Author Topic: First Molly  (Read 3784 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Selfbowman

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,161
Re: First Molly
« Reply #15 on: August 28, 2015, 02:38:37 pm »
Nice looking bow. Now I know what a Molly is . I called that a holmagard. I can't spell that word either. Arvin
Well I'll say!!  Osage is king!!

Offline bubbles

  • Member
  • Posts: 932
  • PM110769
Re: First Molly
« Reply #16 on: August 28, 2015, 03:24:41 pm »
Thanks for all the kind words guys!   

Offline Springbuck

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,545
Re: First Molly
« Reply #17 on: August 29, 2015, 12:03:46 pm »

I asked the same Q on levers... I think thin as you dare :o, just take 'em down a whisker at a time and quit at the first sign of flex (or go back a tad  ;) )
I went for a slightly triangular section, wider on the back, slightly concave sides, narrow on the belly...
Del

This is correct.  the idea is to reduce weight while not having them bend excessively, or be laterally unstable.  A triangle, Gothic arch, or diamond cross section is my usual result, but round or square is fine, too.

  I don't remember the exact numbers, but once on another site I asked a Q? and got a great answer.  Imagine a bar or board 2 cm square. It will have "x" stiffness, and strength.  A round cross section of a 2" diameter will be something like 96% as stiff and strong.  A round, hollow section, like a tube will be 92% as strong and stiff.  A triangle cross section of the same length of side will be 87% as strong, etc...........angle iron will be blah blah, blah, channel iron will be......  I don't have the correct numbers handy, but as you can see, the triangle section will be like 38% lighter, but will only 13% weaker...

Offline bubbles

  • Member
  • Posts: 932
  • PM110769
Re: First Molly
« Reply #18 on: August 29, 2015, 01:20:46 pm »
Good info springbuck