10-23-2010, 11:15 PM
I have not been able to bring up any threads discussing this paper. ( hatra ballista - a secret weapon of the past?) The short version or summary is that the Hatra (inswinging) is 48% more effecient than the Greek palintone outwsinger models. While this news is nothing new to inswinger fans, one would think the implications would go a lot further than that regarding the current debate on inswinger or outswinger design for both Hatra and Orsova machine.
I'd like to add that the paper has a co-author and contributer - an MJT Lewis of the UK. Mr. Lewis build two identicle machines both of the same power and limb length, one an outie and one an innie. He performed the ranging experiments and others, while Mr. Hart did the mathematics with both coming to the same conclusions. In other words the math supported the testing, or the testing supported the math. You figure it out.
The bottom line here folks is that while both the Hatra and Orsova COULD have been constructed as an outswinger, its performance in comparison to using it as an in-swinger makes the argument kinda mute?
For those who might disagree with Mr. Harts math, I too at currently in disagreement with him on a proposed Orsova design I am touting as superior to the Hatra, and that this new design is the most likely configuration of the Orsova frame providing a significant increase in obtainable velocities. While their is no academic evidence to support this claim, it is made clearly on the superior performance of it. Secondary and an independent agreement has been obtained from Nick and his work with his Orsova build and a number of tests involving the chronograph.
Its hard to argue with a math whiz with multiple degrees but then again I always like a good challenge. Especially when Im right LOL. Mr. Hart gracefully has accepted the challenge, confident in his mathematical computations, while I stand with reproducable upon demand evidence.
There can be only one person right, and with future testing and reporting of stats to come, we will soon see.
So take heart outswinger proponents, perhaps sometimes math loses out? Is Mr. Hart and Lewis wrong in their evaluations?
Lets have some lively discussion!
I'd like to add that the paper has a co-author and contributer - an MJT Lewis of the UK. Mr. Lewis build two identicle machines both of the same power and limb length, one an outie and one an innie. He performed the ranging experiments and others, while Mr. Hart did the mathematics with both coming to the same conclusions. In other words the math supported the testing, or the testing supported the math. You figure it out.
The bottom line here folks is that while both the Hatra and Orsova COULD have been constructed as an outswinger, its performance in comparison to using it as an in-swinger makes the argument kinda mute?
For those who might disagree with Mr. Harts math, I too at currently in disagreement with him on a proposed Orsova design I am touting as superior to the Hatra, and that this new design is the most likely configuration of the Orsova frame providing a significant increase in obtainable velocities. While their is no academic evidence to support this claim, it is made clearly on the superior performance of it. Secondary and an independent agreement has been obtained from Nick and his work with his Orsova build and a number of tests involving the chronograph.
Its hard to argue with a math whiz with multiple degrees but then again I always like a good challenge. Especially when Im right LOL. Mr. Hart gracefully has accepted the challenge, confident in his mathematical computations, while I stand with reproducable upon demand evidence.
There can be only one person right, and with future testing and reporting of stats to come, we will soon see.
So take heart outswinger proponents, perhaps sometimes math loses out? Is Mr. Hart and Lewis wrong in their evaluations?
Lets have some lively discussion!
Torsion rules! - Joel from Ham. Ont. Ca.
