Higher Mathematics

Day 140: Some technical explanations are in order here, but I will spare you the higher mathematics which woke me at 3 AM and kept me occupied until I finally relented and got out of bed. First, looms like my old one form sheds in one of two ways: they are either rising-shed, in which one layer of threads is raised as the other remains horizonal, or sinking-shed, in which one layer remains horizontal as the other is lowered. On the other hand, with a countermarch loom like Max, the shed opens in the middle, one layer rising as the other sinks simultaneously. Why does this matter? In both rising-shed and sinking-shed operation, there is a certain amount of friction and resistance on the weft as it is beaten into place. On a countermarch loom, it has a clear path and requires very little force by comparison. I simply bring the beater back, and the shed accepts the weft with no particular energy expenditure on my part. Owing to this bit of mechanics, the weft beats tighter, requiring more throws to achieve an inch of cloth. For Max's first piece, I warped for my default sett of 15-16 ends per inch (i.e., across the width of the fabric). However, 16 throws yields only 5/8" of cloth, as opposed to being balanced (16 epi:16 throws) on my old loom when using this fiber. In order to achieve a balanced weave with the same number of ends and throws per inch on Max, I need to make some adjustments. I promised to spare you the math, so just suffice to say that I think warping at 20 epi will bring the weave into balance, or as they say, "close enough for gov'mint work." This is particularly important when square motifs are desirable as they are in most overshot. As for Max's operation, he is an absolute dream! I knew that a countermarch loom would be quieter, but I had not expected the actual weaving to go any faster or to require less effort. In fact, I find myself referring to Max as "gentle" as our relationship develops. I needed that.