"Oval or Round Shanks"

[Delwin D Fandrich]

Daleboy@aol.com wrote:
> 
> dear list,
>              Who here can say with positive proof that thinning the sides of
> the shanks is the only acceptable mothod of effecting tone in the upper
> octaves? Might it not be possible that some additional support for left or
> right flex of the hammer in that area might be lost by thinning the sides
> only and thereby losing square hammer to strings contact on harder blows??
>          Isn't side taper a recent trend?
> Thanks much!
> 
> Regards,
> Dale


The strength of a beam varies with the square of its height. The
hammershank is a beam.

Removing material from the sides of a round hammershank (within
reasonable limits) has little effect on its ability to transfer energy
from the jack to the hammer. Taking material off of the top and bottom
will have quite a large effect. There will be quite a lot more bending
during a hard blow.

The best hammershank shape would be one that is rectangular--not round
or oval--right out to the end where it would have to be made round to
fit the bored hole in the hammershank. The cross-section of this
rectangular hammershank, i.e., its width, could be varied as required to
meet the stiffness requirements of transferring the necessary energy to
the hammer mass of each note.

--ddf