Re: [ATM] Malacara, Flats etc... topic was "They come through for me, again"

["Chris Dalla Piazza" <dalchri@hotmail.com>]

To avoid the need for a flat, I measure the difference between my tool and
mirror using my spherometer and divide by 2.

I've been figuring that any inaccuracy due to imperfect contact such as an
gap in the center or an gap at the edge would be small enough to ignore.

I'm interested to know, how does that sound to everyone?

-----Original Message-----
From: atm-bounces@atmlist.net [mailto:atm-bounces@atmlist.net] On Behalf Of
Francis J. O'Reilly
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:11 AM
To: Ken Hunter; Gregg Swanson; atm@atmlist.net
Cc: deena@bestweb.net
Subject: Re: [ATM] Malacara, Flats etc... topic was "They come through for
me,again"

Ken,

Thank you for your thoughts. I have received considerable correspondence
from various members of the list advising me that I don't need three blanks
to make a flat. Indeed, one friend has basically advised me that using three
blanks to make a flat is the old way to do it and tedious. 

I am now reconsidering the use of three blanks, but I still like the idea of
having several flats for different purposes. I want one for a reference for
a spherometer, although I am told that a flat is not necessary for that
purpose, just a piece of float glass will do. I also want one for an
autocollimator, which does require a flat. 

Regards,

Francis J. O'Reilly
_______________________________________________
ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/

_______________________________________________
ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/