BL stave suggestions needed- many pics

[GlisGlis]

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  avoiding the risk of the tree fall 
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
 

[huisme]

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 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"

[huisme]

OH, if you need an idea of how ONE inch of BL will bend

[GlisGlis]

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?

[TRACY]

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

[George Tsoukalas]

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

[GlisGlis]

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

[huisme]

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

[GlisGlis]

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 

[huisme]

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

[GlisGlis]

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.

[GlisGlis]

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

[GlisGlis]

depth is measured on the side, not from center of the belly to the center of the back where is deeper

[DarkSoul]

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.

[TRACY]

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