Soundboard stiffness variances

Richard Brekne ricb at pianostemmer.no
Sat Feb 9 15:50:50 MST 2008


List.

The discussion basically left off where it began... with many folks in 
apparent confusion... some left with questions dangling and answers were 
evidently not forthcoming any time soon.  Seems like some of the basics 
are misunderstood... and a few basic comparison questions about how CC, 
RC and RC&S boards each get their stiffness and strength degrees in 
different areas of the soundboard have been asked several times over the 
years without any answer being really ever given.

We do have (or should have) a basic grasp of the RC&S approach.  And 
that should suffice to allow for at least some speculative thought as to 
how RC and CC boards do essentially the same thing. I hope by now Dean 
and whomever else has got straightened out about the stiffness to mass 
ratio bit in the tenor and the bass. 

A next logical question, already put to the list by a couple earlier yet 
not answered went along the lines of how much stiffness in general does 
the soundboard require as a minium in all areas..  and then what the 
effect of a given amount of mass is when coupled to this stiffness in 
the various areas.

If one takes one of the basic presepts of the RC&S gang as a starting 
point, that might help to get a few thoughts rolling.  These fellows 
figure a scale, and assume a certain degree of downbearing, and match 
this to a set of ribs.  One of the primary targets here is to leave the 
loaded board in a state that anywhere between 40% to 75 % of its 
unloaded crown remains.  Given a scale, and an assumed string deflection 
angle... its not difficult to figure out what the overall soundboard 
deflection is.  A scale with say 600 lbs of net downbearing force that 
deflects a soundboard to 50 % of its unloaded crown height leaves the 
board (or the rib set as it were) with very predictable amounts of 
residual upbearing force remaining... which can be translated into 
stiffness conceptually.

How does then one figure the same thing for a CC board ?  Clearly using  
rib center cross section or average cross section... or even treating 
the rib as a beam at all isnt going to work out right. It appears that 
to no small degree strengths in these kinds of boards were arrived at 
empirically.  But there should be some kind of way of translating the 
kind of beam strength an RC rib set has to similar strength degrees in a 
CC rib/panel set. 

If I'm not mistaken, in both cases the strength of the resulting 
soundboard is non linear in character.  So as a CC board is loaded... it 
gets increasingly resistive until such point that it is over loaded (ie 
compression failure in the panel occurs). But up until that time one 
might be able to figure how much force it takes to bend a CC rib through 
the use of horizontal strain along the glued face as the panels face 
takes on compression. The stiffness of the CC system at unloaded state 
then could be calculated so as to be comparable to any given RC&S rib 
set.  The only difference from a support perspective would be where the 
<<strength>> of each system is based. If one succeeds in calculating CC 
strengths accurately thus... then they become every bit as predictable 
as an RC&S board.  The same goes for any compression reliant variant.

That done... one can go on to deciphering what basic operating windows 
we are dealing with when it comes to mass to stiffness ratios.  It has 
been stated several times that the degree of mass in a CC rib system is 
not essentially different then an RC&S board.  I am not sure this is the 
case really.  While it is true a rib that is 1 meter long and 28 by 14 
has the same mass whether you align it one way or the other....  I have 
not seen it shown that a rib required to give any given degree of 
support seen as a beam will have the same amount of mass as a rib 
required to combine with soundboard compression to yield that same given 
degree of support.  And if that DOES turn out to be the same.... well 
then one has an indirect way of calculated the needed dimensions right 
there.

Just a bit of food for thought for any of you still interested in this 
thread.

Cheers
RicB

Cheers
RicB






More information about the Pianotech mailing list

This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC