. Bulletin. Science. Figure 27.—Details of the counterweight carriage in the Otis system. (From Gustave Eiffel, La Tour de Trois Cents Metres, Paris, igoo, pi. 22''.) a device that permitted the car to be lowered by hand, even after failure of all the hoisting cables. The serious shortcomings of the rack and pinion were its great noisiness and the limitation it imposed on hoisting speed. Both disadvantages were due to the constant engagement of a pinion on the car with a continuous rack set between the rails. The meeting ended in an impasse, with Brown unwilling to approve the objectionable ap
Image details
Contributor:
Library Book Collection / Alamy Stock PhotoImage ID:
RH08W8File size:
7.2 MB (398.7 KB Compressed download)Releases:
Model - no | Property - noDo I need a release?Dimensions:
2451 x 1020 px | 41.5 x 17.3 cm | 16.3 x 6.8 inches | 150dpiMore information:
This image is a public domain image, which means either that copyright has expired in the image or the copyright holder has waived their copyright. Alamy charges you a fee for access to the high resolution copy of the image.
This image could have imperfections as it’s either historical or reportage.
. Bulletin. Science. Figure 27.—Details of the counterweight carriage in the Otis system. (From Gustave Eiffel, La Tour de Trois Cents Metres, Paris, igoo, pi. 22''.) a device that permitted the car to be lowered by hand, even after failure of all the hoisting cables. The serious shortcomings of the rack and pinion were its great noisiness and the limitation it imposed on hoisting speed. Both disadvantages were due to the constant engagement of a pinion on the car with a continuous rack set between the rails. The meeting ended in an impasse, with Brown unwilling to approve the objectionable apparatus and able only to return to New York and lay the matter before his company. While Eiffel's attitude in the matter may appear highly unreasonable, it must be said that during a subsequent meeting between Brown and Koechlin, the French engineer implied that a mutual antagonism had arisen between the Tower's creator and the Com- mission. Thus, since his own judgment must have had little influence with the commissioners at that time, Eiffel was compelled to specify what he well knew were excessive safety provisions. This decision placed Otis Brothers in a decidedly uncomfortable position, at the mercy of the Com- mission. W. E. Hale, promoter of the water balance elevator—who by then had a strong voice in Otis' affairs—expressed the seriousness of the matter in a letter to the company's president, Charles R. Otis, following receipt of Brown's report on the Paris conference. Referring to the controversial cog- wheel, Hale wrote ... if this must be arranged so that the car is effected [sic] in its operation by constant contact with the rack and pin- ion ... so as to communicate the noise and jar, and un- pleasant motion which such an arrangement always pro- duces, I should favor giving up the whole matter rather than allying ourselves with any such abortion. . we would be the laughing stock of the world, for putting up such a contrivance. This difficult situation apparen