From: "David Stevens" 
To: "ATM" 
Reply-To: "David Stevens" 


Thanks for answering my post!!
I did not think that I was close to being done. Figure  said that I had a
relativly high center and high edge.

 My original question was how can I keep the edge and deepen the center??

I had thought that I would turn the edge way up before using the
parabolising strokes because the edge always comes down before I reach
correction in the center zones. Is this thinking correct?? Thanks again,
Dave Stevens
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Burrows 
To: David Stevens 
Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2003 7:43 PM Subject: Re: ATM Figuring Question???


> At 09:59 2003-01-16 -0500, you wrote:
>
> >Thanks for answering my post. Here is all the data.
>
> Dave,
>
> Here's the translation into a Sixtests input file:
> ----------------------------------
> David Stevens 2658
>    200.66
> Foucault
>         0
> y, mm    X, mm
>     35.09     5.15
>     53.53     5.16
>     66.86     5.22
>     77.90     5.22
>     87.55     4.91
>     94.15     5.05
> *
>     -1.00     0.00
>      0.03
>   1593.85
> -------------------------------------
> Sixtests says RMS = 248.3 nm, conic b = .073:  it's still a long way from
> done (you want RMS < 20 nm) and slightly oblate.  It wasn't necessary to
> run Sixtests, Tex would probably say the same thing - high edge and
> center.  If you were closer, it would be reasonable to run Sixtests, get
> the surface out, then run Starlap to get the shape of a deformed lap.  Now
> it makes more sense to try good ol' Texereau's parabolizing methods on p.
> 97.  The two safest at this point would be either of the "DEEPENING THE
> CENTER" ones:  A-II, MOT or C-I, TOT.  Let's see, you're pretty fast ~
f/4;
> if the above two strokes get you closer, then we might try a deformed lap
> rather than Texereau's small tool method, which is, as he says,
> "hazardous", and slow.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jim Burrows
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.00 MP