Randall,
Per the email below; you are absolutely correct; it doesn't have a vertical component. Just by my putting a finger
on the mass (which is what I should have originally checked); there isn't any sensed vertical motion whatsoever. I will
eventually change the web page to reflect such correction.
Mental logic says it yet still quite possible to actually make it specifically vertical sensitive, by perhaps adding either a pivot area
metal extension and a adjustable spring which extents perhaps to the base area or thereabouts; which forces a vertical
component into the picture.
The horizontal sensing motion "seems" noteably enhanced (~1/2 hour longer than any other tested S-G pivot setup) by the
offset pivot....i.e., via my simple amateur friction mass offset time duration test. With your background; I suspect you may
have indeed already tried such...what's your simplified opinion on that pivot approach....I'am quite "open" on that subject too.
It does seem to have a very responsive visual pendulum offset to even very the slightest air currents when not shielded/enclosed.
Its a novel S-G pivot (simple gravity pendulum) setup yes; but still interesting where it might be possible to use either
a added spring maintained vertical, or, the as is, horizontal sensing; but likely not both at the same time.
Take care, Meredith
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 6:28 AM, Randall Peters
<PETERS_RD@..........> wrote:
Meredith,
I am trying to understand the vertical response that you mention for
the system described at http://seismometer.googlepages.com/vh
With the pendulum hanging initially at equilibrium (center of mass
directly below the center of the ruby spheres) I can't envision any
physical mechanism for which a strictly vertical acceleration is capable
of producing motion.
Randall