NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Bygrave range of angles?
From: Gary LaPook
Date: 2015 Apr 21, 08:31 +0000
From: Francis Upchurch <NoReply_Upchurch@fer3.com>
To: garylapook@pacbell.net
Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 10:51 PM
Subject: [NavList] Re: Bygrave range of angles?
From: Gary LaPook
Date: 2015 Apr 21, 08:31 +0000
There is no limit on the latitudes that can be handled with the Flat Bygrave. There is a special case when the declination is less than one degree on the latitude is zero then you must use one degree for the assumed latitude but it still computes an accurate Hc and Z. From my website:
===================================================================================
When declination is less than one degree you can't begin the computation the normal way to find "W" because you have to start the process with declination on the cotangent scale and this scale doesn't extend below 1º. So in this case you just skip the computation of "W" and simply set "W" equal to declination. Using this method you arrive at an azimuth that is not exact but is a close approximation and in the worst case I have found the azimuth is still within 0.9º of the true azimuth but most are much closer. If the declination is less than one degree and the latitude is also less than one degree, follow this procedure and also assume a latitude equal to one degree. After you have computed the Az you then follow the same procedure discussed above for azimuths exceeding 85º by interchanging the latitude and declination and then computing Hc which will produce an exact value of Hc.
===========================================================================================
.
See the complete explanation on my websitegl
From: Francis Upchurch <NoReply_Upchurch@fer3.com>
To: garylapook@pacbell.net
Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 10:51 PM
Subject: [NavList] Re: Bygrave range of angles?
Hanno,
I don't know about the flat Bygrave, but with my cylindrical version (about the same size nearly as the original), I have done hundreds of reductions and rarely out more than 1-2' compared to calculator. the lat range seems to cover +/-nearly 90° as far as I can tell and for some reason i do not understand, why when you end up on the "compressed" side of the scales and are interpolating between fairly small scale marks, the accuracy stays the same. Maybe Gary knows why? (Interestingly, I have not found this with the Fuller, which is definitely more accurate in the "expanded" range of the scales. I get 4-7 places with the big Fuller depending on where you are in the scales)
Anyway, good luck. I'm sticking with cylindrical rules. I find them easier to make and use accurately using pre-manufactured, precision tubes, felt friction brakes, no pivot holes to drill etc. But each to their own I guess.
Best wof luck
Francis
