Marcus, I get the feeling that you think I'm being disrepectful of Adam, or undervaluing his experience and knowledge. The way I see much of our discussion, it had little to do with glassmaking per se, and more to do with the physics of the apparatus...we were trying to figure this thing out. I think all of us thought the pull cord a little odd, and I was trying to make sense of it - at least theoretically; I'm not sure it would work so hot in practice.
I think it's fabulous being able to talk to Adam! I have very much enjoyed my discussions with him and other glassblowers, and I really value that about this forum. Call it intellectual masturbation if you want (sounds good to me!), I learn so much by bouncing ideas off Adam and everybody else. I expect
to be told I'm wrong sometimes, and I want
to be told when some crazy hypothesis I have is totally impractical.
Hey hey, I just noticed this last line in the patent: "Motion may be given to the rubber by any suitable means." (Rubber meaning mould)
Ach, just read Tom's reply. Then reread the patent, and he's right, the bubble stays put. "The bars of the rubber are made of graphite, carbon, &c. and may be straight, spiral, &c. in shape provided that in revolving they describe the contour of the vessel to be formed.
" There goes the centrifugal motion notion.
The splines that turned would of had to be very close together to not catch the hot glass as it was turning.
Could this be a reason it needed to turn fast?
The patent is from 1873.
" they're all the stuff we tried that didn't work very well, but we spent so much time making them we couldn't throw them away."
Yup, this machine is for the birds!