Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => Bows => Topic started by: Prarie Bowyer on June 13, 2012, 11:24:05 am
-
Hi guys!
I’m thinking about the factors that contribute to arrow speed OUTSIDE arrow design. Does sinew add to the performance of a bow or is it only breakage risk reduction? I’m thinking it does because it’s a tendon. It’s applied wet and dries which shrinks it. So it’s under tension when the bow is drawn and It’s trying to return to it’s previous state.
So building a fast bow would be a function of keeping the limbs light and arrow dynamic as possible. I’ve been using the multi lam approach to conserve valuable Ipe but as I think about it the middle core is an opportunity to improve the design for performance. Using a light and rigid wood there helps because it’s not “in the way” of the belly wood and less force is lost trying to push that also.
So as I think about it, if one was after a pure performance bow the Sinew on something like a blend of Ipe (or other seriously hard wood) and carbonized bamboo could be excellent place to start ? ?
What about designs? Is there some consensus on which bow designs tend produce the fastest arrow speeds?
-
OOOOO boy what a can of worms this is gonna be I'm gonna make popcorn and grab a 12 pack. Ron
-
"Does sinew add to the performance"
Why yes it does. From what I know it has a higher resiliency than rubber, and certainly more so than wood.
"What about designs? Is there some consensus on which bow designs tend produce the fastest arrow speeds?"
I don't really remember what the best performing design was in TBB when they measured a bunch of different bows fps, but I am pretty sure that all the designs were simple traditional designs. I think that people who build flight bows might be able to enlighten you a bit too, ;D.
-
Traditional Bowyers Bible, Volume 1, Chapter 3 goes into detail on contributing factors to speed as well as other performance characteristics of a bow. There's some interesting reading for sure on arrow speed in relation to draw length, brace height, profile, etc. Many of the things I see that make a bow faster seem to make it also less user friendly. ie. Shorter limbs/lower mass, low brace height, higher draw weight.
IMO there is a big difference in speed and performance. I don't care how fast a bow is if it hurts to shoot or I can't hit the side of a barn with it. That said if all you want is speed I'm sure someone out there can take your draw length and max draw weight and figure out the most efficient design for your characteristics.
I look forward to seeing what others have to say on this. Good topic that should put some minds to work.
Dan
-
Well this is an easy answer.....just do as i do and hit the nitrous button bro 8)
There is a lot of components big and small that all add up to a fast bow.....proper mass placement in your limbs with any design you choose,design of course(short static reflexed recurves,mollys,R/D bows retaining setback,reflexed bows in any design),maintaining a high early draw weight(which is attained by reflex,and good TILLERING while tillering the bow),draw weight,draw length,perry reflex will add a few fps,tempering woods that gain an advantage in doing so,and the list goes on. You just need to understand what works best for each diff piece of wood and design,and be able to build it in the safe "red zone". Its like a racing engine being revved at high rpms,and if it goes a few higher itll blow. You just need to understand how close to that line you can get without sacrificing durability/breakage. But if all you care about is speed,then who cares,make a one n done and break some speed records(and the bow).
-
Ahhhh Grasshopper (Blackhawk) you learn well!!!
-
This thread could go on for days and hopefully will. Their are a few of us that chase speed as part of the hobby. Once a fast design has been established you will see it quickly become popular and lots of other guys will be building the same fast design. No magic to it, many guys here are not measuring the speed of their bows but they are building designs known to be fast so I am sure their are many very fast bows we never really hear reports on.
Just for the sake of theory you could probably break the speed game down into several categories.
Stored energy, is a product of both design and execution. A bow might have the greatest design potential in the world but if not tillered properly, under built, or overstrained durring the building process the potentail to store energy will quickly disapate,
Efficiency, just means how much of the stored energy in the bow is going into the arrow. Understanding how a bow works helps to make a bow more efficient. A bows job is to accelerate the limbs, the arrows job is to steal as much energy as possible from the limbs and slow the limbs as much as possible before hitting brace height. When we are looking for speed we try and find ways to give the arrow a leverage advantage in slowing the limbs. Long levers with low string angles give leverage back to the arrow. We also want to keep the outer limbs light, not only so they accelerate fast but also so they have less momentum carrying them forward allowing the arrow to have more control over them.. Too much mass in the outer limbs and they will slam home before the inner limb is finished moving and transferring energy to the arrow.
Hysterisis ( lost energy) is a huge power robber in wood bows. My own backyard research indicates that hysterisis is a lot more controllable than often reported in some of the old bow building books. I find the best way to control hysterisis is to use a proper design that can be executed without changing the condition of the wood from when it started. Building a bow with 4" reflex so you can finish with one inch is not bad but it will be a lot better if you can maintain 2 1/2 or 3" of that original reflex. Once the wood starts to breakdown internaly the hysteris goes up pretty fast, I imagine internal friction is the culprit but not really sure. So using enough wood to execute a design and using tillering tecniques that will not break the wood down too much durring the process will add a lot of performance.
For those of you who are interested in working on performance and testing designs their are a few very basic math formulas that are useful and don't require any special math skills.
-
In vol. 4 of the Bowyers Bible, Tim Baker really attacks this subject in Design and Performance Revisited. I think it's the most interesting chapter in the whole series.
According to Mr. Baker:
Sinew is only affective in increasing a bows performance if the bow is highly reflexed.
If the bow is long and straight, combed flax is superior to sinew.
His "mantra" for high performance bows is: Make inner limbs wide or long enough for virtually no set. Make midlimbs wide enough for little set. Make outer-limbs an tips narrow enough for lowest possible mass.
-
Its all about finding the sweet spot between speed, durability, and comfort. I don't care how fast a bow shoots, if I feel my shoulder letting go when I draw it, or if it slaps my wrist everytime I'm probably going to leave it on the rack and opt for a more comfortable bow. If its too slow, I'm probably never going to use it in a real hunting situation which is always my goal for every bow I build. And if its not durable I'm probably only going to get to use it a few times.
But if we're talking exclusively about speed, I would guess that a short, bendy handle, reflexed, sinew backed, pyramid design with recurves or flipped tips, and a tempered belly would make for a screamer. And then you need to find a stave that can handle it all, which is easier said than done.
Also you would probably do well to leave out any tip overlays. They probably don't add enough weight at the tips to notice on most regular bows, but I bet its measurable on a racing bow. You want those limbs to throw forward as little weight as possible.
-
The fastest recurves I have tested wer Mark St Louis at about 190 fps, 10 grains per pound drawing 28", Not sure of the length but I think about 58" with stiff handles. The fastest r/d Longbows were about 66" to 67" long, stiff handles also about 190 fps. I think Marks bows had about 4" reflex and the long bows about 2 1/2" reflex. These were backed bows. Same design self bows usuall run about 10 fps slower than the backed bows.
-
Definitely bowyers bible... I own the first and second volumes, the first of which goes into some pretty good depth on design and performance. Mass of working wood, fiber strength, elasticity, plus backing. I'm not sure if they mention, or if I just came to the conclusion that sinew and bamboo would be the best performance enhancing. It also mentions torque of the bow. Say, you have a slick wood handle on a snaky bow that will turn a little in your hand, that is wasted energy. One of the authors mentions that something that will mold to the hand perfectly is a bundle of dead plant fiber wrapped in cloth. Im interested to see the masterpiece this thread produces.
-
When we are looking for speed we try and find ways to give the arrow a leverage advantage in slowing the limbs. Long levers with low string angles give leverage back to the arrow. We also want to keep the outer limbs light, not only so they accelerate fast but also so they have less momentum carrying them forward allowing the arrow to have more control over them.. Too much mass in the outer limbs and they will slam home before the inner limb is finished moving and transferring energy to the arrow.
Using that knowledge you have pointed out it has to be obvious that strong light non-working siyahs (like mulberry or hackberry) at around a 45 degree angle or whatever the optimum angle to result in the optimum string angle at fulldraw (bout 90 degress, right?) would be part of the answer. The next would be to figured out how to get the best compression strength and spring back from the over worked limbs while trying to keep mass down to the utter absolute necessary minimum. (...It seems very close to the final answer being a horn bow... ;D ;D ;D)
-
His "mantra" for high performance bows is: Make inner limbs wide or long enough for virtually no set. Make midlimbs wide enough for little set. Make outer-limbs an tips narrow enough for lowest possible mass.
I always thought it would be an easy mantra to remember if he just summed it up as:
"Make a pyramid bow"
LOL, ;D
In vol. 4 of the Bowyers Bible, Tim Baker really attacks this subject in Design and Performance Revisited. I think it's the most interesting chapter in the whole series.
According to Mr. Baker:
Sinew is only affective in increasing a bows performance if the bow is highly reflexed.
I can't agree with that at all. Sinew + hideglue will sometimes highly reflex a bow with no reflex anyway so that is kinda a weird statement in general, it is rare for me to have a bow that is sinewed that ever has any set even if it started out with set. I have sinewed alot of bows flat, (some even slightly deflexed from set when I first started out, ::) ) and had them all gain reflex over a couple months if not a couple weeks. Now if wood is temperamental depending on the elements, then sinew is like wise 100 times over. So one day when there is alot of moisture in the air, the bow will not shoot all that great. But in the winter when it is dry as a bone, the bow will shoot like lightning. I think these things have to be considered as they can make a great difference for or against performance in regards to sinewed bows, and there is no real middle ground with a sinewed bow I think, when it comes to performance one day verses the next. The turks were smart to hot box their bows the night before shooting. I think the chinese did the same? AND THE MAIN reason ( this is really my only relevant point againt tim bakers statement above, ;D) is that he is assuming the bow is a typical flatbow style or recurve bow where the bow will be at least 75 percent or so covered with sinew. Where the extra weight the sinew adds on the ends can slow the bow down... But if the bow were say a Hun style of bow where only like 50 percent or so of the bow was covered in sinew and the rest siyah, then you lose most of that outer mass added by the sinew and only gain the good attributes of a sinewed inner limb? Inner limbs can have mass (like being wider) and not affect performance as negatively, as they don't really move that much...
-
But a hornbow doesnt gain much advantage over other designs untill over around 60 pounds toomany.
Slackbunny...tip overlays are a must because of how narrow the tips are where the string nocks..all my tips are 1/4"-3/8" where the string nocks..if your were to cut ctring grooves you wood cut the tips right off....and there isnt any noticeable difference having them on,cus the tips themselves are so narrow,and the overlays wont even weigh a tenth of an ounce(i know cus i tried weighing them before gluing them on)
Thanks for explaining more in detail than me steve ;) you have a way with words better than me...and i was waiting for you to jump in :)
-
But a hornbow doesnt gain much advantage over other designs untill over around 60 pounds toomany.
The term "horn bow" covers a broad spectrum of bows of many designs sizes and drawlengths, which by default must perform differently from one an other, and cannot all be dumped into one category in regards of performance. At least I would think so? But I really don't know...
-
But a hornbow doesnt gain much advantage over other designs untill over around 60 pounds toomany.
The term "horn bow" covers a broad spectrum of bows of many designs sizes and drawlengths, which by default must perform differently from one an other, and cannot all be dumped into one category in regards of performance. At least I would think so? But I really don't know...
Ok...so how about ya make every type and test it,and then report back to us in 20+ years...lol :laugh:
l
-
Horn bows actualy test out about the same as good wood bow. We tested a 50# horn bow with 6" reflex against a 50# red oak board bow with zero reflex and they both hit 170 fps for a virtual tie. More modified wood bow designs can go much faster than this. Horn bows have a distinct advantage with the extra long draw lengths they can use and also have some advnatages shooting the extremely light arrows because they are short and carry little mass. Talking 10 grains per pound and normal draw lengths wood bows, horn bows, sinew backed bows will all end up about the same if built properly.
Even modern glass bows are only a tad faster than all wood bows when designed properly. Glass has zero hysterisis or very close to it and wood has a measurable amount, I would say from 3% to about 15% depending on moisture and how well the bow was tillered out, but hysterisis is the deciding factor as any bow has to be designed aroundf the materials we use to build it. I don't believe the TBB is the best source for info on this as advances are constantly being made and the references in the bible are more toward basic primitive designs that are optimized.
-
normal draw lengths wood bows, horn bows, sinew backed bows will all end up about the same if built properly.
This always seems to be the culmination of these discussions. I just always thought and still do think that there is room for improvement with natural wooden bows. Take classical guitars for example, been around for a good little bit of time. Pre - 1850 or so, most of these guitars would be called today "parlor" guitars, and were quite a bit smaller and peanut shaped compared to todays guitars. And I guess they probably were nice little guitars to play. But than comes along Antonio Torres and he completely revolutionizes the acoustic guitar, perfecting it's design and creating an incredible instrument. So much so that without Torres we wouldn't have the acoustic guitar we have today. Now flash forward 150 years, and the design is considered long since perfected, and kept alive by german master luthier's like the hauser family and such. And then here comes along Matthias Dammann, with his blasphemous self. Now the top of a guitar vibrates and the thinner it is, the more it vibrates. The more sound is produced the more it vibrates, so a thin top is something to be desired more or less in an acoustic instrument. But thinness has to be balanced with stability, and there is alot of pressure from the strings on even a classical guitar with lesser tension nylon strings verses higher tension steel. That's where inner bracing comes in. Which there are alot of types for different types of sounds and guitars, but all bracing patterns must do one thing: keep the guitar from blowing up! This can be achieved pretty easily, but to achieve stability and allow the top to vibrate to produce sound is something that the masters like Torres achieved and "perfected" somehow. So Matthias Dammann figured a way out to sandwich the top with insanely thin pieces of wood and thin Nomex in the middle for stability. And thus the double top is born, and becomes an incredible improvement (although not favored by all) to the so called "perfected" design. ;D I just think there might be something to gain sometimes from innovation and experimentation... especially with the tools and knowledge we have today that our ancestors never had access to.
-
My bows with the most reflex are the fastest regardless of design or backings.
-
My bows with the most reflex are the fastest regardless of design or backings.
Pearl, interesting statement that could mean two things. It could mean that the more reflexed a bow is the faster it is or it could mean the better the bow held its shape from the start the faster it is. My experience tells me that to some extent the latter is true. I find you can peek out most designs with as little as 2" reflex.
-
2" is the most any of my bows hold Steve. So your latter comment is probably true. I have also noticed that WHOLE limb reflex is faster than limbs with reflexed tips only. Like some of my statics I have. They would have at least 1 1/2" of follow if I didnt have the tips turned so far ahead. Im a stickler for whole limb reflex and not just turned tips, overlays alone can add some reflex.
-
Pearl - Badger
Than a stave with significant "natural" reflex, that is tillered with no-set tillering would get at both ends of the spectrum.
I keep wondering if induced reflex has less value (for speed) than natural reflex.
Gabe
-
e.g. it would reduce hysteresis while maintaining the value of the reflex..
Gabe
-
Ross, I have two almost identical bows from the same log, sister staves. One I heated in a small amount of additional reflex, it was natural with about 2" I added 1 1/2", after tillering I have about 2 1/2" right after taking the string off. The other bow started out with about 2" and maintained all of it, loosing only about 1/4" while I shoot it. They both shoot the same speed or close enough I did not detect a difference on my chrono.
-
2" is the most any of my bows hold Steve. So your latter comment is probably true. I have also noticed that WHOLE limb reflex is faster than limbs with reflexed tips only. Like some of my statics I have. They would have at least 1 1/2" of follow if I didnt have the tips turned so far ahead. Im a stickler for whole limb reflex and not just turned tips, overlays alone can add some reflex.
I would say that you have a recurve with 1 1/2" set then. Because that is really what you have. I don't know why you would count that as reflex, reflex is the entire limb. I have never measured set this way.
-
2" is the most any of my bows hold Steve. So your latter comment is probably true. I have also noticed that WHOLE limb reflex is faster than limbs with reflexed tips only. Like some of my statics I have. They would have at least 1 1/2" of follow if I didnt have the tips turned so far ahead. Im a stickler for whole limb reflex and not just turned tips, overlays alone can add some reflex.
I would say that you have a recurve with 1 1/2" set then. Because that is really what you have. I don't know why you would count that as reflex, reflex is the entire limb. I have never measured set this way.
There is no way to know how much set my bow has taken without knowing how much reflex I started with.
Bows that hold full limb reflex have higher early string tension than bows with mushy mid limbs and recurved tips.
-
This topic is usually where I find most interest in bow making but its been far too long since I've been able to put a lot of thought into it to be able to contribute a good and coherent response. Hopefully getting back into it soon.
Recently I've been thinking about making a flight bow in a D/R design. My thoughts after a similar bow I made are that the design allows for a high string tension at brace and low string angle which will give some good energy storage. The design also allows for narrow/low mass outer limbs that I would probably feel less willing to produce in a recurve. This bow would also be short, probably 52", because it would only be drawing 23" but also because shorter limbs have less mass and a shorter bow uses a shorter string (less mass).
I think the idea that any well designed bow will shoot about the same comes from the idea of tiller shape matching front view profile to make sure that the mass is moving efficiently. I'm not so sure if this is something that could be measured but my guess is that making sure you do this makes all designs equally efficient.
-
I think the idea that any well designed bow will shoot about the same comes from the idea of tiller shape matching front view profile to make sure that the mass is moving efficiently. I'm not so sure if this is something that could be measured but my guess is that making sure you do this makes all designs equally efficient.
Right on Sparty. And if done properly the starting side profile and lack of set takes care of itself.
-
All else fails, look into my patented bottle rocket fletching and a lit cigarette in the corner of your mouth. >:D
-
2" is the most any of my bows hold Steve. So your latter comment is probably true. I have also noticed that WHOLE limb reflex is faster than limbs with reflexed tips only. Like some of my statics I have. They would have at least 1 1/2" of follow if I didnt have the tips turned so far ahead. Im a stickler for whole limb reflex and not just turned tips, overlays alone can add some reflex.
I would say that you have a recurve with 1 1/2" set then. Because that is really what you have. I don't know why you would count that as reflex, reflex is the entire limb. I have never measured set this way.
There is no way to know how much set my bow has taken without knowing how much reflex I started with.
Bows that hold full limb reflex have higher early string tension than bows with mushy mid limbs and recurved tips.
Yes, I guess I meant to say follow, but I am sure you know what I meant as I referred to the 1 1/2" follow you said the bow would have, and I do understand the terms set and follow. What I am saying is that adding overlays shouldn't be thought to add reflex like you stated. I can see adding recurve which is what I think you mean, but reflex just shouldn't be measured in that manner as it is inaccurate. If a limb is reflexed than it is reflexed. If a limb is recurved it does not automatically equal reflex.
-
For those of you who are interested in working on performance and testing designs their are a few very basic math formulas that are useful and don't require any special math skills.
I'm curious for the formulas.
-
I like to think there are a lot of discoveries waiting to be made regarding bow performance. Flight bows are probably the best place to start looking. But I don't know that realm all to well, so i will throw out my half-baked ideas regarding bow performance from the materials side of things. I think sitka spruce needs to enter the discussion...why? because it is has one of the highest compression strength to mass ratios of all woods. It just needs some tension strength...which is where sinew comes in. My only experience with Sitka Spruce is harvesting a couple staves from the top side of a huge horizontal branch, the pieces must have considerable tension strength for a wood known for its compression strength. Once those staves are bows, I will report back.
The other material minded idea I have regarding performance is feathers. Take one of your turkey fletching primaries and bend it. The main quill has incredible compression and tension strength and has very little mass. I am working on a design that incorporates feather quills. The only problem is securing them without adding too much mass.
-
IMO sinew doesn't add to the performance of the bow it just allows for designs that with wood alone could not be possible or the use of wood that is questionable. Two identical bows, draw weight, mass/ weight, profile, brace height, etc, etc. one backed with sinew one not, theoretically will shoot the same. Everything I have read and experienced with "speed" comes down to a few factors, early draw weight (stored energy), draw length and brace height (transfer of stored energy), bow and tip weight/mass per unit of stored energy (efficient use of stored energy). Some of the best info I have found on this is from research done by Tim Baker.
I am by no means an expert like I said when I started this reply IMO. Lol. I love the exchange of thoughts and ideas in this forum and think that the next breakthrough in bow performance design will come from a forum like this where there is an opportunity to express thoughts with others that love this sport/hobby/way of life as much as I do. Thank you to everyone who contributes to or reads this thread. You are helping keep the tradition alive.
Aaron
-
IMO sinew doesn't add to the performance of the bow it just allows for designs that with wood alone could not be possible or the use of wood that is questionable.
Well if that is true, why haven't we all just been using rawhide instead of sinew, as it is about 1/100th of the work that a sinew backing takes to put on a bow? As well as a small bit less moisture sensitive. You can also get more usable rawhide on one animal than usable sinew? Why haven't the turks, the arabs, the indians, the mongolians/chinese, the Huns, the egyptians, the assyrians, the koreans, the native american peoples, and countless countless other cultures through out history and up to this very day, why haven't they all used simple rawhide? As rawhide can undoubtedly be utilized as a very effective protective backing when put to use as so. What sinew has going for it where wood is lacking, aside from a higher tension threshold, is a higher resilience, which is the ability to return to its original form after being stretched, where wood will not return as much and will "follow" the string. That is an advantage where if put to proper use with a proper design that takes advantage of that feature of sinew, than sinew could in fact add to the performance of a bow, could it not?
-
Prairie here are ome of the formulas you might work with
FDC- force draw curve is usually expressed in graph form to display how a bow builds energy throughout the drawing process. One side of the graph shows inches drawn and the other side shows draw weight at that particular point
SE- stored energy, usually expressed in foot pounds in America. This is found by measuring the precise draw weight in increments of 1" starting 1" from brace height and all the way to full draw. The sum of all these numbers is divided by 12 to give you the amount of stored energy expressed in foot pounds.
KE- Kinetic energy. In archery we use the kinetic energy to express how much energy has been imparted to the arrow. The formula for finding this is (V2XM/450240) velocity squaredXgrains of arrow weight, divided by 450240. We would normaly use KE to determine the efficiency of our bows. (KEX100/SE=E)
E- Efficiency, is usually expressed as the percentage of kinetic energy in relation to stored energy. KE times 100 divided by SE =e.
SEPDF- stored energy per draw force is expressed as a percentage of stored energy to draw force. If you have a 50# bow storing 48# energy it would be 48/50= 96% SEDPF
VM, stands for virtual bow mass. This is the amount of mass in the bow that never makes it into the arrow. Most self bows will usually range from about 200 to 250 grains of virtual mass. Virtual mass will tend to stay relatively consistent regardless of arrow weight being shot while Efficiency will drop or rise rapidly with the weight of the arrow being shot. Virtual mass is found by first determing how much stored energy your bow holds and then how much kinetic energy goes into an arrow of known weight. For instance, your bow might store 50# of energy and shoot a 500 grain arrow at 170 fps. You are putting about 32ft pounds of energy into your arrow. 18ft pounds are unaccounted for. If the arrow being sot was 775 grains and was still traveling at 170 fps it would be using 50 ft pounds of energy so in this case your virtual mass is 275 grains.
These are the basic formulas you might find useful, you don't really need any of them but for some it is fun and very eseful when playing with different designs to see which way you are heading, also helps to establish a logical plan of attack when approaching specific problems.
-
Yet, as Tim Baker likes to point out, the bow that won the day at Mojam was a straight limbed, pecan board bow which was slightly whip tillered, I believe. Go figure. Jawge
-
Jawge, in all fairness if that contest were held today that same bow would not have even been in the running. It would be considered decent but not fast. Tims 66" red oak bows would shoot right with it today. I believe that bow was 76" long. It was a 47# bow shot a 500 grain arrow 164 fps,
-
Jawge, in all fairness if that contest were held today that same bow would not have even been in the running. It would be considered decent but not fast. Tims 66" red oak bows would shoot right with it today. I believe that bow was 76" long. It was a 47# bow shot a 500 grain arrow 164 fps,
Maybe it's time for a Bowyer's Bible vol. 5.
-
woa... processing.
-
does anyone remember the speed bow article in primitive archer awhile back?
the man took i believe HHB billets put what looked like 90 degree recurves on the tips and made the tips real thin and got like 242fps!!!!
-
Matt, those were lightweight flight arrows, still a good speed if I remember the post. I think it was Mark. Here I think we are talking hunting weight arrows or 10 grains of arrow weight per 1# of draw weight.
-
Very interesting topic. I don't worry about speed much but everyone loves to learn a few simple tricks that will make a bow perform and shoot better.Even us old dogs. ;) ;D ;D if it is easy to incorporate into my bows I will almost always do it,if not and takes to much thinking ??? :o ;) and planing I usually won't. :) Still I love to listen to the folks that do. Everyone has their own reason and interest in doing what we do and that's Cool in my book. :) :)
Pappy
-
Pappy, I think if you are talking practical performance expectations you and a lot of us are already there. Tricking bows out for flight or just for fun to see what we can get is a game in it self. When you stop to think about it we can sum it up in just a few lines. Reasonably thin tips, good tiller, a little reflex, slightly flipped tips for a low string angle, dry wood, heat treat for a little extra and don't damage the wood as you tiller it out. No matter what we do it won't get a lot better than just covering the basics.
-
I was reading about this substance in insect joints, called resilin, that stores a tremendous amount of energy--basically insect sinew. They were joking around calling it flubber (like from the old black and white Disney movie). Thats where modern traditional archery should be headed! We should all be gathering up insects to harvest their sinew and further our advancements in archery! = P
Do a google search on resilin.
-
Heck yeah. Insect sinew, that is the materials side of things I am talking about. Might be a pain to harvest, but there are some big bugs in the world. ;D What about hagfish glue as marine hide glue?
I guess the title of this thread is designing for speed, so maybe the abstract biological materials stuff is a little off base, but I think there has got to be some good materials out there waiting to be stuck on a bow. For example, backing bows with bat wings. ;D
-
For example, backing bows with bat wings. ;D
...says the bat biologist ;) That would be one gross looking bow. :o
-
For example, backing bows with bat wings. ;D
...says the bat biologist ;) That would be one gross looking bow. :o
No way, it would be a beautiful bow, in my opinion. ;) Weylin, if bat wings aren't your thing, what about spider webs? You could size your bow with hide glue, and walk through the forest, bow held out, collecting spider web goodness along the back. ;D