RickHunter
New Member
ORz！！！I have to complain that Apache appears everywhere when I search for bows..
Let's see other replies.
Let's see other replies.
About the difference between Chinese & Western Archers
- Thread starter RickHunter
- Start date
Siegecrossbow,
I don't think the vibration of western design is by the rotating cylinder alone as even a irregular cylinder can be balanced. I feel that it is the trigger motion itself where in the western model, to release the bolt, force is applied normal to the wood furniture, while in the eastern version it is applied inline to the furniture.
Thus in the western design, a moment pivoting on the other support hand is created when the trigger is depressed, while in the eastern version the as the trigger depression is along the furniture, the furniture is more likely to absorb it with its high linear inertia.
strangely this reminds me of the hip launched panzerfaust which share the squeeze barrel trigger design. As the weapon was so inaccurate i guess the trigger climb was not that big of an issue than more precise weapons like the RGP7 or the stovepipe or the bazooka. the LAW remedied the squeeze trigger by being shoulder launched where the moment of the squeeze is absorbed by the supporting shoulder.
now back on topic.
I don't think the vibration of western design is by the rotating cylinder alone as even a irregular cylinder can be balanced. I feel that it is the trigger motion itself where in the western model, to release the bolt, force is applied normal to the wood furniture, while in the eastern version it is applied inline to the furniture.
Thus in the western design, a moment pivoting on the other support hand is created when the trigger is depressed, while in the eastern version the as the trigger depression is along the furniture, the furniture is more likely to absorb it with its high linear inertia.
strangely this reminds me of the hip launched panzerfaust which share the squeeze barrel trigger design. As the weapon was so inaccurate i guess the trigger climb was not that big of an issue than more precise weapons like the RGP7 or the stovepipe or the bazooka. the LAW remedied the squeeze trigger by being shoulder launched where the moment of the squeeze is absorbed by the supporting shoulder.
now back on topic.
RickHunter
New Member
Yes I think so, bcoz hungarians came from Xiong Nu. Chinese beat Xiong Nu in Han dynasty and they moved to Europe, so they brought the eastern bows to there.
You will find that the hungarians put their family name before their first name just like Chinese and Japs.
First of all crossbows ARE NOT more powerful than bows. Just because you need to pull a HIGHER or HEAVIER weight pull on a crossbow DOES NOT mean it has more power or velocity. Why is that? Because the crossbow has a SHORTER length of pull. Therefore it NATURALLY takes more lbs of draw weight on a crossbow to equal a full size bows energy.
Second without question the composite bow has the clear advantage. Not only is it more portable, but it has more power than an English longbow, recurve bow. That is a short English longbow by the way.
As far as manufacture of course the recurve bow will be easier to manufacture. However the Chinese invented the assembly line, Henry FORD is FOS, and had a clear advantage in manufacturing large quantities of arms.
The composite bow was transferred to the West via central Asian Turks. So they learned rather quickly of the advantages of the composite bow vs recurve bow.
Also if you compare the shooting styles you should notice the draw hand's position of the fingers. The Asian styles tend to use a ring and hold the string differently.
As far as your photo shows I think the arrow is positioned incorrectly on the wrong side of the arrow rest for the long bowman. (It also could just be another style.) I shoot western style, but on a modern composite bow. (Traditional composite bows need a lot of care. They are not meant to remain strung permanently.)
Personally I feel the western grip is easier for me than the Asian styles. But I love the speed and power of a composite bow much more than a recurve bow. I also don't like the idea or feel of using a shooting ring.
You are not entirely right, a draw strength is not a spring rate, it is a force. F = K*X where F is force (draw strength), K = spring rate, X = draw length.
A higher draw strength does equal more energy as F = M*A where M is the mass of the projectile and A is acceleration. if both cross bow arrow and bow arrow have the same mass, the cross bow arrow will accelerate faster and therefore have a greater velocity.
But it is a bit more complicated than that, as F*X is work, work is not energy, but is actually power. spring energy is related by E = 1/2*K*X^2 -> which the longer draw of some bow design will give it an advantage of energy stowed.
But a typical long bow can have a draw weight of 150 lb, while a cross bow can easily go up to 1200 lb. the K value of a cross bow can just be so much bigger. that the ~15 inch draw of the cross bow does not disadvantage it that much greatly vs the ~30 inch draw of the bow.
A cross bow can
You don't need to use a thumb ring for an Asian bow release, you can use your thumb alone if you have strong enough thumbs - and in fact, historical thumb rings for bows are only found in the tombs of the rich.
The coefficient of friction might have been reduced by using oil or candle smear or even by adding lead to the bronze alloy. But your estimate shows that that wouldn't have been necessary for the mechanism depicted.The Qin type? the hammer type is the grand daddy of all cross bow and they should have been used in Qin, atleast early Qin. now you mean the imperial Qin type...
it is actually not that complicated. It have 4 main working components: trigger, differential lever, bow string catch and the housing (okay, you can throw in the safety lock too).
I haven't built a replica before, but as a mechanical engineer analyzing it, it is a remarkable achievement for the time.
The function of the trigger is of course to allow the user to release the bolt. It acts directly against the differential lever which in turns interact with the bow string catch.
Technically you do not need the differential lever but it is there for a very good reason. If the bow is a 150 lbf bow, (I heard 300 lbf is not unheard of), it will exert 150 lbf onto the bow string catch. Bronze to cast iron (okay, it should be bronze to bronze, but bronze/cast iron coefficient of friction is readily available) coefficient of friction is 0.22, bronze/bronze will be less, so lets say 0.2.
Given that the lock (lets say directly by the trigger now) which holds the bow string catch will have to create a acting force to release it, and I am eyeballing that the trigger mechanical advantage is 1:3. By virtue of mechanisms, this will be a little bit more force than the coefficient of friction multiplied by the normal force: 0.2 X 150 X 1/3= 10 lbf.
So without the differential lever, the soldier will have to pull 30 pounds of force to release the bolt. With the differential lever which I eye ball as giving a mechanical advantage of 1:3, this is reduced to 3.33 lbf. Comparable to modern sniper rifles trigger draw weight of ~3 lbf.
now with modern tools, to build the said trigger mechanism, shouldn't be hard. To rediscover the crossbow sighting range is a different story.
()
The composite bow was taken by the Hungarians and the several Turkish peoples to the West. To the extend that they used crossbows these will have been
made mostly in the towns and they were apparently not taken west. Crossbows were known to the Romans but they seem to have been re-introduced in the Middle Ages perhaps from the Islam? In what way? At any rate the Western lock is inferior to the Chinese locks.
Btw I wonder why I didn't see this thread earlier.
Last edited:
A nice animation of how the Chinese crossbow trigger may have worked.
Chinese crossbow serves a different function compared to western medieval crossbow. The latter is usually fired behind the cover of fortifications or screened by other troops. The former is lined up and fired in rows for offensive, musketeers style. Therefore how quick the crossbow can be reloaded becomes very important and one cannot take lesure winding them. As long as they provide a advantage in range compared to the bows that China's enemy equips, the purpose is served.
Chinese crossbow serves a different function compared to western medieval crossbow. The latter is usually fired behind the cover of fortifications or screened by other troops. The former is lined up and fired in rows for offensive, musketeers style. Therefore how quick the crossbow can be reloaded becomes very important and one cannot take lesure winding them. As long as they provide a advantage in range compared to the bows that China's enemy equips, the purpose is served.
Last edited:
IIRC crossbows entered Western European armories first as the equipment of ships from such ports as Genoa and Barcelona for defense against pirates. ( The arbalists being recruited from the Balearic islands. These islands had recently been taken from the Muslims by Aragon. ) This accords well with the remark that the weapon was mostly used from behind cover.
Quickie
Colonel
Here is some data showing a crossbow with a much higher draw weight is not as efficient as the longbow in transmitting the energy (k.e.) to the bolt or arrow. This can be partly explained by the difference in draw lenght but there should be other factors at play that negatively affect the transfer in energy if too much draw strength is stored at the bow.
W.F. Paterson (1990) published data from Stephen V. Grancsay about an experiment comparing a longbow and a crossbow that was spanned with a cranequin.
Type of Weapon_____ Draw weight____ Bolt weight____ Speed of bolt_____ Difference
Longbow ___________ 68 lbs. ________ 2.5 oz _______ 133.7 fps _______ Not much!!
Crossbow___________ 740 lbs ________ 1.25 oz. _____ 138.7 fps ________ Not much!!