0
Research Papers

Improvement in Ballistae Design From Eutitonon to Palintonon: A Study on the Mechanical Advantages

[+] Author and Article Information
C. Rossi

e-mail: cesare.rossi@unina.it

S. Pagano

D.I.M.E.,
Department of Mechanical Engineering for Energetics,
University of Naples “Federico II,”
Via Claudio, 21 80125 Naples, Italy

Contributed by the Mechanisms and Robotics Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received October 11, 2012; final manuscript received April 23, 2013; published online June 10, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Hong-Sen Yan.

J. Mech. Des 135(8), 081006 (Jun 10, 2013) (7 pages) Paper No: MD-12-1511; doi: 10.1115/1.4024371 History: Received October 11, 2012; Revised April 23, 2013

This study investigated why the design of ancient throwing machines evolved from eutitonon (arms outside the mainframe) to palintonon (arms inside the mainframe) from the end of the first century B.C. to the first century A.D. and evaluated the mechanical advantages of the new design. Palintonon was first used for big machines; in the following centuries, it was also used for much smaller machines. Essentially, the palintonon design has several advantages: more elastic energy can be stored in the hair bundles representing the motors of these machines, heavier projectiles can be thrown with the same charging effort, projectiles are stressed by lower acceleration in the machine with the same muzzle velocity, and the throwing machines have higher efficiency. Results are also presented regarding the “internal ballistics” of these ancient throwing machines by using simulation software.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Rossi, C., and Pagano, S., 2011, “A Study on Possible Motors for Siege Towers,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 133(7), pp. 1–8. [CrossRef]
Rossi, C., Russo, F., and Russo, F., 2009, Ancient Engineers' Inventions, Precursors of the Present, Springer, Berlin.
Rossi, C., and Russo, F., 2010, “A Reconstruction of the Greek-Roman Repeating Catapult,” Mech. Mach. Theory, 45(1), pp. 36–45. [CrossRef]
Rossi, C., 2012, “Ancient Throwing Machines: A Method to Calculate Their Performance,” Mech. Mach. Theory, 51, pp. 1–13. [CrossRef]
Russo, F., Rossi, C., Ceccarelli, M., and Russo, F., 2008, “Devices for Distance and Time Measurement at the Time of Roman Empire,” Proceedings of HMM 2008 International Symposium on History of Machines and Mechanisms, Tainan, Taiwan, pp. 101–114.
Chondros, T. G., 2010, “Archimedes Life Works and Machines,” Mech. Mach. Theory, 45(11), pp. 1766–1775. [CrossRef]
Dimarogonas, A. D., 2001, “Introduction–The Machine: A Historical Design,” Machine Design: A CAD Approach, John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 4–19.
Soedel, V., and Foley, V., 1979, Scientific American: Ancient Catapults, 240(3), pp. 150–160. [CrossRef]
Lahanas, M., “Ancient Greek Artillery Technology From Catapults to the Architronio Canon,” http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/war/CatapultTypes.htm
Russo, F., 2004, “L'artiglieria delle legioni romane,” Ist. Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato, Rome, Italy.
Russo, F., 2007, Tormenta Navalia, L'artiglieria navale romana, USSM Italian Navy, Roma.
Baldi, B., 1616, Heronis Ctesibii Belopoeka, hoc est, Telifactiva, Augusta Vindelicorum, typu Davidu Frany.
Shramm, E., 1918, Die antiken Geschütze der Saalburg, Reprint, Bad Homburg, Saalburg Museum, 1980.
Marsden, E. W., 1969, Greek and Roman Artillery: Historical Development, Oxford University Press, New York.
Marsden, E. W., 1971, Greek and Roman Artillery: Technical Treatises, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 106–184.
Chondros, T. G., 2008, “The Development of Machine Design as a Science From Classical Times to Modern Era,” HMM 2008 International Symposium on History of Machines and Mechanisms, Tainan, Taiwan, Nov. 11–14, Springer, Netherland.
Baatz, D., 1978, “Recent Finds of Ancient Artillery,” Britannia, 9, pp. 1–17. [CrossRef]
Bishop, M. C., and Coulston, J. C. N., 1993, Roman Military Equipment From the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome, London, Reviewed by Rankov, B., 1994, “Roman Military Equipment From the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome,” The Classical Review (New Series), Vol. 44, pp. 137–138.
Vitruvius, De Architectura, Liber X. 1st Century A.D. Available at http://la.wikisource.org/wiki/De_architectura/Liber_X
Appianus Alexandrinus, Wars Against Carthage, Liber VIII. Available at http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0230%3Atext%3DManuscripts
Hart, V. G., and Lewis, M. J. T., 1986, “Mechanics of the Onager,” J. Eng. Math., 20(4), pp. 345–365. [CrossRef]
Hutchison, W., and Godfrey, S., 2004, “A Modern Reconstruction of Vitruvius' Scorpion,” http://www.eg.bucknell.edu/∼whutchis/scorpion
Russo, F., 2009, La grande Balista di Hatra, Ed. ESA, Torre del Greco, Naples, Italy.
Hart, V. G., and Lewis, M. J. T., 2009, “The Hatra Ballista: A Secret Weapon of the Past?,” J. Eng. Math., 67(3), pp. 261–273. [CrossRef]
Iriarte, A., 2003, The Inswinging Theory, Gladius XXIII, pp. 111–140.
Iriarte, A., 2000, “Pseudo-Heron's Cheiroballistra A(nother) Reconstruction: I. Theoretics,” J. Roman Mil. Equip. Stud., 11, pp. 47–75.
Harpham, R., and Stevenson, D. W. W., 1997, “Heron's Cheiroballistra (a Roman Torsion Crossbow),” J. Soc. Archer-Antiquaries, 40, pp. 13–17.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Reconstruction of a Roman ballista (archaeological area of Saepinum, Campobasso-Italy, courtesy of Dr. F. Russo) and an author's virtual reconstruction of the torsion motor

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

(a) Maximum twist of the bundle versus L/D ratio and (b) elastic energy versus rotation [4]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Schemes of the eutitonon and palintonon designs

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Projectile velocity versus arm position

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Force of inertia on the projectile versus arm rotation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Projectile velocity versus arm position

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Force of inertia on the projectile versus arm rotation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Projectile velocity versus arm position

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Force of inertia on the projectile versus arm rotation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Eutitonon model and projectile velocity as a function of time during the launch run

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Palintonon model and projectile velocity as a function of time during the launch run

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In