Official Luthiers Forum!
http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Too clever for my own good
http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=5123		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 4:44 am ]
Post subject: 
Well I thought I would get cute and make a new way of clamping binding in place during glue up. I built a half box near guitar shaped fixture to rig go-bar type clamping in the horizontal plane to secure binding in place. The opposite edge indexed to a near half a mold. The Idea was to do half an edge at a time. I bought a bunch of 3/32 hickory rod and cut them to a short length for this experiment. All went well till I got to the upper bout and I let a rod slip and it went through the side. I may be able to repair the side but I will not sell this one. Sorry no pics as Diane still has not got Micki Sue to send back our camera. But here is a drawing of the idea Me thinks it needs refining


Author:  Brock Poling [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 4:57 am ]
Post subject: 

Yes. I agree... too clever for your own good. I suffer from that too sometimes.      

Didn't I see something similar to this that Mike Doolin did, but he used rope / cord to pull the bindings in tight?

Author:  Bruce Dickey [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:11 am ]
Post subject: 
Edison's lightbulb. Michael, if it worked well, you'd be famous in the luthier community.

I'm gonna blow up this picture for the wall of my shop. reminds me of modern art Michael!
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:48 am ]
Post subject: 
I know how to make it work safely but didn't do it .
I will cut a fiber board shim to use If a rod slips the fiber board will distribute the load enough to keep the the rod from punching through. As soon as it happendd I asked myself Why I did not do that in the first place. like they say hind sight is 20/20 (emoticon used as blid as a bat)MichaelP38764.5760069444
Author:  Shane Neifer [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:07 am ]
Post subject: 
Hey Michael I was using hard wood dowels for go bars but fibreglass is way more consistent and it flexes a lot more also. They are cheap from a bunch of different places, inluding Home Depot I hear. I don't think that they would punch through your sides. Might be worth looking into or considering. I am quite happy I switched.

Shane
Author:  Bruce Dickey [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:09 am ]
Post subject: 
Idea. If your form were not rectangular, but rather DoubleJUMBO guitar shaped, then the gobars would not be going at severe angles. Try that and you'll be doing radials from the center, more or less. ?
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:18 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Shane Neifer] Hey Michael I was using hard wood dowels for go bars but fibreglass is way more consistent and it flexes a lot more also. They are cheap from a bunch of different places, inluding Home Depot I hear. I don't think that they would punch through your sides. Might be worth looking into or considering. I am quite happy I switched.

Shane[/QUOTE]

If you noticed I use 3/32 hickory I am not flexing them as much as my dwg appears because not much pressure is required. As short as these bars are 3/16 fg would be way too stiff that is why I used such a thin dowels. I am the one that origniated the use of the fb diveway reflectors from HD as go-bars, on this forum anyway, and I do use them. But like I said my thinking was to use a thin flexable dowel because the length is very short 10"-8".
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:23 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Bruce Dickey] Idea. If your form were not rectangular, but rather DoubleJUMBO guitar shaped, then the gobars would not be going at severe angles. Try that and you'll be doing radials from the center, more or less. ?[/QUOTE]

I did think of that, but choose the KISS method, or thought I did anyway. The rods are not rally flexed as much as the drawing shows I was not trying to add much clamping pressure, just a positive butt-up
Author:  Brock Poling [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:28 am ]
Post subject: 

Something else you might want to put on that.... is a restraint across the front and back so the body can't accidentally flip out of there and smash to the floor.

That would be bad.   
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:35 am ]
Post subject: 
It is horizontal on by bench with a corked cross brace clamped on the non-accessible side of the guitar. I did not want to use this in the vertical position for that very reason, thou it would have made 1/2 the top and back accessible.MichaelP38764.6080787037
Author:  Shane Neifer [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:54 am ]
Post subject: 
Well what about real thin fibreglass then. It is amazing that those had enough force to go through the sides. I just find fibreglass much more flexible and consistent. Anyway, you'll figure it I know! Is the hole in the wrong spot for a nice sound port?

Shane
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:03 am ]
Post subject: 
Oh I agree but locally it would have been very hard to fin that thin of fg rods. If this works out in the end I will order fg rods
Author:  Don Williams [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:20 am ]
Post subject: 
I have a better way.
It's what I call the "2-Person Method".
I bend my bindings and work them so they are a perfect fit for the dry run.
Next, I hold them in place with my fingers while I shoot some water-thin CA glue onto the binding where it meets the guitar side/top/back, and hold it there until the glue holds it.
Next my wife comes along with some CA deactivator to get my fingers unstuck.

Works like a charm.
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:25 am ]
Post subject: 
got that t-shirt too
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:33 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Shane Neifer] Well what about real thin fibreglass then. It is amazing that those had enough force to go through the sides. I just find fibreglass much more flexible and consistent. Anyway, you'll figure it I know! Is the hole in the wrong spot for a nice sound port?

Shane[/QUOTE]

yep to close to the lining. It knocked the wood out in three nice chunks that may glue up near invisible. I will know tonight but I walked away last night before I really goofed up and trew the box accross the shop.
Author:  RussellR [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:39 am ]
Post subject: 
Michael

I'm puzzled what do you see as the benefit of this system, over say taping the bindings. Speed ?
Author:  Rod True [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:45 am ]
Post subject: 
What about doing something like Bruce mentions, a second, larger outside type shape, but than some sort of air bladder blown up between the two. This would conform to the side profile and you wouldn't have any sharp or hard tips to worry about.

Just a thought.
Author:  Lars Rasmussen [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:56 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Brock Poling]
Yes. I agree... too clever for your own good. I suffer from that too sometimes.      

Didn't I see something similar to this that Mike Doolin did, but he used rope / cord to pull the bindings in tight?

[/QUOTE]

Is it something like this?? This is a method ihave been thinking on copying...

http://www.bevelsnob.com/2004album/1setting_up_binding_to_gl ue.htmlLars Rasmussen38764.6645138889
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:09 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Lars Rasmussen] [QUOTE=Brock Poling]
Yes. I agree... too clever for your own good. I suffer from that too sometimes.      

Didn't I see something similar to this that Mike Doolin did, but he used rope / cord to pull the bindings in tight?

[/QUOTE]

Is it something like this?? This is a method ihave been thinking on copying...

http://www.bevelsnob.com/2004album/1setting_up_binding_to_gl ue.html[/QUOTE]

My company firewall forbids this site
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:16 am ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=RussellR] Michael

I'm puzzled what do you see as the benefit of this system, over say taping the bindings. Speed ?[/QUOTE]

both speed and assured not to pull away while glue cured. I have had some binding that when wetted with glue wanted to twist just a hair and pull away from the top or back. I hate roping binding thou that solves the issue. More than anything I had this idea in mind for a while. I have to say it is pretty quick and if I had not slipped all ould have been fine
Author:  RussellR [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:20 am ]
Post subject: 
I've got it now, Michael.

I use Tape and whilst a good method it is time consuming, another advantage I can see of your method apart from speed is even when clamped you can see the bindings joins so you would know if you had a gap, the more I think about the more it makes sense

Author:  Serge Poirier [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:57 am ]
Post subject: 
Michael, sorry to hear about the hole in your guitar, your clamping jig idea is a mighty interesting one though, how about Bruce's idea of a bigger outside shape but with glued strips of wood on the inside of that outside shape so you'd be able to get the bars to lean more securely to the shape ? Might just be a silly thought i had just like i did when i wanted to build myself a bandsaw! My 2 1/2 cents of maybe non sense
Author:  Michael Dale Payne [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 9:21 am ]
Post subject: 
The slip was not cause by the bar slipping off the deck It slipped while I ws placing it The deck has shallow pockets for the rods to set in. so they could not slip at the deck. I may have to move a pocket or two but I think it is going to work pretty goodusing a shim plate between the guitarand the rods
Author:  Philip Perdue [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:32 am ]
Post subject: 
Sorry about your problem but sometimes it's just trial or error. I do like your drawing though, it looks like the start of a nice lable.

Philip
Author:  Bruce Dickey [ Thu Feb 16, 2006 3:19 pm ]
Post subject: 
Lars here is your Picture. This is ultra cool. Rubberized binding machine, nice....

Bruce Dickey38764.9761342593
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/