Drilling C nat Thumb Hole

The Ultimate On-Line Whistle Community. If you find one more ultimater, let us know.
User avatar
DrPhill
Posts: 1610
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:58 am
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 10
Location: None

Re: Drilling C nat Thumb Hole

Post by DrPhill »

hans wrote:I made changes to the Flutomat formulas calculating the lengths for window and end of the tube corrections, so the calculated whistle model fits better with real whistles. The end correction factor is increased (I use 0.5*bore, not 0.3*bore), which affects all hole locations, making them smaller by the same amount (less distance measured from the foot end). The window or embouchure correction is a very difficult one, as it is quite a large value. It only affects the window/embouchure position, i.e its distance from the foot end. If you use a slide, errors can usually be compensated. This window correction depends on the size (width/length) of the window, but also on its depth(wall height at the window), and perhaps some other factors.

Phill picked up my suggestions and created with it the 'HB Flutomat' algorythm of TWJCalc.
WHS.

Hans is spending a lot of time fine tuning the approximations used in these calculations - he is the expert. My role is simply to provide a way for people to use these algorithms. Hans has made changes to his algorithm since 2.02, and these will be incorporated in 2.03, due soon.
Phill

One does not equal two. Not even for very large values of one.
Pipe Bender
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:03 am
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 12

Re: Drilling C nat Thumb Hole

Post by Pipe Bender »

The two of you (Phill and Hans) are a great team.

The algorithm and its presentation just keep getting better :D
User avatar
DrPhill
Posts: 1610
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:58 am
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 10
Location: None

Re: Drilling C nat Thumb Hole

Post by DrPhill »

Thanks.
DrPhill wrote:.............. Hans has made changes to his algorithm since 2.02, and these will be incorporated in 2.03, due soon.
Done.
Phill

One does not equal two. Not even for very large values of one.
Pipe Bender
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:03 am
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 12

Re: Drilling C nat Thumb Hole

Post by Pipe Bender »

I've added the thumb-hole to 13 low and medium end whistles. In the first half of these the thumb-hole was positioned by entering a selected diameter (e.g. 5mm) into TWJCalc. In each case it turned out that the diameter required to make the note in-tune (e.g. Cnat) was about 1+ mm greater in diameter than anticipated and therefore could have been positioned a little higher up the barrel with a smaller sized hole.

In the second half I ignored the the calculated position and simply went for the mid-point or only very slightly below and ended up with a better balance of hole size vs position.

Possible reasons may be because the hole diameters of my whistles were entered in 0.5mm increments they did not exactly match the true hole sizes nor did the calculated positions match dead-on my whistle hole positions. I did think it noteworthy, however, that the final thumb-hole size was consistently larger than anticipated for the calculated position.

In the end, all 13 whistles now have a good solid flattened seventh!
Last edited by Pipe Bender on Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
DrPhill
Posts: 1610
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:58 am
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 10
Location: None

Re: Drilling C nat Thumb Hole

Post by DrPhill »

Hi PipeBender,

What fingering do you use for Cnat with the thumb hole? I am assuming that you will have the top hole covered and all the others open?
Phill

One does not equal two. Not even for very large values of one.
Pipe Bender
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:03 am
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 12

Re: Drilling C nat Thumb Hole

Post by Pipe Bender »

DrPhill wrote:What fingering do you use for Cnat with the thumb hole? I am assuming that you will have the top hole covered and all the others open?
Yes I do.
User avatar
DrPhill
Posts: 1610
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:58 am
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 10
Location: None

Re: Drilling C nat Thumb Hole

Post by DrPhill »

OK, I am not sure why the results are off then. :(
Phill

One does not equal two. Not even for very large values of one.
Pipe Bender
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:03 am
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 12

Re: Drilling C nat Thumb Hole

Post by Pipe Bender »

Image

Image

Image

As I was doing the modification I documented the first 4 whistles. The TB*-C6 column shows the "Size Selected" vs "Actual Hole Size" for them.

EDIT: Note that even for the Mellow Dog with a Calculated Position of 135.24 and and Actual Position of 135.2 that Actual Hole Size is 6.37 for a Selected Size of 4.5mm.

EDIT2: This necessary increase in hole size prompted me to have both my PC tuner and the Korg CA-1 tuner on at the same time as initially I thought the Korg tuner might be wrong. And I played a tune to triple check and the Cnat sounded fine.
User avatar
hans
Posts: 2259
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2002 6:00 pm
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 8
Tell us something.: I've been making whistles since 2010 in my tiny workshop at my home. I've been playing whistle since teenage times.
Location: Moray Firth, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Drilling C nat Thumb Hole

Post by hans »

I think it is a tricky business. How can you expect an accurate calculated thumb hole position, when the actual hole sizes and positions don't match the calculated model? And then there are the discrepancies in the tuning of the instrument.

I can comment on the Dixon Trad D, since I got one:
Your measurements are close to my own, but your tube wall thickness is too high. OD is 13.49mm, wall thickness is 0.34mm.
You used ET in the calculator, but this is a trad tuned whistle, so just intonation fits better. The difference to the JI frequencies of the whistle calculator are chiefly these: the B on the calculator is a flat B, -16cents to ET, which is a just major third above G, whereas on the Dixon the B is a sharp B, a just fifth above E. I prefer a flat B, and blow it sharp when needed, and Phill took on this interval as part of my JI tuning. The C# on the Dixon is too flat. And the bottom D is flat too. This flat D (ca. 6 cents) makes all the holes appear a bit higher than the calculator says [trick: you can compensate for that on the calculator by adjusting the EndEffect factor].

I proceeded by fitting a thumb hole on this whistle. Hole 1 (from top) is 144.5mm, hole 2 is 126mm from end. I drilled a hole 135mm from the end, which is about half way in between. I step-drilled it to size 5mm, and after cleaning the hole edges with a needle file was happy with the result. It is well tuned to a just C nat. The calculator says 134.3mm for a 5mm hole, give 1mm as compensation for the flat D, so calculated and actual hole are very close. Note also that changing the thumb hole size by 0.5mm in the calculator moves the hole location by about 1.5mm, so small changes have a big effect here: 1mm length difference is about 11 cents for the Cnat.
Pipe Bender
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:03 am
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 12

Re: Drilling C nat Thumb Hole

Post by Pipe Bender »

hans wrote:I think it is a tricky business. How can you expect an accurate calculated thumb hole position, when the actual hole sizes and positions don't match the calculated model?
I thought that since I actually did notice this consistent difference that it might be useful to point it out rather than just say nothing, but as I had mentioned I did suspect that since I was only dealing with approximations (the 0.5mm increment, and so on) that that could well be the cause for the difference I encountered. I am happy with the results, a number of my whistles had noticeably crappy cross fingered C natural's and now they sound so much better.
hans wrote:Note also that changing the thumb hole size by 0.5mm in the calculator moves the hole location by about 1.5mm, so small changes have a big effect here: 1mm length difference is about 11 cents for the Cnat.
After modifying the first batch I realized that in my case it was better to change over from choosing the hole size first and the position second, to choosing position first and hole size second.

Thanks for taking the time to test the thumb-hole out on one of the same whistles. I'm glad you proved that TWJCalc is functioning as intended.
User avatar
hans
Posts: 2259
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2002 6:00 pm
antispam: No
Please enter the next number in sequence: 8
Tell us something.: I've been making whistles since 2010 in my tiny workshop at my home. I've been playing whistle since teenage times.
Location: Moray Firth, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Drilling C nat Thumb Hole

Post by hans »

Pipe Bender wrote:After modifying the first batch I realized that in my case it was better to change over from choosing the hole size first and the position second, to choosing position first and hole size second.
I think that is generally good practise, not just for adding a thumb
hole, but for designing the layout on an entire whistle. Fingering needs to be ergonomic. Hole size is secondary, but needs to be adequate.
Post Reply