Forars Kaede (X-Weave)
View previous topic | View next topic >
Post new topic Reply to topic
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
   
Author Message

Joined: April 30, 2018
Posts: 63
Submissions: 9
Location: San Diego, CA

Forars Kaede (X-Weave)
Reply with quote
Posted on Sun Jul 15, 2018 11:22 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

I'm noticing -- perhaps running smack into -- a lack of agreement between the [weave=Forars Kaede] weave page and Corvus' tutorial on how to do the weave.

The weave page states that the minimum AR is 4.1, the ideal is 4.4, and the max is 4.8.

Based on the max AR being 4.8, I purchased some 22 awg 7/64" rings, with an AR of 4.6. I thought it'd be okay.

Now looking at the tutorial, Corvus states that 4.1-4.2 is the idea range, that the weave is very "AR-sensitive", and that anything less than this won't let you weave and anything greater will be loose.

I was having a LOT of problems trying to weave with the small stainless rings. Now, it could be that I'm a newbie and this is a very small piece to work, but I found that the rings were shifting and the whole thing just wasn't holding together. I am completely willing to chalk this up to inexperience.

However, I broke out the 1.2" polycarbonate rings I bought for The Next Generation and was able to weave them without any problems. They're hella big compared to what I work with, which is probably why it was much easier, but they are also 12.7mm / 2.9mm, meaning an AR of 4.4, which is the ideal AR as listed by the weave page.

Am I crazy? I'm thinking that maybe the AR should be MAX 4.4, min 4.1, ideal, 4.2 (or something like that), and that my teeny rings are not only teeny, but have too big of an AR.

Can anyone who's really familiar with Forars Kaede let me know what you think? Thanks in advance!

Joined: August 05, 2010
Posts: 601
Submissions: 28
Location: Bar Harbor, ME, USA

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:06 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

I'll point out that there is an editors note on X-weave / Spring Chain / Forars Kaede.
Quote:
Ed. note: Above an AR of 4.5 the weave remains stable, but has a layer slip issue beginning from open chain ends, similar to high-AR JPL chains. This can be overcome either by weaving closed loops, or by finishing a Forars Kaede chain's ends with at least four lower-AR rings.


Since it uses the same cousin interaction as Jens Pind Linkage, too big of an AR will cause it to unravel and the locations of the rings can jump around. Forars Kaede looks like it locks the rings in place after an additional 2 rings per grain (giving 4 total) have been added.

That being said, what you may be running into could also be things like the difference between mandrel AR and measured AR... wire thickness tolernaces... or even rings being slightly more oval than circular. Noting that the image is CGI, someone did geometry calculations for this weave and probably found the maximum that way. Real life things don't quite work that well and aren't quite as clean-cut.


while(!project.isFinished())
project.addRing();
// Maille Code V2.0 T7.1 R5.6 Eo.n Fper MFe.s Wsm Caws G0.8-1.6 I2.4-8.0 Pn Dcdejst Xw1 S07

Joined: April 30, 2018
Posts: 63
Submissions: 9
Location: San Diego, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:15 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

TrenchCoatGuy wrote:
I'll point out that there is an editors note on X-weave / Spring Chain / Forars Kaede.
Quote:
Ed. note: Above an AR of 4.5 the weave remains stable, but has a layer slip issue beginning from open chain ends, similar to high-AR JPL chains. This can be overcome either by weaving closed loops, or by finishing a Forars Kaede chain's ends with at least four lower-AR rings.



Saw that, but was thinking it would primarily affect the ends of the chains. Perhaps if I'd just kept at it, but I couldn't keep everything stable enough to get that far. I'm not conversant with JPL chains (yet), so I wouldn't have really grokked that.


TrenchCoatGuy wrote:

Since it uses the same cousin interaction as Jens Pind Linkage, too big of an AR will cause it to unravel and the locations of the rings can jump around. Forars Kaede looks like it locks the rings in place after an additional 2 rings per grain (giving 4 total) have been added.


Okay, so it could be that I just need to figure out a way to keep at it for a couple more repeats. Fiddly. I'll have to work on reducing the expletive-to-repeat ratio. ; )

TrenchCoatGuy wrote:

That being said, what you may be running into could also be things like the difference between mandrel AR and measured AR... wire thickness tolernaces... or even rings being slightly more oval than circular. Noting that the image is CGI, someone did geometry calculations for this weave and probably found the maximum that way. Real life things don't quite work that well and aren't quite as clean-cut.


That's definitely probable. Yet another excuse for me to get off my duff and get that micrometer.

Thanks for your help!

Joined: August 05, 2010
Posts: 601
Submissions: 28
Location: Bar Harbor, ME, USA

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Jul 16, 2018 2:03 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

Jackalgirl wrote:
Yet another excuse for me to get off my duff and get that micrometer.


Keep in mind, there are alternatives to using a micrometer. That being said, micrometers are super quick once you've invested in one.


while(!project.isFinished())
project.addRing();
// Maille Code V2.0 T7.1 R5.6 Eo.n Fper MFe.s Wsm Caws G0.8-1.6 I2.4-8.0 Pn Dcdejst Xw1 S07

Joined: July 17, 2009
Posts: 451
Submissions: 76
Location: Denver, Colorado

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:54 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

A few thoughts from my experience with Forars Kaede:

1) I agree it is extremely AR sensitive. I have tried it with a range of ARs, using very consistent rings I make myself. Unlike other weaves, I don't find there to be an optimal AR. It is both "too loose" and "too tight" at the same time.

2) Master your understanding of AR first with other weaves. Come back to FK later. It is a frustrating weave in many ways IMHO. There is something more to learn from FK later, after you think you understand chainmaille and looking for a new challenge.

3) I agree you need to taper the ends (use smaller AR tighter rings on the end) to keep it from unraveling. The middle will stay stable if the ends are kept tight.

4) Jens Pind 3 might be easier to learn first. The 2 weaves are unrelated, but have some similarities in construction method (locking rings, hold chain in your hand while assembling, twist chain to position for next ring). JP3 rings stay in place a little easier, while you learn to build with locking rings.

5) A piece of masking tape on the first few rings might be worth a try. I find you do need hold it in your hands to start it, which is difficult due the the number of rings that need to stay in place before it becomes stable.

6) FK is unusual in that, it has a direction to it. If you flip it around, you cannot build the chain in the other direction (not easily anyway and not by the same method).

7) I need to put my micrometer on the rings I make one of these days. AR discussion for FK really needs to be based on actual ring measurements (or CGI). Cutters



Joined: April 30, 2018
Posts: 63
Submissions: 9
Location: San Diego, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Tue Jul 17, 2018 12:03 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

Pfeiffer wrote:

5) A piece of masking tape on the first few rings might be worth a try. I find you do need hold it in your hands to start it, which is difficult due the the number of rings that need to stay in place before it becomes stable.


I like this. I kept thinking, "I need another pair of hands" and in my frustration didn't think about tape, duh. I'll give it a try.

I've started looking into JPL also. It calls for a much smaller AR than what I've got handy at the moment, but at least I can read. : )

Thank you!

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT. The time now is Tue Oct 15, 2019 5:21 pm
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
Display posts from previous: