Re: [ATM] Trefoil caused by lateral supports

[Dale Eason <atmpob@yahoo.com>]

It was not just single center support.  It was single
center support at the front edge of the mirror.  That
fact that it was well in front of the edge center of
mass is the important part.  

I have also heard 70 deg is optimum.
Probably the Wilson book Mel talks about has already
specified the optimum.  But I don't have access to a
copy.

I think the reality of mirror with thinness ratio of
mine will be fine with 2 pegs at 90. Most scope
viewing is not done at the horizon and once scope is
raise the lateral support force is much 
less.

Dale Eason

--- Michael Lindner <mikell@optonline.net> wrote:

> Dale Eason wrote:
> > Here is my analysis of trefoil caused by 2 peg
> lateral
> > support.
> 
> Dale,
> 
> Interesting analysis, in that the single center
> support introduces 
> opposite error. That implies that there may be a
> position between 0 and 
> 90 degrees that minimizes error. I recall reading
> somewhere that 2 
> supports 50 degrees apart was optimal in supporting
> the bottom edge of a 
> mirror, but I'm not sure where I read it. Might be
> worth a test?
> 
> Clear skies,
> -- 
> Michael Lindner
> http://www.starastronomy.org ***
> http://home.att.net/~mikel
> http://www.atmsite.org *** http://www.atmlist.net
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/