Main Discussion Area > ABO

Indirect Pressure Percussion

<< < (4/8) > >>

JackCrafty:
That's pressure-assisted percusion, with a composite punch, on a braced workpiece.  The punch doesn't look "supported" unless you are able to get "rapid fire" strikes one after another (but maybe you are... I can't tell for sure).  The striking technique appears to be a "hybrid" that is very similar to using pressure-assisted percussion with a vertical punch.  The entire setup probably acts very similar to Mike Dothager's technique.  Marty's technique uses the "pressure-assistence" sometimes but his shaft punch is a lot more flexible and acts a little differently.

I've tried the pressure-assisted stuff and my main complaint is an increase in mis-strikes caused by the slipping off of the punch just before I strike it.  That often leads to me breaking the workpiece in some annoying way.  In other words, I'm not coordinated. :o

My technique with a horizontal punch leans very strongly to the "supported" side with a freehand hold and very little pressure assistence, if any.  The forces I use are completely different from your setup.  But I'm not saying that I don't like your technique.  It looks awesome! 

Also, I think if you try your technique on something less cooperative than Sonora, you will get a better idea of how the forces are working.  Sonora likes ANY type of tool.  Try it on some Quartzite, Rhyolite, or raw Bull Gravel.   >:D

nclonghunter:
Thanks Patrick, I think you are spot on with your assessment. It is extremely similar to others composite antler pressure punch techniques. I just set it up a little different by sitting down and putting the shaft under my leg and then using a log for supporting the end while sitting in a chair. Not a lot of variation. To me it keeps it more horizontal than vertical, but no question there is an angle to it. My left hand holds the stone anvil wrapped in leather and I can roll it forward or back and change angles for setting up the strike on my leg which is the support. Once I place the antler on the platform by applying pressure with the opposite leg it seems to lock it there for the strike. Sometimes it will slip but not often. I can not do a rapid fire on the rock, it is all a deliberate placing and striking act for me. Maybe someone else could.

I openly admit I have taken what I have seen from others, including yourself and just changed it some. I encourage anyone to give it a try and if it is not for you then try something different.

 To me it is the knowledge and technique of flake removal that is most important. Put a great technique in someones hands that has no knowledge of rock reduction and they will fail. A knapper that is experienced in rock reduction can use many tools and techniques to accomplish the goal.

bubby:
I'll have to try this, i have tried jackcrafty's method but having had both knees replaced i just can't seem to lock the ishi in good enough, gonna try this and see

AncientTech:
NcLonghunter,

The experimentation is impressive.  I see that you have found that you can mount the antler directly into the shaft.  The reason that it does not need to be lashed is because the antler is highly plastic, and will compress when hammered down into the hole.  Then, antler is under tension, and will want to expand.  But, since it cannot expand it creates pressure outwards against the wood.  And, this pressure creates static friction, so that it will not slip.  Thus, lashing is not needed, which actually leads to a second benefit.

Before Philip Churchill passed away, we were looking at a potential case of this sort of tool, from the early 20th century.  At the time, he did not think that the antler bits were fitted in the ends of the flakers.  He thought that they would fall out, during use.  After he died, I carried out an experiment and found that just the opposite was true.  Once the antler bits are pounded in, they are nigh impossible to remove - apart from breaking the flaker in pieces. 

Also, seeing that you understand all of this, I will explain something else.  You can use an enlarged wooden head, with a smaller shaft handle.  If you do this, the tool will not feel so bulky.  And, the heavier end will pivot around the lighter end, when struck. 

If you do this, you may have to upgrade your striker.  That antler striker looks really light.  So far, my experience has been that antler on antler is good, for removing finer flakes that come off at high speeds.  But, if you upgrade your flaker size, then you will need to upgrade your striker size.  It is kind of like a hammer and a nail.  No one would want to use a sledgehammer on a one inch finished nail.  And, no one would want to use the smallest hammer on the largest nail - or railroad spike.  If you use the larger heavier flaker, with the punch bit, you may want to use a wooden mallet, for a flaker.  If you do, then you probably could get away with a hard bump.  It would be like a really heavy car bumping something.  The speed may not be the fastest.  But, the sheer weight can also contribute to the damage.

If you follow this path, then there is a third issue of mass.  If you strike a heavy flake with a heavy percussor, a smaller point is liable to move.  So, how do you increase the point's mass, as it gets smaller and smaller?  You can increase the points mass - at least in terms of behavior - by lashing it to your anvil, so that it behaves as a single object.  This is how you can understand the three masses.  They are like three kings that should be proportionate to one another.  Probably, many experiments failed because people did not understand how to reckon with these three masses.

Lashing a flaker bit is probably good on something like an Ishi stick.  But, the way you are mounting the antler, on the heavy flaker, is probably the way to go if you want to get into really heavy flaking.  Only, you may need an enlarged flaker head, and a narrower handle.  You also should consider the length of the handle, itself.  It is important, because when you striker the flaker head, and the bit bites into the stone, a lighter flaker may want to rebound off the stone.  If the handle is longer, then there is more mass that must be moved if the flaker should bounce away from the stone being flaked. 

If you understand this, then many mythical accounts of flakers, will make sense, in terms of what type of object they were speaking of, especially when they were not speaking of composite bit pressure flakers.  Also, Mrs. Kroeber's words will make sense, if you understand this.  And, what is known of one world renowned knapper, who used unknown tools, will make sense, though he is long gone.  I think that he may still hold the world record for one of his blades.  Also, if you understand all of this, then you will see that there is probably something that we should be looking for in the iconographic work of both the woodlands cultures, and Mesoamerica.   

Also, if we pull back the curtains of modern jargon, and terminology, what can be seen is that many earlier American observers knew about what is finally being done now.  Only, they used different terms.  For example, according to the most knowledgeable student of Native American lithics, a flaker had TWO roles.  A#  A flaker could be used to remove flakes, via pressure.  And, B# a flaker and hammerstone could be used to remove flakes via indirect percussion.  If a flaker is used in this dual manner, then pressure flakes are generated by manually generated pressure, and indirect percussion flakes are generated by the percussive blow of a hammer. 

The logic runs like this:  A person can only generate a limited amount of force, via hand pressure.  Once a person reaches the upper limits of hand generated force, the same process must be carried out, but with a much stronger percussive blow from a hammerstone, instead of hand generated pressure.  It is the same process, only two different types of force are applied - pressure, and percussion (in the form of indirect percussion). 

This was understood by American researchers, in the 1870's, 1880's, 1890's, 1900's, 1910's, and 1920's.  The trail was lost during and after the 1930's, when European academics began to push the soft hammer baton theory, conceived by Barnes, in an English laboratory.  By the way, the Europeans almost never ever listened to the American researchers who had contact with Native American knappers.  If they had listened, they could have revolutionized their own theories, instead of inventing soft hammer baton knapping. 

Anyway, this is a few thoughts from flintknappingdom's most banned flintknapper, still hanging on here, at "Primitive Archer".  Lol.  Also, it is January.  And, it is the one year anniversary of reconciling a historical account with outrepasse flaking, fluting, regular flaking, etc.  One wonderful year has passed.  Maybe I will run an anniversary clip showing all of the tine based outrepasse flakes made since January of 2015.

Have a great year!   
     

nclonghunter:
Ben,  I appreciate your comments and direction you have offered. I will narrow the mass on the large wood composite stick. That sounds like a reasonable and valuable move to remove bulk. You also mentioned lashing the point to the anvil. I have been pondering a way of securing the point to prevent movement away from the strike. I can hold it rather solid but I know it is moving more than I like. Several accounts I have read speak of "clamping" the point and unfortunately I do not know how it was done. I have a few ideas but those are based on what my 2016 brain tells me. I have read that the points or preforms were put into splits in a log which satisfied the same purpose as clamping.

Hopefully we can all learn more and break a bunch of rock for 2016.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page