June, 1954]
JAMES
N.
WARNER
AND
O.
P.
AGARWALA
117
of this carrier frame are connected by strap iron braces to both the portions of the
bicycle frame which extend backward from the housing for the guiding fork spindle
(Plate V, Fig. 7). A spring type attachment for fixing the front of this carrier rack to
the bicycle frame, was tried on the assumption that a little flexibility here would permit
better distribution of the load. This did not prove satisfactory, however, so a rigid
attachment was finally used.
When the unit was used on the milk routes the spokes in the rear cycle wheel
repeatedly broke, apparently because of the angle of the force of the load and the
rider when turning corners or when on uneven ground. Some variations in this
angle were tried, but no suitable adjustment was found. Although heavy-duty
spokes were used in this wheel for a while, this did not prevent the need of repeated
repair of this wheel. Because the rear cycle wheel hub contains the free wheel
mechanism, it was not possible to modify the wheel greatly to increase its length
otherwise. This side-car unit was eventually discarded in preference to the other
units described here; although another design for a side-car unit is now under study.
THE CYCLE RICKSHAW UNIT
In 1948 and 1949 two cycles were constructed on the principle of common
cycle rickshaw. This design contains three wheels of which two are behind, one in
front of the rider; above and between them is the carrier rack. This cycle is pro-
pelled by the ordinary pedal mechanism with the chain driving a sprocket fixed to
the rear axel immediately behind the pedal sprocket, in a manner similar to that
of the ordinary cycle rickshaw. The carrier rack is also constructed in a similar
manner; it is suspended on the axel by two leaf-type springs, one at other side
supporting the side of the carrier rack at the ends of the rear axel immediately inside
the wheels. At the front of the carrier rack it is attached to the bicycle frame by a
pin and hinge unit. The motive power is transferred through the chain and rear
axel sprocket to move one of the rear wheel, the other being fixed over the axel.
The reason for this is simply that there has not yet been made available differential
mechanism for turning both this rear wheels when the cycle is turning a corner at
which time one wheel travels faster than the other.
The basic differences between these two rickshaw units were simply that one had
a larger carrier to accommodate a larger load; this larger carrier was equipped
with special heavy duty leaf-type springs to support the heavier load placed on it.
Both units of the rickshaw type are working very satisfactorily indeed.
The rickshaw type delivery units now in use in the Institute dairy are serving
out purpose very satisfactorily. They handle large loads and effect considerable
economy as compared to the imported type of cycle, or the conventional standard
bicycle which is not designed for heavy loads.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
A grant from the Indian Council of Agricultural Research helped to make this
study possible. Mr. S. R. Biswas, Dairy Manager, Allahabad Agricultural Institute,
gave his assistance throughout this study by using these Milk Delivery Cycle Units
on regular milk routes of the Institute Dairy and by suggesting many of the features
of the mechanisms described here. The contributions from these sources are greatly
acknowledged.