Tree bark as a belly material in 5-curve bows

[bownarra]

How about we simmer down and read the link he posted?  Generally speaking, the group's conventional wisdom trumps google,  but once you get rude you can't ask him to be polite. 

Let's not shoot down the idea until it has been proven wrong, let's not adapt the idea until it has been proven right.

Some of us already know and don't need to prove things again and again....
I've read the link. I've read many articles like it too and am not particulary keen with the way assumptions are made in it. It isn't very scientific, the writers have likely never made a bow and as such is of very limited practical use.
Parnell -

[HanibalLecter(InnerSmile)]

How about we simmer down and read the link he posted?  Generally speaking, the group's conventional wisdom trumps google,  but once you get rude you can't ask him to be polite. 

Let's not shoot down the idea until it has been proven wrong, let's not adapt the idea until it has been proven right.

Some of us already know and don't need to prove things again and again....
I've read the link. I've read many articles like it too and am not particulary keen with the way assumptions are made in it. It isn't very scientific, the writers have likely never made a bow and as such is of very limited practical use.
Parnell -

Some scientist you are. What little evidence you have provided for your bows is unimpressive. Bad experience = bad opinions. Thing is, a lot of people don't realize how bad they've had it.

[PatM]

How about we simmer down and read the link he posted?  Generally speaking, the group's conventional wisdom trumps google,  but once you get rude you can't ask him to be polite. 

Let's not shoot down the idea until it has been proven wrong, let's not adapt the idea until it has been proven right.

Some of us already know and don't need to prove things again and again....
I've read the link. I've read many articles like it too and am not particulary keen with the way assumptions are made in it. It isn't very scientific, the writers have likely never made a bow and as such is of very limited practical use.
Parnell -

 Did you see the bow Adam made?

[Marc St Louis]

How about we simmer down and read the link he posted?  Generally speaking, the group's conventional wisdom trumps google,  but once you get rude you can't ask him to be polite. 

Let's not shoot down the idea until it has been proven wrong, let's not adapt the idea until it has been proven right.

Some of us already know and don't need to prove things again and again....
I've read the link. I've read many articles like it too and am not particulary keen with the way assumptions are made in it. It isn't very scientific, the writers have likely never made a bow and as such is of very limited practical use.
Parnell -

Some scientist you are. What little evidence you have provided for your bows is unimpressive. Bad experience = bad opinions. Thing is, a lot of people don't realize how bad they've had it.

Unfortunately "Tom" you have never shown any evidence of your own.  Keep it up and you will be banned....again

[scp]

In spite of many peculiar terms, probably literal translations of Russian terms by a person not familiar with English terms used by us, descriptions of the bow's composition appear to be meticulous and reliable. There are not many speculations. I find the information quite valuable and useful.

The use of the term "pre-stressed" in the article does not appear to be referring to the pre-stressed and glued reflex we understand, but just a side profile that is pre-stressed on bracing.

The binding of two wood strips suggests Scythians are not just making setback/reflex-deflex-recurve shape bows; but actually making pre-stressed and glued reflex/setback bows using fish bladder glue between the two distinct wooden laths. The question remains why tree bark was used for the belly instead of simply making an oak backed oak bow.

[PatM]

Maybe just as a way of sealing the belly?

[JW_Halverson]

How about we simmer down and read the link he posted?  Generally speaking, the group's conventional wisdom trumps google,  but once you get rude you can't ask him to be polite. 

Let's not shoot down the idea until it has been proven wrong, let's not adapt the idea until it has been proven right.

Some of us already know and don't need to prove things again and again....
I've read the link. I've read many articles like it too and am not particulary keen with the way assumptions are made in it. It isn't very scientific, the writers have likely never made a bow and as such is of very limited practical use.
Parnell -

Some scientist you are. What little evidence you have provided for your bows is unimpressive. Bad experience = bad opinions. Thing is, a lot of people don't realize how bad they've had it.

 

1) "Some scientist you are."  Denigrating people again? Not cool and not what this group tolerates.
2) "What little evidence you have provided for your bows is unimpressive."  What is unimpressive is your body of work. Or shall we say the utter lack thereof. Until you post your work, any credibility you may have had when you joined is spent. You now have none.
3) "...a lot of people don't realize how bad they've had it"  You, with no experience in so much as tillering a simple D bow, don't even realize how vast your lack of knowledge is. And here you are, yet again, lecturing experienced bowyers, including a number of world record holders in international competition. 

Your hubris has once again become tedious to bear.

[willie]

How about we simmer down and read the link he posted?  Generally speaking, the group's conventional wisdom trumps google........

Let's not shoot down the idea until it has been proven wrong, let's not adapt the idea until it has been proven right.

the author of the quoted paper also proposes a bow side profile whose tips become more reflexed as the bow is drawn.

Edit: "also" removed as it implies the author of the paper asserts the same as the OP. 

[PatM]

And the handle  becomes more setback under the pressure of the draw too.

[Digital Caveman]

    So maybe I should have followed my own advice and read the thing, I guess I am not interested enough to worry about it.
 

 

[AndrewS]

Please note that the conclusion refers to a piece of bark 4.54mm wide and 3.24mm thick  (25,4mm = 1 inch).
Several bows were examined and only one possibly had a bark facing.
Sinew coatings, sinew and bark wrappings had several bows
The whole thing can be perceived as an interesting detail but nothing more.

I am very interested to see the bow of hannibal.

[scp]

Please note that the conclusion refers to a piece of bark 4.54mm wide and 3.24mm thick  (25,4mm = 1 inch).
Several bows were examined and only one possibly had a bark facing.
Sinew coatings, sinew and bark wrappings had several bows
The whole thing can be perceived as an interesting detail but nothing more.

That's what's left. It was clearly stated that the belly strip of tree bark was structural.

"To this we should add that the fruit-tree plate glued to the belly also contributed to the stiffness of the bow. this combination of various flexible and resilient materials in the design of the bow from Vodoslavka kurgan allowed the bow with short shoulders to impart more energy to the arrow than a simple bow construction."

The tree bark was not a mere decoration or water-proofing. It was used as a part of pre-stressing the two layer limbs. A simple experimentation is in order.

Can someone glue a 1" wide, 1/2" thick and 24" long hickory strip to a 1" wide, 1/4" thick, and 24" long cedar strip, pre-stressing them with 2 inch setback/reflex?  Then we can compare its strength with a same size, 3/4" thick, hickory stave. It can be heat-bent to the same shape. I am not sure how long it will take for me to get around to do this myself. Thanks.

[HanibalLecter(InnerSmile)]

How about we simmer down and read the link he posted?  Generally speaking, the group's conventional wisdom trumps google........

Let's not shoot down the idea until it has been proven wrong, let's not adapt the idea until it has been proven right.

the author of the quoted paper also proposes a bow side profile whose tips become more reflexed as the bow is drawn.

You don't understand what you're talking about. The figures aren't depicted at identical angles/positions.

[PatM]

Is bark stiff enough to logically create additional stiffness to the limb?

[scp]

Is bark stiff enough to logically create additional stiffness to the limb?

Possibly, especially if bound to an oak stave and encased with tendon.