Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.

NavList:

A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding

Compose Your Message

Message:αβγ
Message:abc
Add Images & Files
    Name or NavList Code:
    Email:
       
    Reply
    Re: Finding stars in daylight
    From: Fred Hebard
    Date: 2019 Jul 17, 20:55 -0400
    Darn if Laplace hasn’t taken the fun out of working this out.  Thank you very much Paul.  Now to make some graphs, or pictures of the data such as my first attempt.  It will be at least a day before I get a chance.  It was good to be reminded of George Huxtable by being referred to by name in the third person.

    Fred

    Fred Hebard



    On Jul 15, 2019, at 12:01, Paul Hirose <NoReply_Hirose@fer3.com> wrote:


    On 2019-07-12 9:46, Fred Hebard wrote:
    >
    > But if the azimuth is 0 in the direction of tilt, then when rotated to an azimuth of 90 degrees and raised to 90 degrees altitude, the azimuth will be off by the amount of tilt.  Those were, more or less, the conditions for me.  I could find Venus when it was low, altitude 10-20 degrees, pointing near the direction of tilt, but raising the telescope to 45 and rotating 90 degrees in azimuth made it hard to find.
    
    That sounds like a problem similar to the Laplace correction of the
    surveyor. It accounts for the fact that the direction of gravity is not
    perpendicular to the ellipsoid (the mathematically perfect surface that
    is the basis for geodetic coordinates). This "deflection of the
    vertical" is typically a few arc seconds, and is caused by the irregular
    mass distribution in the Earth.
    
    In Fred's case the tilt of the telescope mount corresponds to deflection
    of the vertical. Geometrically, the problem is the same as the Laplace
    correction.
    
    For a simple example, suppose you need to set a stake in the ground
    precisely north from a theodolite. Its scope has been pointed carefully
    to Polaris, the azimuth axis locked in position, and the azimuth circle
    zeroed. (We'll pretend Polaris coincides exactly with north.) However,
    the instrument is inclined a little to the east. Therefore, the line of
    sight diverges to the left as you tilt down, so your assistant will
    drive the stake west of the correct point.
    
    The Laplace correction can be computed if the amount of dislevelment is
    known. The math in this document is quite an eyeful, but we can skip the
    derivation and accept equation 10 as correct:
    
    http://www.mygeodesy.id.au/documents/Laplace.pdf
    
    In surveying the deflection of the vertical is split into two
    perpendicular components ξ (xi) and η (eta). These angles are positive
    if the instrument is tilted respectively to the north and east of the
    true vertical.
    
    Variables αA and αG are respectively the azimuth indicated on the tilted
    instrument, and the true azimuth.
    
    The quantity φA is the altitude of the azimuth reference that you use to
    align the instrument to north.
    
    The quantity zA is the zenith distance (90 - altitude) of the target body.
    
    The result of equation 10 is δα, which you subtract from the instrument
    indication to obtain true azimuth.
    
    Let's try equation 10 on my example of setting a stake true north of the
    instrument. Suppose latitude is 40°, hence Polaris altitude (φA) is
    likewise 40°. Assume the instrument is tilted one degree east, hence ξ =
    0 and η = 1° = .0175 radian. Since the stake is on the horizon, its
    zenith distance zA is 90. Plug those values into the equation:
    
    δα = .0175 * tan 40 + (0 * sin 0 - .0175 * cos 0) * cot 90
    
    Since cot 90 = tan 0 = 0, the second term is zero, so the equation
    simplifies to
    
    δα = .0175 * tan 40
    
    δα = .0146 radian = .84°
    
    Thus, the instrument says 0 (aka 360) when pointed at the stake, but
    with the Laplace correction, true azimuth is 360 - .84 = 359.16.
    
    We can reverse the problem and use the stake as the known azimuth. Sight
    the stake and set the azimuth circle to read 359.16°. Of course the
    theodolite reading doesn't change when you aim up at Polaris, but it
    must be corrected for an instrument tilt of 1° to the east.
    
    The azimuth reference is at altitude 0, so φA = 0. As before, the tilt
    components are ξ = 0 and η = 1° = .0175 radian. Polaris azimuth per the
    instrument (αA) is 359.16, and its zenith distance zA is 50°. Plug those
    values into equation 10:
    
    δα = .0175 * tan 0 + (0 * sin 359.16 - .0175 * cos 359.16) * cot 50°
    
    δα = -.0175 * cos 359.16 * cot 50°
    
    δα = -.0146 radian = -.84°
    
    Subtract that from the instrument reading to obtain corrected Polaris
    azimuth: 359.16 - (-.84°) = 0.00.
    
    There's also a tilt correction for the zenith distance in that same
    article, equation 12.
    


       
    Reply
    Browse Files

    Drop Files

    NavList

    What is NavList?

    Get a NavList ID Code

    Name:
    (please, no nicknames or handles)
    Email:
    Do you want to receive all group messages by email?
    Yes No

    A NavList ID Code guarantees your identity in NavList posts and allows faster posting of messages.

    Retrieve a NavList ID Code

    Enter the email address associated with your NavList messages. Your NavList code will be emailed to you immediately.
    Email:

    Email Settings

    NavList ID Code:

    Custom Index

    Subject:
    Author:
    Start date: (yyyymm dd)
    End date: (yyyymm dd)

    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site