Japanese 8-in-2 Captive 1 Analysis
View previous topic | View next topic >
Post new topic Reply to topic
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
   
Author Message

Joined: August 25, 2004
Posts: 686
Submissions: 30
Location: Santa Barbara, CA, USA

Japanese 8-in-2 Captive 1 Analysis
Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:24 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

First I want to say that I'm quite impressed with this weave. I've been expirimenting with it (and close variants) pretty heavily for the past week or so. Mad props to Zlosk for inventing it.

However, as useful as it is, it is EXTREMELY sensitive to the ring dimensions used. I don't say AR sensitive because the appropriate dimensions can't be measured in AR alone (as is often the case with captive rings). Zlosk posted some ARs in his weave description, but it's not really adaquate to figuring out an appropriate set of ring sizes. Having experimented pretty heavily with the weave now, I wanted to post my observations to save others some time.

For the basic Japanese 8-in-2, you can use any ring size that works for a Japanese 8-in-2 at all. Contrary to what Zlosk posted, I've found that this works quite nicely with an AR as low as 4.0.

For the captive rings, assuming they're infinitely thin, they would need to have an outer diameter equal to twice the ID of the main rings, minus twice the wire diameter. Thus, if you had 16 ga (1/16"), 1/4" rings, you would want a 3/8" OD captive ring. If the ring is even slightly smaller, the weave doesn't hold stiff and the captive can fall out. If it's even slightly bigger, the weave can't be expanded even to a 3x3 grid before it binds up. By slightly bigger and slightly smaller, I mean with a few percent. In one of my experiments with this weave, the almost unobservable difference in springback between an 18ga, 1/4" mandrel size bright aluminum captive and an 18ga, 1/4" mandrel size stainless captive made all the difference.

Of course, there is no such thing as infinitely thin wire. As the wire gets thicker, it forces appart the rings it's sandwiched between. This forces them to ride up the curve of the rings they're attached to, and pulls the whole weave in tighter. The implication of this is that, the greater the wire diameter of the captive ring, the smaller it's OD needs to be. The actual mathematics of this can get pretty complicated, and I haven't actually worked them out.

So far, I've found two combinations of ring sizes which worked really well for it. The first is the 16ga, 1/4" annodized aluminum rings pre-cut from TRL, combined with 18ga, 5/16" mandrel size stainless captives that I rolled myself. The second is 18ga, 3/16" mandrel size bright aluminum, combined with 18ga, 1/4" mandrel size stainless captives (both rolled myself). Lacking callipers, I can't give you the precise ACTUAL measurements of those rings.


- Mike Powell
<a href="http://spiritofiron.com">Spirit of Iron</a> custom chainmail

Joined: February 15, 2002
Posts: 385
Submissions: 10

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:11 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

You're absolutely correct; this weave is mighty finicky. The AR's I posted only work in one case - infinite sheet using one wire diameter for both the Japanese 8-2 and the captives. The 4.25 AR I stated refers to that particular case, not Japanese 8-2 in general. I apologize if there was any confusion. (BTW, the theoretical AR limit for Japanese 8-2 is 3.78.)

Also, I probably should have stated the ring sizes for the weave sample:

Japanese 8-2 rings: .045 dia. Titanium wrapped around a 8 ga. (.162) nail (.182 actual ID, AR = 4.04)
Captive rings: .045 dia. Titanium wrapped around a #3 (.212) dia. drill rod (didn't measure, estimating .238 ID, est AR = 5.29)

At these sizes, I highly doubt I would have been able to fill in the center of my sample square.


IGP (Irregular Grid Painter) Links:
Home | FAQ | Downloads

Joined: July 24, 2018
Posts: 1
Submissions: 0
Location: Southampton, England

Reply with quote
Posted on Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:40 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Hi I really like the shape of this weave but I don’t understand how to make it rigid. Could you please explain in layman’s terms? I’m a bit of a newbie and can’t quite grasp the explanation that you have written.

I have made a nine rigid one though and think it would make nice earings.


Jo Morningstar

Joined: April 02, 2008
Posts: 2249
Submissions: 42
Location: Lincoln, NE

Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Jul 29, 2018 12:12 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

making it rigid or not depends on the Aspect Ratio of your ring size. If you go to the lower end of the the Aspect Ratio chart, found on the left side of the weave page, the weave will tighten up and get more rigid. It is just a matter of how rigid you want to get.


Hope that helps


Once you stop learning, you stop living, so...
Ask questions.
Try new things.
Share what you know.

MailleCode V2.0 T5.3 R4.4 E0.0 Feur MFe.sBr Wg Cwb G.7-5.1 I3.1-11 N20.5 Pj Dcdjt Xa1w2 S08

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT. The time now is Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:19 pm
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
Display posts from previous: