From: "deelusbybeekeeper" <deelusbybeekeeper@excelonline.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 16:21:12 -0800
To: <BiologicalBeekeeping@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: Foundation Comparisons

Hi to all on Biological Beekeeping

Helmut writes:

> I still think that it is
> time to apply a simple way of measuring and respect the measure of
> volume for the larvae to develop WITHIN adjacent Walls and not from the
> center of walls.I for instance measure Dee's cells to be about 4.45 m/m
> inside measure. Sorry to be wet cold towel. If a decimal of a m/m is so
> important , then one must respect it. But there has to be a value of
> tolerances plus and minus as it relates to age and ductility.

Reply:

I am told by Jerry at Dadant via fax taht if you measure the inside
dimension of the cell (they are making now), from the inside of one cell
wall to the inside of the opposite cell wall you will find the average
measurement of around 4.5mm, give or take a minute amount of beeswax stretch
and dlexibility. The cell walls are beeswax of a thickness of approximately..32mm.
They anticipate the bees thinning down the cell walls by at least half,
perhaps more, resulting in a final cell size from 4.81mm to 4.96mm.

Now here is where the conflict comes in in debate for the experiments. We
are working currently measuring ten linear cells in length counting the cell
walls outside to inside, or inside to outside to gage sizing for mill making
where we have been in both ocrrespondence with Tom Industries and also had
Toma visit here taking personal measurements by hand before selling us and
industry here in the USA the 4.9mm mills made by him.

So consequently, to match what we are physically doing now and holding and
now increasing numbers with our colonies, you must first count the ten
cells, plus the cell walls and then mesure the inside diameter. Now also we
prefer to make foundation without cell walls. so the calculation would be at
its smallest comprabable to natural cell walls for doing the math.

Now to quote E.B.Wedmore of whom early Root read along with Cheshire in
arriving at a lot of what he did and quoted in his ABC and XYZ early on, it
is written * In nature the inside dimensions of worker cells across the
flats may vary even as much as from, say, 0.195 to 0.235 inch with the same
lot of bees, and will vary still more as between races haveing the smallest
and largest bees. Similarly, in one lot of bees drone comb may run from 0.22
to 0.26 inch.

In new comb the cell wall in worker cells may be less than 0.004 inch thick
and more than 0.006 inch in drone cells. There is not muchy data on this,
but the average cell wall in used worker cells exceeds .0004 inch. Owing to
rounding out of the cells where the flats meet at a corner, the diagonal
dimension witin a used cell is ruduced by about 0.015 inch, more or less.*

Now helmut, this means the dadant foundation will get a bigger inside
diameter as the bees thin the wax there. I understand your need for volume
figures, but we are talking copying what we are using right now that is
controlling without the use of various treatments of any kind. That means
ten continuous cells plus the walls counted and then you count the inside
diameters. But it is the ten linear cell count with walls that gives
foundation size hopefully it's name.

One measurement for simple field use and the other for more exact usage like
you require. We are talking two different things here. This has been the
problem all along. Scientists wanting volume measurements for lab usage,
while all the field originally wanted was something simple to knonw what to
buy.

Regards to you,

Dee