[Bell Historians] Re: Diameters (was Dogmersfield)

[Chris Pickford]

Alan Buswell wrote "Surely this also applies to bell weights"

Indeed, there is a similar problem with weights - but it's less of an issue (as we've said before) if we think in terms of "recorded weights" rather than "exact weights". That way, the last "kosher" recorded weight stands as being the one to use.  So a bell delivered as 10-1-9 in 1910 and altered to 10-0-23 when rehung in 1989 - and if it turns out to be different when it's weighed again, then the new weight should be used. This only happens at intervals, and the source of the information is usually clear, so its reasonably clear-cut

The problem with diameters is that we can all go round measuring them at any time - and all come up with different figures. John Baldwin has (I think sensibly) indicated that he does not wish to receive corrections to diameters unless there are significant errors - and he will accept corrections only when the revised figures are reliable. 

Dalton would never trust diameters taken by anyone else, as George says. I recall one tower where we agreed on five out of the six but he still wouldn't accept my diameter for the remaining bell - and we were 1/8" adrift when we had measured it! No need to say who "lost"!

CP
           
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20080807/b6e774f2/attachment.html>