There would be a cup at the end of the extension to hold the projectile in place, similar in appearance to a slightly hollowed out boating oar. But because of the physics involved with the leaf spring assembly (layering wooden slats in decreasing lengths), a greater curvature can be achieved, and subsequently, greater propellant power.įor the single arm catapult, a long post would be inserted into the drum barrel, from which the throwing or “swing” arm could be set into launching position. As it narrows out at the extremities, it becomes much more pliable. Like the bow, a leaf spring system is broader at the middle, making it harder to flex. The leaf spring section would have replaced the bow component seen on the standard catapult. The effect could be compared to the spin motion of pulling a ripcord to start a gas engine. The mechanism would enable a significant increase in the throwing arm speed, without an overexertion of physical force upon its release. The brilliance of his model was that, contrary to the conventional way of using a bow to draw the throwing arm upwards to its ready position, a rotating drum was introduced which would spin swiftly on an axel connected to the arm. Sometime during the 1480’s Da Vinci drafted two designs using a leaf spring system: the single arm catapult and the double arm catapult. For this reason, Da Vinci validated the catapult as an enduring and competent tool in warfare. Although the essential catapult design had already been conceived and put to use for a great number of years before his time, Leonardo’s creative mind saw room for improvement nonetheless.ĭa Vinci recognized a simple fact that was likely overlooked by most: that gun powder, albeit a resourceful substance, was not 100% dependable while in the line of fire. In his spare time, he was known to sketch mechanized throwing devices. Leonardo Da Vinci was a man who wore many hats: painter, sculptor, and innovator.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |