Saturday 5 April 2008

a fairground life (twisting the years away)



The Twist.
I speak often about the old paratrooper but this is not the only older ride we had. We needed another ride. The new "Sizzler" type twist was on the go, but we could never afford one of those. So In 1987 we purchased an old twist ride from another Scottish showman, it was a Jacksons (1966) make. It was an odd design for this type of ride (one of only two built I think) as the whole ride ran on a track around the outside and it had a waltzer centre instead of a pole. Not surprising when you remember Jacksons were better known for Arks (speedways) and Waltzers. The ride had an aluminium floor of over 180 wedge shaped pieces. They started small in the centre and got larger as they moved out. The ride had no top arms only three broad bottom arms that had waltzer/ark type wheels on them. One of these wheels was connected to a worm drive and this drove the cars around on the end of each arm. The centre was a waltzer drive but with no paybox on top. It all packed into an 8 wheel Atkinson Borderer (split windscreen, old N reg) and Ford D series (old M reg). We took possession of the ride at Dunfermline in late October. It was quite heavy to erect and took a while. All the pieces had to be lifted into the lorry on a gib arm with chain block. So we decided to trailer mount it that winter. This would mean that much of the ride would be fold up.
We went to an engineer that my father had used to fabricate our fold up arcade a few years before.We would help out so as to keep labour costs down. They made a chassis first then we fitted the centre (drive) into it. Next a new floor frame was made for us to fit the existing aluminium floor to. The steel frame was from 50 x 50 x 3 box section. The floor was in 24 wedge sections divided by concentric rings. EVERY cut (hundreds) was made by hand using a hacksaw!!! How stupid were we? The cuts were so off square that it took the welder longer to fill the gaps than weld the joins! After the frame was made the hydraulics were fitted to raise it for travelling. Next we fitted the old aluminium sheets. To do this we removed all the aluminium spars and riveted the sheets to the frame. All the ally spars (50mm C section) were scrapped. The steel track was welded into position and the handrails fitted. A new control box was fitted to the rear of the trailer on runners so that it could slide in for travelling. The cars all packed on the arms in the centre of the truck. The floors folded up, wheels under and it just looked like a 40ft trailer. It knocked at least 3 hours off a build up or pull down. Job done in about three months. The ride was mechanically sound but the old tin clad cars were too heavy and old fashioned looking. So in 1995 we made new car frames (we bought a chop saw) , finished them with moulded metal flake fibreglass skins and seats (were getting cleverer too) and new handrail inserts . The ride looked a lot better, but nowhere near the look of a Sizzler Twist. So in 1997 it was back to the drawing board. We decided to do away with the waltzer center and track drive. Basically we done away with the top of the ride. We put in a slew ring centre with hydraulic drive, pole with neon lighting, new top and bottom arms, new stainless steel lighting panels for the top arms. It was a total re build. Most of the fabrication was from profile cut steel plates. I picked it up in a small lorry. When I got to the yard I said to my dad-"look a twist ride in flat pack!" All the welder had to do was join it together. It took a couple of months to do the conversion and the ride worked really well, more importantly it looked even better! Before we started out the river came up behind the yard and flooded where the twist was erected. The water got into the old 110v drive motor (now attached to a hydraulic pump) and not long after it burnt out. So by about the second fair that year we had changed to 3ph 415v. The ride worked fine for the next few years. Not finished there, it was still a 40ft draw bar trailer, so in 2002 we made it into a swan neck articulated trailer with new larger GRP panelled control box fitted, extra lighting, a sign and another new hydraulic drive with reverse motion. The ride looked even better, but not finished there in 2005 it was sold to an Irish showman shortly after my brother took possession of his brand new Twister ride. It is the bees knees. Is there a lesson here?? Maybe so, nearly twenty years of work, three rebuilds and conversions then finally replaced by a new Twister- basically the ride we wanted in the first place, perhaps it would have been cheaper to buy the new one in the first place?

The photos show the new twist and our old twist version 3.

P.S. blew a pipe off the miami ride today, I must be getting used to breaking down now as I nearly forgot to post it. That is worrying! Had a spare though so "r" had it up and running again in 30 mins. Only lost 20 lt of oil has he spotted the problem as the ride was ending its cycle but it will still take a bit of cleaning up (sigh)

11 Comments:

At 6 April 2008 at 09:52 , Anonymous Anonymous said...

ANOTHER GOOD READ AS ALWAYS. HOW WAS THE OLD TWISTER TO RIDE IT SOUNDED QUIET RUFF??




K.J

 
At 6 April 2008 at 17:34 , Blogger jesters said...

Was that the flood at riverside? Remember that, what a mess! The old twist looks fine, lot of work in the re builds though.

 
At 6 April 2008 at 17:49 , Anonymous Anonymous said...

hi borderer here is the first picture of the twister taken at hawick haugh.

 
At 6 April 2008 at 17:58 , Blogger showman said...

The old twist was superior to the new ones in mechanical sturdyness.It also had clutches for each set of cars as a safety feature (twists have scissor action).The original alloy floor was made by Bennetts and the ride was like glass at full speed.The ride had a 2.5 :1 ratio between car revs and ride revs so it was faster compared to the new twisters that have about 2:1 ratio. When we made the ride fold up the first time the floor was less sturdy with less packing points to increase erection times, but on grass the track was spongy. Although the ride looked like it ran as a bag of hammers it still felt smooth-presumably due to some kind of gyroscope effect from the motion of the car arms. The next revamp saw the ride do away with track and run on the slewring. The ride was smooth and looked smooth but the ratio had changed to 2:1 so was only as fast as the new twists and felt slower. The ride unfortunately was like an old mobile phone-it was sturdier,better built and did exactly what it was built to do-it just didn't look the part anymore!

yes-riverside
yes-hawick

 
At 6 April 2008 at 19:00 , Blogger jesters said...

I liked my origional mobile, the motorola brick, the first hands free as it was so huge you could cradle it in your neck, talk and drive no probs.
Wonder if that last version of the twist you sold is still earning a coin somewhere this week?

 
At 26 May 2008 at 17:09 , Anonymous Anonymous said...

hi

i really like this blog, very interesting read.

I`ve always been fascinated by the grasscutter twist (merry mixer) ever since i saw it at Bensons in the 70s!

i`m intrigued by the gear ratios, could never figure it out!

could you explain further please

thanks

 
At 27 May 2008 at 15:48 , Blogger showman said...

I think the difference between a good twist ride and not so good is the ratios. Its hard to explain- the ride basically follows 2 circles, one turning the opposite direction to the other. I could be wrong but i think the correct ratio for a good ride would be so that the car with the riders in it would appear to STOP for an instant when reaching the outer most diameter of the ride then appear to shoot in across the ride to the next furthest point for an instant then repeat. If this path was drawn on paper it would look like a spirograph drawing. When the two paths of the circle align this creates the greatest outward thrust and causes the outer most passenger to get squashed- hence the spiel-"slide to the end and squash your friend!" the length of the two circle diameters would have to be calculated and the ratio made so that they combine to make a speed of 0 when the two align at the outer most diameter of the ride. The centrilfugal forces would still be the greatest at this point however and this could be what generates the thrill. This is of course only my opinion.

 
At 27 May 2008 at 18:42 , Anonymous Anonymous said...

hi Showman,

thankyou very much for replying.

I should have made it clearer but i`m trying to get my head round how the gear mechanism works.

Is it one large static bevel gear fixed in the centre with the three arms fixed to a shaft rotating about it, each arm with a bevel gear running around the fixed centre bevel gear on a shaft leading to another bevel gear under the car `circle` with yet another bevel gear on an upright shaft turning the cars?

and yes i think a 2.5:1 ratio would create the `stop and throw` effect as found on the grasscutter twist whereas i think a 2:1 ratio would just give a constant and as you say a slower ride

hope you can clarify or put me right about the above

thanks once again

Matt

 
At 28 May 2008 at 09:01 , Blogger showman said...

its been a long time since I seen a grasscutter but the principle is the same. The centre pole revolves on either a slew ring or ball race & guide rollers. The 3 arms are attached to this. around the centre is a steel track about 7-8 ft dia. at the end of each arm a shaft drops and is secured by a second arm at the bottom. The top arm holds everything up, the bottom arm only stops it all moving outward due to forces. This drop shaft has a round steel plate (3-4 ft) attached near the bottom and the cars on radial spokes attach to it. The drive is simple. a shaft is mounted into the bottom arm with wheels or tyres at each end. These tyres run around the centre track and the other end drives the drop shafts because the wheel is pressed up against the round plate (3-4 ft dia) . note the two sizes giving a ratio around 2:1. there are no cogs, it is only friction drive and since the track and plates are smooth is does give some slip especially in the wet.The centre pole is driven by a cog and basically drags the arms around with it. the arms drag the wheels around the track and all motion is provided by 1 motor. the counter motion of the two circles is provided naturally without any machinery/ gearboxes.
There was an old Bennetts twist that had separate motors to drive each set of cars- it was heavy and took a lot of running amperage wise. this meant you could spin the cars without turning the ride-but that was only a gimmick, no real thrill.
The new twists pick up the drive by the tyres running around the floor instead of a fitted track-this is probably what led to the floor being added as it was only an extension to the track.

IPI--TOP ARM-- I
IOI I
ILI CAR ___I____CAR
IEI--BOT ARM-O ]
_O_ ]
] 4ft plate
Track

O=WHEELS, with thru shaft (not shown) pressed down at pole and up at car end

 
At 28 May 2008 at 09:14 , Blogger showman said...

sorry-drawing went kyboshed.

 
At 28 May 2008 at 14:02 , Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh blimey!!

thankyou very much Showman, it`s so bloody simple! it`s clever.

That`s what i love about automata and fairground rides, you look at them and think how do they do that and start thinking of over elaborate ways the result is achieved when in fact, as you`ve just explained, it`s very simple techniques involved.

shame about the drawing, never mind.

thanks again

Matt

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home