Preemptive CA in bridges?

[Mark Schecter]

Hi, Terry.

Probably at first, the effect would be negligible. But, and here's the 
part that's harder to test, would it, by spreading the work load into a 
larger mass of wood, reduce yielding of the wood over time, IOW promote 
a longer-lasting state of like-new performance? And one advantage of 
water-thin CA is the ability to apply it after the piano is already in 
service.

During rebuilding, where your choice is more wide open, why to you 
choose epoxy over CA? I'm thinking of the CA as penetrating and 
intermingling with the cellular structure of the wood, and that they 
would mutually reinforce. Is it possible the kind of strength this 
provides is actually functionally superior to that provided by higher 
viscosity epoxy, which doesn't penetrate as much?

Thanks for your thoughts.

-Mark Schecter


Farrell wrote:
> I'm not sure how much effect CA will have on a fully assembled newer 
> piano in excellent condition - remember CA has little shear strength - 
> but I think the general idea is a good one. This is why myself, and some 
> others at least, epoxy-treat the bridge pin hole during the pinning 
> procedure of rebuilding. There are different ways to do it, but I swab 
> the bridge pin hole with a length of piano wire dipped in epoxy (I get a 
> couple drops in there). Then I dip the base of the new bridge pin in 
> epoxy and tap it in place.
>