On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 05:05 PM, Brian Maynard wrote:
I'm looking for some feedback from anyone who has their g11t loaded, over 70lbs.?
There may be few examples because the capacity of a GEM is based on the expected distance from the RA to the Center of Mass.? Observing the 16" OTA, it requires an additional 3 inches of distance to the center mass compared to the assumed capacity distance for the G11T.? Using the typical adjustments from the RA provides a reliable estimate of how the limits change with the counterweights required at the maximum limit at the standard OTA to RA axis distance.? If standard, the declination needs four 21-pound counterweights (84 pounds) to balance 90 pounds at 14.5 inches.? This becomes 75 pounds at 17.5 inches (90 pounds * 14.5/17.5), which is the new maximum allowed for visual observation.? This increase in RA axis spacing reduces capacity by 20%, positioning the mount not at the upper recommendation for photography but at or above the limit recommended for visual use.? Actual examples of this should be rare.
?
As you might expect, we cannot increase capacity by adding more counterweight due to the role of inertia.? Shifting the OTA outward to this extent, while lowering the limit, also slightly alters the inertia.? However, adding weight exacerbates the issue for the mount, which is already at its maximum recommended load (torque on the RA).
?
Doug
