Acoustic Guitar Construction

I got to thinking last night when I was on the...err....I was in my "thinking Spot" and it occurred to me that scalloping the braces might be pointless.
I shall explain why I thought this:
On a scalloped brace, the lowest point of the brace, between the peaks, is the weakest part of the brace, correct? Thus, the peak after the scallop is merely adding weight to the soundboard.
We need the strength of the brace behind the bridge and bridgeplate to prevent excessive bridge rotation, but the portion behind where we scallop could simply run to the linings as a low triangular shaped brace, and not go back up to a peak. This would be lighter which is what most people look for with their soundboards but still serve the function of that part of the brace, which in my opinion, is to help transfer vibrations to all areas of the soundboard, much like the tone bars, which are not structural but merely serve to help distribute vibrations based on the opinions of people with way more experience than I.
So what do you all think? Scalloped braces definitely look cool, but do the peaks serve a purpose?

Tony,
I'm certainly no "Expert" nor an I an Engineer, but I am somewhat familiar with the power of the TRIANGLE. The triangle is one of the strongest design concepts known.
It would appear to me that the "Peak" of the scalloped brace serves as "Strong Point" (A triangle) in the scheme of things to maintain the radius of the top and act in reverse to control the pull pressure from the strings and the low points are intended to give the top room to "Breathe" or move...how much it "Moves" depends on how much is carved away, it's a fine line balancing act to me...I believe there's much more to it than it would first appear.
Of course, this just my personal opinion and I welcome comments to the contrary I could easily be wrong, just an idea or feeling on my part.

Ray :)

In his first book Roger Siminoff more or less comes to the conclusion that the peaks are a non functioning shape and pretty much unnecessary. Personally I've tried to mimic the sound of a giving guitar I like. So I simply use the braces patterns, shapes and sizes found in that guitar.

kencierp wrote:In his first book Roger Siminoff more or less comes to the conclusion that the peaks are a non functioning shape and pretty much unnecessary. Personally I've tried to mimic the sound of a giving guitar I like. So I simply use the braces patterns, shapes and sizes found in that guitar.

Makes sense to me! During a conversation I had with Wayne Henderson in Denver a couple of years ago, I ask him ( Who wouldn't?) what the secret was to his guitars? His answer mirrored Ken's..."No magic, while working at Gruhn's in Nashville I had the opportunity to remove the back from a 1937 D-18 and I was so impressed with the sound of this instrument that I measured every aspect of this guitar while inside, I've been trying to reproduce it for the last 30 years!"

Ray :)