Author Topic: Split Trail design, submitted for approval  (Read 3645 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Zulu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2477
  • Honor is a gift a man gives himself.
    • Wood & Ironworks
Re: Split Trail design, submitted for approval
« Reply #60 on: February 16, 2013, 11:11:08 AM »
DD,
Something is not to scale in the drawing.  I think it is the barrels.
The barrels are 4.5" long. 
46 divided by 4.5 = 10.22
The wheel is 3"
3 X 10.22 =30.66"
A 30" wheel is too small for that carriage.
 
Doing the same thing for the carriage only will give him a 7' long trail on 42" wheels which I feel would be alright for a 46" barrel.
Zulu
Zulu's website
www.jmelledge.com

Offline Double D

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12609
  • SAMCC cannon by Brooks-USA
    • South African Miniature Cannon Club
Re: Split Trail design, submitted for approval
« Reply #61 on: February 16, 2013, 11:40:35 AM »
DD,
Something is not to scale in the drawing.  I think it is the barrels.
The barrels are 4.5" long. 
46 divided by 4.5 = 10.22
The wheel is 3"
3 X 10.22 =30.66"
A 30" wheel is too small for that carriage.
 
Doing the same thing for the carriage only will give him a 7' long trail on 42" wheels which I feel would be alright for a 46" barrel.
Zulu

Is the drawing 90 degrees to point of view?  Does it look right?

What is the length of the trail in the drawing, multiply that by the scale multiplier?   That would be the correct scale length to go with a 46 inch barrel. 

In your example the scale factor is 10.22.  So if as you say the wheels measure 3 inch in the drawing they should be 30.6" wheel.  If  7' trail  is the scale length product of multiplying the drawing length by 10.22 (8.1 inches or so,) then that is also correct to fit a 46" barrel.   

I have no idea where you came up with 42".  The bigger those wheels are the smaller that barrel is going to look.

Those drawing in round shot are pretty good drawings.  Heavier, longer barrels will have proportionately  smaller appearing wheels.

Offline Zulu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2477
  • Honor is a gift a man gives himself.
    • Wood & Ironworks
Re: Split Trail design, submitted for approval
« Reply #62 on: February 16, 2013, 11:42:15 AM »
The more I think about this, the more I think the drawing in the book is right.
The barrel is 50% longer than the wheel diameter.  On a big gun, having a 6' barrel on 4' wheels would not look bad.
On a small gun having an 18" barrel on 12" wheels would look good also.
Maybe a 46" barrel would also look good on 30" wheels.
Now it just boils down to personal preference.  When I built my white carriage, I also wanted it big.  I put a 36" barrel; on 36" wheels by choice.
Very easily my carriage would hold a 54" (50% bigger than the wheels) barrel and match the scale in the drawing.
Personal preference.
Zulu
Zulu's website
www.jmelledge.com

Offline Zulu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2477
  • Honor is a gift a man gives himself.
    • Wood & Ironworks
Re: Split Trail design, submitted for approval
« Reply #63 on: February 16, 2013, 11:47:10 AM »
DD,
Something is not to scale in the drawing.  I think it is the barrels.
The barrels are 4.5" long. 
46 divided by 4.5 = 10.22
The wheel is 3"
3 X 10.22 =30.66"
A 30" wheel is too small for that carriage.
 
Doing the same thing for the carriage only will give him a 7' long trail on 42" wheels which I feel would be alright for a 46" barrel.
Zulu

Is the drawing 90 degrees to point of view?  Does it look right?

What is the length of the trail in the drawing, multiply that by the scale multiplier?   That would be the correct scale length to go with a 46 inch barrel. 

In your example the scale factor is 10.22.  So if as you say the wheels measure 3 inch in the drawing they should be 30.6" wheel.  If  7' trail  is the scale length product of multiplying the drawing length by 10.22 (8.1 inches or so,) then that is also correct to fit a 46" barrel.   

I have no idea where you came up with 42".  The bigger those wheels are the smaller that barrel is going to look.
The drawing looks correct.
The trail in the picture is 6"
The 7' long trail came from using 42" for the wheels.  It had nothing to do with the barrel.
You are correct.  The bigger the wheels, the smaller the barrel is going to look.  Just liike my white carriage barrel looks too small.
Zulu
 
Zulu's website
www.jmelledge.com

Offline Zulu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2477
  • Honor is a gift a man gives himself.
    • Wood & Ironworks
Re: Split Trail design, submitted for approval
« Reply #64 on: February 16, 2013, 11:51:59 AM »
Using the 10.22 multiplier, the trails would be 61.32" long.
Zulu
Zulu's website
www.jmelledge.com

Offline Double D

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12609
  • SAMCC cannon by Brooks-USA
    • South African Miniature Cannon Club
Re: Split Trail design, submitted for approval
« Reply #65 on: February 16, 2013, 12:00:14 PM »

if you stick to the scale from the drawing and build a carriage to fit this barrel with that scale, you will end up with a barrel that is proportionate to and look similar to the picture.




Offline Indygunworks

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 333
  • Gender: Male
Re: Split Trail design, submitted for approval
« Reply #66 on: March 08, 2013, 04:22:27 AM »
Being I am out here in the wolderness and no speciaty steel suppliers at hand I use http://www.speedymetals.com/  This is the closest I could come looking real quick.  http://www.speedymetals.com/ps-3515-204-2-34-od-x-250-wall-dom-steel-tube.aspx and  http://www.speedymetals.com/ps-3515-204-2-34-od-x-250-wall-dom-steel-tube.aspx

Living in paradise where I do, I accept this thing of higher cost  plus postage for the privilege of being here.

Ironically this place was the only place that had close to what i wanted, and was by far the best price even beating the locals AFTER i added shipping.   was still a 75 dollar order though... thanks