Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => Bows => Topic started by: GlisGlis on June 23, 2014, 12:17:59 pm
-
Hello wood lovers
after a slow start (some broken or orrendous bow, some kid bows and much reading) I'm now I'm in the phase when the first staves I collected begin to be usable.
In particular there is a Black Locust I'd really like to use. it was a standing dead 10/12 '' tree placed in a urban park.
After looking at it for some months I took my saw, cutted it, tied it to my bike and took it to home.
I feel like I made a public service O:) avoiding the risk of the tree fall O:) O:) O:)
It was dead since 2 years and I've kept it in a garage for about 7 moths now.
to make it short after splitting this is one of the staves i got from it.
Dimensions- total length 69''
back widht in the thinnest point approx. 1.5 ''
issues:
- some little bug hole. i got rid of many of them bye chasing rings but there are still 2 or 3
- section is very triangulare so there is no much place to widen the limbs
- 3 knots at 2, 10 and 18'' from the same tip
- while chasing the back ring I had some unexpected violation. wood looks a little bit brittle.
How would you proceed? What kind of bow? I guess I have to back it in some way as going down to next ring could reduce even more the width. I'm not after a specific draw lenght or wheigth tough a shootable 40# would be good.
Sorry for the long post and the many and so open questions but i'd really like to ear your comments
-
At 69" I don't think losing a fraction of an inch past 1.5 is going to be a huge problem unless it's very near the center of the stave. You're probably going to want to do a flatbow, maybe with some curves, so the 1.5-2" at the fades tapering to at most .5" tips should give that thin spot room. You're not going to lose so much that chasing another ring, especially since those rings don't look all that huge, is going to ruin the bow-- but a worm hole or violation most likely will.
I say chase one more ring.
I just finished a six year standing dead BL molle, so don't let anyone give you lip about standing dead ;) Stuff always feels like it's been cured to perfection and is my favorite to work with.
I think you've got more than enough wood there for something around 40-50#@28", pretty much any design. You could even try a mollegabet if you wanted to go unconventional and Danish ;D Just keep the belly flat and get as much of the limb bending evenly as possible and black locust will do amazing things for you-- heat treat and trap it and we get into miracles and great big cans of worms when it starts out-shooting "the king" ;) >:D
-
OH, if you need an idea of how ONE inch of BL will bend >:D
(http://i.imgur.com/qvqIooT.jpg)
-
hello Huisme nice to see you. You're allready in my inspiration/reference book.
Hope some of your skills to work BL could reach me ;)
Unfortunatly (my bad while splitting) the narrowest point is 20'' from the same tip where knots are.
i made a drawing to explain better
The thin section has a very small triangle with the back of 1.5 and both other sides even little smaller :-\
More than that the triangle is not rounded as tips are :-\ :-\
That pose some issue both for chasing another ring (yes they're thin at present) both to maintain limb width.
i was thinking about cutting the stave short before the 3° knot and obtain a 55''-54'' to move the thinner part more tip side. what do you think about?
What's the draw weight of that beautiful bow in the picture?
-
Your thin spot looks to be handle area. If it's 1 1/2" back to belly, then you should have enough thickness after chasing another ring for the back. Looks like you'll lose the knot on the edge as the limbs narrow. Try to get below the bug damage first, that's a deal breaker if it goes too deep. Good luck!
Tracy
-
The stave is crowned. Leave it a few inches longer than you would for a stave not so crowned. I can't be more specific because I did not see any draw lengths. Jawge
-
ok ty. got it
Chased next ring.
Got rid of all bugs holes except the one in the middle of the stave
Got rid of previous back violations but induced some smaller new ones :-\ . still alot to learn.
Rings are extremely thin so i'm in the way of going down another ring. very very carefully.
Should I fail even this time i'll go for some backing.
@Tracy
Ty for your suggestions. Actually pictures are a little bit deceptives as the middle of the stave corresponds approximatly with the bug hole i marked with an arrow in the attached picture
@George
Crowned means the back is really round in section, right?
Once again pictures could lead you off as, excpet maybe at one tip, the back is quite flat. As i wrote I have no real draw length or weight target. reaching at least 40# @28 would be good.
I also reduced a little bit the belly in the knots area.
Knots 1 and 2 moved to the sides and reduced alot. I dont think they'll give much troubles.Knot 1 will be easily out of the tips layout as Tracy pointed.
Knot 3 will be there but it'll be a sort of depression, not a hole. Better than i tough at first. The idea of cutting down the stave is almost gone
-
We agree, try one more ring extremely slowly and carefully. Bug holes and ring violations are equally bad news in locust.
I'm still not sure that narrow spot is trouble. It can be deceptive, looking at a stave and thinking you're not going to get much out of it after all the scraping is done. If you're really sure about shortening the stave to move it, though, I'd go around ten inches past your line- that section really looks like it's at least mid-limb thickness to me ;)
I think you're headed in the right direction now; mark out the bow and see how the profile interacts with the stave before deciding anywhere is too narrow, too knotty, etc.
The draw on that little thing is 30#@22", and its overall length is 44". It was a big shaving I pulled off the back of a larger stave, but when I saw the one flipped tip and just enough meat to smooth out a decent tiller I had to flip the other tip and get that thing shooting :laugh:
-
very nice little bow !
I chased next ring in the knotty limb and all went well but I could have trouble on the other one.
Now apologyse me if a say a blasphemy.
Is that possible to have the back on separated rings for the 2 limbs?
If the transition between rings falls in the non bending handle area that should not pose problems. correct?
in the meantime a full truck of work hitted me so I may be off archery for a while.
I'll have time to read your suggestions and ponder it well ;)
-
Y'know, I've never tried that. I've left rings on the back of the handle so I could carve finger grooves or just flesh out a narrow handle, but I've never had an extra ring over a whole limb ???
It seems like it'd work as well as any spliced stave would work. To be sure I'd get the handle figured out after long string tillering and wrap it with sinew.
Are you being sure to get the edge just under the ring you're removing, only really cutting the spongy early wood? You should only remove down to the early wood and then clean that off with gentle scraping and sand paper ;)
-
Are you being sure to get the edge just under the ring you're removing, only really cutting the spongy early wood? You should only remove down to the early wood and then clean that off with gentle scraping and sand paper
yep. that's what I try to do but in the first half inch from back I count 7- 8 rings (7 early and 7 late).
They are so thin that sometimes I cant understand if I'm working on the top or bottom ring.
Tried to give you a better picture but that one also sucks.
-
Had the time to learn and chase rings. I found really useful to stop, put the wood at direct sunlight, mark all area to be removed with a pencil and only then use drawknife and scraper.
Those are prolly the bases you all know.
As you can see the limb on the right is the one with the thinnest and tighest part.
I left it with the same ring as 5 days ago to prevent limb reduction while I had to go down 2 more rings on the other to finally avoid all back violations. So the back of the bow is not a continuos ring but 2 half that meet at handle area.
Now I'm a little unsure what to do next.
Looks to me that width is not alot (the one marked in the picture is the belly flat part). Trapping will reduce even more the usable tension.
If I lower limb depth to gain width I may end with a toy bow isn't it?
I have the idea to go with a very little stiff handle area and use allmost the entire length of the stave.
How do you sounds to you?
ty in advance
-
depth is measured on the side, not from center of the belly to the center of the back where is deeper
-
That's not the correct way to measure depth (or width, for that matter). Just measure the total thickness and width. WITH the crown included. The center of the back is of course deeper than the sides of the crowned back, but this center of the crown still dramatically increases the bow's strength. The further away from the neutral plane, the more it is contributing to the stiffness of the material (just physics).
All technicalities aside...how stiff is the stave now? Can you flex it when you press it on the floor, as you would while floor tillering? That's what matters. Not the actual thickness of the wood.
-
As you can see the limb on the right is the one with the thinnest and tighest part.
I left it with the same ring as 5 days ago to prevent limb reduction while I had to go down 2 more rings on the other to finally avoid all back violations. So the back of the bow is not a continuos ring but 2 half that meet at handle area.
I would get to only one continuous growth ring for your back. If you don't have enough thickness then do what you have to.Other than that, it looks like it's shaping up just fine. Good work.
Tracy
-
Ty darksoul.
I see your points about thickness . More crown --> distance from belly --> tension and also stress
I also appreciate the practicle approach.
I allready could flex a bit the stave and that point i marked is where the most flex happens. I'm not able to guesstimate the draw weight needed and dont want to cause hinges too early tough ;)
Please consider now the depth/trapping issue.
would you reduce a little the depth to obtain a larger width or keep the depth as large as possible?
Green solution could maybe loose some more power but need less trapping and is more on the safe side?
@ Tracy
ty
Well actually thickness is allready an issue I fear.I'm not able to evaluate how much power i'll lose after final shape will be achieved.
I think that at last i will ignore drawweight and concentrate on proper shape and tiller
-
You should now start by laying-out your width profile. Don't worry about the thickness at this point. Just leave it full thickness (i.e. the red line). You're getting too concerned about the technical aspects of trapping, thickness taper, crown etc. Those are not important in your first few bows. Just focus on getting a bow that shoots. Once the bow is roughly shaped in width, you can determine how much wood you have left to spare. If possible, you could trap it a bit, but that is really not necessary. Start with the green width, and the red thickness. If that turns out to be way too stiff when floor tillering, remove some thickness (resulting in the green outline). If it's still too stiff, you could remove wood by trapping the back. Still too stiff? Remove wood until you get the green thickness, but the red width. Just sneak up on your draw weight.
If you have a finished bow (any bow, even modern recurve is fine), you can use that as a training device to get a feel for floor tillering. Push that bow onto the floor, as you would floor tiller a stave. And compare that feeling to your stave.
-
very well
makes perfect sense
thankyou
-
Almost buried in work but slowly progressing.
I tried to keep my weakest point as reference and tiller the rest.
Tough the belly is pretty flat, the sections are not at all uniform. Hope this will not be a problem
In the 3° floor square from handle on the right lies the big knot that make a nice hole in the belly.
It' all floor tillering as i dont have a tillering tree yet (and also cause I think that was the way ancients did).
Are the outer midlimbs too stiff?
Well, please tell me what you think about. (ok maybe ancients didnt have internet ;) )
Dont spare critiques as I'm more interested in the result than in kindness
greedily waiting you suggestions
-
It looks like it could bend more in the outer thirds; tiny bit of set shows in the inner third.
Looks great so far ;D
-
Ty huisme
here tiller at around 20''.
just to check if what i see is correct i marked in red the parts that look stiff to me. Is that right?
doubled red line is the knot
will you leave tips a little stiffer? almost like little levers?
anyway looks like things start coming together
ty all for the support
-
Looks like to me you are ready for Erik's gizzmo. If you don't have one take the time and make one if you can. It will tell you where to scrape on your limbs. Saved many a bow for me.
-
BL has never disappointed me. Some of the best bows I ever was able to do are made of BL, even when a BL stave was knotty, a bit twisted, a bit rottened....................some bug holes...........easy to steambend or to heattreat, one of my favs, a very solid bow- wood, a very true companion.
The bow looks good so far, I second Huisme, could bend more in the outer thirds, when tiller is finished, I would narrow the tips.
What' s the bow' s drawweight at 20"?
Dean, what' s Eriks Gizzmo?
Huisme, great BL shortie!
-
Here is the gizzmo. Run it along the belly of the limbs when you got it bending and it will leave pencil marks where it isn't bending.
-
Glis, that looks perfect ;D How far are you from your target weight?
I've seen some good work with those gizmos; I say give it a try-- but I'm telling you I hate using them for no good reason :o :P
-
ty Dean
i read about the gizmo on this site.
I dont own a proper one but i usually place the flat scraper on the belly surface to visual check the curvature
the draw weight actually is about 29# at 20''
I plan to draw it at 28'', maybe little more. What final drawweight should I expect?
what draw length would you consider safe with a ntn of little less than 67''?
-
GlisGlis, about 45lbs at 28"?
Thanks Dean, makes absolutely sense. What' s the length of this gizzmo?
I guess it should be shorter for shorter bows, how is the length calculated?
-
The rule of thumb is 3 pounds more draw weight for one more inch of draw. My gizmo is 6" long. Erick Krewson is the person who got me using the gizmo. He had a demo on how to use and make one I believe either here or on TG a while back.
-
here me again
very excited this time
picture is at 27'' draw.
I had to be quick as I dont wanted to induce set
I measured little more than 46# @28''. In perfect line with redhawk and marlow guess.
at present non dare to draw it more :-[
in my mind right side will be the top. Is there a special rule to choose wich one is better?
Keeping right side of bow on top will let the string little little more on the left of center that should be better for a right handed archer. is that correct?
At present bow has taken around 1'' of set compared to a straight line.
Would you heat treath it and try to reduce set in the same time?
tanks to all you folks for every suggestions. this forum rocks. cant wait to shoot some arrow with it
-
Usually the stronger limb goes on bottom. Looks like right should be bottom. Depending on how your string alignment is as well
-
I would heat treat it and add some reflex, but set won't be undone; you can only hide it and hope to avoid more of it. The cells that are crushed are crushed, but strengthening the remaining cells and adding reflex might reduce string follow.
-
Heat treated it, retiller corrections and shooted it several times !!!
I really like it.
I have to experiment a little with arrow spine to find the best combination but it's allready fast, accurate and silent.
At least for my standards :D
I had tons of ideas for decorations, tips overlay and such but I think I'll leave it as is.
Simple and plain wood with some rope attached to.
Ahh..... life is good ;)
-
Your trials/tribulations with this stave and the helpful advice offered to solve same have made this a good read.
And congrats on final result!
Michael
-
that looks great congrats
-
tankyou Michael and Brad
but at least half of the work was made by this forum ;)