To answer your question Jim, The Kitt Peak Gnomon is 30 meters tall. The face area is vast, but not as vast as it could have been had we been allowed to expand the face area. But you can "Chop off" the face boundaries just about anywhere you like to accommodate the available size and shape of the available area. We were only allowed to use the cement area just below the scope/dial, but we managed to include time points from sunrise to sunset anyway.
I'm not sure what you mean by this question: >The casual user would also have to be instructed to > disregard the errant linear portion of the shadow as well, wouldn't he? What is "the errant linear portion of the shadow? Do you mean those parts of the shadow that are not cast by the active style? (remember this dial has multiple styles. It also casts an unnecessary shadow from its vertical tower). If that's what you mean, then yes, I suppose the user should have reading instructions, but it's pretty obvious when you're on site. ----- Original Message ----- From: "J.Tallman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "John Carmichael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Sundial List" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 1:16 PM Subject: Re: Turtle Bay Sundial Bridge opens > John, how does this structure compare in height/scale to the Kitt Peak > structure? > > The area required to accomodate the shadow of a nodus that high for a good > portion of the daylight hours must be quite vast - assuming that it would > operate year round. The casual user would also have to be instructed to > disregard the errant linear portion of the shadow as well, wouldn't he? > > Perhaps this is a good candidate for a very well done (sitework & > landscaping) noon analemma? The nodus could be flat as Bill suggested, > perhaps with an aperture or lense in the center of the disc to give a good > spot and generate additional interest. If the bridge is oriented N / S then > the analemma would proceed nicely along the main axis of the bridge, though > I haven't checked how much longitude correction would be required for that > site. > > Fun to think about, though. I will certainly watch with interest. > > > Best, > > Jim Tallman > Sr. Designer > FX Studios > 513.829.1888 > > > -
