MalR wrote:
Congratulations
[...] Do a 5 ply, not 6 ply. Don't bond the core as 2 pieces. It must be one piece.
[...] Use an exterior grade poly vinyl acetate glue. Normal glues will not give you the bond strength you require.
[...] The vinal acetate molecules bind strongly with the lignin and create cross linked bonds. This gives a very strong bond and stiffens the bat.
[...] Basically, and in practice you apply a very thin coat onto the veneer, not the balsa.
[...] If you apply it to the balsa the solvent which carries the glue will penetrate the pores of the balsa and carry the glue into it.
[...] Don't press so hard that you distort the balsa structure.
[...] Bonding end grain balsa is far more critical because you are dealing with something similar to glueing the ends of a bundle of straws and the glue will penetrate. If you need to bond the end grain for any reason you can use a flash coat then a final coat.
[...] For balsa selection do not worry about gsm unless you buy from a recognised supplier and know what you are ordering. If from a shop look for the whitest timber. The lighter it is the lower the density and the better the bat will perform.
[...] Make your handles out of balsa to keep the weight down.
[...] Seal the bat and handle with a timber sealer or the veneers will tear.
[...] Trying to lower the cost lowers bat performance. It is expensive to build a bat that has the same performance as a commercial bat.
Hi MalR, there are surely not many "musts" in blade building, but a whole lot of experience and some arguments.
An even number of plies is highly unusual, because (_IF_ sticking strictly to the rule "90 degree fibre angle between adjacent plies") it is not possible to have for the two outermost layers the fibers running in the "handle direction". That's why I chose in my 6 ply bat for the two center plies a relatively small angle (25-30 degrees) with the bisecting line running in the "handle direction" (let's call it "vertical"), and then carry on with "horizontal" fiber direction for the next layers.
This results nevertheless (yet only in theory) in slightly different torsional and vibrational patterns for forehand and backhand, yet it is completely unclear (not investigated) whether this is an advantage, disadvantage or irrelevant. More relevant in this context, though, is that the bending properties of the core layer (in this 6 ply case two plies forming "the" core layer) have hardly any influence on the bending-stiffness properties of the final bat. Stiffness against bending is (from the point of view of numerical relevance: exclusively) determined by the layers further away from the plane in the center of the bat, ...and therefore also the thickness of the core ply: The "geometrical moment of inertia" goes with the cube of the thickeness, see e.g.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_moment_of_area (This is why one finds (for example in case of balsa cross-cut cores) that with everything else being identical a thicker balsa core results in a much stiffer (and generally "faster") bat, even though the cross-cut ("end grain") balsa core itself brings hardly any bending strength to the table.)
By the way, another technique to still have the outermost plies in the preferred "vertical direction" ("handle direction") while still having two plies in the center would be to have Zero degrees between these two core layers.
The question is rather _WHY_ would one want to have two layers in the center (or, in another way of looking at it: a glue interface in the very center)???
One legitimate reason is curiosity. In a highly experience-based and hardly science-based discipline like TT-blade building, curiosity is always a good motivation.
(It's interesting to read scientific literature on TT blade properties. Very little is sufficiently understood to conclude from mechanically well defined properties to the playing properties. Well, that's another topic, and I will add one or two more papers on that body of literature in the future...)
The other reason for making an even-numbered ply (e.g. 6 ply) blade can be pragmatism: You may have two 1.5mm plies, abut you want a 3mm core.
While not ideal, due to the glue joint and unnecessary weight from the glue, this is a valid reason.
In my case, it was a combination of the two reasons above, consciously "violating" traditional design rules.
A third reason is this, and I will possibly explore that in the future: One may be interested in creating a bat with notably different character for forehand and backhand. To some degree that can be done with the choices for the outer layers, but the different playing properties for forehand and backhand can also be increased by using two different wood types (and even two different thicknesses! ...increasing the asymmetry!) of a "2 ply core".
So no: there is no "must be one piece rule" for the core, although there are good arguments for it for blades that shall have symmetric properties.
Regarding glue bond strength: That is hardly an issue. Letting aside severe gluing errors, bond strength will hardly ever lead to failure, given the large area of the gluing interface.
Regarding your statement that a strong bond stiffens the bat: Stiffness is not necessarily what I am striving for, at least not by means of the glue. I want to design the blade properties by the wood layers, and not by the glue. Ideally, the glue layer is so thin (and ideally does not penetrate the plies) that it does not create any influence on the vibrational or compression properties. Of course, if the glue layer is too thick, it can have an influence, but one that I doubt can be positively used for designing favorable properties.
I made excellent experience with hide glue (after initial learning, i.e. mistakes). The temperature of the hide glue allows very nicely to get it to the desired viscosity, and sanding the plies (which can be a pain and difficult to do manually in an even, uniform fashion) is highly recommended to minimize the amount of glue necessary.
I do support your recommendation to not apply the glue onto the balsa, and rather on the other adjacent ply. When gluing balsa on balsa, you still need to do it, though. In that case, if one is an end grain balsa, and the other ply is not, then applying the glue to the "not end grain ply" is the better choice also in my view. This is for the argument that you described by the analogy of "gluing (the ends) of a bundle of straws". To minimize this, and even when not applying it directly to the end grain ply, I find that on the one hand side hide glue is quite good (does not penetrate as much as other glues), and also some ideas can be found here:
viewtopic.php?f=43&t=11969&p=398312#p398312 The essence of this is for me in practice: Sand the end grain balsa with your finest sanding paper. (e.g. No. 600), but extreme care has to be taken, since the balsa is so easily reduced in thickness by sanding, ...and when doing it manually you can very easily end up with intolerable thickness variations.
Pressing too hard on the balsa is something that I was also concerned about. I therefore determined the pressure that causes damage. I found though, when gluing the plies and pressing them with two even plates on both sides of the blade it is very unlikely that you can reach those damaging pressure levels with normal manual clamping arrangements. It turned out to be a "non concern" in practice.
My main attention is not so much on the balsa density (although for fine tuning probably a very important parameter), but rather the homogeneity of the balsa. This is of particular importance for end grain balsa, which (according to my knowledge) is always made from gluing different pieces to one block, and you can end up having areas where high-density balsa is right next to low density balsa. Such end grain balsa I do not judge primarily by color, but rather by transparency: Hold it against a light source (best is a homogeneous light source, and a practical low-tech option is a window on a sunny day) for that purpose.
This technique is also useful for "non end grain balsa", and you will see that the judgement by color sometimes needs correction.
You wrote: "Make your handles of balsa to keep the weight down."
That's what I described in my earlier post. There I also described to make such balsa handles more practical by using an appropriate oil. Pure untreated balsa is particularly "sensitive" and quickly gets ugly. Yet applying a "lacquer" or varnish can lead to an unpleasant "feel", ...but some people like the feel of a lacquered handle (I don't). I find a "hard oil" produces an excellent compromise of the warm, non-slippery feel of wood, and yet a sufficiently resistant surface in case of a balsa handle. I recommend considering those aspects before choosing the type of "timber seal" that you mention.
Note though: Focusing on the handle weight alone is not necessarily the best approach. Frankly, it is what I am currently doing, because my "manufacturing throughput" is limited.

But I am aware that (particularly for very light balsa blade) the center of gravity is far away from the center of the handle, particularly with balsa as material for the handle. Such weight distribution is not for all playing styles advantageous. Perhaps one day I will experiment with concepts like in Stiga's cybershape, where you can add some weights at the end of the handle: The best place to change the weight distribution while adding the least possible total amount of weight:
https://www.stigasports.com/product/cybershape-wood-cwt I very much disagree with one of your last statements, particularly the second phrase here:
"Trying to lower the cost lowers bat performance. It is expensive to build a bat that has the same performance as a commercial bat."
While I don't even look at the cost (i.e. have never decided to opt for a cheaper option just out of cost considerations) the total "bill of materials" of my bats does not even faintly reach the price of commercial bats, and while I have not yet fully characterized my bats, I doubt that they stand behind in performance of commercial bats.
No, what makes bats "expensive" is the labor costs, i.e. in case of my private activity: My time, ...and that I am not yet efficient in doing this, needing to think longer than a professional builder would with his/her standard processes. In a truly professional setting, there'll be also a whole lot of other things, such as waste minimization, throughput, production volume (and hence access to customers...) that will strongly influence your cost structure.
I doubt that any blade manufacturer died from the cost of the raw materials.
(Good news for us hobby builders: The raw material costs do not limit us.)
How are your bats coming along, MalR ?