Curing the Backlash in Flourins Mills

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


We have received a letter from a corres- pondent in Dundee, N. Y., in reference to the article on the above subject, which appeared in our issue of the 13th of last month (page 179). In that article it was stated that the fly-wheel of a grist mill ought to be made " sufficiently large and heavy, so that its momentum shall exceed that of all the stones combined," and if so made, backlash would be prevented. Our present correspondent states that ho has built twenty steam flouring mills within the last twelve years, and in no one instance has he witnessed a steady motion produced from a single engine where the periphery of the fly-wheel did not exceed in momentum that of the stones, by one-fifth; and he is now building mills with fly-wheels, the momentum of which exceeds that of the stones in the ratio of seven to four, and ho finds that this is not too much to make the motion regular. He agrees with our former correspondent that short-stroke, quick-running steam engines are the best for grinding grain ; and those which he now puts up, make from 140 to 150 revolutions per minute, and they do much better than slow-running engines.

Scientific American Magazine Vol 13 Issue 28This article was published with the title “Curing the Backlash in Flourins Mills” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 13 No. 28 (), p. 224
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican03201858-224b

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe