Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Heavy arbalest testing Reply to topic
This is a Spotlight Topic Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 17, 18, 19  Next 
Author Message
Randall Moffett




Location: Northern Utah
Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Reading list: 5 books

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Wed 07 Jul, 2010 2:20 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jean,

Sure but you are now leaving the material it is made with and going to processes done to that material. The heat treatment is a huge factor.

The info I gave is still correct. You only gave the Italian charts, you need to look at the German and outside Italy and German charts. All the other charts (German is p.331 for example and mostly iron) are mostly iron. If the charts represent reality then outside of Italy for most of the century steel is not the most common material.

RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,140

PostPosted: Wed 07 Jul, 2010 4:46 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Randall Moffett wrote:
Jean,

Sure but you are now leaving the material it is made with and going to processes done to that material. The heat treatment is a huge factor.


Well, yeah, I think obviously tempered steel is better than untempered steel, but I think (arguably) untempered steel is better than iron. So that is really a third category like I said, in fact I think you really need at least five:

Iron
Low Carbon Steel
Medium Carbon Steel
Low Carbon Steel (Tempered)
Medium Carbon Steel (Tempered)

Alan Williams goes on to differentiate fully tempered steel vs. partly tempered or tempered but not quenched. All of these effect the metalurgy but you have to draw the line somewhere. But I'm still not sure how common plain iron was at any rate, at least not by the second half of the 15th Century.

Quote:

The info I gave is still correct. You only gave the Italian charts, you need to look at the German and outside Italy and German charts. All the other charts (German is p.331 for example and mostly iron) are mostly iron. If the charts represent reality then outside of Italy for most of the century steel is not the most common material.

RPM


I am not nit picking to be obnoxious, but I'm not sure I entirely agree with that and this is something I've been trying to figure out for a book I've been working on, so bear with me.

Unfortunately the google books scan of KATBF is cut up with quite a few missing pages, (and this is the only version I have access to) but that list on p. 331 appears to be all helmets made before 1450, and most of them are 14th Century. You can see them on pp 337-353, they are mostly pig faced bascinets from the 1300s.

The table on pp 356-357 of German armor from 1500 -1630 shows mostly steel armor.

Unfortunately the table for the following section on Augsburg armor is missing, but in the pages after that he does list 8 (German) body armors from the 15th Century. All but one are steel:

P 336 laminated body armor steel 0.5% carbon

PP 358 359 Century German 15th plate harness A mix of component part iron, part heat treated 0.3 steel, part untempered steel 0.5% carbon

PP 373 374 German Gothic Harness 1480 tempered steel of variable carbon content

P377 German Gothic harness 1480-1490 tempered steel of variable carbon content
P379 German breastplate 1485 tempered steel
P380 German horsemans breastplate 1485 tempered medium carbon steel
P385 German Gothic harness 1492 Tempered 'banded' steel
P387-388 German plate harness 1495-1500 Tempered 'banded' steel and tempered medium carbon steel

J

System D'Armes Historical European fencing in New Orleans

Essays on Hroarr

Introducing the Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic


Last edited by Jean Henri Chandler on Wed 07 Jul, 2010 7:22 pm; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,140

PostPosted: Wed 07 Jul, 2010 4:51 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Leo Todeschini wrote:
Jena Henri Chandler wrote
Quote:
The crossbow draw weight of 850 lbs is indeed a big number, but it is still a bit lower than a lot of the Renaissance arbalests, which as we know were often up to 1,200 lbs draw or more. Just something to keep in mind.

From what I understand, most of the antique bolts that have been found from the Renissance are around the same wieght, roughly twice the weight of a longbow arrow on average although there are also many diifferent types. Not a whole lot more than that though, I've never heard of any all-steel bolts.


I am not so sure of your numbers here Henri,

Payne Gallwey says he tested a 1200lb bow but I think this is a bit high for most bows.


Alan Williams also mentions an (informal) test done 1200lb bow in Italy. That is the number I've seen bandied about most often.

Quote:
the prod on the 850 was 48 x 15 x 730 which is about right for most bows, a 1200lb bow would be about 18mm thick for these dimensions and most were not this thick.


Is thickness the only significant factor? The temper of the prod doesn't make any difference?

Quote:

As for the bolts, most bolts in museums that have sqaure/diamond profile heads are about 65g and 400mm long and so I assume that these were 'standard' battle field bolts, that presumably went with standard windlass bows. From earlier in this thread I think it was mentioned that longbow arrows are about 95g which sounds about right and I think a 180g bolt would be massively overweight for a 'normal' bow.


One of us is definitely way off then! You probably know better than I do. I'll have to check my sources.

Quote:

I have made a string for another 850 I have in a slightly different way that will lighten it and I will lightly wax this and let you know what I find. There is no order for this bow so I won't be able to test this until I make one, unless I find the time and it fits my bow, in which case I can swap it in and give it a test shoot. I will keep you posted of anything I do.


I'd really appreciate that.

J

System D'Armes Historical European fencing in New Orleans

Essays on Hroarr

Introducing the Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic
View user's profile Send private message
Randall Moffett




Location: Northern Utah
Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Reading list: 5 books

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Wed 07 Jul, 2010 7:33 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jean,

Yes that is right. The dates are important as the century starts with most locations using basically iron going to steel, perhaps excluding the master armourers of Italy. If you go back to my initial post you will see I said that the German marked armour does start moving into steel and hardened armour the last decades of the 15th, which is what the chart shows.

Regardless, the section on unmarked german and the rest of Europe are still mostly iron. While Italy may have been steel (heat treated or not) the rest of europe was not at the onset of the 15th. I have a list of the contents for these sections somewhere but one really needs the rest of the conclusions for context to understand what he is doing. If you are working on a book on this topic getting a hold of the book is basically a must. I'd see if a local library could not get it on loan. I had a copy for some time, it is a valuable resource, but the online version is missing a great deal of the sections and in some ways worse the conclusions that you really need to get this process. I passed a chance to get my own copy which I lament now to some degree but it was ( and is) expensive.

I was not saying heat treatment was unimportant but that was not what you were referring so I was not really going down that road. I was avoiding a tangential response/answer if you get what I mean.

I think heat treatment is more important as low carbon steel is only a slight step above iron to be completely honest

Leo,

Have you looked at The Springalds and Great Crossbows by Jean Liebel? It has much higher weights for the projectiles for standard crossbows than 65g. I think he used 120g or 140g. His two foot crossbows bolts are 265g but these bolts are literally about 2 feet. That said as I said earlier I really doubt the crossbow used just one bolt. I figure just like bows they had lighter flight arrows and heavier close up targeted bolts.

Here is a good picture of some bolts (almost at the very, very bottom).

http://users.stlcc.edu/mfuller/novgorodmetalp.html

These were more what I had in mind though

http://www.ancientresource.com/images/medieva...olt665.jpg

I will keep looking for my notes as I have time but keep prodding me if I forget.

RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,140

PostPosted: Wed 07 Jul, 2010 9:15 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I hope they reissue it. I wish I had a copy you are right the google books version is pretty confusing.

Yeah Randal that is what i thought too about the crossbow bolt weights, and it correlates to the ratio of modern crossbow bolts too not that it means much.

Every time I've seen crossbow bolts in a museum there were many different types all different shapes and sizes.

I'm trying to see if I can find out some more definitive data from some people.

J

System D'Armes Historical European fencing in New Orleans

Essays on Hroarr

Introducing the Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic
View user's profile Send private message
David Pim




Location: Trieste, Italy
Joined: 13 Mar 2008

Posts: 6

PostPosted: Thu 08 Jul, 2010 12:17 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Randall Moffett wrote:

I am not sure that 125lbs is really a sweet spot. I know people who draw much more than that and they seem, if the archer has good control, to increase in power very well.

RPM


Yes, the "sweet spot" that's alluded to concerns shooting for distance, where increases in draw-weight don't produce large increases in distance, but maybe every extra yard was considered desireable. At closer ranges the extra poundage has very real advantages in energy and penetration, make no mistake.
View user's profile Send private message
Neil Eddiford





Joined: 17 May 2008
Reading list: 1 book

Posts: 7

PostPosted: Thu 08 Jul, 2010 2:12 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Leo Todeschini wrote:
Jean Henri Chandler wrote
Quote:
Has anyone done any kind of test or academic study with an antique or replica of a military grade Renaissance arbalest? I know a couple of the very heavy prods (circa 1000 lb draw strength) have been made, at least one in the US and one in Europe, but I never heard about any tests actually being done. Anybody know about any?


I have a client who is looking into this at present and believes that you are correct in that no testing has been done to date. With this in mind he has ordered a circa 900-950lb bow that will be delivered in a couple of weeks with the express pupose of doing testing.

If I learn anything I will let you know.

Tod


HI, just discovered this thread. The bow in Tod's great photos is mine. At the moment I am spending a little time getting used to the bow, as well as putting some bolts through it to get it " shot in ".

After the summer season I plan to do the "science bit", I have access to a chronograph,digital scales and the like. I am trying to get access to a university physics department to get exact measurements on the strength of the bow. After these basics I will move on to distance and penetration tests.

Any ideas or advice welcome.

All the best,

Neil.
View user's profile Send private message
Aleksei Sosnovski





Joined: 04 Mar 2008

Posts: 313

PostPosted: Thu 08 Jul, 2010 4:35 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Neil Eddiford wrote:
Any ideas or advice welcome.


Get a good collection of different bolts (different weight, head types and heat treated/not heat treated heads) for penetration tests. Chronograph bolts of different weight and calculate their energy.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Glennan Carnie




Location: UK
Joined: 23 Aug 2006

Posts: 289

PostPosted: Thu 08 Jul, 2010 5:15 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

David Pim wrote:
Randall Moffett wrote:

I am not sure that 125lbs is really a sweet spot. I know people who draw much more than that and they seem, if the archer has good control, to increase in power very well.

RPM


Yes, the "sweet spot" that's alluded to concerns shooting for distance, where increases in draw-weight don't produce large increases in distance, but maybe every extra yard was considered desireable. At closer ranges the extra poundage has very real advantages in energy and penetration, make no mistake.


From my experience I would say the 'sweet spot' is somewhere around 135 - 140lb. That seems to be the best compromise for power, speed and distance with a military-weight arrow.
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,140

PostPosted: Thu 08 Jul, 2010 6:22 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Aleksei Sosnovski wrote:
Neil Eddiford wrote:
Any ideas or advice welcome.


Get a good collection of different bolts (different weight, head types and heat treated/not heat treated heads) for penetration tests. Chronograph bolts of different weight and calculate their energy.


What he said. Also maybe a lighter string from Tod. And welcome to the thread, thanks for making this effort I think it will be of interest and value to a lot of people in the community. I will definitely be following it with interest.

J

System D'Armes Historical European fencing in New Orleans

Essays on Hroarr

Introducing the Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,140

PostPosted: Thu 08 Jul, 2010 6:23 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Does anybody here have a copy of The Great Warbow? I'm told a lot of the stats we have been looking for can be found therein. But it's out of print and I can't afford a copy at the moment. ($122 on Amazon!)

J

System D'Armes Historical European fencing in New Orleans

Essays on Hroarr

Introducing the Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic
View user's profile Send private message
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

Location: Cincinnati, OH
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Likes: 21 pages
Reading list: 231 books

Spotlight topics: 15
Posts: 9,192

PostPosted: Thu 08 Jul, 2010 6:27 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jean Henri Chandler wrote:
Does anybody here have a copy of The Great Warbow? I'm told a lot of the stats we have been looking for can be found therein. But it's out of print and I can't afford a copy at the moment. ($122 on Amazon!)

J


Bookfinder.com finds listings that are half that price. Happy

Happy

ChadA

http://chadarnow.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Philip Montgomery




Location: Houston
Joined: 29 May 2008
Likes: 2 pages

Posts: 83

PostPosted: Thu 08 Jul, 2010 1:40 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jean Henri Chandler wrote:
Does anybody here have a copy of The Great Warbow? I'm told a lot of the stats we have been looking for can be found therein. But it's out of print and I can't afford a copy at the moment. ($122 on Amazon!)

J


I have a copy. Tell me again what you are looking for. It is a very large oversize book, but I think I can scan some pages for you and send you a pdf of some pages. Contact me by private IM if you like.

Philip Montgomery
~-----~
"A broken sword blade fwipping through the air like a scythe through rye does demand attention."
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,140

PostPosted: Thu 08 Jul, 2010 4:51 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thanks to both of you.

I'm looking for metrics on Renaissance arbalests or crossbows: how much the bolts weighed, what the draw strength was for a typical military cranequin or windlass crossbow, fps of a released bolt and / or "muzzle energy" if that is available.

And thickness of the prods.

Matt Easton suggested much of this information was in the Great Warbow, no idea what chapter that might be or anything.

J

System D'Armes Historical European fencing in New Orleans

Essays on Hroarr

Introducing the Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic
View user's profile Send private message
Lafayette C Curtis




Location: Indonesia
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 2,689

PostPosted: Sun 11 Jul, 2010 5:42 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Glennan Carnie wrote:
From my experience I would say the 'sweet spot' is somewhere around 135 - 140lb. That seems to be the best compromise for power, speed and distance with a military-weight arrow.


I'd second this from an Eastern perspective; the best results obtained by Turkish flight archers generally appear to have been made with bows of about 140 pounds draw-weight. Can't say if it has any relevance to crossbow construction and design, though.
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,140

PostPosted: Thu 15 Jul, 2010 12:19 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Has any further testing been done?

J

System D'Armes Historical European fencing in New Orleans

Essays on Hroarr

Introducing the Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic
View user's profile Send private message
Leo Todeschini
Industry Professional



Location: Oxford, UK
Joined: 12 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,600

PostPosted: Fri 16 Jul, 2010 12:03 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jean Henri Chnadler wrote
Quote:
Has any further testing been done?


Not by myself. I will be tied up quite heavily until at least mid September and at that point I can look into either modifying my bow or making another 850lb and looking at that.

When I do, I will post up any information I get.

Regards

Tod

www.todsworkshop.com
www.todcutler.com
www.instagram.com/todsworkshop
www.facebook.com/TodTodeschini
www.youtube.com/todsworkshop
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kel Rekuta




Location: Toronto, Canada
Joined: 10 Feb 2004
Likes: 1 page

Posts: 614

PostPosted: Fri 16 Jul, 2010 5:56 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jean Henri Chandler wrote:
Thanks to both of you.

I'm looking for metrics on Renaissance arbalests or crossbows: how much the bolts weighed, what the draw strength was for a typical military cranequin or windlass crossbow, fps of a released bolt and / or "muzzle energy" if that is available.

And thickness of the prods.

Matt Easton suggested much of this information was in the Great Warbow, no idea what chapter that might be or anything.

J


Jeanri, you should buy that book. You'd love it, very well written even the chapters by Hardy. Chapter VII "The Reign of the Crossbow" is mostly anecdotal. There are few details about bolt weights and other technical details. Strickland repeatedly refers to Payne-Galway so perhaps that book would be more helpful with these details. It is readily available in libraries and on used book lists.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,140

PostPosted: Fri 20 Aug, 2010 6:44 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Todd,

Any word from your customer?

And... do we have any consensus here as to the weight of say a 15th century crossbow bolt vs. the weight of a longbow arrow?


J

System D'Armes Historical European fencing in New Orleans

Essays on Hroarr

Introducing the Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Henri Chandler




Location: New Orleans
Joined: 20 Nov 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,140

PostPosted: Fri 20 Aug, 2010 6:59 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Neil Eddiford wrote:
Leo Todeschini wrote:
Jean Henri Chandler wrote
Quote:
Has anyone done any kind of test or academic study with an antique or replica of a military grade Renaissance arbalest? I know a couple of the very heavy prods (circa 1000 lb draw strength) have been made, at least one in the US and one in Europe, but I never heard about any tests actually being done. Anybody know about any?


I have a client who is looking into this at present and believes that you are correct in that no testing has been done to date. With this in mind he has ordered a circa 900-950lb bow that will be delivered in a couple of weeks with the express pupose of doing testing.

If I learn anything I will let you know.

Tod


HI, just discovered this thread. The bow in Tod's great photos is mine. At the moment I am spending a little time getting used to the bow, as well as putting some bolts through it to get it " shot in ".

After the summer season I plan to do the "science bit", I have access to a chronograph,digital scales and the like. I am trying to get access to a university physics department to get exact measurements on the strength of the bow. After these basics I will move on to distance and penetration tests.

Any ideas or advice welcome.

All the best,

Neil.


Neil,

Done any testing yet?

Jean

System D'Armes Historical European fencing in New Orleans

Essays on Hroarr

Introducing the Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Heavy arbalest testing
Page 3 of 19 Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 17, 18, 19  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2019 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum