
Home  Forums  Rules  Articles  diyAudio Store  Gallery  Wiki  Blogs  Register  Donations  FAQ  Calendar  Search  Today's Posts  Mark Forums Read  Search 
Analogue Source Turntables, Tonearms, Cartridges, Phono Stages, Tuners, Tape Recorders, etc. 

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.
Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving 

Thread Tools  Search this Thread 
15th November 2011, 03:37 AM  #221 
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2005

Mark, I owe you more than a beer. I'll add a bowl of alphabet soup.

15th November 2011, 07:20 AM  #222 
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Willy, VIC

And now to Floating B.
Please note that I'm using the spindle as the origin in these calculations where I used the point B in the last. This simplifies the maths a bit. If it causes confusion, the best option is to beg the mods to allow me to edit the previous post and I'll change the coordinate system so they're both the same. We have a series of radial lines from A to C of length R. I will give points for 3 values of R, namely 50, 100 and 150 but to do this properly it is best to calculate many more points (that's what spreadsheets are for). We have corresponding line segments CD which are orthogonal to the radii AC. This is the length of the main part of the arm, we will set it to some fixed value and I'm going to use 150 so the two examples are similar. If we then draw the line DA for each point D we have a right angle triangle with the two right sides known, the hypotenuse is found by Pythagoras. For the radii chosen, the hypotenuses are 158.1, 180.3 and 212.1. The angle ADC will be ARCSIN (AC / AD) so we have 0.321, 0.588 and 0.785 respectively*. Each segment CD is part of a longer segment CB where B is the intersection with the base line. Note that with this geometry the point B is different for each radius, unlike the Birch geometry where it is fixed. We now set the pivot point P. Let's make the length of the arm from pivot P to each point D 60 mm. If the length AP is made to equal the sum of PD and DC, then the arm will have zero overhang, so we set point P at (210,0). This defines a second triangle with three known sides so we can use the cosine rule <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_cosines> to calculate the angles APD which are thus 0.449, 0.923 and 1.463. This in turn allows us to define point D for any radius. The X coordinate will be 210  PD*COS APD, the Y coordinate will be PD sin APD so the three points D are (155.9, 26.0), (173.8, 47.8) and (203.6, 59.6). In turn this means we can calculate the angle PAD which is simply ARCTAN (Yd/Xd) for each point D giving 0.165, 0.269 and 0.285 respectively. Each segment CD is part of a longer segment CB where B is the intersection with the base line. Note that with this geometry the point B is different for each radius, unlike the Birch geometry where it is fixed. We can now calculate the angle ABC which must be equal to ADC + PAD. The slope of the line BC is the tan of this angle so we have 0.157, 0.330 and 0.546 respectively. Since we have a slope and a point on each line (the points D) we can calculate the intercept with the base line which will be the point B by substituting into y = mx +b the same was we did previously, obtaining intercepts of 321.4, 318.55 and 312.68 respectively. Although this looks like the geometry is quite different from that of Birch, it isn't. The difference is that we've put both B and P on the base line whereas with Birch geometry P is always below the base line. We can show the equivalence by calculating the equivalent "Birch line" and finding the intercepts which will fall near the opposite Thales locus. In this case that locus is at (315, 2) but I'm not going to clog things up by showing you how to find this. The beauty of this geometry is that we do not need to use the Thales locus so we can completely eliminate the errors in the Birch geometry. We do this by getting rid of the remaining variable length, which is the length BD. Instead we assign a new set of points E which fall a defined distance past D on the line CB. Since we know the equation of the line and the points D, for a given length DE the points E are defined by Xe = Xd DE * slope, Ye = Yd  DE * ( 1  slope^2). These points will define a track which will constrain the motion of the segment DC so that the angle DCA is always 90 degrees. The fun bit is designing the interface between the arm and the track. You now owe me two beers. * Angles in radians. Last edited by Ana; 16th November 2011 at 06:03 AM. Reason: User's request 
15th November 2011, 04:18 PM  #223 
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2005

What have I gotten myself into?! I should have listened to the moderator EC8010 and focused on unipivot designs.

16th November 2011, 10:38 AM  #224 
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2011

It is rather amazing, that after one hundred years of disc record players history , new purely mechanical arm designs are still coming, and they still are able to come closer and closer to perfection. The last Schroeder design looks like almost final stage, but who knows...

16th November 2011, 12:50 PM  #225 
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Portugal

Nice Thread.
In 1970, i was working in the research and department office of Scientelec (A well known French hifi manufacturer at this time). There were too a famous manufacturer of professional turntables and PU cartridges Clement (He equipped the state French Radio "ORTF"). Clement He produced a Radial arm turntable: Platine bras radial http://www.audiofolia.com/Download/RDS201.pdf The first, as far as i know, to have a strait free arm on a chariot , measuring the angle error with a light, and moving the arm's charriot with a motor. Back to my story. I wanted a radial arm for my company too. So, i had offered two patents (around 1970) to my company. The first one was a pure copy of the clement's one, with just the idea that, instead of moving the arm, it was the record plate witch moved under the arm. The second idea was to fix the arm at the periphery of a rotating plate, and to makeit turn in order to correct the error. The arm itself is free on the two axes, the error of angle is detected under the main plate by a light and two photo cells. Each time the arm is moved by the grove to the inside, it create an error, the the motor make rotate the A plate until the error is 0. On my point of view, any system where the head is making an angle is messy, as it create a "centripetal ?" force. To conclude, i would like to point out the most intelligent radial arm turntable ever: Technics SL7. Technics SL7 Owners Manual, Service Manual, Schematics, Free Download  Vinyl Engine The arm, his chariot and his motor was in the cover: you do not have to wait for it to be parked before opening the cover. Brilliant. This plate was able to detect the size of the record, and was fully automatic if you like: one button press. That the one i use. Last edited by Esperado; 16th November 2011 at 12:58 PM. 
16th November 2011, 03:42 PM  #226  
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2005

Quote:


16th November 2011, 03:50 PM  #227  
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2005

Quote:


16th November 2011, 04:54 PM  #228  
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Portugal

Quote:
Conceptually, there is nothing in common. Whatever the distance of the head from the center , there is always a position of the plate A (as you can see on my design) for the Diamond of the head to be on the tangent. You don't have to know where, as the error correction system will turn the A plate in the good direction untill no error (the light hit the center of the record plate). Exactly like the Technics or the Clement. The arm is totally free on the two horizontal and vertical axes.The difference is that, on the traditional radial arms, the error system can be in the arm itself, looking for good perpendicularity between the arm and his chariot. Here the error will be measured by 2 cels at the vertical of the record plate axe. If the light hit the Right cell, the motor will turn the A plate clockwise, if it hit the left cell, anticlockwise. When the light is right in the middle (no error), the motor is stopped. The advantage of this system is just that it is easier and cheaper, on a mechanical point of view to rotate something than to generate a linear movement. Note that the second parallel arm under the plate will have an advantage, resonance of the arm (with the cell suspension) will not be the same in vertical and horizontal direction. For me, the Technics was absolutely perfect: you cannot hope something better. Heavy, easy to run, and the size was just 30cm X30cm, the exact size of the 33RPm. More, you where obliged to run the turntable closed, so, no dust. And it was not a so expensive turntable. Last edited by Esperado; 16th November 2011 at 05:01 PM. 

16th November 2011, 06:55 PM  #229 
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2011

Quote:
Here the error will be measured by 2 cels at the vertical of the record plate axe. If the light hit the Right cell, the motor will turn the A plate clockwise, if it hit the left cell, anticlockwise. When the light is right in the middle (no error), the motor is stopped. The advantage of this system is just that it is easier and cheaper, on a mechanical point of view to rotate something than to generate a linear movement. Reply: Design is elegance itself, among electronically controlled linear trackers. 
16th November 2011, 09:49 PM  #230  
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Willy, VIC

Quote:
If you construct an extension of the arm past the circumference of the circle you will find that these extensions approximately converge at the opposite Thales locus. The servo system basically reduces the error inherent in the Birch geometry. Frank's guidance system serves a similar pupose. It would be possible to dispense with the servo system entirely and use the convergence of the arm extensions to establish something very close to tangential tracking. Esperado if you have the exact length of the arm, the radius of the chariot (between pivots) and the distance from the platter spindle to the chariot's centre I will show you how it conforms to Birch geometry. It would be interesting to measure the actual error in the servo system and see how the two compare. What is the distance between the two lights cells? Last edited by Mark Kelly; 16th November 2011 at 10:10 PM. 

Thread Tools  Search this Thread 


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
GLIDING FOR 90°  mechanical linear tonearms: no airpump, no servo  directdriver  Analogue Source  30  7th April 2015 06:13 PM 
Angling of ports and/or drivers?  Dave McReeferson  Full Range  11  27th March 2012 08:45 PM 
String suspension vs. uni pivot or gimball tonearms  nghiep  Analogue Source  26  13th August 2011 05:27 AM 
Angling drivers left and right in a vertical linearray????  ozziozzi  MultiWay  12  16th January 2009 05:23 AM 
Need Amp For 90090 V DC  Drafance007  Solid State  15  12th October 2003 09:03 PM 
New To Site?  Need Help? 