[TheForge] treadle hammer design (was: treadle hammer anvils)

Thu Jan 23 04:04:01 2003

At 02:29 PM 1/22/03, you wrote:

Thought about doing the same thing. Figured that the set up would require a 
much heavier frame and base plate as well as  a massive pivot mechanism and 
lever arm...thought about making the weight adjustable along the arm.
The advantages would be, not only double mass, but also a slower, more 
penetrating blow. Disadvantages would include slower BPM , cost and loss of 
portability...cause you sure would have to tie that dog down.

>I have looked at the designs of several different styles of treadle 
>hammer.  And they all seem to have one thing in common, some sort of lever 
>and large springs which lift the hammer, and a treadle to over come the 
>springs and lower the hammer.  So I ask, what would be the result if the 
>springs were replaced with a weight great enough to balance the 
>hammer.  Then a light spring could lift the hammer.  Say a conventional 
>design has a hammer of 50# and the operator can accelerate that weight to 
>say 5 fps and the travel is 8 inches.  You would have an
>impact of XXX pounds per sq. inch.  If you had a hammer where the head was 
>balanced, say 25# hammer and 25# counterweight, would it not strike at the 
>same pounds per sq. inch when moving at 5 fps?
>This does require the ram and the weight be rigid to each other.  The 
>point being is that you still have 50# of mass in motion, and the energy 
>is transferred in the blow, not in the motion of the head.  Seems 
>somewhere it is written that a mass in motion will remain in motion, or 
>something like that.   Just something to think about.  I'm sure I am over 
>looking some obvious law of physics that says this is not how things work.
>
>Larry
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
>theforge mail list group photo site is
>http://www.photoaccess.com
>Login:  [email protected]
>password:  anvil
>___________