Question RE: Archive lamellar; extra hole...

Baculus · Post by **Baculus** » Thu Oct 04, 2001 11:27 am

This question for those that were a part of the Archive lamellar order.

In the original lamellar plate design, an extra hole was inadvertantly left out--this is the hole that actually allows the rows to be laced together. Thus, an extra hole has to be added to the plate for the lamellar to be properly laced together.

What method did everyone use to add this extra hole? Or, *did* everyone add the hole, or did anyone find a work around? I have been trying to use a punch to add the hole, but frankly, it's time-consuming, and it's hard to accurately add the hole from plate to plate.

Between this extra hole, and the lacing material, I have had a hard time getting very far on my lamellar. Grrrr!

Any ideas would be appreciated.

BTW, if anyone else is making another lamellar order, I would like to know!

Thanks a bunch,

~B.

Templar Bob/De Tyre · Thu Oct 04, 2001 11:48 am

If you can find a machine shop that carries them, get a Roper-Whitney #5 or XX punch. If not, go directly here.

In making the holes uniform, I made an experimental plate, then used an ultra-fine point Sharpie marker to mark the remaining plates. This insures uniformity in your center holes. If you think punching one hole is bad, try doing twelve!

------------------
Robert Coleman, Jr.

The Noble Companie and Order of St. Maurice

Those who beat their swords into plowshares end up plowing for those who don't.

[This message has been edited by Templar Bob/De Tyre (edited 10-04-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Templar Bob/De Tyre (edited 10-04-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Templar Bob/De Tyre (edited 10-04-2001).]

jagatei · Post by **jagatei** » Thu Oct 04, 2001 12:40 pm

Mine laced just fine without the extra hole.

Dmitriy · Post by **Dmitriy** » Thu Oct 04, 2001 1:09 pm

I also made a test plate, and then traced the hole onto all the other plates with a sharpie and then punched it out with a whitney punch.

The lamellar lacing method I used was the same that Norman used and described here: http://www.geocities.com/kaganate/howlamlr.html

Brodir · Post by **Brodir** » Thu Oct 04, 2001 2:28 pm

I didn't need to punch an extra hole, but the lacing pattern I used resulted in the plates being staggered. I don't know how historically accurate this is, but it in no way affected the performance of the armour.

One Ugly Bastard

Adam from White Mountain laced his together without the extra hole & without staggering the plates, but his harness only has about 1/4" overlap top-to-bottom. He's happy with it, I like a little more overlap.

Get some shoelace & experiment, post if you have any other questions.

BroÃ°ir

[This message has been edited by Brodir (edited 10-04-2001).]

Cedric · Post by **Cedric** » Thu Oct 04, 2001 2:58 pm

I did not add any holes, my lamellar went together just fine without it.

As to the overlap, yeah I have about a 1/2 - 1/4". I have fought in it since July and cant think of any reason that you would need more overlap than that. Plus the fact that the more overlap you have the more plates you will need..

Cedric

Post by JT » Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:34 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Baculus:
In the original lamellar plate design, an extra hole was inadvertantly left out<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
There was nothing inadvertant about it. It was left out quite consciously.

There was (is) some dispute as to whether the center hole existed in the Birka plate. Those who felt it did not did not want the hole put in. Those who felt that it did have the hole were willing to add it to their plates after the fact.

What method did everyone use to add this extra hole?

I used the "procrastination" method. The 1000 plates I have remaining do not need a hole right now, because they have no lacing at all.

-- jt --

Tim Finkas · Post by **Tim Finkas** » Fri Oct 05, 2001 1:26 pm

I have been wondering the same thing. I'd like to add the extra hole so my lamellar has more overlap/vertical flexibility.

Can this hole be drilled? I just thought I'd set up a wooden jig so that I could drill 5-10 plates at a time. What kind of bit would be needed to drill through the stainless steel?

Of course, I'd have to debur the holes, right? Would an abrasive Dremel tool bit work for the deburring?

[This message has been edited by Tim Finkas (edited 10-05-2001).]

Cedric · Post by **Cedric** » Fri Oct 05, 2001 1:51 pm

I would think that the more overlap you have the LESS vertical flexibility you will get.

Halvgrimr · Post by **Halvgrimr** » Fri Oct 05, 2001 2:04 pm

What method did everyone use to add this extra hole?

I used the "procrastination" method. The 1000 plates I have remaining do not need a hole right now, because they have no lacing at all.

--wouldnt consider selling them woudl you?

------------------
HÃ¡lvgrÃm AÃ°Ã¡lraÃ°arson

Post by JT » Fri Oct 05, 2001 2:44 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Cedric:
I would think that the more overlap you have the LESS vertical flexibility you will get.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope. It isn't so much the amount of overlap between rows, but the length of cord tying a row into the one above it. (And it isn't so much "flex" imho as "articulation" -- sliding between the rows, not flexing of a row.

The rows aren't tied together tightly. Instead, the lower row is allowed to hang by some length of cord. The row, then, can slide up and down by 2x that length.

If you don't have a center hole, then the amount that it hangs by (even with the same overlap) is less. Thus, it can move vertically by a smaller amount.

See http://www.geocities.com/kaganate/howlamlr.html -- about 1/2way down, for an illustration of "hanging" the lamellar rows.

Does that make sense?

-- jt --

Cedric · Post by **Cedric** » Fri Oct 05, 2001 5:09 pm

ok, it makes sense now.. it didnt when I looked at the first time (before I put my armor together).

How about this: If you laced it the way I did, more overlap would mean you would have less vertical flexibility.

There, thats an accurate statement

Cedric

Galileo · Post by **Galileo** » Sat Oct 06, 2001 7:22 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally (somewhat-it's edited

) posted by Halvgrim:

--wouldn't consider selling them would you?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm with Halvgrim - I'm looking for about 300 plates, you wouldn't consider selling some would ya JT?

G--

Cedric · Post by **Cedric** » Sat Oct 06, 2001 8:48 pm

I dont want to get anybody's hopes up, but I have given plates out to two different people who "knew someone who could make those". IF it pans out I will let y'all know.

Cedric