Primitive Archer
Main Discussion Area => Bows => Topic started by: huisme on March 07, 2014, 03:05:37 pm
-
I've been doing these nocks for a while now and they've always held together if I leave the last ring before the back partially intact so the string doesn't touch the last ring of early wood. My main shooter, which I've probably put around five hundred arrows through, has these nocks and is holding up just fine, but concerns were expressed and now I need to know if this is safe.
(http://i.imgur.com/MuN8K9V.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/h7jkHWm.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/y9iMncA.jpg?1)
(http://i.imgur.com/INKqHeG.jpg?1)
-
I'd shoot it.
-
its possible that you could pop those rings off.
-
Doing it that way is no different than a wood overlay, better probably.
-
I don't have any personal experience with that technique, but I know it is shown in one of the Bowyer's Bibles. I would think it would be as safe as an overlay. Since the tip is not bending much if any, and since the fibers of the back ring are not violated, it seems pretty secure to me.
-
I would say it is different than an overlay . I run my grain across the tips so the string would have to rip through a few rings.
-
Who cares what anybody says they will probably hold up just fine
-
He asked Joe, evidently he cares what we think.
-
Don't listen to moaning pesimists and armchair bowyers who have never made a bow in their life >:(.
Your reasoning is faultless The nocks are great :)
The number of people who start a conversation with "I read that..." >:(
Or come out with some blethering nonsense... I've learned to bite my tongue and walk away as I was running out of places to hide the bodies :o
Del ;)
-
It should be good as long as any violated ring doesn't extend into a working part of the limb.
-
Have you ever tried having the growth ring lines facing out? I have used oak this way and it seems ok. anyone think this is no good?
Any time you need a brave soul to try out your style I am more than willing to accept a bow from you! :laugh:
-
The only thing that might happen ,is the little piece that was left in the bottom picture (above the nock and below the string nock?) will be very susceptible to breaking . You could likely pull it off with a finger nail if you tried. ......So don't try ;) Even if it did happen , it wouldn't ruin the bow. Nice, very refined looking nocks.
-
its possible that you could pop those rings off.
The thing is that the string is pulling those rings against the back of the bow, and the edge of the rings is in a static area. There's nothing moving to lift them, so I thought maybe there was something I didn't know would pop them off. What would that something be, though?
PD and Tim, that's what I thought, though I've only had a TTBB in my hands once and don't remember seeing this in there and so thought I was doing something pretty weird at first.
Bob, that is one of the things I worried about in the beginning, and I still try to make sure I don't give the string a good reason to go between any thin growth rings. I think my success has been in part due to leaving a good chunk of the last extra ring on the bow and having the closest exposed layer of early wood above where the string rests.
Joe, I appreciate it but coming here and asking for everybody's harshest has never steered me wrong ;)
Del, that's one of things that made me nervous before trying these nocks was I couldn't find anyone with experience. I winged it and got lucky 8)
Marc, so you would you suggest I just stick with overlays for bows with bendy tips? I like to make every last inch of my shotbows bend, so would I really want to stick with side or overlay nocks?
NM, I just might need volunteers some day ;)
Lostarrow, I started that thinking of stringers, but realized what you're bringing up, it's a fragile but not dangerous part of the bow I just left because I think it looks nice now. And thank you, I put a lot of paranoia into not breaking them ;D
-
An overlay will pop off if the limb bends too close to it.
-
An overlay will pop off if the limb bends too close to it.
Makes sense, I probably should have known that already ::)
Thank you!
-
For what it's worth, I'll offer my thoughts on the subject. If you look at how wood is violated along a growth ring, you'll find that it's often the porous early growth that fails. (Likewise, dimensional lumber often tears out when the early growth ring fails.) The string is, in general, trying to slip down the limbs (less so the shorter the bow is). If you're not careful (and lucky) in your design and execution, that force could cause the string to sheer the "natural overlay" that you've created right off. Best care scenario is that you could just sand the area down and add an overlay. Worst case scenario is that it tears out and ruins the bow.
You could improve your design by adding deeper grooves on the SIDES of the tips, which would transfer more of the load perpendicular to the grain. Relying primarily on a groove on the back of the bow (whether as you've done it or on with an overlay) localizes the strain along the weakest orientation.
I prefer glued-on overlays because a properly prepared and glued joint will be STRONGER than the wood around it (quite the opposite of the "joint" that the early growth rings function as).
Perhaps that makes sense? :-\
-
You're right, the first one I did I didn't go deep enough into the last late growth ring and the early wood started to lift. I've been careful since to make sure the string is off of the early wood enough that it doesn't leave an impression after shooting. It's very easy with my thicker ringed stuff, but for the nocks you see it required a lot of fine tuning.
I've just had the right mix of good and bad experiences to feel safe with these nocks. I don't try these with small rings, and I still do overlays if I fail to shape the blended nock properly, but once it's shaped properly I still haven't seen that these are less safe than overlays. Glue should be stronger, but these have proven to be at least as strong as necessary.
It makes sens,e and it's what I think about while making these. I'll be careful and keep testing rigorously ;)
-
For what it's worth, I'll offer my thoughts on the subject. If you look at how wood is violated along a growth ring, you'll find that it's often the porous early growth that fails. (Likewise, dimensional lumber often tears out when the early growth ring fails.) The string is, in general, trying to slip down the limbs (less so the shorter the bow is). If you're not careful (and lucky) in your design and execution, that force could cause the string to sheer the "natural overlay" that you've created right off. Best care scenario is that you could just sand the area down and add an overlay. Worst case scenario is that it tears out and ruins the bow.
You could improve your design by adding deeper grooves on the SIDES of the tips, which would transfer more of the load perpendicular to the grain. Relying primarily on a groove on the back of the bow (whether as you've done it or on with an overlay) localizes the strain along the weakest orientation.
I prefer glued-on overlays because a properly prepared and glued joint will be STRONGER than the wood around it (quite the opposite of the "joint" that the early growth rings function as).
Perhaps that makes sense? :-\
My advice too ;)
-
For what it's worth, I'll offer my thoughts on the subject. If you look at how wood is violated along a growth ring, you'll find that it's often the porous early growth that fails. (Likewise, dimensional lumber often tears out when the early growth ring fails.) The string is, in general, trying to slip down the limbs (less so the shorter the bow is). If you're not careful (and lucky) in your design and execution, that force could cause the string to sheer the "natural overlay" that you've created right off. Best care scenario is that you could just sand the area down and add an overlay. Worst case scenario is that it tears out and ruins the bow.
You could improve your design by adding deeper grooves on the SIDES of the tips, which would transfer more of the load perpendicular to the grain. Relying primarily on a groove on the back of the bow (whether as you've done it or on with an overlay) localizes the strain along the weakest orientation.
I prefer glued-on overlays because a properly prepared and glued joint will be STRONGER than the wood around it (quite the opposite of the "joint" that the early growth rings function as).
Perhaps that makes sense? :-\
Actually it's the brace height that determines how much shear pressure on the nocks, this depends a bit on the bow's design. The lower the brace height the more shear force on the nock.
What you have there is perfectly suitable for a longbow/flatbow with sufficient brace height. I wouldn't trust it on an R/D bow or a Recurve
-
What you have there is perfectly suitable for a longbow/flatbow with sufficient brace height. I wouldn't trust it on an R/D bow or a Recurve.
I tried it on a recurve once. Lets just say I learned that the hard way ;)
-
A good insurance policy for nocks like that is to cut a slot and glue in a spline to shore up the area. Check out this Homer Prouty yew bow featuring that technique.
The link was removed because it was from an auction site that is not a PA sponsor. You should be able to quickly find the pics by googling for Prouty Yew bows.