Main Discussion Area > ABO

ABO techniques, processes and tools.

<< < (41/52) > >>

iowabow:
that overshot would not have happened if you would have removed the mass on the other side. That delta on the right lower, second flute needed to be address before the platform was hit. there was too much mass for the flake and it dived

iowabow:
notice you have extra mass on the terminal end?

iowabow:
This is way it takes years for people to learn knapping. We focus on the problem and not on the solution.

AncientTech:

--- Quote from: iowabow on October 20, 2015, 09:53:15 am ---The flake widening (this is when it is not prepared) across a flat surface is equal to a large mass. The increase in total mass to  energy becomes directed down or up relative to energy. The fact that it is near the edge really only clouds the issue. (The following assumes you know how to hold the chert and swing the antler or stone) The mass that the propagated wave and energy encounter are the variables. Therefore changing the energy or the mass produces a given result. This is simple to understand. What you do with this information is the smart guy stuff.

--- End quote ---

There are five physical components involved in the flaking process.  It is the interplay of the components that produces a shift in variables, while the break is forming.  By the time the turn is achieved, some of the variables are no longer the same as when the break was initiated. 

Also, the zone in which the turn occurs is subject to a different set of variables than where the break is initiated from.  The interplay of said components leads to the creation of a final variable, as the flake break reaches the zone where the turn will occur. 

The idea that mass causes a change in energy which leads to a change in direction, is true in some other instances.  But, that is not how I create a controlled overshot with this technology, especially the outrepasse flakes with a large mass on the opposite edge. 

Also, due to the nature of the process, it works far better with evenly grained stone, even if the stone is raw.  It does not always work in the case of stone containing granular concretions, because the granular concretions cause the energy to "scatter", whereas an evenly grained stone is more prone to an even delivery of energy. 

In the case of granular concretions, the energy will scatter, and the break will frequently stop, producing a massive hinge.  So, with this technology, hardness is not so much of an issue as the evenness of the grain. 

StevenT:
Hey guys, I have bit my tongue as long as I can. I was really enjoying this post up to the point it got hi-jacked. Iowabow, I compliment you on a post that goes beyond the copper-ABO debate. It WAS and is a very good demonstration of ABO techniques. That is the good. The bad is that the overshoot, impasse or what ever the heck it is called is really muddying the water. I personally would appreciate it if the main two who just cannot leave that bone alone take your back and forth debate to another thread. Call it the Great Impass Debate and have at it. I'm asking pretty please, with a smile and leave this post alone. Thanks.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page