Jump to content
Google Logins Fixed! ×

mistermikev

GOTM Winner
  • Content Count

    2,835
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    60

Posts posted by mistermikev

  1. Just now, Prostheta said:

    So that's a thing then.

    Well, CF in a neck is no bad thing. I recall that David Myka did a test many years ago where he made a neck with LOTS of pultruded tubes replacing the wood. The comment was that it was very bright sounding. I wouldn't say that's a bad thing, just a thing to quantify when juggling your parameters. I'm of the opinion that a simple wooden neck can always be better whether through basic lamination of the same wood to achieve a more stable growth ring orientation and symmetry, lamination of different woods and materials to achieve the same and bring together a variety of tonal qualities, or flat out going super tech and dropping in everything....in reasonable balance.

    Like you've heard other people say, a couple of small reinforcement bars are more than enough. You can easily make a neck too stiff and unresponsive. Strings need to pull in a little bow for fret clearance. Man, you know all this. haha 😄

    right on, some good fact-lets there (I've heard many complaints about teh sound of carbon fiber, then again flea seems to make an entirely carbon fiber neck sound pretty good so... grain of salt).

    I have two 5 strings right now... and don't really care for either.  they both are solid maple and are under constant strain to maintain the super low action I like.  I think I'm probably most of the way there just going with a 7 piece lam w opposing grain and an ebony board... and perhaps I'm jumping the gun thinking that that on it's own won't be enough to get me rock solid stability with a thin profile... but I'd hate to be wrong!

  2. 9 minutes ago, Prostheta said:

    It's always a good thing to round up ideas and document how they play out. Too many forum threads around the Interwebs hit one snag and go cold forever with no meaningful closure. Where do you think you might take this, if anywhere?

    well, the takeaway for me is that if one wanted to do something like this you'd have to address the need to put tension into the carbon fiber.  that really complicates it for me. 

    I think what I'll end up doing is buying some of the thinner pulltruded carbon fiber rods and perhaps do a 1/16 route that is deeper.  I just don't want to put a lot of "anything other than wood" in a guitar if I don't need to.  The one thing I think I heard from many sources is that the typical 1/4 x 1/4 carbon fiber reinforcement is more than anyone needs.  so... perhaps I'll snag some 1/16 x 1/4 rods and try that out.  this whole thing came from me thinking about a 5 string bass (my next) that is a purpleheart/maple lam.  probably going to be pretty solid as is, but I'm wanting to do a really shallow profile and I'd like to maintain as much rigidity as I can without adding any more carbon fiber than I need. 

  3. 3 hours ago, curtisa said:

    Small Bear Electronics would have most, if not all of those. Look up the 16mm Alpha potentiometer range.

    250K blend pot with centre detent is a bit unusual. Stewmac sell a 250K Alpha blend pot but there's no indication that it has the centre detent. Mind you, if you're building an active preamp there are ways to do blending that don't require the use of such a hard-to-find component

    Are you sure you need 250K pots for an active installation? Seems a bit on the high side.

    yeah... what he said!  also, you can check mouser but it's such a pain to find things there for me.  if it exhists they'll have it.

    also... there's this: https://reverb.com/item/31157001-alpha-blend-potentiometer-with-center-detent-250k-ohm

     

  4. 1 hour ago, MiKro said:

    I only use those on very fine work. I have even used 1/16" and 1/32" TBN, Otherwise I use a straight 1/4" or 1/8" BN. One other thing is not to do all of the surface just what needs to be milled using  a vector to contain the area. If it is flat there is no reason to mill that in a finish. it can be easily sanded to transition if needed..

    MK

     

    3dvector.jpg

     

    Also the back side ready to flip.

    heel1.jpg

    right on.  using a 1/8 ball vs 1/4 ball makes a huge dif in the time estimate it comes up with.  Also, I've noticed that the whiteside .tool database bits are set to run much faster and as such come out with much lower time estimates.  I figure I'm going to be doing plenty of sanding so I'll probably just go with a 1/4 ball nose and call it good enough. 

    afa area... right now I'm just working on the body... and everything is restricted to the bounds of the body in 90% of the area.  I will keep that in mind tho - no sense wasting bit/time/etc on something that doesn't need to be carved.

    that's a nice clean edge where that neck meets the heel.  I love that about cnc... just looks so professional.  nice work.

    • Like 1
  5. 53 minutes ago, MiKro said:

    So when you use Aspire and some other types of CAD/CAM software that import STL files mainly. This is the problem you may face with STLs. If the mesh count is not up to par it will introduce triangulation artifacts in your work. Which will show up in the milling as well. Sometmes in Aspire you need to up the visual resolution in order to see it.   There are also two available higher resolution modes, Extremely high (20X slower) and Maximum (50X slower) that are not normally visible. They can be made available in the Model Resolution pull-down menu by holding the Shift key down before selecting Create a new file or Job Setup. This can be very useful when needed.

    So to give an example look at the neck transistion to the headstock. One has low mesh count the other high mesh count. Both are the same file only mesh sizes changed in Rhino before export.to STL for use in Aspire.

    I experienced this myself by cutting corners in Rhino to make a quick neck model for a Cigar Box Guitar.

    MK

     

     

    mesh1.jpg

    hehe... you are my yoda.  as it were... I'm going to be facing this issue shortly I suspect as I transition to neck design for my bass.  Further... current graphics card is being pushed to the limit on standard resolution... but we will be rectifying that shortly.  (nother side proj coming up - building a 16 core pc!!)  I will come back to this thread once I get there and I'm thinking this will be very relevant then!  thank you for that!

    afa bit... just wondering if you are in fact going down to a tapered ball nose 1/8" bit for finishing.  it appears to be the recommendation but will result in an estimate run time upwards of 10hrs!!

  6. 2 hours ago, MiKro said:

    So to speed things up just a bit, I tried using a smaller number in my meshes/breps. which in turn creates larger triangulations if converted to STL. This is not good. While it may look good in the software design, it shows up on the CNC as large triangulation and is rough, So I will need to go back and redo this one. :)

    Since it is a one off I will just sand the neck. but it does make me look at my settings in Rhino.

    MK

     

     

    testcut.jpg

    wow, that's a lovely piece of scrap.  if I may - what bit do you use for the finished pass?

    • Like 1
  7. clearly not doing historicaly accurate so... over at herald you can find design for yamaha attitude bass. 

    https://www.electricherald.com/guitar-templates/page/2/

    there are lots of folks who have the 51 pbass neck

    here you can find a p-bass headstock template

    https://www.tdpri.com/threads/p-bass-headstock-template.252557/

    and this site actually has a p bass neck

    https://www.gitarrebassbau.de/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=6

     

  8. 39 minutes ago, MiKro said:

    No big deal as the holes are not a problem only when they raise up the surface and things don't sit flat. A quick scrape with a blade and that is gone. Resurface every few weeks as the mdf will swell some over time due to humidity. The screws that hold the MDF down are counter sunk so I have about 0.550" of surface I can remove.. Removing approx 0.010"-0.015" every few weeks to keep flat.

    right on.  I appreciate the insight!

    • Like 1
  9. Just now, Prostheta said:

    I'd hazard that it would be very hard to match the properties of a manufactured pultruded section using home gamer methods. You might get 50% of the way, and perhaps - if you run the numbers - that might still meet your end goal. Can you quantify the objective in this manner? I'd say that consistency is the main enemy. A section might have properties that vary in spots which may be less than predictable. This is a rabbit hole. I've always been interested in laminating carbon fibre as pinstripes 3-4 layers thick. That would provide stiffness, however the final finish would need to shield your fingers from the abrasive cutt-y end bits!

    I'm not familiar with this engineering term "cutt-y"... please elaborate (hehe). 

    well I was thinking that if you did a gloss finish over the top it would be less 'cutt-y".   just spit balling here. 

    more I think about it carbon fiber rods seem like much less effort... but the original premise was that you could use TOW carbon fiber thread, and potentially reinforce a neck 'enough' without adding all that much carbon fiber and more importantly the amount of resin you'd put in your guitar would be lessened.  this was all spurred on by a thread I was reading over at talkbass where an experienced gentleman (bruce) uses 2-12 threads under the truss rod, puts in a filler stick, then the truss rod.  It is essentially a cheaper way, and according to bruce - adds enough rigidity without adding all that plastic/resin.

  10. 17 minutes ago, Prostheta said:

    I forgot about the heat-cured part. This is perhaps a property engineered into the epoxy for the process rather than letting it chooch on its own time. Curing in the mould or die through applied heat works from a manufacturing viewpoint so the thing is a continuous process. Given that pultruded products are dimensionally very consistent, this would seem an advantageous choice.

    obviously doing it 'from home' one would expect the exact consistency and rigidity that a commercial process would yield... as all things it would have that downside... with the upside being the potential for a more malleable application.  if the rigidity was comparably 'close enough'.

  11. Just now, Prostheta said:

    Not sure because this isn't an area I'm too familiar with. I understand the uses of the finished product, but not so much the methods used to create them. I've used pultruded rods in necks before, and they're a nice off the shelf "thing". As for access to epoxies, well, I'm sure that if you're willing to buy a bucket or larger then anything is available. It might be that you can't get it in human quantities.

    hmm, well the search goes on then!!

  12. Just now, Prostheta said:

    Regular epoxy is plastic and deforms easily, removing the whole "strong under compression" aspect of why carbon fibre composites rule. If you used a correct epoxy, I imagine it wouldn't need much pulling. Just enough to remove slack rather than warping the thing.

    tell me more of this.... "correct ep-oxy"

  13. kind of makes me wonder... how much tension is on that carbon fiber when it is pulltruded?  what if you took carbon fiber tow... cut a 3/32 grove on the back side of a neck... clamped it down and pulled it tight (just by hand) and then use reg epoxy to seal it in place?

    the carbon fiber they use on fishing rods - they don't put any tension on that... they just roll it up around a rod.  then again, maybe that fabric already has epoxy and has tension... seems pretty limp in the video.  yet they heat it up... and all of the sudden it's hard.

    and another thing... how well does carbon fiber/epoxy bond to wood?  what if you used carbon fiber as a laminate in a multi lam setup?  just the carbon fiber fabric?  used it sort of like an accent strip?

    just a childs' meandering here but something I wonder about.

×
×
  • Create New...