[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: ATM mirror grinding mechanics ...?



The answer is in "localized" pressure at the beginning of grinding.
 
Gravity is not the answer, you can mount the tool on the ceiling
(above your head) and grind the center of the mirror with the edge
of the tool using localized pressure. I haven't tried this as it's very
awkward to do... kinda like overhead welding.
 
Ken Hunter
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 8:05 PM
Subject: ATM mirror grinding mechanics ...?

This may be a second copy.  If so apologies.
 
Hello everyone,
 
I have what I think should be a simple question but I can't find a direct answer in any of the atm books that I have.  Why does the mirror become concave when it is ground on top of the tool, and the tool convex?  The books note that the center of the mirror gets more grinding than the edges, because it is always on the tool.  However, the same is true of the center of the tool.  It is always on the mirror.  So, both centers should grind out faster, leading to TWO concave surfaces. But of course then neither would be in contact, and grinding would move to the edges until the centers are in contact again, etc. In equilibrium, the result would seem to result in continued flat surfaces for both the tool and the mirror. 
 
So there must be another factor.  Two possibilities that come to mind are rotation and gravity.  Clearly rotation of the tool and mirror are crucial to producing a sphere, but since both mirror and tool are rotated after every few manual strokes, the effect appears to be symmetric.  So, it seems unlikely to me that the rotation itself is what makes the mirror concave and the tool convex.  On the other hand, gravitational effects are asymmetric.  When the tool is fixed, it is essentially part of the mass of the earth.  The mirror on top, on the other hand, has tiny mass in comparison.  The result I think is that the grinding force is largest on the portion of the mirror at the edge of the tool when the mirror is maximally extended over the tool.  The effect is a grinding away of the outer areas of the tool and scooping out of a region of the mirror between the center and the edge.  Note that, when the mirror is fully extended, the force on the tool is least at the other edge of the mirror (the on the tool).   So, the gravitational effect is not symmetric for the mirror and tool. In other words, the action of the earth's greater gravity is to make the mirror concave and the tool convex, I think.
 
If there were no rotation on either disk or of the line of the stroke motion, it seems the result would be a mirror in the shape of a concave cylinder, and a tool in the shape of a convex cylinder. It rotation is taking place, the mirror becomes a concave sphere.
 
This explanation predicts, for example, that if a robot is standing fixed to the earth, rubbing two identical disks together vertically by moving both of its hands back and forth along a line (i.e., controlling for differential mass/gravity effects), they would remain flat indefinitely...  
 
I would really like to understand this but the books that I've looked at don't really speak to it.  If I am wrong about this, could someone please explain why, not in terms of a metaphor please, but in terms of the physics principles that actually do lead to a concave mirror and a convex tool.
 
Thank much!
 
Tim Rickard