@Mikerb I used to work for Renolds in the 1970's. At that time it claimed to be the largest manufacturer of chain in the world. It may have been true, who knew what the Chinese were up to in those days?
They had a thing about belt drives, ie "not wanted on voyage". There were still people in the business who were family members of the original Hans Renold and they (allegedly) insisted that all belt drives be replaced with chain drives. Full stop, no argument! To stamp out the billions of chain links they had a lot of very large presses. All had a large motor on the top, connected by a belt drive to the mechanism that powered the press's reciprocating motion. All these belt drives had been replaced with a chain drive. Because of the confined space and the size of the pullies, a multi-strand chain (x4 if I remember correctly) was required. The location on top of the press was not a good environment for a chain drive, neither for cleanliness, nor for maintenance access. Consequently, the chain drives failed frequently, but on an irregular basis. Something had to be done! I was a mechanical engineering undergraduate on assignment to the drawing office for 8 weeks. I got the job of designing, and having made, a chain case for the drive. This had to be capable of being fitted and removed by no more than two men. It had to be sealed against oil leaks and also contain a quantity of oil to cool and lubricate the chain drive. I got it done and it worked, but it was the most stupid thing to do! A belt drive was the perfect solution and we should have kept them. But I didn't get a vote.
PS: It was still in place two years later when I went back for a visit after graduating.
