Del's MR Copy

[JW_Halverson]

Ewww!  Gross!   That's like looking at photos of tumor surgery!

[Del the cat]

Nicely done Del, I have to say I never go to the trouble to fill a knot just leave it a little bigger. But then I haven't used Englsih yew yet.

Yeah, if a knot is sound wood, that's what I'd do.
With this one, I just couldn't figure out where the other end of the knot was, which is why I was cautious.
As I worked away reducing the side of the stave it exposed the rot, it was pretty soft, black and manky.
This shows how it looked just before it was exposed... it looks fine!
Just goes to show, you can't always be sure what lies beneath the surface. If you can see just one end of a knot it begs the question where is the other end!

You can sort of see how the knot ended suddenly and the wood had grown over it with a nice bulge and continuous sapwood.
Del

[JW_Halverson]

If you can see just one end of a knot it begs the question where is the other end!
Del

There is a lotta wisdom in that statement. 

[CraigMBeckett]

Hi Del,

Great post and thanks for the additional info, according to the MR archaeologists your bow is "course grained" having 40 or less rings per inch, while the original 80A608 was "fine grained" and therefore had more than 60 RPI. I wonder what difference that really makes?

Regards

Craig.

[Del the cat]

It would be interesting to cut two strips from that Yew off cut, one from the tight grain section and one from the coarse and do comparitive tests.
However I expect it would be difficult to cut and test them accurately without machining facilities, even then it would prob' be foolhardy to draw conclusions.
The one good thing about the idea is that we would know the wood was same genetically, which would be one less variable.
A test like that (repeated with enough different samples) would be a good way to determine any corellation between rpi and stiffness/density etc.
Hmm, Maybe I'll have a go if I get the time, a simple deflection test might suffice... simple is good.
Del
PS, I'm still toying with adding a discreet arrow plate (I won't put a leather grip on it), maybe when I do that, I'll measure up the other limb.
In WoW some of the dimensions are a tad difficult to interpret, or they have two dimensions and an asterisk, for which you can't then find the explanation  E.G Two different length figures for the same bow... overall and ntn?
Also the dimensions at the 'nock', do they mean the nock groove? I daresay the info is in there somewhere, but theres such a huge amount to plough through and with a finished bow you can't measure at the nock groove once it's covered with horn
(I'm not complaining you understand, it's a great source of info)

[CraigMBeckett]

It would be interesting to cut two strips from that Yew off cut, one from the tight grain section and one from the coarse and do comparitive tests.
However I expect it would be difficult to cut and test them accurately without machining facilities, even then it would prob' be foolhardy to draw conclusions.
The one good thing about the idea is that we would know the wood was same genetically, which would be one less variable.
A test like that (repeated with enough different samples) would be a good way to determine any corellation between rpi and stiffness/density etc.
Hmm, Maybe I'll have a go if I get the time, a simple deflection test might suffice... simple is good.
Del
PS, I'm still toying with adding a discreet arrow plate (I won't put a leather grip on it), maybe when I do that, I'll measure up the other limb.
In WoW some of the dimensions are a tad difficult to interpret, or they have two dimensions and an asterisk, for which you can't then find the explanation  E.G Two different length figures for the same bow... overall and ntn?
Also the dimensions at the 'nock', do they mean the nock groove? I daresay the info is in there somewhere, but theres such a huge amount to plough through and with a finished bow you can't measure at the nock groove once it's covered with horn
(I'm not complaining you understand, it's a great source of info)

Hi Del,

IMO an arrow plate would be out of place on a bow such as you have shown, why not demark the arrow pass with an incised pattern, (a smiling cat maybe?) but thats my opinion, you as bowyer should do as you wish.

Re the two different lengths for the bows, they have
1,  measured along the back of the bow, and;
2, measured directly knock to nock.

If the bow was perfectly straight then the two measurments would be the same but if the bow has any reflex or deflex then the measurments would be different. The measurment along the back of the bow are the ones that would give you the actual length of the bow.

I have assumed that the measurments "at the nock" are taken at the discolouration which indicates the location of the end of the horn, the dimensions seem to agree with my assumption as they tend to be about 12 mm, ranging from 11 to 14 as I recall, as well as agreeing if the dims are taken at the point I believe then we have the location of them as we are given the length of the stain.

Regards

Craig.

[Del the cat]

I shot it again at the club, much better draw this time, here's a pic (taken from video so the quality isn't great).
It makes the lower limb look a tad stiff, but that could be an artefact of the video scan plus my movement. V difficult to get a decent still as I can't hold full draw for long yet.

Here's a link to the video.
http://s411.photobucket.com/albums/pp195/Del_the_Cat/websitevideos/?action=view&current=MRcopyvid.mp4
Del
(PS Thanks for the dimensional clarification Craig )

[Ian.]

Its funny how the tiller can change so much when its drawn, are you going to remove a little from that lower limb or keep her as she is.

[cracker]

Del The bow looks great the way you filled the knots shows patience that I think a lot of us should aspire to My self included. Ronnie

[Del the cat]

Its funny how the tiller can change so much when its drawn, are you going to remove a little from that lower limb or keep her as she is.

Here's a still pic of full draw, top limb to the right.

The video capture pic looks worse for several reasons, the scan of the camera is reacting with the downward movement of the bow as I bring it down onto the target (or maybe even the actual loose) and the lighter background of the sky is also distorting the image. The previous frame looks fine.
In the still you can see the lower limb is a tad stif in the third nearest the grip, but that is where the knot with the pinch is, so I must take care.
The bow is actually 92# at 28" so I make take off a couple of scrapes either side of the pinch without making it under weight.
I shall do plenty of thinking about it before doing anything.
Stills captured from video can be very distorted and it would be a big mistake to adjust the tiller on that basis.
The purpose of the still from the video was to show that I'd actually got back to a decent draw length rather than to show the tiller.
Here's a frame or two earlier. The top nock is just in front of the tree trunk as I havn't started bringing it down onto target and the bow doesn't look so distorted, the extra half inch draw isn't going to make much difference, it's the slow scan of the capture and the movement of the bow that causes the distortion. I've seen a photo of an arrow leaving the bow taken with a regular digital camera which happened to catch the moment by chance. The string looked completely slack and wobbly, there was all sorts of esoteric dicussion about string oscillation until it was pointed out that it was just an 'artefact' of the camera.

Del

[Blacktail]

hey del,that is a great bow..i seen it on your blog...i didnt read all through this topic...but, i do have a question for you or some one who might know...what causes the purple color in yew..i have seen this in yew before but never found out why...thanks john

[Del the cat]

hey del,that is a great bow..i seen it on your blog...i didnt read all through this topic...but, i do have a question for you or some one who might know...what causes the purple color in yew..i have seen this in yew before but never found out why...thanks john

I don't know, but it seems to be round the knots which have formed from dead branches on this Yew.
Del

[backgardenbowyer]

Wonderful work Del - as ever.  Hope we might see the bow at one of the events this spring/summer.  Stan

[Del the cat]

Wonderful work Del - as ever.  Hope we might see the bow at one of the events this spring/summer.  Stan

Cheers,
The guy I built it for is coming to collect it this afternoon, so I may never see it again Bwahhhhh .
But on the other hand, once it warms up a bit I'll get on with the next bow.
Del

[bow-toxo]

     Congratulations on making a replica MR bow. Edward lll sent his bowyer to find some English yew for bows, but everyone considered it to be not the best and the mountain yew from dry areas was used when they could get it. The measurement of MR bows at the point the horn starts is 12 mm often enough to be considered standardization.. Rather than a discreet arrow plate, why not do the mediaeval and Tudor thing with a one inch buckskin strip glued around the bow at the arrow pass? You can see where one was on one of the MR bows. That would be more appropriate for a replica, but I guess it’s too late now. I see you are testing it with only the Victorian corner of the mouth draw. The tiller looks good enough and the bow is long enough for your customer to safely manage a 32“ draw.

                                                                        Erik