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

Re: [ATM] Blank ratios for different materials.

To: <atm@atmlist.net>
Subject: Re: [ATM] Blank ratios for different materials.
From: "Mel Bartels" <mbartels@bbastrodesigns.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:31:06 -0700
Delivered-to: atm_arc@astro.umsystem.edu
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <000301c7b3ad$ee347d80$6400a8c0@gct20>
List-archive: <http://www.atmlist.net/pipermail/atm>
List-help: <mailto:atm-request@atmlist.net?subject=help>
List-id: The Amateur Telescope Makers List <atm.atmlist.net>
List-post: <mailto:atm@atmlist.net>
List-subscribe: <http://www.atmlist.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/atm>, <mailto:atm-request@atmlist.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://www.atmlist.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/atm>, <mailto:atm-request@atmlist.net?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: atm-bounces@atmlist.net
Thread-index: AceyxKx033NjkspXRxmq16dkuip4KwA6MUYgAAWZ3yA=

> Why is the 9 point worst than the 6 point?

I'll jump in on this one because it's a favorite of mine.  The ideal support
is a ring such that any sagging of the mirror sags the center and edge
equally.  By doing so, you have another parabola that simply needs a touch
of refocusing.  The 6 point support more accurately portrays the ring
support.  The 9 point support tries to keep center and edge from sagging and
does not do as well.

Mel Bartels


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

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ATM] Blank ratios for different materials.
  - From: Dominic-Luc Webb <dlwebb@canit.se>

References:
- Re: [ATM] Blank ratios for different materials.
  - From: "Donald Good" <donald.good@comcast.net>

Prev by Author: Re: [ATM] ITV Telescope meeting Awards
Next by Author: Re: [ATM] Blank ratios for different materials.
Previous by thread: Re: [ATM] Blank ratios for different materials.
Next by thread: Re: [ATM] Blank ratios for different materials.
Index(es):
- Author
- Thread