Log in
Register
Menu
Log in
Register
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Satellite TV receivers & systems support forums
DISH SETUP: Single sat, Multi-Sat & Motorised
My Channel Master 1.8 project.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="a33" data-source="post: 1124971" data-attributes="member: 332642"><p>I noticed that!</p><p>In fact, I quoted you on it, in post #171.</p><p>As not many people refer to the triangle, when talking about rotation. But the triangle is indeed the basis! <img src="https://www.satellites.co.uk/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/smile.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It was not just splitting hairs, it was actually wrong from him. Because the triangle that you refered to, was about the fixing points, not about the rose joint, or however that is called. So you were actually very right.</p><p></p><p>Same happens where he writes about "... another 5 or so degrees of <strong>error</strong> within your calculation", seemingly referring to my calculations.</p><p>There is no error in my calculation. It is an error to call something an error when it is in fact no error at all.</p><p></p><p>The fact that after the calculation, you have to take some <em>other</em> factors into account for some relevant practical situation, does not mean that there is an error in the calculation.</p><p></p><p>I'm afraid I don't think, that he is able to understand this, alas ....</p><p></p><p>And by the way, the exact equation to calculate the actuator length out of a USALS angle can be found easily here, on this forum.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Greetz,</p><p>A33</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="a33, post: 1124971, member: 332642"] I noticed that! In fact, I quoted you on it, in post #171. As not many people refer to the triangle, when talking about rotation. But the triangle is indeed the basis! :) It was not just splitting hairs, it was actually wrong from him. Because the triangle that you refered to, was about the fixing points, not about the rose joint, or however that is called. So you were actually very right. Same happens where he writes about "... another 5 or so degrees of [B]error[/B] within your calculation", seemingly referring to my calculations. There is no error in my calculation. It is an error to call something an error when it is in fact no error at all. The fact that after the calculation, you have to take some [I]other[/I] factors into account for some relevant practical situation, does not mean that there is an error in the calculation. I'm afraid I don't think, that he is able to understand this, alas .... And by the way, the exact equation to calculate the actuator length out of a USALS angle can be found easily here, on this forum. Greetz, A33 [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Satellite TV receivers & systems support forums
DISH SETUP: Single sat, Multi-Sat & Motorised
My Channel Master 1.8 project.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top