Hi Rick, The possibility of a roller crusher is based on the presence of a small square roofed structure on the opposite side of the wheel from the winder, shown on the 1867 Bedford Estate Map.  This could be a crusher, unless there is any evidence for flatrod cranks being boxed in?  That said, there isn't any reference to a roller crusher in the sale particulars after the mine closed in 1869, so I appreciate this is a bit difficult to prove either way.  My point was essentially that one wheel could do several different jobs. As for the chain connection to the second set of pumps, Middle Adit has a rub mark for a chain or cable on its walls and roof, guided by cast iron pulleys, one of which we found in-situ.  As the adit is 150ft upslope at a different angle to the water wheel, they must have used a chain or cable on rollers to transfer the power uphill, as there isn't an angle bob for rods, nor is there a flatrod trench.  It must have been powered by this wheel, as the other one is much further away, and isn't on the right alignment either.  We know that the chain must have come out of the hill on the alignment of the adit as there is an angle or small balance bob pit at the top of the slope on the edge of the dressing floor just outside the adit. Robert Waterhouse(Morwellham Quay Archaeologist)> Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 06:12:48 +0100> From: [log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: Winding over long distances> To: [log in to unmask]> > Roller crusher on the George & Charlotte????? I am intrigued.> > Additionally the evidence for a second set of pumps driven off the wheel via> a run of chain is less than conclusive.> > Convince me> > Rick Stewart> (Mine Manager, George & Charlotte Mine)> > > ----- Original Message -----> From: "Robert Waterhouse" <[log in to unmask]>> To: <[log in to unmask]>> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 12:07 PM> Subject: Re: Winding over long distances> > > Hi Peter,> > 500 yards sounds quite long, but as long as methods to reduce friction, ie:> use of wire rope, greased sheave wheels & keeping the rope in a straight> line, were used, I don't see any reason why not. On Tamar Valley mines in> West Devon, we have several examples of this, though the distances are> usually rather less, more like 100-200 yards maximum.> The usual reason was the difficulty of placing the power source (usually a> water wheel) close to the shaft. This was also compounded by the fact that> the wheel often did several jobs, such as winding, stamping and crushing,> meaning that it had to be located on a reasonably level area suitable for> dressing floors.> One 40ft diameter wheel on the George & Charlotte mine in the Tamar Valley,> of 1840s-1860s date, drove two sets of pumps, one by flatrods, the other by> chain on pulleys; it also wound from a shaft about 100m away via a winch> which was declutchable from the wheel, and there is a possibility that a> roller-crusher was also run off it, also via a clutch.> We don't have evidence for hauling using flatrods, but try The Cornish Beam> Engine by D Bradford Barton, published by David & Charles of Newton Abbot.> This describes unusual systems, albeit briefly.> > Robert Waterhouse> Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:16:24 +0930> From:> [log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: Winding over long distances> To:> [log in to unmask]> > At both the Kapunda and Moonta copper mines> in South Australia there were> arrangements for hauling from multiple shafts> with one engine, using> combinations of flat rods or winding ropes. These> were in use in the late> 1840s at Kapunda, and from the mid-1860s until at> least the late 1870s at> Moonta. The engine at Kapunda pumped three shafts> at distances up to about> 100m with flat rods. Elders and Hughes engines at> Moonta between them could> pump or wind a total of eight shafts, with flat> rods extending to between> 200 and 300m horizontal distance, and one haulage> rope extending nearly 400m> horizontally. > > The best description of these> arrangements is in Greg Drew & Jack Connell,> Cornish Beam Engines in South> Australian Mines, Department of Mines &> Energy, Adelaide, 1993.> > Peter> Bell> > > On 10/8/07 6:19 PM, "D.R.Poyner" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:>> > > I've been trying to make sense of the winding arrangements for coal> mines> > on the Clee Hill, Shropshire. A photograph survives showing a> single> > winding engine serving two shafts; one is a significant distance> from the> > engine and the rope (or chain) is carried on rolley posts to the> headframe. It> > is difficult to judge how far the shaft was from the engine> from the> > photograph. However, looking at the relevant 1:2500 map from> 1881, it> > seems that some, possibly active shafts, could have been around> 400 yards> > from the nearest winding engine. Allowing for the depth of> shaft, this would> > give a total length of chain or rope of around 500> yards.> > > > Has anyone any views on the plausibility of such> arrangements?> > > > David Poyner> _________________________________________________________________> 100’s of Music vouchers to be won with MSN Music> https://www.musicmashup.co.uk/index.html> > > --> No virus found in this incoming message.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.11/944 - Release Date: 09/08/07> 14:44
_________________________________________________________________
Feel like a local wherever you go with BackOfMyHand.com
http://www.backofmyhand.com