# [Bell Historians] Re: Radial Frames

David Bryant davidbryant at quUesOKG2OuxxSGGKvcIe7fMXRyKyYUnzTuD2gwYqn37lw6L9NNsGhQ8V9bE32TEi1FN4LRQm7PEKBStG2M7xsgTh8w.yahoo.invalid
Tue Dec 26 19:11:34 GMT 2006

```> Why do you need to have 'H' pattern framesides?

I don't suppose you do have to necessarily - it is just the most common way
of building a modern two-tier frame.

> What about putting the wheel on the opposite side of the upper bell to the
one below?   Still maintains the perfect circle!

This would be OK for a semitone bell, which would be rung in place of the
bell beneath it (although the wheel could perhaps be on the same side in
this case), but it wouldn't be very ideal for a standard augmentation. Yes,
the circle would be preserved but the effect would be to bunch up the ropes
around the bells in the two-tier part of the frame. If it was a ten to
twelve augmentation, this would probably result in the trebles being bunched
up together, then bigger gaps between the other bells. An evenly-spaced
circle is particularly important if the bells are being used to teach
learners, as they will unconsciously rely on visual gaps in many cases
rather than rhythm to place the bell.

> The main advantage of a radial frame is not only the elegant rope circle,
but also that it minimises the effect of the horizontal forces on the
> tower generated by the bells.

But spreading the load in this way is not especially important in the
majority of towers. A well-designed standard frame is perfectly adequate.
Our 59 cwt twelve are in a standard Taylor H frame, all on one level, and
there is very little tower movement even with them all going.

> Why do you consider this to be so messy David?

Because it is a makeshift addition to the original radial design. Yes, it
might work OK, but it surely highlights one of the main limitations of
radial frames - namely that they are extremely inflexible when it comes to
augmentation.

> Provided there is enough space in the tower, it is no more difficult to
change a radial frame than it is to redesign many conventional frames to
> accommodate extra bells.

This is hardly true in the majority of cases. Assuming there are no
complications and the frame has been put in sensibly, augmenting a ring in a
normal frame is usually a matter of simply adding pits into empty space, or
if space is limited above the existing bells. In most cases, it will only be
necessary to move one or two of the existing bells at most. By contrast,
adapting a radial frame to take more bells will necessitate removing all of
the bells, dismantling the frame and replacing a number of the components,
and then putting the bells back in again.

David

```