here - never mind- I may need that for the shellac. I can supply some dry high quality cigars (I don't smoke but they were gifts) - they just need a humidor - |
Author: | weslewis [ Thu May 23, 2013 8:20 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Bracing tops that are less stiff |
Carbon fiber |
Author: | Trevor Gore [ Thu May 23, 2013 8:55 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Bracing tops that are less stiff |
There's a good book around which shows you how to measure the material properties of the wood you're about to use (using either a static 3 point bend method or a dynamic tap test method) and then tells you how to use those material properties to derive the thickness that you need to reduce that panel to in order to get a consistent vibrational performance from guitar to guitar. It takes both the stiffness and density of the wood into account because the modal vibrational frequencies (which determine a guitar's sound) are dependant on both. So you can figure out the thickness you need for any type of wood top attached to a standard bracing pattern (with instruction on how to design the bracing, as well). Regarding using figured wood tops, Schleske, in his 1990 Catgut Acoustical Soc. paper, related long grain run-out to damping; basically the more run-out, the higher the damping. He was talking spruce, but I don't see why his measurements wouldn't hold for redwood. Figured wood is just lots of reversing run-out. Have to say, having used "good" redwood, with all its splitting and splintering, I wouldn't be in any great hurry to use figured redwood in a guitar I'd sell to a customer. Todd Stock wrote: Mini-Mid-Atlantic gathering...sounds good... Make it mid Pacific and I'll drop by... |
Author: | LarryH [ Thu May 23, 2013 12:50 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Bracing tops that are less stiff |
Todd Stock wrote: ...but I back my tops with a zero clearance insert anyway... There you go again, I just can't seem to keep up with the guitar speak around here. What, pray tell is a zero clearance insert? And I totally agree redwood is just so darn pretty. |
Author: | Robert Hosmer [ Thu May 23, 2013 3:18 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Bracing tops that are less stiff |
LarryH wrote: Todd Stock wrote: ...but I back my tops with a zero clearance insert anyway... There you go again, I just can't seem to keep up with the guitar speak around here. What, pray tell is a zero clearance insert? And I totally agree redwood is just so darn pretty. Wood is completely supported on back side of the cut so as to prevent tearout/splintering during blade exit. On a bandsaw or tablesaw, it's accomplished with an actual insert that hugs the side of the blade. If cutting by hand, additional stock placed underneath accomplishes same effect. With some woods, simply taping the cutline helps. |
Author: | LarryH [ Thu May 23, 2013 4:00 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Bracing tops that are less stiff |
That's what I thought it was but didn't get the context so good. Thanks for the explanation. |
Author: | jeffreyyong [ Tue May 28, 2013 2:02 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Bracing tops that are less stiff |
I only used hardwood for my bracing. |
Author: | Rodger Knox [ Fri May 31, 2013 11:57 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Bracing tops that are less stiff |
Todd Stock wrote: Mini-Mid-Atlantic gathering...sounds good...work it for a weekend afternoon and transition to porch jam and beverages...will check the schedule. How's tomorrow afternoon look? |
Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |