Talk:Bellcrank

Picture

Article could really use a picture. Drutt (talk) 03:47, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree completely, I was shocked to see it didn't have one. I created one using SolidWorks and posted it on commons and and added it to the page. Hopefully that will help a bit. (npcserver) (talk) 02:52, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

An example of a bell crank mechanism modeled using computer aided design. Click to see animation.

Note: The animated drawing to the right is drawn incorrectly, and completely misses the point of what a bell crank is for. It should have the input and output motion each at 90 degrees to the ends of the 'L' and therefore at 90 degrees to each other.-text moved from article.--KTo288 (talk) 21:04, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Is bell crank or bellcrank preferred?

The article uses both. Wakablogger2 (talk) 09:05, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

"Bellcrank" is universal in engineering refs (and my bookshelf is fairly extensive for Victoriana and both UK & US). "Bell crank" is probably used around campanology and servant-summoning bells. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:31, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Mechanical advantage question

The article states that "Changing the length of the arms changes the mechanical advantage of the system". I think that the change must be that the arms become different lengths. As in, "Changing the length of the arms with respect to each other changes the mechanical advantage of the system". Maybe even include more information such as the ratio of the lengths of the arms determines the mechanical advantage with an example. I didn't make the change because I wasn't sure if I was missing something.192.249.47.204 (talk) 15:40, 1 March 2016 (UTC)