Telescope Reviews: EQ Balance

· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt

· Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

You are not logged in. [Login]

Entrance · Main Index · Search · New user · Who's Online
FAQ · Calendar

Equipment Discussions >> Mounts

Pages: 1

Rinaldo
Pooh-Bah

Reged: 06/28/04

Loc: Lawng-eye-lind - New York, USA

EQ Balance - 14lbs or 21lbs?
#3168946 - 06/17/09 11:52 PM

I was wondering, is it better to use 14lbs further out on a counterweight shaft, or 21lbs slid higher up the shaft closer to the rotational axis? Or, does it not make any real difference?

Post Extras:

rdegoutier
super member

Reged: 02/18/08

Loc: White Rock, BC, Canada

Re: EQ Balance - 14lbs or 21lbs? new

[Re: Rinaldo]
#3169011 - 06/18/09 01:01 AM

For an EQ6 I use 22 lbs (the supplied 2 x 11 lb weights).

To balance a MAK-Newt 190 it was not quite enough, so rather than packing an extra weight I added a 3 inch extension to the shaft (M12x3 bolt with a sleeve). It balances perfectly this way, but I have also tried 3x11 lb weights further up the shaft which also balances perfectly so either way should be OK as long as you can achieve balance. Personally I prefer not carrying and fooling with the extra weight.

Post Extras:

Chris Curran
scholastic sledgehammer

Reged: 06/14/05

Loc: Brandon, FL

Re: EQ Balance - 14lbs or 21lbs? new

[Re: rdegoutier]
#3169341 - 06/18/09 09:26 AM

More weight closer in is always better than less weight farther out. On any GEM.

Post Extras:

rdegoutier
super member

Reged: 02/18/08

Loc: White Rock, BC, Canada

Re: EQ Balance - 14lbs or 21lbs? new

[Re: Chris Curran]
#3170658 - 06/18/09 11:04 PM

Quote:

More weight closer in is always better than less weight farther out. On any GEM.

Yes, theoretically, The closer the counterweights are to the equatorial head, the greater the resonant frequency
and so the less problems with vibration, but I don't find that I have a vibration problem either way, and prefer to simply use the two supplied weights.

Post Extras:

Chris Curran
scholastic sledgehammer

Reged: 06/14/05

Loc: Brandon, FL

Re: EQ Balance - 14lbs or 21lbs? new

[Re: rdegoutier]
#3170715 - 06/18/09 11:39 PM

It's not about resonant frequency... Think about it this way: put a 10lb sack on your back and hold 10lbs close to your chest to "balance" that pack. Count to 100. Now replace that 10 lbs and hold 2lbs out at arms length. Count to 100. You might make it, but I know I wouldn't.

Using less weight farther out on the cw shaft isn't going to hurt anything most of the time, but, if you're asking which is "better"...

Post Extras:

rdegoutier
super member

Reged: 02/18/08

Loc: White Rock, BC, Canada

Re: EQ Balance - 14lbs or 21lbs? new

[Re: Chris Curran]
#3171512 - 06/19/09 12:51 PM

That's a good argument if your counterweight shaft is made of flesh and bone, but mine is a 3/4" steel shaft.
As long as you achieve static equilibrium, the result is the same. Basic physics, the Lever principle, Newtons Laws of Motion...

Sorry, I'm an engineer, which goes against my common sense not to argue.

Post Extras:

hudson_yak
Carpal Tunnel

Reged: 11/15/07

Loc: Hyde Park, NY, USA

Re: EQ Balance - 14lbs or 21lbs? new

[Re: rdegoutier]
#3171529 - 06/19/09 01:00 PM

Yup.

My impression with my SVP was that there was a bit more resonant jiggle with less weight located out at the very end, it was better with more weights further up, and with them spread out on the bar if using more than one weight.

Needs to be tried either way, certainly the less weight you can use the better for portability and so forth. The location of them may not matter if the mount itself is of stout-enough design.

Mike

Post Extras:

Chris Curran
scholastic sledgehammer

Reged: 06/14/05

Loc: Brandon, FL

Re: EQ Balance - 14lbs or 21lbs? new