(05-16-2017, 01:29 AM)EdCa Wrote: Here's and odd question- does it matter whether you use the column for minutes of declination or "d" correction from Pub. No. 249 to get the proper "d" correction? By this I mean I've discovered that whether 249 specifies any "d" correction (45 for example) and the Sun's declination for a certain day and time (let's just say 21 minutes of declination) the same correction value of 16 can be found whether you use 45 minutes of declination and a "d" of 21 or 21 minutes of declination and a "d" value of 45. No matter which way you arrange it you still get a d correction of 16.
That would let me think that Table 5 is goof proof- you'll still get the same d correction value.
What do you think?
Thanks,
Ed
TABLE 5- Correction to Tabulated Altitude for Minutes of Declination
(05-25-2017, 05:51 AM)RumataGreetings, EdCa.I think some kind of explanation can be found in Pub.229, Vol.1 Page XI, 4. Interpolation Table. (a) Design. It shows how the table is designed. Wrote:(05-16-2017, 01:29 AM)EdCa Wrote: Here's and odd question- does it matter whether you use the column for minutes of declination or "d" correction from Pub. No. 249 to get the proper "d" correction? By this I mean I've discovered that whether 249 specifies any "d" correction (45 for example) and the Sun's declination for a certain day and time (let's just say 21 minutes of declination) the same correction value of 16 can be found whether you use 45 minutes of declination and a "d" of 21 or 21 minutes of declination and a "d" value of 45. No matter which way you arrange it you still get a d correction of 16.
That would let me think that Table 5 is goof proof- you'll still get the same d correction value.
What do you think?
Thanks,
Ed
TABLE 5- Correction to Tabulated Altitude for Minutes of Declination
Greetings EdCa, I think some explanation may come from Pub.229, Vol.1, Page XI, 4. Interpolation Table. (a) Design.
Hope it can help.