This is a question about the age of a particular windmill, but it has a relevance to land surveying in that the real question is whether this windmill could be the same one that existed in 1917. I haven't begun researching this one, so this isn't the history of technology equivalent of a canned hunt.
I'm not certain when wooden windmill towers were generally replaced by galvanized steel. This particular tower is braced with tension wires rather than steel angle sections, which may be a clue as to its age if it is an Aeromotor tower. I checked the concrete encasement around the wellhead, but didn't see a date scratched into it. The tower and mill are the main clues as to age at this point.
The mill is an Aeromotor model sold by the Charles Schreiner Co. of Kerrville, TX
Uh, make that "Aermotor".
BTW here's a link to
the Handbook of Texas entry for Charles Schreiner.
Here's one link to the history of the Aermotor Company.
The Aeromotor flyer near the bottom of this page suggests that Aeromotor didn't really get going until about 1890. It certainly seems possible that they supplied this one prior to 1917.
> The Aeromotor flyer near the bottom of this page suggests that Aeromotor didn't really get going until about 1890. It certainly seems possible that they supplied this one prior to 1917.
It looks as if one clue to the age of the mill is the design of the directional vane. With a straight trailing edge, it differs from the early Aermotor vane designs in the brochure you linked.
It's also possible that the tower isn't an Aermotor design, but was made by someone else.
Probably self-oiling mill
It seems safe to say that the mill is one of the self-oiling designs that Aermotor made after 1915. Prior to then, maintenance of the mill required oiling it once a week instead of at most a couple of times a year as the self-oiling designs only required.
In this page all of the photo captions list the tower separately from the actual mill, and some include the name of the tower supplier. I can't see it in the photos but the Aermotor website talks about an enclosed gearcase starting in 1915 - might be another clue.
I believe you may be suggesting that the windmill is newer than the tower on which it rests. That is very possible. A search of windmill tower design is recommended over a search of Aermotor styles. At first glance, the total unit looks very similar to the one setting about 150 feet from my chair that was erected in the late 1980's. The primary difference being the cable crossbracing.
Hmm, could be mid 1960's
That Chas. Schreiner Co. mill sure looks like another example described as a 1964 Aermotor product, namely, this one:
Hmm, could be mid 1960's
Well someone is gonna have to climb up to read the model number.....
You mentioned the concrete around the well head.....How old does that look?
Do you have known samples for date comparisons?
You can still read most of the sign on the vane.... another clue to age....
This looks like a book idea....."How old stuff is... a field guide to data flotsom-jetsom from windmills to cast iron catch basins"
Hmm, could be mid 1960's
> You mentioned the concrete around the well head.....How old does that look?
Cast-in-place concrete is very difficult to date without other clues. In this case, it was just a block of concrete poured around the well casing. Without a date inscribed, it would be difficult to say when had been poured.
kent, this is an urban skill
I spend a lot of time looking at concrete, it comes with the territory.... urban surveying..... Modern concrete uses a lot more sand..... Check it out look at concrete in the area where you know how old things are.... like those photo's of the old courthouses I have seen you post on facebook..... surely there is concrete around those builidngs...do the same for modern buildings compare/contrast....
just a thought...
kent, this is an urban skill
> I spend a lot of time looking at concrete, it comes with the territory....
Well, when you get in the middle of a ranch, your results will vary. :> There was at least one portland cement plant in San Antonio from probably the late 19th century onward. So the cement would have been available. As to the aggreagate used, river sand would probably also have been widely available since that was what was used in mortar from probably the late 19th century forward.
No, about all you can say from looking at concrete is that the low-quality, air-entrained mixes are probably relatively modern. For good quality concrete that has been formed with some level of craft, that covers a wide period of time.
> I believe you may be suggesting that the windmill is newer than the tower on which it rests.
Yes, I don't know of any reason why an Aermotor mill couldn't have been installed on a tower made by some other manufacturer.
kent, this is an urban skill
You have to train you eye.... It is pretty tough if you at looking at a single sample in the middle of nowhere, but if I am in a 1911 subdivision with lead and tacks set in the top of curb, I have a frame of reference and it is ease to tell the modern from the ancient..... It is nice when they stamp the date in the flatwork.....there is a difference from 1890 to 1924....from 1970....and you can tell the difference easily when you have context....but near impossible as in you case...
It seems that the the windmill could have been replaced in parts and pieces over time.... I will guess 1957....
kent, this is an urban skill
> You have to train you eye
Oh, I'm fairly familiar with what urban sidewalks look like, at least in Austin I am. The problem you run into is that in the middle of several thousand acres the guys who poured the concrete weren't most likely on leave from building urban sidewalks. When I get a chance, I'll post some photos of some examples of ranch concrete and you can tell me how old it looks to you.
kent, this is an urban skill
I look forward to that....but I totally agree that local and other variables like how mixed the crete could cause it to be near imposible to date the crete....
I think you count the number of bullet holes in the tail and then multiply by five to get the age. This one looks pretty new.
> I think you count the number of bullet holes in the tail and then multiply by five to get the age. This one looks pretty new.
lol....
Well yeah....but how many bullet holes did it take until the rancher replaced the tails?
In the middle of a Ranch, no bullet holes. Anyone that would shoot holes of something so expensive and important would not be on the ranch long, would not matter if the guilty was 3 or 103. Bullet holes in useful things is a fairly modern phenomena engaged in by those who never learned to respect others and their property, usually they have a town or city background.
jud
