---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment In a message dated 1/22/2002 10:39:22 PM Pacific Standard Time, pianobuilders@olynet.com writes: > Subj:Re: Baldwin Accu-Just Hitch Pins--General Information > Date:1/22/2002 10:39:22 PM Pacific Standard Time > From:<A HREF="mailto:pianobuilders@olynet.com">pianobuilders@olynet.com</A> > Reply-to:<A HREF="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A> > To:<A HREF="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A> > Sent from the Internet > > > > > >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: <A HREF="mailto:Erwinspiano@AOL.COM">Erwinspiano@AOL.COM</A> >> To: <A HREF="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A> ; <A HREF="mailto:Davehugh@email.msn.com">Davehugh@email.msn.com</A> >> Sent: January 22, 2002 9:50 PM >> Subject: Re: Baldwin Accu-Just Hitch Pins--General Information >> >> >> . Del >> >>> I read John Hartmans articles on the subject in the journal and no >>> disclaimers there as to the specifics you mentioned. I read all of Nick >>> Gravagnes info on the subject many times as to the 1& 1/2 degree method >>> which doesn't really work. No disclaimer there and yes I used that for a >>> while with less than satisfying results. My point is that unintentional >>> dis- information occurs unfortunately. >>> >> > Now, see? That's just what I mean. Obviously Nick's specification worked > for him using his boards, his process and his shop conditions. There was/is > enough different in what you were/are doing to make the results less than > satisfactory to you. From his perspective it probably wasn't > disinformation. > . Del --My first board was one of Nicks. I should have mentioned that Nicks method apparently didn't work for him any better than for me as I learned from him later that he had incorporated pre-stressing along with the other.Talk about disinformation from a well respected Rebuilder!! I've since forgiven him because all his other good qualitys and contributions."Grin"> > > > >> >> >>> >>> Although prestressing isn't as sceintific as measuring rib height >>> ,tension, beam strength, and resultant angle of deflections for bearing >>> values , it does work. But that's not to say that I'm uniterested in >>> calculating bearing in that manner. I just haven't gotten there yet. I >>> would love to compare the end results using both methods and will. >>> >> > I wasn't suggesting that you should measure all this stuff. But, I'll be > you compensate in some manner for it all. Whether you do it consiously or > intuitively is another issue. > > > >>>>>>>>>I was going to say this last night but ran out of gas. Both I > believe. I learned a while back that Ds need real generous amounts of > bearing to move a panel this large, When I'm pounding on the bridge and > driving in the wedges it;s pretty clear how stiff a particular board is to > the tactile sense. > > >> >> >>> >>> As a matter of interest to me we both stated we would apply more >>> bearing on the Baldwin system than the factory specs. suggested. The >>> accujust info. was concise. >>> >>> >> > Well, I have had a bit of experience with them, albeit some time back. (And > I'd also like to see a bit more crown in those ribs.) ....................................>>>>>>>>No Doubt Dale > > Del > ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/36/b1/8d/5b/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC