Bookwheel has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
February 16, 2015. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
bookwheel (pictured) was one of the earliest devices that allowed a person to read multiple books in one location? |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
This mechanism appears bulky, with a lot of wasted space. An improvement in design could be effected by having much smaller gears or sprockets at the top and and having the books suspended on a pair of bicycle chains, rising and falling in close proximity. This would reduce the depth of the mechanism to about 1 meter or less. It could even be contained within a podium with the book to be read being suspended at the apex of the top sprocket. Photojack53 16:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
This material has been present for years but has no references. As the original creator of this page, I know it does not come from "One Good Turn," the only listed reference as of this edit. Moving to talk page for time being. Geethree ( talk) 14:47, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
As the engraving shows, the gearing employs three types of gears. The central gear is fixed to the stand, and thus immobile relative to the ground, while the intermediate and outermost gears are free to rotate around their axes. A simple calculation shows that if the outermost gears have the same shape as the central gear, then no matter the size of the intermediate gear, the outermost gears will not rotate relative to the ground, thus making the books remain at a constant angle.
Ramelli's design was copied by subsequent authors. It appears in Heinrich Zeising's " Theatrum machinarum" (1611), printed by Henning Gross and possibly engraved by a young Andreas Bretschneider. It also appears in a German copy of Ramelli's work appearing in 1620. It too was printed by Gross and engraved by Bretschneider although the plate clearly differs from Zeising's edition. The book wheel was copied once again in a Chinese work edited by the Jesuit missionary Terrence Schreck. This Chinese copy is notable because it misrepresents Ramelli's original epicyclic gearing arrangement, perhaps indicating a lack of mechanical competence on the part of the engraver. The book wheel makes a final appearance in 1719. Grollier de Serviere criticized Ramelli's overly complicated design and presented a much simpler gimballed design.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: 23W ( talk · contribs) 01:30, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Here's my review:
Gave this a few copy edits. Here are my comments:
Short and sweet: nice work. On hold for a fortnight. 23W 02:07, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
It seems that "in contemporary times" they have inspired art and a blog title. But should the article make it clearer, at the start, that they are no longer used for their original purpose? The lede says "The books are rotated vertically ..." and this suggests they use still in use. Martinevans123 ( talk) 19:38, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, the mechanical principle involved is, too, "absolutely identical". This is not "a slight matter of scale" as
User:Andy Dingley thinks, because a principle is independent of such things.
About sources:
-- BjKa ( talk) 11:23, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
English is not my first language, so I may get this wrong. We have a section called "Mordern reproduction"; I think it might be more correct to talk of either replicas or reconstructions. Nø ( talk) 09:47, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
At the end of the "History and design" section, it is noted that *maybe* someone also invented this principle (except the axis of rotation was different, so it's not the same invention) in China up to 1000 years earlier than Agostino Ramelli. This potential Chinese invention is entirely irrelevant, as the book wheel as known to Europeans was invented by Agostino Ramelli. We do not credit Martians for inventions Earthlings have come up with on their own, even the Martians did it first -- unless someone can trace that the supposed Chinese invention allowed Agostino Ramelli to design his version, that someone in China has made the same invention is irrelevant, except as a binote on yet another thing more than one culture has invented independently. 87.104.34.113 ( talk) 17:59, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Bookwheel has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
February 16, 2015. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
bookwheel (pictured) was one of the earliest devices that allowed a person to read multiple books in one location? |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
This mechanism appears bulky, with a lot of wasted space. An improvement in design could be effected by having much smaller gears or sprockets at the top and and having the books suspended on a pair of bicycle chains, rising and falling in close proximity. This would reduce the depth of the mechanism to about 1 meter or less. It could even be contained within a podium with the book to be read being suspended at the apex of the top sprocket. Photojack53 16:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
This material has been present for years but has no references. As the original creator of this page, I know it does not come from "One Good Turn," the only listed reference as of this edit. Moving to talk page for time being. Geethree ( talk) 14:47, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
As the engraving shows, the gearing employs three types of gears. The central gear is fixed to the stand, and thus immobile relative to the ground, while the intermediate and outermost gears are free to rotate around their axes. A simple calculation shows that if the outermost gears have the same shape as the central gear, then no matter the size of the intermediate gear, the outermost gears will not rotate relative to the ground, thus making the books remain at a constant angle.
Ramelli's design was copied by subsequent authors. It appears in Heinrich Zeising's " Theatrum machinarum" (1611), printed by Henning Gross and possibly engraved by a young Andreas Bretschneider. It also appears in a German copy of Ramelli's work appearing in 1620. It too was printed by Gross and engraved by Bretschneider although the plate clearly differs from Zeising's edition. The book wheel was copied once again in a Chinese work edited by the Jesuit missionary Terrence Schreck. This Chinese copy is notable because it misrepresents Ramelli's original epicyclic gearing arrangement, perhaps indicating a lack of mechanical competence on the part of the engraver. The book wheel makes a final appearance in 1719. Grollier de Serviere criticized Ramelli's overly complicated design and presented a much simpler gimballed design.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: 23W ( talk · contribs) 01:30, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Here's my review:
Gave this a few copy edits. Here are my comments:
Short and sweet: nice work. On hold for a fortnight. 23W 02:07, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
It seems that "in contemporary times" they have inspired art and a blog title. But should the article make it clearer, at the start, that they are no longer used for their original purpose? The lede says "The books are rotated vertically ..." and this suggests they use still in use. Martinevans123 ( talk) 19:38, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, the mechanical principle involved is, too, "absolutely identical". This is not "a slight matter of scale" as
User:Andy Dingley thinks, because a principle is independent of such things.
About sources:
-- BjKa ( talk) 11:23, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
English is not my first language, so I may get this wrong. We have a section called "Mordern reproduction"; I think it might be more correct to talk of either replicas or reconstructions. Nø ( talk) 09:47, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
At the end of the "History and design" section, it is noted that *maybe* someone also invented this principle (except the axis of rotation was different, so it's not the same invention) in China up to 1000 years earlier than Agostino Ramelli. This potential Chinese invention is entirely irrelevant, as the book wheel as known to Europeans was invented by Agostino Ramelli. We do not credit Martians for inventions Earthlings have come up with on their own, even the Martians did it first -- unless someone can trace that the supposed Chinese invention allowed Agostino Ramelli to design his version, that someone in China has made the same invention is irrelevant, except as a binote on yet another thing more than one culture has invented independently. 87.104.34.113 ( talk) 17:59, 15 June 2024 (UTC)