Interchangeable Parts free essay sample

Whitney obtained a federal grant from the government in 1798 to build 10,000 muskets for the army in 2 years, which was a ridiculous proposal for the time period. He applied the idea of interchangeable parts to the production of firearms and created a machine that could make exact copies of individual components of guns. These could then be assembled faster and more efficiently, thus saving the government time and money. News of the newly invented machine by Eli Whitney spread across the country and by the war with France, the leading firearms manufactures in America were using the system to produce weapons at an alarming rate. By the 1950s, firearms manufactures around the globe had approved interchangeable parts thanks to Eli Whitney. Whitney proved to be an effective businessman and manager building equipment that enabled the production of large numbers of identical parts quickly and at a low cost. The 10,000 muskets that Whitney had promised in his original contract came in eight years late, but were of superior quality, and he produced 15,000 more the next four years. We will write a custom essay sample on Interchangeable Parts or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page By the time the War of 1812 broke out between the United States and Great Britain, leading weapons producers like Colt and Smith amp; Wesson had made the doctrine of interchangeable parts established practice in the American gun industry. The U. S. introduced the first large-scale assembly of weapons with its approval of the Model 1842 musket, and the new arms industry would produce hundreds of thousands of rifles for Civil War soldiers, all from interchangeable parts thanks to Eli Whitney. By the 1850s, arms makers around the world were following what had become known as the American System of Manufacture, which had helped the United States out-produce traditional industrial powers such as Great Britain and Germany. The impact of this new system spread quickly to other industries and other products, from sewing machines and typewriters to the first automobiles. As said by Jean Giraudoux, â€Å"â€Å"I tell you, sir, the only safeguard of order and discipline in the modern world is a standardized worker with interchangeable parts. That would solve the entire problem of management. This proves that many people believed that interchangeable parts were the way to go and people accepted it as the truth. However, though many people approved that interchangeable parts was an excellent contribution, there were always some people that rejected the idea of this, and wanted to stick to the old-fashioned way. An average locksmith would say that if a lock was made from interchang eable parts, then every lock would be the same, and crime rates would be higher. They tested this theory, and indeed, it was the same as what the locksmith said. But a modern actor said â€Å"Common law is the law for common man. Common law is the fundamentals of all laws. The model for common law is to accept the objectivity of actions. This refers to the unspoken rules agreed by the majority which dictates habits, truth and false, right and wrong. This forms the fundamentals of common law. Thus when you brought the bottle to your mouth with a swallowing action, the whole set of actions under normal circumstances would lead one to believed that the bottle is filled with water or other forms of liquid. Thus a normal person would then be driven to display a drinking action. Of course, a person would also would pick up an empty bottle and pretend to drink. This is because he is acting. He is an actor. The motive behind your actions is to create a perfectly logical scenario. In reality, your account is an unconceivable illusion which is a blatant attempt to overthrow the whole truth†. The same goes for this. The typical person who opens the lock is usually the one who owns it. The thief might create an unconceivable illusion to make us think that he/she was the owner and the people around him/her might actually get fooled by it, so this event is an unexpected one. But, the negative aspect of this invention was that massive job loss and unemployment rate. As machines took over the human hand, blacksmiths lost their jobs because a machine could do the same work as him in a faster and more efficient way than him. Ultimately, the idea of interchangeable was not a straightforward topic. This led to lots of controversy between whether this invention of interchangeable parts was a good invention or a bad one. The people that rejected this invention were usually blacksmiths or a type of person who believed in the old-fashioned way of constructing weapons, locks, etc. On the other hand, the people who approved of this invention were considered as more modern and industrialized people. All in all, this invention of interchangeable parts had both positive and negative aspects to it, and it only depended on the way how people from the time looked at this.