Dear Frans,

I happily endorse all your suggested improvements.  I'd add the possibility of 
using 3M's retro-reflective material, as on traffic signs, on the hour-markers 
or, if the layout is reversed on the centre-post.

I just hope Mr Phillips appreciates all the hard thinking we've done on his 
behalf.

John Lynes


--- On Mon, 7/7/08, Frans W. Maes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Dear John,
> 
> Do you think Mr. Phillips really is willing to go along
> with such an 
> idea? If so, I have been considering the options a bit
> further.
> 
> The explanation in Karl Schwarzinger's webpage has
> January outermost and 
> December innermost. For a human shadowcaster, it would be
> easier to have 
> June innermost, as his/her shadow will be short. Next May +
> July, which 
> see about the same solar declination, then April + August,
> etc. The 
> spacing of the month rings can be adapted to the average
> person's shadow 
> length in that month. You might stop at March + September,
> as there is 
> not much going on in the remaining months, according to the
> Year 
> Calender in the Estate's website
> (http://www.kentwell.co.uk/).
> 
> The type of pavement/planting may limit the accuracy of
> reading. If one 
> does not care about high precision, one could average the
> azimuth values 
> of two months (like May and July) and use this single
> value.
> 
> The placement of the month names is free. They could be
> aligned with the 
> main driveway, thereby fulfilling another of Mr.
> Phillips' requirements.
> 
> We still have the wish/requirement for scales having the
> hour points at 
> the south side. This could be met by reversing the lay-out,
> as follows: 
> Rotate the rings by 180 degrees. The person walks the ring
> for the 
> present month until his/her shadow points at the center
> spot/post. Then 
> he/she reads the time from his/her position. This makes the
> dial even 
> more 'interactive' than the usual analemmatic dial!
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Best regards,
> Frans Maes
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > YES!!!  Why didn't any of us think of this?
> > John
> > 
> > 
> > --- On Sat, 28/6/08, Frans W. Maes
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> >> From: Frans W. Maes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Subject: Re: Advice wanted, on
> 'Analemmatic' sundial orientation
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Cc: [email protected]
> >> Date: Saturday, 28 June, 2008, 9:51 PM
> >> Dear John,
> >>
> >> What you describe resembles an azimuth sundial.
> See for
> >> instance the 
> >> Plochingen sundial in Karl Schwarzinger's
> collection:
> >> http://members.aon.at/sundials/bild44_e.htm
> >> In this case, there would be no clear-cut
> alignment with
> >> anything, 
> >> including the (in)famous path...
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Frans
> >> www.fransmaes.nl/sundials

---------------------------------------------------
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Reply via email to