Steve Gray
|
Re: Stone Shifting
Aug 23, 2003, 15:32
|
|
It all sounds plausible. I guess that if the holes taper (slightly) from top to bottom they would guide the base of the stone to the exact position. Wedges could be used to plumb up the uprights and then removed as needed to allow a small amount of lateral adjustment when the lintel is being fitted. I can't see any reason why a large stone should not behave in the same way as a scale model, so we ought to be able to evaluate the exact height/offset needed to hit the hole every time using a small block of stone/concrete (e.g. a kerb stone). Do you know what the dimensions of the trilithon uprights are and how deep will the holes need to be?
|
Steve Gray
|
Re: Stone Shifting
Aug 23, 2003, 15:38
|
I like the summer solstice idea. It's a great way to attract interest.
On the previous topic of not being taken seriously, I don't really think it matters whether people take us seriously before the event. But if we are successful, they sure will take us seriously afterwards. It will be a done job, on the record. Anyway, it's your show, Gordon, you call the shots, were just here to help if we can.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Stone Shifting
Aug 23, 2003, 16:12
|
Yes, top marks for the solstice/solar connection. Added value for the product, especially in the eyes of TV companies, for very little effort - we can easily pop a couple of heelstones in at the right spot.
Sponsorship from Sun Micro, or Ambre Solaire...
Gordon, if it's not a secret, where exactly are the BBC stones? And do you have pictures?
|
GordonP
|
Re: Stone Shifting
Aug 23, 2003, 16:40
|
Hi all.
Nigel I thought you would be out in the garden digging holes in the lawn.
I have a picture of the BBC Trilithon in front of me, It is part of a paper presented to the British Academy entitled "Science and Stonehenge" by Julian Richards and Mark Whitby. It was sent to me by Julian Richards in an attempt to get me to forget the silly ideas that tend to fly about in my head. Needless to say it didn't work, however the paper as been most useful.
Regarding the latest crazy notion, If we do it right and don't hit any unforseen problems we might even do it without burning the midnight oil.
This is how I see it, we start with the holes pre-dug (JCB) and the first of the uprights in position across its hole. At first light we start to elevate this stone working a two shift system say 2hrs on 2hrs off. If all goes well we should have this ready for planting well within 6 hrs. Then we move the next stone into its position (a distance of 30ft) Say 30mins, elevate and plant it, say 6hrs. 2 or 3 hours for the lintel, then its party time. Early rise next day and the whole group form a human heel stone at dawn.
|
Steve Gray
|
Re: Stone Shifting
Aug 23, 2003, 17:23
|
Do you plan to party all night or should I bring my alarm clock?
More seriously, though, won't it take at least as long to elevate the lintel as the uprights?
|
GordonP
|
Re: Stone Shifting
Aug 23, 2003, 18:18
|
It probably will but I reckon we'll have some time in hand after the uprights. its all guesswork till we do some testing. Anyway lets aim high, convince ourselves its possible, and who knows what we can do.
Party all night? I'm afraid I'm getting a bit long in the tooth, 20yrs ago I'd party on until my body assumed an horizontal position without my bidding. Not now though.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Stone Shifting
Aug 23, 2003, 18:29
|
"until my body assumed an horizontal position without my bidding. Not now though."
Trust me, you'll get back to that stage.
But careful, I'd hate to see you get there prematurely and TMA having an entry for "Gordon's Wedge Tomb"...
|
Hob
|
Re: Stone Shifting
Aug 23, 2003, 19:55
|
Would the ground conditions make a lot of difference?
If it was soggy? Or do you put support logs on the ground to give the levers something to act against?
There really should be more of this kind of thing.
Go for it, you loony style rock shifting types!
p.s. I'm trying to track down a local (Tyneside) standing stone that has been moved, If it gets found, I'd love to try and put it back by this method.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Stone Shifting
Aug 23, 2003, 23:00
|
More confirmation:
“It was no more difficult to move the stone up the ramp than it had been to move it on level ground”
I’m sure most of us reading that would have found it hard to credit, especially as the slope was 1 in 8, but I can confirm that, on my small scale basis, I found you were exactly right.
Having thought about why it happens, I realize that I shouldn’t have been surprised. When you’re rowing 1 in 8 uphill, you could maintain precisely the same lever action as if you were on the level, except that the maximum forward travel of the stone will be restricted by 12.5% due to the front of it hitting the slope. Thus, you might get the impression that it’s actually marginally less effort per (shorter) stroke when going uphill. To counter this, all that is required is that everyone levers the stone a bit higher on each stroke, thus maintaining an unchanged forward travel per stroke. It’s clear that if you’ve got things arranged so that at each stroke everyone is levering the stone fairly comfortably, then they are hardly going to notice the extra effort in levering it a little higher during their stroke. Thus, they’ll be able to row up a hill at much the same speed as on the level.
I’m not sure what the limits of slope are – I guess you’d eventually be forced into limiting the forward travel per stroke, so it would be slower, and there would also come a point where the levers wouldn’t grip or the brake wouldn’t work, but I’m convinced that the limiting factor wouldn’t be exhaustion or numbers of people. If 20 people could move a stone along the flat, 20 people could move it up a steep hill. That’s more than can be said for all the other methods.
|
BrigantesNation
|
Re: Stone Shifting
Aug 23, 2003, 23:51
|
|
Yes, I'm in for any further experiments, if I can make it.
|
