Accuracy of weights

grblundell GRBlundell at
Sat Jul 15 09:14:53 BST 2006

I have a nasty feeling that I may have just posted this twice. But 
replies to digests now seem to go off to a very strage address that 
may not appear on the list. Apologies if I'm blessing you with this 
message more often than it's worth (stands back and waits for 
someone to point out that sending message once is more often than 
it's worth....)

The most recent digest contains the following:

    Posted by: "John Baldwin" 
> Dove seems to have shown the tenor at Londonderry (G&J, 1929) as
> 32-0-6 ever since Edn2.

> However, Fred Dukes's Campanology in Ireland shows it as 32-0-5
> (p162).  

    Posted by: "Mike Chester" 
> Whilst on the subject of doubtful data, can anyone confirm the 
> tenor weight at Atlanta?  In a RW article is was given as 13-1-12, 
> on the church/NAG websites it is given as 13-1-14.

- I won't go straight into whether enquiries at this level of 
are meaningful - we argued that one out some months back, and I 
think I convinced the list of my views. The list didn't convince me 
of its views either. 
But I will ask if we know (either specifically or in general terms) 
how accurate weighing at foundries is. To use one of the above 
as an example, if (and I must emphasise that this is an entirely 
question) Atlanta tenor had been put on the same set of scales 
with no work or alteration made to the bell in between, would anyone 
been surprised or upset if the weighing machine showed 13-1-12 the 
first time 
but 13-1-14 the second?
Giles Blundell


More information about the Bell-historians mailing list