The Traditional Fisherman's Forum

Thanks Nobby, another one of life's mysteries.

Not sure if this will help or not but this is a photo of a Southwell Carp Plus and a B.James Avon.

Yes, I think I can see the same sort of undamaged fibres in the pressed node on the far rod OK...I'm not sure about the B.James rod in the foreground.

Neither are the dark colour we've been told to look out for, are they?

! A couple of nodes, by comparison, the affected zone seems very short in comparison with a filed node more generally found.

JPC wrote: ↑Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:32 am Maurice told me that once the cane had been baked Bob could split, plane and then glue the blanks in record time, no measurements were needed he could do everything by memory and feel.

CrayCane wrote: ↑Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:55 am Those who had seen the video were greatly impressed by the way Bob measured the strips by feel and the speed with which he worked.

I would suggest if you were looking for an explanation as to variation in blank quality and feel this is it. There is no way anyone could measure strip dimensions by feel to within 0.001" accuracy which is what most pro cane rod builders aim for.

Nobby wrote: ↑Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:16 pm Now just how many other rod makers were setting these nodes aright by hand before planing the cane I just don't know. A good few had gone over to 'built' cane by then for the speed of production, simply milling the strips straight regardless of the grain. I once read that Allcocks spoke of being able to make 1500 rods a week this way, but Tony Croft, who worked for them as a lad before going to Aspindale certainly learned to split cane the old way, so maybe Allcock did both, depending upon the 'grade' of the model being made?


One person who did mill cane was JB Walker, who had two mills and had worked them to death by the time he shut up shop.

Here's the image of Dick's pressed node, right under the butt ring( clever) lovely parallel and unbroken fibres:

Actually milling cane has no relationship with "grain" runout and is just another method of adding the tapered triangular shape to the strips.

What does affect "grain" runout is the initial method of creating the strips - split strips tend to follow the "grain" of the fibres whereas sawing doesn't. It is sawn strips which can exhibit runout of fibre bundles across strips.

Barder mills his cane but splits his strips which is perhaps the best combination for commercial production as the fibres remain parallell and milling allows strips with an angle slightly over 60° which results in strip geometry that eliminates the glue line.

In terms of node pressing this is standard practice amongst all rod builders now but many had their nodes planed off back in the day for speed.
ALL nodes are filed/dressed to some extent, even pressed ones as it is not possible to fully displace the nodal ridge sufficiently by pressing alone - in part because the top surface of the strips have a slight curve to them which must be flattened and in part because some of the nodal ridge remains after pressing. What pressing does is reduce the length of the strip that needs dressing. The resulting "nodal scars" arising from dressing can be recognised by white lines on either side of the node where the fibres have been dressed/filed through. I have circled them in the picture of the Walker rod to make them easier to see. On a rod where these have been planed off without pressing they will be quite a bit longer and are sometimes referred to as "spears" by some builders.


Some builders actually planed the whole outer face of the strips as well and the white spears are very evident on these rods.

Interestingly research has shown that the actual "power fibres" are relatively short at about 10-12mm which is why bamboo does not have "grain" in the same sense as wood - however bundles of fibres do lay parallel giving a grain like appearance.

Hope this info helps

Regards
Steve

What you say is true Steve.
It's also been shown that pressed nodes are no stronger than nodes that are filed flat: article in IBRA journal no 11 http://www.rodmakers.eu/
The summary of the article is:

"In light of the results of the experiment we have illustrated, we can say that – from a structural point of
view – the pressing operation or the filing operation (or abrasion or planing) are equal.
On the other hand, one cannot deny that pressing produces a shorter node than the other elimination
operations.
From this point of view the node is more elegant.
So, it all boils down to an aesthetic and formal choice rather than a structural and mechanically
functional result and above all it is obvious that the dispute over the node is part of the Rodmaking
Myths."

Pete

That is really interesting Steve and Pete, thanks for posting.

I'm going to have to read that a few times. My head hurts a little bit......:-)

There goes the value of Southwell cane..........'twas the Emperor's new clothes all along......


Now about that Weasel cane.....??


Edit I've just remembered where this whole Southwell cane 'thing' started..........one man and his website.

Nobby, sorry if I've misunderstood - did Tony Croft press the nodes in his later rods? I've studied mine and to be honest I can't tell either way.

I couldn't say Tim, I've only held hid rods rarely, but certainly he learned that method at Allcocks.
Sent you a PM and e-mail btw.