Heavy Hammers / High Ratio / Ric

[Delwin D Fandrich]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment

  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: Erwinspiano@aol.com=20
  To: pianotech@ptg.org=20
  Sent: September 25, 2003 9:09 PM
  Subject: Re: Heavy Hammers / High Ratio / Ric


  In a message dated 9/25/2003 8:27:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time, =
pianobuilders@olynet.com writes:

  One easy way to do this is to simply change the shape of the =
hammershank.
  The currently in vogue hexagonal hammershank cross-section shape is =
not the
  best. In fact, it's not really very good at all. Many early action =
makers
  used a rectangular shape well out toward the end of the shank. Some of =
the
  Pratt-Read shanks we used in the 1970s started out with this =
rectangular
  shape extending out about 3/4 of the length of the shank in the bass, =
about
  half way through the tenor, and about 1/4 the length in the treble. =
Why
  this is no longer done is a mystery to me. I guess the idea didn't
  originate in Germany.

  Del

    Del
    The Abel shanks have gone to an all thinned shank.Though not the =
shape your are referring to they seem to be made of very stiff Hornbeam, =
I'm guessing now. What is your opinion of this. Mine is that it works =
well with modest hammer weights but now wonder at action saturation with =
heavier hammers. The last set I used was heavier than the octaganal =
shaped Renners. That's wood for you.
     Dale

Yes, I'm aware of all the wondrous claims made for the nearly miraculous =
hornbeam wood. By some accounts you'd think the stuff was stiffer than =
an epoxy/carbon fiber matrix. Comparing the stuff side-by-side with =
decent maple, however, belies many of those claims. Both maple and =
hornbeam are good woods to use for hammershanks, but with both of them =
the shape and cross-section have a considerable affect on the overall =
stiffness of the hammershank. I'm just not a fan of the slender, =
octagonal hammershank -- the bending losses are just too great. =
Especially with heavier hammers. I keep wondering about the rational =
behind this design. It has to be style, structurally it makes no sense =
at all.

Del
---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/5e/29/b8/46/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--