Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => Arrows => Topic started by: Wooden Spring on February 03, 2014, 09:46:24 am
-
OK, first off, this isn't my design, so, if you are the one who came up with this bit of genius, please let yourself be known so I can give you credit...
I saw this online in one of my searches, and, after having ALREADY spent $350 bucks for the Lee Valley Dowel Maker (which doesn't work for crap by the way), I decided to give it a try.
FIRST AND FOREMOST, find out what kind of music that your bows like. Until you do this, your bows and arrows will resist proper construction. Mine happen to like blues... When you find what they like, play it LOUD... bows and arrows are a little deaf from all those people who suspiciously "knock on wood."
1) Start with a 2 inch by 2 inch by about 8 inch block of hardwood. I had a piece of purpleheart lying around, so I used that.
2) You'll need to first drill (2) concentric holes halfway through the block. The first needs to be a 23/32" (18mm) hole that will allow a 1/2" piece of square stock to enter the "feed" side of the jig. This hole needs to be drilled with a forstner bit. The other size of the concentric holes needs to be whatever your finished arrow size is going to be. i.e. 5/16", 11/32", and 23/64".
3)Now, drill a clearance hole halfway through the bottom of the jig to meet where the two concentric holes have been drilled - this is for a straight router bit. The hole I drilled was 5/8".
4)Drill a couple of mounting holes and attach it to some kind of contrivance to attach it to your router table
5)You'll need a 1/2" square socket for your drill to hold your 1/2" square stock
6)Spin the square stock with the drill quickly, but feed it into the jig slowly. If your arrows are coming out slightly burnished, then you've got everything adjusted properly.
7)Laugh at all those poor saps (like me) who wasted hundreds of dollars on jigs that don't work, and you've built this one out of scrap.
-
More pics...
-
awesome, i will be trying this out for sure. thanks a ton for posting. have a good one, Duck
-
I first posted that type on line about 2001, I thought I had invented it until Jim Davis pointed out it was published in popular mechanics abut 20 years prior to mine. They work very well and are fast and accurate once properly adjusted.
-
Badger,
I wish I had seen your post before I spent the money on a commercial jig that doesn't work!
-
So awesome. Thank you for posting this, I will be trying this out for sure!
-
That's very similar to the jig I use. The only difference is a friend of mine made an awesome titanium block for me. :) Actually 4 separate blocks for 5/16" - 3/8". These are excellent pictures!!
G
-
So, is the straight bit directly under the square stock?
-
The jig I want to make will have one outlet hole with bushings in 1/64 increments from 3/8 to 1/4 that I can just change depending on what size I want.
-
So, is the straight bit directly under the square stock?
Yep, if you'll look at picture 1971, you can see the router bit spinning under the jig. The idea is that you creep up the bit until it is spinning at the same level as the BOTTOM of the finished diameter hole.
-
The jig I want to make will have one outlet hole with bushings in 1/64 increments from 3/8 to 1/4 that I can just change depending on what size I want.
Oh, that would be cool... OK, You've got my brain working in AutoCAD now...
-
I am also going to do them in two steps instead of one. Run them all at 3/8 and then change my feed hole to 3/8 for the final cut at whatever size I want.
-
So, is the straight bit directly under the square stock?
Yep, if you'll look at picture 1971, you can see the router bit spinning under the jig. The idea is that you creep up the bit until it is spinning at the same level as the BOTTOM of the finished diameter hole.
Okee Dokey, sweet. Thank you. I tried to make one similar and was using a straight bit on the bottom of the stock like you are, and I got yelled at on here because of it! lol I am definitely going to make me one like yours.
-
toomanyknots,
Nah, don't let anyone bring ya' down. I'm one of those folks who buck trends on a regular basis just to find out for myself WHY things happen the way they do.
The biggest way that I buck trends these days is that I build backed board bows to exacting dimensions - exacting to the point that they hold tolerances to within the thickness of a pen line. And they produce outstanding, predictable, and repeatable results... I was an architect, so I guess I come by it honestly.
The name of the game is trial and error, and the only WRONG way to do anything is just not to do anything at all!
-
toomanyknots,
Nah, don't let anyone bring ya' down. I'm one of those folks who buck trends on a regular basis just to find out for myself WHY things happen the way they do.
The biggest way that I buck trends these days is that I build backed board bows to exacting dimensions - exacting to the point that they hold tolerances to within the thickness of a pen line. And they produce outstanding, predictable, and repeatable results... I was an architect, so I guess I come by it honestly.
The name of the game is trial and error, and the only WRONG way to do anything is just not to do anything at all!
but....... what if the wood is different densities and bending strengths along the length of the bow?
-
This is the best design I've seen yet......I think I'll build me one by golly. Got a few redwood 2x6's left over from a project, begging' me to run them through the bandsaw. Thanks a bunch.
-
Thesquirrelslinger
"but....... what if the wood is different densities and bending strengths along the length of the bow?"
After building over a dozen of the exact same bow with the same materials and the same dimensions, I've found that the poundages can vary by about 5 pounds +/-...
When I change materials but keep the dimensions the same, obviously the poundages are different, but still, within the new construction, the quality of wood (grain orientation, density of grain, etc) have given a tolerance of about 5 pounds +/-... I've not built thousands of bows like some on here, but in the samples that I have built, it's rare for me to get a tolerance greater than 5 pounds due to the quality of wood.
-
I usually insert a metal drill in my output hole and then adjust until I touch for a rough initial setting.
-
I usually insert a metal drill in my output hole and then adjust until I touch for a rough initial setting.
Yup. That's exactly what I did. And I then adjusted it until I started burnishing the dowels.
For what it's worth, I just got back from a machine shop in town who said they could make me one of these out of stainless steel for around $100 bucks. I can't WAIT to get this! What a bargain... I'm still beating myself up over that Lee Valley tool. Oh, well, I suppose that's what ebay is for. Someone somewhere is bound to want the thing.
-
drill bushings are fairly cheap and could even be installed in a block of hardwood.
they are made from hardened steel (quite a bit harder than most stainless) and come in a variety of styles and can be replaced when worn or the jig need a different size
http://www.reidsupply.com/products/metalworking/drill-busings/
woodenspring
I have built a number of bows the same way with good results. I also use a spreadsheet for design.
When I change materials but keep the dimensions the same, obviously the poundages are different,
would you care to quantify some of the poundage changes you see using different woods in the same design?
willie
-
toomanyknots,
Nah, don't let anyone bring ya' down. I'm one of those folks who buck trends on a regular basis just to find out for myself WHY things happen the way they do.
The biggest way that I buck trends these days is that I build backed board bows to exacting dimensions - exacting to the point that they hold tolerances to within the thickness of a pen line. And they produce outstanding, predictable, and repeatable results... I was an architect, so I guess I come by it honestly.
The name of the game is trial and error, and the only WRONG way to do anything is just not to do anything at all!
Heck yeah. :)
-
I have built a number of bows the same way with good results. I use a spreadsheet for design also.
I have too, mostly bows with pyramid tapers, but also some thickness tapered reflex deflexs.
-
drill bushings are fairly cheap and could even be installed in a block of hardwood.
they are made from hardened steel (quite a bit harder than most stainless) and come in a variety of styles and can be replaced when worn or the jig need a different size
http://www.reidsupply.com/products/metalworking/drill-busings/
woodenspring
I have built a number of bows the same way with good results. I also use a spreadsheet for design.
When I change materials but keep the dimensions the same, obviously the poundages are different,
would you care to quantify some of the poundage changes you see using different woods in the same design?
willie
Willie,
I make my bows 68" long with a 4" handle and 2" fades... They are always 1/2" thick at the fades, and taper to 7/16" at the tips. (by doing this, you'll have very little wood to remove during tillering). Also, all of my bows have pin nocks.
I then start with a 2" wide fade and see where that poundage winds up.
(Note, I never build a bow to an arbitrary size and then tiller it to a certain poundage, I do just the opposite, I build a bow to a certain set of dimensions, and the bow's poundage is what it winds up being.)
This is always a starting point for me when I try a new wood. In the plan below, I have listed the bow wood and dimensions that I have built LOTS of bows to. There's not more listed just because I haven't made a large enough sample yet to call it "repeatable." But the bows listed are fairly repeatable, and easy to make!
Now, keep in mind, if you're using quarter sawn lumber for your belly wood, it's going to be a slightly higher draw weight. If you are using any other cut of wood where the grain is not perfectly vertical as seen from the end view, it's going to be a slightly lower draw weight.
1/8" hickory backing over quarter sawn red oak
> 2" @ fades - 40-45 pounds
> 1 1/2" @ fades - 30-35 pounds
1/8" hickory backing over jatoba
> 2" @ fades - 60-65 pounds
1/8" hickory backing over ipe
> 1 1/4" @ fades - 35 pounds
Let me know if you've got any questions...
-
what type of router bit are you using for making arrows?
-
I use a 1/2" diameter flush trim bit. Available at any hardware store... You really can use whatever diameter bit that you want though.
-
Where does the sawdust exit and have you had any problems regarding a sawdust jam?
-
Where does the sawdust exit and have you had any problems regarding a sawdust jam?
The hole in the bottom of the jig is 5/8" diameter, and my router bit is 1/2" diameter. It sounds like a tight tolerance, but in actuality, it isn't really. There's plenty of room for the dust to fall out the bottom of the jig. I've not had the slightest problem with dust or chip buildup, but if you do, it wouldn't be a big deal to attach a shop vac to your router table.
-
Wooden spring
Thanks for the specs on the different belly woods that you have used. Now that I see your design, I must apologize , as I may have asked the same question earlier. I do not recall our previous discussion, but I do remember putting your design into the spreadsheet a few months back, just out of curiosity. It seems to me that by using the same taper on all of your bows, it is easy to predict fade width for the needed poundage. Have you been measuring densities of the various species you use? Some bowyers maintain that density is a better predictor of draw weight than specie.
Willie
-
Wooden spring
Thanks for the specs on the different belly woods that you have used. Now that I see your design, I must apologize , as I may have asked the same question earlier. I do not recall our previous discussion, but I do remember putting your design into the spreadsheet a few months back, just out of curiosity. It seems to me that by using the same taper on all of your bows, it is easy to predict fade width for the needed poundage. Have you been measuring densities of the various species you use? Some bowyers maintain that density is a better predictor of draw weight than specie.
Willie
I haven't kept track of densities to be honest. I love reading about the technical aspects of bow building, but when it comes down to my own building, I'm more of a "learn by doing" kind of guy, and unfortunately that doesn't lend itself very well to data gathering...
I make a bow (ok, LOTS of bows) of a certain set of dimensions and materials, then based on the average performance of those bows, I can say with a reasonable amount of certaintly that, a certain dimensions with a certain wood will have a given tolerance of poundage and performance.
To me, that seems a bit more tangable than a spreadsheet of wood properties to try to determine performance. NOT THAT SPREADSHEETS ARE BAD!!! Like I said, I love reading them, I'm just not fond of making them, because inevitably that's going to involve math somewhere, and admittedly, at heart, I'm just too lazy for all that. ;o)
-
Willie, density is a fair predictor when working woods that fall into average elasticity range, most do. When elasticity and design are the same in two bows the thickness will be the same. The actual draw weight adjustment will come in the width. The more elastic a wood is the lighter mass you can potentialy build a bow most of the time.
If woodshavin is using woods similar in density they will likley come out very close in weight. The denser woods would be proportionaly narrower to make the same weight.
-
"The denser woods would be proportionaly narrower to make the same weight."
----------------------
Amen to that... I can make a hickory backed red oak bow at 2 inches wide, and it comes out to 40 pounds.
The same dimensions, but using jatoba instead of red oak, and the bow is now 60 pounds!
-
wooden spring
I hope you don't think that I was advocating you employ excel into your
bowmaking, quite the contrary as I also find the computer/math thing an antithesis to the pleasure of working in the shop. The suggestion to monitor densities was offered as a way to incorporate a simple measuring procedure into your work flow, as a way to increase the certainty and reduce the variation you experience. Contrary to what is often repeated, i have found clear wood to be very consistent in properties.
willie
-
badger
The more elastic a wood is the lighter mass you can potentialy build a bow most of the time.
thanks for this insight, it is just the kind of knowlege that can only come from long experience and observation.
willie
-
wooden spring
I hope you don't think that I was advocating you employ excel into your
bowmaking, quite the contrary as I also find the computer/math thing an antithesis to the pleasure of working in the shop. The suggestion to monitor densities was offered as a way to incorporate a simple measuring procedure into your work flow, as a way to increase the certainty and reduce the variation you experience. Contrary to what is often repeated, i have found clear wood to be very consistent in properties.
willie
No problem. Actually, the only way that I have of consistently measuring wood density is to hide out by my wife's bird feeders and whack squirrels with it until it breaks. Red oak is generally 5 squirrels, while jatoba tends to be about 15.
-
there's easier ways than that. any ripping with a even cross section that can be floated vertically in water will work. the sinking length divided by the total length is the specific gravity. I have often dunked samples the size of pencils into pop bottles My pup would be your best friend forever if you brought your jatoba here to help him with the tree rats
-
there's easier ways than that. any ripping with a even cross section that can be floated vertically in water will work. the sinking length divided by the total length is the specific gravity. I have often dunked samples the size of pencils into pop bottles My pup would be your best friend forever if you brought your jatoba here to help him with the tree rats
OK, that's awesome! As soon as I get the metal version of my jig from the machine shop, I'm going to HAVE to try that!
So would this be a reasonable way to go about determining draw weight based on SG?
Get the SG of wood used in a standard bow. Say, 2" wide at the fades, and 40 pound draw weight.
Next, get the SG of a test sample, and compare that to the SG of the known sample. Let's say the test sample is 5% more dense than the known sample.
Does that mean that the test bow will be 5% heavier draw weight???
-
woodenspring
Does that mean that the test bow will be 5% heavier draw weight???
S.G. and width are pretty much directly proportional, and the width and weight are also directly proportional, so yes to that. As Badger posted earlier, this relationship holds true within an identical design. Hence the reason I thought you might be interested, as you seem to prefer making a lot of bows with the same design. There is a caveat although, and that is moisture content has to be considered when testing the samples. I would simply write the specs of the bow on the sample, and keep the samples for future reference and inspection. One of the regrets I have about the various bows I have made and attempted to make, was that I did not keep very good notes and samples of materiel. Also the changing of designs at a whim made it harder for me to grasp the principles of the craft, as I would not know which effect was caused by what change.
Badger, by the way, was instrumental in bringing these density correlations into the view of the present community. He is the author of The Mass Principle, a chapter in tbb4, and he has developed criteria for using mass to fine tune performance, and extrapolate known qualities into different designs. Perhaps he will weigh in with another nugget of experience.
willie
-
Willie,
That's awesome if a simple density comparison could be used to predict the outcome of a bow... I've never thought of it before.
OK, so MAYBE there's the possibility for extrapolation in bow predictions...
Example:
You have a known sample bow of given dimensions and given density.
You have another wood that tests 5% more dense than the known sample. So, to make a bow out of the test wood that is the same draw weight of the sample, we should reduce the width of the fades by 5%...
Is that an over simplification? I realize there may be many other factors, but will this get us into the ball park?
-
Seems like it loses all the romance once formulas and spreadsheets come into play to me. I prefer to just make chips and go by sight and feel. Guess there's a lot of ways to skin this cat though. I must admit I'm right there with you on those Tab Benoit CD's though. Tab, Albert Cummings and I have shared quite a few projects over the years!
Like your arrow jig by the way!
-
wooden spring,
Is that an over simplification?
not at all,
but will this get us into the ball park?
probably get you on base, at least better than comparing by species
5% accuracy seems doable, 1% might be asking too much
check out badgers thread, down about the middle of the page.
http://www.primitivearcher.com/smf/index.php/board,29.0.html
willie
-
I think the whole thing behind density is that bowyers are working with different kinds of woods, it is not critical that they might get a bow too wide but it is critical that they don't get it too narrow. The denisty range of bow woods is not all that great they average from about 60 to 85. Knowing about how much a specific type of bow should weigh when finished is just a guideline for safety and not over working the wood. Some people assume that the mass principle is about building as low mass bow as possible. Just the opposite it is about having sufficent mass in the right places, My average 66" long osage bow has gone from about 17 oz to closer to 20 oz now and they perform better. ( still look like crap)
-
I am going to make one of these arrow jigs, and am wondering about the function of the top holes. Are they necessary? Do they make it easier to adjust the router depth? Or, (most likely choice), am I missing something?
-
Timbo-
do you mean "top" when looking at the holes facing the viewer in 1966.jpg?, those holes are extra large to provide chip clearance around the cutter.
-
I get it now...I failed to notice that after you connect the jig to the longer wood for clamping, you flip it sideways...duh. I was seeing the side with the diameters marked as the top. Thanks! I figured it must be me...
-
toomanyknots,
Nah, don't let anyone bring ya' down. I'm one of those folks who buck trends on a regular basis just to find out for myself WHY things happen the way they do.
The biggest way that I buck trends these days is that I build backed board bows to exacting dimensions - exacting to the point that they hold tolerances to within the thickness of a pen line. And they produce outstanding, predictable, and repeatable results... I was an architect, so I guess I come by it honestly.
The name of the game is trial and error, and the only WRONG way to do anything is just not to do anything at all!
but....... what if the wood is different densities and bending strengths along the length of the bow?
Very unlikely. We make "pyramid" bows all the time that are uniform thickness throughout the limb and have straight taper sides. Any small amount of variation in material can be corrected by slight scraping.
Back on topic, when you guys run your square stock through the router setup and get the stock in as far as you can with the drill, just unchuck your adapter parts and chuck the drill on the far end of the finished part of the shaft and pull it on through. No need to back your shaft out because the drill can't reach any closer.
Also, there is no need to make your square stock half inch. That just wastes wood. Make the square stock 3/8" and your entrance hole 33/64". You will have a 25% saving in wood.
Your placement of the cutter directly under the shaft avoids having to make an adjustment arrangement, but your cut is cross grain. Putting the router bit at the side of the shaft puts the cut in line with the grain, resulting in a smoother cut. That also allows the use of a dial indicator, making adjustments visible in thousandths of an inch.
Jim Davis
-
asharrow,
Just further proof that there's thousands of ways of doing anything.
Did you ever have a college professor send you home to write the directions to making a peanut butter sandwich? Very interesting results, and one of those results is that it is entirely possible to have an infinite variety of ways of doing anything, and yet still arrive at the same finished result.
I've done it the way that you've mentioned as well, but I really didn't notice any difference in the smoothness of cut. This jig works for me because my router is micro-adjust for vertical adjustments. It's super easy for me to keep the jig secure and move the tooling. But, depending on your router, you may want to keep the tooling secure and move the jig, it's up to you and your tooling.
(That jig and fixture design course that I took in college finally paid off!) :)
-
Also, there is no need to make your square stock half inch. That just wastes wood. Make the square stock 3/8" and your entrance hole 33/64". You will have a 25% saving in wood.
Jim, what is the biggest diameter arrow you can finish with when you start at 3/8 square?
do you use a jig on the tablesaw to rip the squares?
thanks
willie
-
Also, there is no need to make your square stock half inch. That just wastes wood. Make the square stock 3/8" and your entrance hole 33/64". You will have a 25% saving in wood.
Jim, what is the biggest diameter arrow you can finish with when you start at 3/8 square?
do you use a jig on the tablesaw to rip the squares?
thanks
willie
I regularly turn out 23/64 shafts. I don't use that size but some do. I have also made 5\16 shafts from squares that were about 1/64" over that size.
I will add that most of my dowel making is resizing hardwood dowels to make Reparrows. But I make all my arrows from 3/8 squares in 1/4" through 23/64.
Jim
-
Jim, have you tried any tamarak or larch for arrows. I recently bought some and really like it. Looks just like doug fir but a tad heavier.
-
Jim, have you tried any tamarak or larch for arrows. I recently bought some and really like it. Looks just like doug fir but a tad heavier.
I haven't tried larch in a long time and don't have any here in western kentucky. I have looked at its numbers in the past and figured it ought to make a good arrow.
There are a lot of softwoods that make good arrows. It's only when we go chasing the "BEST" arrow wood that we turn up our noses at lots of "good" arrow wood.
Jawge likes white pine in barreled shafts. James Duff liked white spruce when he couldn't get Norway pine and said white pine was good if you got outer wood near the base of the tree.
Woods I have found to be "good" include red and black spruces (white spruce not quite as good), Douglas fir, red pine and yellow pine. I would like to try some others whose numbers have looked good, but I am unlikely to come across any silver fir or other uncommon species.
Jim
-
I have an easier one than that, post pics hopefully soon......... ;)
-
I have an easier one than that, post pics hopefully soon......... ;)
Easier than a block of wood with some holes drilled in it? Sure, I can't wait to see it!
-
If this concept had been around, Howard Hill would have named his book "Hunting the Easy Way." ;)