Talk:Archimedes' screw

message: The drawing on this page is not correct. It suggests that the screw is completely filled with water. The water is, however, transported in individual packages. Ellywa 04:10, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I do not understand why someone recently removed the mathematics behind the screw section from this article. Can someone suggest why or reinstate it as to me it is invaluable information that is definitely relevant to the article. 86.27.12.206 (talk) 12:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mathematics behind the screw 

message: Can anyone produce a section on power generation using Archimedes'(s) Screw by putting it into reverse.  I mention this because proposed changes to the tidal Teesside White Water Course (an artificial whitewater course fed by the adjacent Tees Barrage) involve the addition of three(?) Archimedes's Screws to lift the water back up to the start of the 'U' shaped course when they want to use the course but the tide is at high water, and to generate electric power at low tide when the course is not in use, in the hope of becoming energy neutral at worst.  This is going to be an interesting engineering solution when it happens.  Has anything along these lines been created elsewhere?  What would be the efficiency of generating electric power in this way compared to alternative methods?
--Stuffed cat (talk) 16:32, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Power generation using Archimedes's Screw 

message: I don't know who decides what articles rate on the importance scale, but I've seen this in actual encyclopedias, so this should be rated "top" as opposed to not rated at all  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.153.132.151 (talk) 03:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Importance scale 

message: I'm no latin/greek scholar but surely it would be piscalator, wouldn't it?
Stuffed cat (talk) 01:40, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pescalator 

message: Some interesting data to fuel usage arguments: .  Dicklyon (talk) 03:47, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  on the name in books, over time, via Google n-gram viewer 

message: There are two types of Archimedes screws. One is a screw within a cylinder. The other is a tube, wrapped in a helix, around a shaft. This article is entirely about the one and neglects the other entirely.--ghh 12:44, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Important information is missing from this article 

message: Reference "PVC archimedean screw pump, how to build a functioning Archimedes screw pump from modern materials" is a site that sells plans for constructing the screw (among other things). I don't think it backs up anything in the text nor gives additional information, but represents a commercial link in which only people who pay can obtain information regarding the article in question, which I think goes against the spirit of Wikipedia. I think it should be removed.
:You're right, I've removed it Richerman   (talk) 00:31, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commercial references 

message: I followed a link from another article to Archimedes' screw. The other article was talking about an experimental continuous-flow heart that uses Archimedes' screw to pump blood through the body. I'm guessing the screw also moves other fluids, too. I don't believe the screw is limited to just water. I think the introduction would benefit from a more general description that is less focused on water in particular.
Here's the first sentence of the intro:
The water screw, popularly known as the Archimedes' screw and also known as the screw pump, Archimedean screw, or Egyptian screw,[1] is a machine used for transferring water from a low-lying body of water into irrigation ditches.
Jeffrey Walton  (talk) 16:21, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is intro too focused on water? 

message: According to ‘The Oxford Guide to Pronunciation’, as well as several websites I've checked, the apostrophe comes before the s in singulars and after the s in plurals. The Oxford Guide goes further and states that the apostrophe should follow the s exclusively in the case of plurals. However, for words ending in s this appears to be a contentious and confusing issue. Some advise that you should be guided by pronunciation, in which case the title is correct, but most sick to the plurals rule, in which case it should be ‘Archimedes's screw’. Whether ‘Archimedes's’ is pronounced ‘Archimedes’ or ‘Archimedeses’ is debatable, but I would argue for the former: we don't pronounce the missing letters in contractions. As for the apostrophe, I've always stuck with the plurals only rule, so I would go with ‘Archimedes's screw’. 2.99.27.217 (talk) 20:57, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar 

message: Under the heading "design" the second paragraph makes the following claim: "...the screw volume must not be completely filled with water; there must be a fair amount of air 'scooped up' together with each scoop of water. For this reason, the pump ceases to function if the bottom of the pipe is completely submerged, so that no air can be sucked in. This is because the individual pockets of water need to be separated from each other by pockets of air, or else there would be no difference between an Archimedean screw and a (curled up) pipe, which would let the water back-flow from the top basin to the bottom basin, just like a siphon."
I believe this is incorrect in theory, although it may be mostly true in practice. There is a significant difference "...between an Archimedean screw and a (curled up) pipe..." since the former is rotating and that rotation continuously "scoops" the fluid into the "curled-up pipe", forcing it upward. While water will tend to flow back down, this can be overcome if the augur is turning at a sufficient speed, since like all fluids, water has inertia which can be exploited. Here is an example: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/rutaa1TCXxg . Perhaps the original assertion should be somewhat modified to reflect this. Bricology (talk) 20:36, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Somewhat incorrect claim about air being required 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: no consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) asilvering (talk) 21:19, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Archimedes' screw →  – 1) "Archimedes' screw" is incorrect per MOS:POSS. 2) Most of the cited sources use "Archimedes screw", some use "Archimedean screw", very few use "Archimedes' screw." 3) Even if we ignore the incorrect possessive, it's awkward; we don't talk about "Diesel's engine". GA-RT-22 (talk) 06:22, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

text: I don't have very strong feelings about this article's title or the other one, but "Archimedes screw" just looks wrong, and I've rarely—if ever—heard of an "Archimedean screw".  If a significant number of people want to treat it as a possessive—which is perfectly logical, since many more people have heard of Archimedes than of his screw—unlike the example provided, Diesel, for which the reverse is true, the name "Diesel" having been transformed into an adjective referring to a type of fuel, not the inventor of the engine—then I don't see anything to be gained by telling them that they're wrong, and they have to do it some other way.  That's as pedantic as insisting that they must use an apostrophe would be, or that "Diesel" shouldn't be capitalized anymore, as in general use it's no longer associated with a person or brand.  P Aculeius (talk) 13:19, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Physics has been notified of this discussion. – robertsky (talk) 15:52, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Engineering has been notified of this discussion. – robertsky (talk) 15:52, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Comment. Classical and classicising names conventionally take single apostrophe without suffix . See eg quote from Oxford guide to style on my user page. Ifly6 (talk) 15:53, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 17 February 2024 

message: Sorry it does not meet the definition of a PDP since if it stops rotating it drains. Greglocock (talk) 23:25, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Positive displacement pump claim