2 ms·
This is a great thesis because it can be falsified. The contention you are making is that between 1640 and 1690 the standardization of units of measurement and
by andrewla 4y ago
This is a great thesis because it can be falsified.
The contention you are making is that between 1640 and 1690 the standardization of units of measurement and the invention of the lathe meant that Kalthoff (say) could not produce a viable steam engine in the 1640s, but Savery could successfully produce one in the 1690s.
I suspect this thesis is false, but I wanted to state it here before I did any research into it.
- andrewla 4y agoSome basic research I think indicates we can rule out the standardization of units of measurement; there were no serious attempts at this in the timeframe in question. Hard to say about the lathe; as the article notes, Wilkinson's work in cannon boring machines certainly made James Watt's life easier, but that was still way in the future (circa 1774) so there doesn't appear to be anything relevant to the timeframe the article is discussing.
- bitexploder 4y agoI think I conflated invented with reproducibility, etc.. Without relatively precise (for the tome) tolerances on your components you can’t build a steam engine that works. I have machined a steam engine from pretty limited pieces before on my lathe. The cool thing about them is they do tolerate a lot more variance than what comes next in the evolution of engine design, but only so much. Wish I had my books detailing the intertwined history of precision machine tooling and steam engines developing hand in hand. Anyhow I think other comments covered it. I should have been more precise with the claim :)