Flying shuttle

Flying shuttle showing metal capped ends, wheels, and a pirn of weft thread

The flying shuttle was one of the key developments in the industrialization of weaving during the early Industrial Revolution. It allowed a single weaver to weave much wider fabrics, and it could be mechanized, allowing for automatic machine looms. It was patented by John Kay (1704–c. 1779) in 1733.

Before the flying shuttle

In order to understand the importance of this invention, it is useful to review the action of weaving prior to it. In a typical frame loom, the operator sits with the newly woven cloth before him or her. Using treadles or some other mechanism, the heddles are raised and lowered to open the shed in the warp threads. The operator must then reach forward, holding the shuttle in one hand, and pass it through the shed; the shuttle carries a bobbin for the weft. The shuttle must then be caught in the other hand, the shed closed, and the beater pulled forward to push the weft into place. This action (called a "pick") requires a lot of bending forward over the fabric; more importantly, however, the coordination between the throwing and catching of the shuttle requires more than one operator if the width of the fabric exceeds that which can be reasonably reached across (typically 60 inches (150 cm) or less).

How the flying shuttle works

In one respect, the term is somewhat misleading, as the shuttle itself is only a component in a new system attached to the loom as part of the beater. A board called the "race" runs along the front of the beater, from side to side, forming a track on which the shuttle runs. At each end of the race, there is a box which catches the shuttle at the end of its journey, and which contains a mechanism for propelling the shuttle on its return trip. The shuttle itself has some subtle differences from the older form. The ends of the shuttle are bullet-shaped and metal-capped, and the shuttle generally has rollers to reduce friction. The weft thread is made to exit from the end rather than the side, and the thread is stored on a pirn (a long, conical, one-ended, non-turning bobbin) to allow it to feed more easily. Finally, the flying shuttle is generally somewhat heavier, so as to have sufficient momentum to carry it all the way through the shed.

Social effects

The increase in production due to the flying shuttle exceeded the capacity of the spinning industry of the day, and prompted development of powered spinning machines, beginning with the spinning jenny and the waterframe, and culminating in the spinning mule, which could produce strong, fine thread in the quantities needed. These innovations transformed the textile industry in Great Britain. All were attacked as threats to the livelihood of spinners and weavers, and Kay's patent was largely ignored. It is often incorrectly written that Kay was attacked and fled to France, but in fact he simply moved there to attempt to rent out his looms, a business model that had failed him in England. The flying shuttle itself produced a new source of injuries; if deflected from its path, it could be shot clear of the machine, potentially striking workers. Turn of the century injury reports abound with instances in which eyes were lost or other injuries sustained, and in several instances (for example, an extended exchange in 1901) the British House of Commons was moved to take up the issue of installing guards and other contrivances to reduce these injuries.[1]

Obsolescence

The flying shuttle dominated commercial weaving through the middle of the twentieth century. By that time, other systems had begun to supplant it. The heavy shuttle was noisy and energy-inefficient (since the energy used to throw it was largely lost in the catching); also, its inertia limited the speed of the loom. Projectile and rapier looms eliminated the need to take the bobbin/pirn of thread through the shed; later, air- and water-jet looms reduced the weight of moving parts further. Flying shuttle looms are still used for some purposes, and old models remain in use.

References

  1. ↑ House of Commons of the United Kingdom (January–August 1901). "Factories and workshops: Annual report for 1900". Sessional Papers (H. M. Stationery Off.) X: 289–290. OCLC 4689281. During the past year I have investigated many shuttle accidents, and on no occasion where serious injury had resulted, has the shuttle guard been placed in that position for which it was intended.
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the Monday, April 25, 2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.