Talk:Spinning wheel

Old discussions

Numerous types of spinning wheels exist, including the great wheel also known as "walking wheel" or wool wheel for rapid long-draw spinning of woolen-spun yarns; the flax wheel, with its bobbin and flyer assembly, for spinning linen and worsted-spun yarns; and the charka, a small, portable, hand-cranked wheel for spinning cotton and other fine, short-staple fibers.

I've never heard of a great wheel being called a wool wheel before- is that common somewhere? Also, is the distinction between what types of fibers and yarns can be spun on which wheels necessary? For example, it implies that one couldn't use a great wheel for spinning worsted yarn. Is that true? I had the impression that one could use any wheel to spin any fiber, within limits. Loggie 01:32, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Loggie, from my experience with great wheels, they would have been used for woolen spinning, using a long draw technique with rolags created by hand cards. So in general, I think the entry is correct. Worsted spinning is created from a shorter draw, based on the length of the wool staple -- with the twist being created within 3 or 4 inches from the orifice. The main problem being the length of one's arm. Since a great wheel doesn't have a foot treadle, you use one hand to keep the wheel amoving and the other arm/hand to do the long draw. It would indeed be difficult to do worsted spinning on a great wheel, unless you had a second person to keep the wheel turning. I suppose you could get some nice combed top that would allow you to approach worsted spinning on a great wheel, but it would still be tough. Also, I think the "wool" wheel terminology might come from the time when treadle wheels had very small orifices so were used mostly for flax. The great wheel permitted the spinning of wool since it did not have an orifice. I don't have a problem with the term "wool wheel," but will check some of my reference books to be sure.

During the short time period I had our great wheel working, I used worsted spinning. I'd give the wheel a big turn and then spin a while. I see that it would be easier to spin woolen yarn, but I defiantly was spinning worsted. I also had a wool that spun very easily, and required me to do little work, so that it could be spun with one hand. When spinning on my Ashford I occasionally use one hand with that fiber, while still getting the fan of fibers that makes a worsted yarn. Loggie 01:55, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Loggie, I checked my library and found a little book by Katy Turner, The Legacy of the Great Wheel, Select Books, 1980. On page 33 she states," 'Wool wheel' was the term used to distinguish the great wheel from a treadle for 'flax' wheel. There is an element of truth in both of these old terms because no knowledgable person would deny that line flax is spun better on a flax, or Saxony, wheel, while fine wool is spun better on a great wheel. It is also true, of course, that a tereadle will spin beautiful wool yarn; the great wheel will spin very good tow flax, very good being the highest mark we are willing to give tow. The terms flax wheel and wool wheel imply limitations that can be misleading." So, it is a term that is used, even though misleading. I learned to spin in NZ in the 70's and DO recall reference to wool wheels there. So even though misleading, I have never had a problem with the term. -- Msass 5 Dec 2005

Thanks. I learned to spin only 2-3 years ago, and my mom taught me, so while I know how, I don't necessarily know the terms. My mom always calls the great wheel a walking wheel. I had never heard wool wheel before, so I was curious. Loggie 00:31, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

I would take exception to the phrase "any knowledgable person" as a determinitive for wool wheel vs flax (or other) wheel.

In various parts of the country (the US and I have been in more than a few parts of it) THe great wheel will also be called a walking wheel or a wool wheel. The smaller saxony styles may be called flax wheels as well. I have spun both flax and wool on the great wheel as equally well as on a saxony style wheel. For that matter you can spin them both on a charka but with smaller amounts allowed.

"any knowledgable person" would know this. Spinners as a group are much more organic and less into do's and don'ts.

Changes I made

Hi! Happy to join this discussion on spinning wheels. I made a few edits -- added saxony and upright wheels to the discussion on types of worsted-spinning wheels, since that's what the new wheels I've looked at are classified as today. Also, I noted that a flax wheel uses a distaff, which is almost all of the information I have about spinning flax, being a wool/silk girl myself. I don't know if this helps or hurts with the above discussion -- but it was clearer to me as a new spinner vs. a textile historian. I can probably take some pictures of my Louet if anyone thinks it would be helpful -- I don't know anyone with a saxony wheel. Added a bit to the Sleeping Beauty legend (I've gotten questions about where the sharp part on my wheel is -- I tell folks they're much more likely to get their hand caught in the flyer unit than thay are to prick a finger!) I hope this was ok.JenniSue 06:01, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

merger of Charkha into Spinning wheel

• Agree. --Regards. Miljoshi | talk 11:42, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

• Disagree - The charkha is a very specific kind of spinning wheel and should have it's own page Ranvaig 06:18, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

• Weak Agree. The charka page is interesting, but at its currently length could easily be incorporated into the spinning wheel page. So unless someone is planning to expand it. Limegreen 23:19, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, thats what has been suggested in the direction of merger: Charkha into -> Spinning wheel. --ΜιĿːtalk 06:39, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

• Disagree - I feel Ranvaig is right, the charkha has enough of its own history to justify a seperate article. --Ahc 06:36, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

• Disagree - per Ahc. Rama's Arrow 17:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Somehow I missed that this merger had happened...a year ago. Since this has gone so long without discussion I thought I'd mention it here before putting a split template up if anyone had new thoughts since it was generally agreed not to merge the two. --Ahc 21:38, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Diagram

It would be helpful to add a schematic diagram showing how the spinning wheel mechanism spins the wool. I assume you take a bit clump of wool, start twisting it, then attach the free end to the spinner, etc. A picture is needed showing how the wool is spun and fed to a take-up spool (or however it actually works). 71.77.9.127 21:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)Craig Hyatt

I have to say I entirely agree with the above. While I think the photographs currently in the article are fascinating in and of themselves; detailed diagrams really would enhance the article no end, adding much needed clarity. Specifically diagrams of the varying spindle/bobbin designs. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. 20:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Is a picture like Image:Shortdrawspinning.JPG at all useful in this? Or Image:Wirtel01.png ? Loggie (talk) 15:45, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

first appearance in europe.

perhaps it would be beneficial to list its first appearance in Europe? it was sometime in the 13th century wasn't it... 69.153.19.41 20:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Done, using Encyclopedia Britannica. Moerou toukon 09:03, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

GA fail

I have quick-failed this article as per 2.1 under the How to review an article section at Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles. More inline citations are neccessary throughout this article for it to pass GA. Sorry. - Shudda ^talk 04:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

References need some help

The existing references need to be updated, particularly those that refer to other Encyclopedias. They don't really provide enough information that someone could go track them down. It would also be good to find some better sources in general. --Ahc (talk) 03:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Lots of missing info here

Like.. what the heck is spinning? What's actually going on here? I know it has something to do with wool turning into thread, and that you can twist it in your fingers to get a similar effect, but what does the wheel actually do? how do you feed the wool into it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 00:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Mechanical advantage. One turn of the big wheel transmitted through the drive belt turns the small wheel, which twists the fibers, several times. The spinning wheel increased the productivity of thread making by a factor of greater than 10. Before the spinning wheel women carried a tip like device which they hung from one hand, while holding the distaff in the other. They spun constantly, going to market, by the fire, or visiting with friends and family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phmoreno (talk • contribs) 22:50, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Corrections

"However, they did not have much financial success; nor did Thomas Highs, credited as the inventor of the spinning jenny." Who credits Thomas Highs as the inventor of the spinning jenny? I am removing this line as it is not cited. Sufficient scholarly consensus would need to exist that Thomas Highs invented the spinning jenny (note that this statement is contradicted in the preface of this article). Also, why would it be expected for Highs to receive financial success? He didn't own the patent, James Hargreaves did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Henry! (talk • contribs) 08:16, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Focus

While working on the article on Spinning mule, I have had to refer back here. I didn't find the information I needed on the technical differences between the action of the flax wheel and the Saxony wheel- but I did find a fanciful description of spinning history post Slater's Mill. Has anyone got the energy to restructure all this, check facts, and re-establish a focus? Must this go in my to-do list? --ClemRutter (talk) 10:29, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Pictures

If someone should be in urgent need of a lot of images of Indian spinning wheels, I can help. Just ask ;-)--Zenit (talk) 17:33, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

What's wrong with this picture?

Main text: "The earliest clear illustrations of the spinning wheel come from Baghdad (drawn in 1237), China (c. 1270) and Europe (c. 1280), and there is evidence that spinning wheels had already come into use in both China and the Islamic world during the eleventh century. According to Irfan Habib, the spinning wheel was introduced into India from Iran in the thirteenth century."

Picture text: "Detail of The Spinning Wheel, by Chinese artist Wang Juzheng, Northern Song Dynasty (960–1127)"

Some clarification could be needed... The picture seems to pretty clearly illustrate a spinning wheel, so if there is some academic controversy to invalidate such an interpretation it should be pointed out. As it stands it looks like the texts contradict one another.

80.216.64.241 (talk) 15:03, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Critique Project

This article is comprehensive and well written. There are a few things I would have like to have seen. It would have been nice to have more up close illustrations of the wheels and the process of spinning. While the history in the article is full and good, the concept of the spinning still seems unclear. The materials used could have been better described. The vague references to fibers was not enough. Also it is still not completely clear how the fibers became yarns though the functions of the wheels are explained. Perhaps a step by step explanation of a simple wheel would have been good.

I find it really interesting that the automatic wheel went out of use in China and I would have liked to have learned more about this, why this happened, and how it came to affect Chinese history. The technology transfer involved in this article helps to illustrate the evolution of this invention pretty well. It also helps to show how important and widespread the spinning wheel was in history. This article probably could have used more sources to validate the information. Otherwise it is packed with important information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.2.129.92 (talk) 04:32, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Critique Project

This article is comprehensive and well written. There are a few things I would have like to have seen. It would have been nice to have more up close illustrations of the wheels and the process of spinning. While the history in the article is full and good, the concept of the spinning still seems unclear. The materials used could have been better described. The vague references to fibers was not enough. Also it is still not completely clear how the fibers became yarns though the functions of the wheels are explained. Perhaps a step by step explanation of a simple wheel would have been good.

I find it really interesting that the automatic wheel went out of use in China and I would have liked to have learned more about this, why this happened, and how it came to affect Chinese history. The technology transfer involved in this article helps to illustrate the evolution of this invention pretty well. It also helps to show how important and widespread the spinning wheel was in history. This article probably could have used more sources to validate the information. Otherwise it is packed with important information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HIST406-10Swekstei (talk • contribs) 04:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Saxony wheel

When talking about the development of spinning mules and water frames we refer to two types of wheel- the Cottage wheel and the Saxony Wheel. This is a red link- but is a type double drive wheel with bobbin, flyer and heck. Could this term be incorporated and explained here perhaps. --ClemRutter (talk) 17:52, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Principle of operation needs text

While the links to the youtube videos may be informative, this article needs text and diagram based descriptions of how a spinning wheel works. Dlabtot (talk) 20:22, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

I second this observation. This article provides some historical information and some nice photographs and paintings, but does not say what does a spinning wheel do and how does it do it. Imerologul Valah (talk) 18:33, 18 August 2016 (UTC)