[TheForge] nail header

[Michael H. Murphy]

Sorry, Dave.  Solid geometry and mathematics are against you on this one.
Assuming the heads are the same size, let's just look at the shank.  A nail
that is 2" long and tapered its whole length will occupy less volume than a
2" nail that is the same thickness for 1.5" and then tapered for that last
1/8".  I can show you the math, but we'd better do it offline; there are
some graphics that go with it.

Murf

> -----Original Message-----
> From: theforge-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:theforge-
> bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of David E. Smucker
> Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2004 9:14 PM
> To: Sponsored by ABANA
> Subject: Re: [TheForge] nail header
> 
> The volume of total metal in the nail is less.  I happen to have one of
> Jerry Darnell's nails in front of me and while the shank is taper to a
> blunt
> point it is really quite rectangular except for the last 1/8 of an inch
> just
> below the head.  This short section is upset to the size of the header
> from
> forming the head.  The rest of the shank is the size that the nail was
> formed to before going into the header.  In other words with the
> shouldering
> the nail is a very loose fit going into the header.  This also means that
> the nail comes out of the header very easily.  (You don't want the nail to
> upset below the short reverse taper at the top of the header or you will
> have an hourglass shape and it will stick.)
> 
> The nail doesn't look like a cut nail -- i.e. a long straight taper -- but
> rather a short taper to a point (about 3/8 of an inch) and then a long
> rectangular section of about an inch and 1/4 followed by a 1/8 inch long
> taper to the bottom of the head.  For the record Jerry used to make nails
> by
> the 1000's for the reproduction hardware market.  The long rectangular
> section is smaller than if it tapered its whole length -- hence less
> volume.
> 
> Dave Smucker
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jj tobako" <jjtobako at juno.com>
> To: <theforge at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2004 4:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [TheForge] nail header
> 
> 
> >
> > > As far as I know the historical nail makers always (or let us a least
> > > say
> > > nearly always) formed a
> > > shoulder, then cut almost through, inserted into the header, broke
> > > off, and
> > > then formed the head.
> > >
> > > Reason, -- more nails per length of wrought iron.
> >
> > how does that work?  why would a shoulder use less material than a taper
> > when heading?  the shank for each would be the same size (width at
> > header, length of shank) unless the shouldered nail had a more
> > rectangular shape which would be more iron, not less.  amount of iron in
> > the head is determined by where it's cut.
> >
> > john tobako
> >
> > ________________________________________________________________
> > The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
> > Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
> > Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
> > _______________________________________________
> > Manage membership or unsubscribe at:
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
> > theforge mail list group photo site is
> > http://www.photoaccess.com
> > Login:  blacksmithblacksmith at hotmail.com
> > password:  anvil
> > ___________
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Manage membership or unsubscribe at:
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
> theforge mail list group photo site is
> http://www.photoaccess.com
> Login:  blacksmithblacksmith at hotmail.com
> password:  anvil
> ___________
>