Going by figures given in the link below, the Coffer INNER dimensions are:
6.49 x 2.22 x 2.86 = 41.206308 cu ft
Of course, I had to divide that by 2:
41.206308/2 = 20.603154
I found that more than intriguing, then my dimension search brought me to the second link below, a discussion on the condition of the box. That coffer has - seemingly - seen serious abuse.
Third link* [coming]has coffer+contents = counterweight, but is it credible? Where's the drain hole?
How much weight could a water-filled coffer counterbalance?
How does it perform on a 26 degree slope for given floor materials.
What is the empty weight?
Density of water is around 1000Kg/m3 (Temperature dependent, 997Kg/m3 commonly quoted)
Conversions required....
41.206308 cu ft = 1.16683270226m3
Therefore: @ maximum water density (1000Kg/m3), = 1,166.83270226Kg
Granite on the other hand weighs some 2.97 tons/m3, that sounds more useful for hauling 2.5 ton blocks - partly fill the coffer with granite bricks, adjust with added water.
'Mean' Empty weight of coffer? (original vs current size)
Stay tuned - or not.
Engineering toolbox
Coffer condition
*The coffer = counterweight theory comes from the [kindle] book 'The Great Pyramid - a constructional perspective' which I'm reading on Amazon for 'free'. [£9 a month for unlimited kindle books.]
Synopsis: All 26 degree passages are for counterweights, all chambers/shafts are rope management devices. Evidence offered in photographs of 'wear marks'/damage to specific locations - including the smooth troughs in beams above the KC. (I find this 'Highly compelling'. :) ) Considers new 'void' as supporting this theory. The antechamber portcullis was a triple rope brake to control speed of counterweight - in this theory.
Interesting, but requires further reading. :)
Like this precise figure for the Royal Cubit derived from the Sun: (20.61811 inches)
Sacred Geometry
With multiple [ancient] cubit measuring rods varying from 20.61 to 20.83in, how does one conclude anything about the precision of the structure - as intended? Side length would range from 9068.4 to 9165.2 inches, that's a 96.8 inch difference - over 8 feet. So what was the method used to derive Petries' Cubit - assume the architect intended 440 and divide his measurement of the side length by that? Are there any modern laser measurements of the 'socket' distances apart?
It's easy nowadays to model the structure in 3D, but that RC length is critical in deriving any meaningful analysis of what was intended against what's actually measured - its' Precision. [Oops, edited cock-up.]
6.49 x 2.22 x 2.86 = 41.206308 cu ft
Of course, I had to divide that by 2:
41.206308/2 = 20.603154
I found that more than intriguing, then my dimension search brought me to the second link below, a discussion on the condition of the box. That coffer has - seemingly - seen serious abuse.
Third link* [coming]has coffer+contents = counterweight, but is it credible? Where's the drain hole?
How much weight could a water-filled coffer counterbalance?
How does it perform on a 26 degree slope for given floor materials.
What is the empty weight?
Density of water is around 1000Kg/m3 (Temperature dependent, 997Kg/m3 commonly quoted)
Conversions required....
41.206308 cu ft = 1.16683270226m3
Therefore: @ maximum water density (1000Kg/m3), = 1,166.83270226Kg
Granite on the other hand weighs some 2.97 tons/m3, that sounds more useful for hauling 2.5 ton blocks - partly fill the coffer with granite bricks, adjust with added water.
'Mean' Empty weight of coffer? (original vs current size)
Stay tuned - or not.
Engineering toolbox
Coffer condition
*The coffer = counterweight theory comes from the [kindle] book 'The Great Pyramid - a constructional perspective' which I'm reading on Amazon for 'free'. [£9 a month for unlimited kindle books.]
Synopsis: All 26 degree passages are for counterweights, all chambers/shafts are rope management devices. Evidence offered in photographs of 'wear marks'/damage to specific locations - including the smooth troughs in beams above the KC. (I find this 'Highly compelling'. :) ) Considers new 'void' as supporting this theory. The antechamber portcullis was a triple rope brake to control speed of counterweight - in this theory.
Interesting, but requires further reading. :)
Like this precise figure for the Royal Cubit derived from the Sun: (20.61811 inches)
Sacred Geometry
With multiple [ancient] cubit measuring rods varying from 20.61 to 20.83in, how does one conclude anything about the precision of the structure - as intended? Side length would range from 9068.4 to 9165.2 inches, that's a 96.8 inch difference - over 8 feet. So what was the method used to derive Petries' Cubit - assume the architect intended 440 and divide his measurement of the side length by that? Are there any modern laser measurements of the 'socket' distances apart?
It's easy nowadays to model the structure in 3D, but that RC length is critical in deriving any meaningful analysis of what was intended against what's actually measured - its' Precision. [Oops, edited cock-up.]