whitespruce wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:29 pm
I would argue that this is BS. For that to be true either the top or bottom carbon fiber (depending on the direction of flex} would be acting in compression, and carbon fiber as used in this case just doesn't have much compressive strength.
g
BTW, John. No offense meant and I am not questioning you...you are just passing on somebody else's info.
Grant, the carbon fibre top and bottom has considerably more compressive strength (and shear resistance) than spruce alone, and more than a spruce sandwich around a single layer of carbon fibre. I think the I-beam analogy is a good one to describe the light weight/increased resistance to bending possible with such an arrangement. Of course, the size and strength of the I-beam has to be adjusted in the design phase to match the amount of vibration you want to allow in the top. A large section of the Gore books is about calculating this, in combination with adjusting the thickness of the top depending on the particular piece of wood, mass weight of the sides, active or not back and so on to provide an optimum guitar box.
The Gore books are an interesting read, and give a coherent and logical account of the engineering issues involved and the structural issues which affect how a guitar sounds like a guitar.
I understand your way of layering fibreglass between layers of wood for practicality of vacuum bagging in your kayak tops, but if you are looking for maximum strength of a plate or beam the fibreglass or carbon fibre goes on the outside of the wood layers, with the wood's main function being to keep the layers apart (and make an I-beam ...). I built a 32 foot boat using this method, with 25 mm strips of western red cedar as the core and glass both sides: the same cedar that dents if you look at it but which made for a very light and strong hull.
Kym