Main Discussion Area > Arrows

Compressing Shafts.

<< < (9/10) > >>

Justin Snyder:
Tested the idea on several types of wood. I was trying to understand the dynamics of bending wood, not building arrows.

Diligence:
I wonder if an 11/32 shaft which has been reduced with the burnishing tool to 5/16 has a larger spine than a 5/16, non-burnished shaft?  (ie. measure of spine differences as a result of burnishing and compressing, rather than spine losses from the smaller diameter).

I would guess that the spine is higher for the burnished 5/16 shaft, as compared to the non-burnished 5/16 shaft. (of the same shaft material)

anybody?

J

CraigMBeckett:
Diligence,


--- Quote ---I wonder if an 11/32 shaft which has been reduced with the burnishing tool to 5/16 has a larger spine than a 5/16, non-burnished shaft?  (ie. measure of spine differences as a result of burnishing and compressing, rather than spine losses from the smaller diameter).

--- End quote ---

Given the differences in spine between different pieces of wood I doubt that you could get a definitive answer to the question unless a large number of tests were done and you would have to start with pairs of 11/32 shafts of equal spine, reduce one by use of the swage, the other by say a plane. You would also have to prove that mereley reducing the diameter of a pair of shafts that began at the same spine produces smaller diameter shafts of the same spine.

Craig

mullet:
 To keep it simple, thin bends easier than thick, Nootons Law of Compression.

Hillbilly:
I like fig Newtons.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page