 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Bob Bernardo
Date: 2010-08-11 00:55
Just one, Arnald Brilhart made one. I tried it and it was pretty bad. Another problem with fiberglass is the glue can be toxic, actually it is toxic while making one, but depending on the type of glue used after it's cured it should be safe. The wrong type of glue and resin can still be toxic after it's cured.
Designer of - Vintage 1940 Cicero Mouthpieces and the La Vecchia mouthpieces
Yamaha Artist 2015
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2010-08-11 12:35
I'd worry that a bump could flake off tiny bits of glass. From a few days installing Fiberglas insulation, I can testify that it's really nasty stuff, even on your hands and arms, let alone your lips and tongue.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2010-08-11 17:39
Absolutely terrible material for clarinets. Too hard to control dimensions of the finished composite, too rough a surface texture, fibers migrating out of the matrix, toxic (or at least unhealthy) components, etc.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2010-08-11 17:50
David Spiegelthal wrote:
> too rough a surface texture, fibers migrating out of the matrix,
Hmmm ... tell that to the automotive and boat manufacturers. I think I might use a gel coat on MY clarinet should I want to make one out of fibreglas ...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2010-08-11 17:56
True Mark, but most people don't stick cars and boats in their mouths. Also, putting a nice smooth gel coat on the bore of a clarinet body could be challenging, though the outside should be too hard, I guess. And I would want to use tonehole inserts (maybe Delrin or hard rubber) rather than try to make the bare fiberglass holes and seating surfaces smooth enough. Anyway, what would be the point? There are far better materials out there.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: pewd
Date: 2010-08-11 21:24
What Ken said. Dangerous if damaged.
- Paul Dods
Dallas, Texas
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2010-08-11 21:37
Wonder if anyone ever made an asbestos-bodied clarinet (before they knew how dangerous asbestos was)?
And wonder if anyone'll make an MDF clarinet (with the joint surface and bore sealed to prevent water damage)?
And as there are already carbon fibre flutes, has anyone ever made a thin walled carbon fibre clarinet?
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Bernardo
Date: 2010-08-12 00:47
I don't think I used the right term in my post above. Glue is not used when hardening and coating fiberglass, therefore it's the wrong choice of wording.
Fiberglass is coated with a catalyst and resin base. The catalyst is a hardening agent mixed with the resin. A lot of companies that use fiberglass use this type of compound. For example epoxy is often called a glue and this is why I was used the term glue. It's actually not a glue in the formal sense, but it is often used in the manufacturing coating of fiberglass. If you go to a hardware store and ask for epoxy glue, chances are the epoxy package won't say glue.
At any rate these chemicals are pretty much all toxic while in the curing stage and often still toxic after it's cured. When making mouthpieces I contacted Dupont and one of the chemists stated there are about 10,000 different types assorted epoxyies and explained to me about the toxic activities during the curing stages, also referred to as molecular activity. This was back in the early 1980's. Epoxies range in hardness, some are as hard or harder than glass, which is why I injected a very hard epoxy into my molds. ( These were 100% epoxy, no fiberglass was used in the molds.)
Anyway, the epoxy formula from Dupont had a very low shrink rate and was non toxic after it was cured.
It is very possible that clarinets can be made from a 100% epoxy type of compound and safely molded.
Designer of - Vintage 1940 Cicero Mouthpieces and the La Vecchia mouthpieces
Yamaha Artist 2015
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2010-08-12 14:54
2 part epoxy is an excellent glue. Asbestos has been used as a filler in some thermoset plastics. Toxicity would not be an issue unless the mouthpiece was also made from "it". Fibreglas particles in tone holes would present considerable pad sealing problems as well as machining problems. IMO not a practical approach.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: timg
Date: 2010-08-13 00:42
There are various coatings for fibre-glass which seal the fibres and give a smooth-ish surface without changing the dimensions of the piece. However fibre-glass has a tendency to delaminate when being machined. I think you'd end up with distorted tone-holes which would be very difficult to seal.
I'm sure it's doable, but it would require a lot of skill. I doubt anybody would try to make a fibre-glass clarinet unless there was a very good reason.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2010-08-13 02:55
"There are various coatings for fibre-glass which seal the fibres and give a smooth-ish surface without changing the dimensions of the piece."
"ish" is probably not good enough. 0.01 mm (0.0004") irregularity in tone hole edges is significant, especially with the firmer pads being used nowadays.
If there were exposed fibres on the tone holes - and that would happen if they were dressed to overcome irregularity, then the ends of those fibres would be murderously abrasive to pad membrane.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Franklin Liao
Date: 2010-08-13 06:45
I think I would not use Fiberglass at all. Personally, I would opt Delrin and Ebonite.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2010-08-13 23:26
I agree... I would not use Fibreglass at all.
Unfortunately ebonite (hard rubber) turns green and smelly with time and use.
I guess most plastic clarinets are made from ABS, presumably partly because it is easy to mould.
For an alternative to wood for higher quality clarinets, I would plug for acetal (more correctly polyacetal, also known as Polyoxymethylene, POM, polyformaldehyde, or under DuPont's trade name Delrin.
It is sometimes called the "engineering plastic", I suppose because it machines so well, I'd say a lot better than grenadilla! So I guess it is not being used at present because it does not mould so well. the shape would have to be machined rather than moulded, as it is for grenadilla. I suppose this would mean it was not priced as a student instrument.
It is about 70% stronger than ABS, but may have problems from:
- 3 times more stretching before reaching its breaking point.
- 25% higher density
- It does not glue as well as.
- 3.6 times the thermal linear expansion.
But that last one, thermal expansion, is a biggy! It could present a significant issue of the pivots jamming or becoming sloppy, depending on air temperature. (One of the major reasons grenadilla is chosen over other timbers is its dimensional stability.)
So perhaps that makes it unsuitable fro clarinets, and especially bass clarinets.
Polypropylene is used for plastic Fox bassoons.
Compared with ABS, it has:
- 4 times less moisture absorbency (and probably less dimensional change resulting from this)
- 70% of the tensile strength
- about twice as "bendy"
- 12% less dense
- 3.3 times less thermal expansion. That's a biggie!
But it has that weird greasy feel.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LesterV
Date: 2010-08-13 23:51
One polymer not mentioned yet is PEEK (polyetheretherketone). It's strong and machines nicely. It also costs more than grenadilla which obviously means it has to sound better. Imagine, a PEEK clarinet with rhenium keywork - wow.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris P
Date: 2010-08-14 06:41
I worked on some acetyl oboe joints and it wasn't great (more like a bloody nightmare).
There were burrs kicked up along all slots and toneholes from being milled and the tonehole bedplaces were hard to get a good smooth, clean finish to - they wouldn't cut nicely at all and were hard to get level as the cutter would either skim across the plastic or suddenly dig in and rip loads of plastic out. However, Delrin and PVC joints machined very well using the same processes and cutters.
But an alternative to plastic is wood with a lined bore.
Former oboe finisher
Howarth of London
1998 - 2010
The opinions I express are my own.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2010-08-14 13:15
LesterV, Peek sounds good, apart from price and only half the scratch resistance of Acetal. How easily does it machine?
Chris, are you absolutely certain that was acetal (not acetyl BTW)?
Acetyl is used by engineers mainly because it machines very easily and cleanly. I have done lathe work on it and it was an absolute dream.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2010-08-14 14:08
I've been making bass clarinet low-C extensions out of acetal resin (trade name "Delrin") and as Gordon wrote, it machines really well. I started using it based on experience from my bicycling days as a teenager, recalling that one of the French derailleur manufacturers made their gearshift levers out of the stuff and even though the were a bit flexible, they never broke; also we used to make fittings out of Delrin for US Navy sonar equipment. It's a very tough plastic.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2010-08-14 14:47
David Spiegelthal wrote:
> based on experience from my
> bicycling days as a teenager, recalling that one of the French
> derailleur manufacturers made their gearshift levers out of the
> stuff and even though the were a bit flexible, they never
> broke;
Simplex; gawd how I hated those! Had them on a Peugeot frame I bought in Japan. The idlers, pulleys, & some of the bushes were Delrin and worked great. Exchanged the levers for Campys. But we digress ...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LesterV
Date: 2010-08-14 22:07
Gordon, PEEK machines easily, similar to Delrin. The property of PEEK that is unusual for a polymer is its strength over a wide temperature range. It can replace stainless steel tubing in some applications. One shortcoming however, is most adhesives don't stick to it well.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Franklin Liao
Date: 2010-08-15 01:19
And the other thing is that you do pay for that PEEK... I just looked at the cost for a rod.
You need $80 for a 20mm x 750mm PEEK rod, Nevermind a 30% carbon variation which makes it about $130? You also need a billet to make a bell out of...
That is multiples of the costs of Delrin, although how much it would be comparing to say Grenadilla I know not.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2010-08-15 02:30
Advantages of PEEK:
1.Strength. Providing you don't put the clarinet assembled on a bed and sit on it, this added strength is simply not required.
2. Wide temperature range for its strength... Not required.
3. Several times greater "Limiting PV" value i.e. basically suitability for bearings where speed is a factor... Not required at all. This property, being well ahead of other plastics, is probably its main feature in mechanical engineering.
4. Lower expansion with temperature.... Desirable.
To counter that, a significantly lower scratch resistance, and huge price.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LesterV
Date: 2010-08-15 15:46
The only reason I mentioned PEEK is because it could never be considered "cheap plastic". If solid rod stock were used, the raw material needed for a Bb soprano clarinet would cost about $500. This was meant to poke fun at what seems to be the the prevailing attitude that "cheap plastic" could never sound as good as expensive wood. Therefore, it logically follows that "very expensive plastic" must sound better.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: tictactux ★2017
Date: 2010-08-15 16:40
LesterV wrote:
> The only reason I mentioned PEEK is because it could never be
> considered "cheap plastic". If solid rod stock were used, the
> raw material needed for a Bb soprano clarinet would cost about
> $500. This was meant to poke fun at what seems to be the the
> prevailing attitude that "cheap plastic" could never sound as
> good as expensive wood. Therefore, it logically follows that
> "very expensive plastic" must sound better.
Definitely. Why do you think it is that expensive? Because it sounds so good!
...uhm...can PEEK by cryo-ed? ![[tongue]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie6.gif)
--
Ben
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LesterV
Date: 2010-08-15 17:39
Looking at the prices paid for barrels, PEEK, is probably not too expensive to consider. A piece 1.5" diameter x 3" length goes for $46.70 (mcmaster.com, part number 7269K12)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gordon (NZ)
Date: 2010-08-15 22:42
LesterV wrote:
"The only reason I mentioned PEEK is because it could never be considered "cheap plastic". If solid rod stock were used, the raw material needed for a Bb soprano clarinet would cost about $500. This was meant to poke fun at what seems to be the the prevailing attitude that "cheap plastic" could never sound as good as expensive wood. Therefore, it logically follows that "very expensive plastic" must sound better."
I'm totally with you. Utterly crazy.
And I suppose it is that sort of thinking in part that induced Bufet to put the grenadila dust filler (rubbish) in their Greenline mix.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Franklin Liao
Date: 2010-08-16 00:42
(Wishing I have all the monies to contract Stephen Fox to make a Nexus in C out of Delrin again...)
Post Edited (2010-08-16 00:43)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
