ball bearings

[djb122uk <djb122@y...>]

Chris Povey wrote:

> The recent comments on ball bearings have been interesting. The 
comment from David that 'his' ball bearings had open sides reminded me 
of an inspection of a tower structure by a member of the Towers & 
Belfries Committee in (I think) a Derbyshire tower. It was pointed out 
to him that all the bells had been fitted with ball bearings. To his 
quite reasonable surprise he found that ordinary ball bearing races 
had been fitted onto the gudgeons and that the races themselves were 
held onto the frame by a flat-section inverted 'U' straps. The balls 
themselves were fully exposed. The local ringer there was very proud 
of the conversion. This had clearly been done on a DIY basis and 
clearly without the knowledge of the Diocesan authorities and a 
faculty.
> 
> If David's bearings are anything like this, he needs to be worried.

No, they're not like that - it wasn't a bodge job. The bearings are of 
the type which Dave Cawley described, and have proper but open sided 
housings. The gudgeons were replaced when they were fitted.

I have seen a local DIY job just such as you describe (I'd better not 
say where). It was done about 50 years ago, and there have been no 
problems with the bearings at all, although the fittings are generally 
falling to bits now and there is a project to rehang them. All things 
considered, it is surprising that the bells in question go as well as 
they do!

Out of interest, when did Whitechapel move over to using double-row 
bearings in SKF housings? I've got one of theirs from the 1930s, and 
it is single row with an extra ring around the outside to achieve the 
aligning properties.

David