Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star, How We Wonder Where We Are?
CSEF · 2007 Physics & Astronomy
Overview
Objectives/Goals This project was designed to determine how accurate, and operator friendly the navigational tools were (compared to each other) when determining latitude, and using GMT to determine longitude (part two). Methods/Materials Both the Sextant and Quadrant were hand constructed. The North Star was sited on the head of the quadrant and the weight was pulled by gravity, intersecting a point of an angle. When determining latitude, the sextant was set on the base of a leveled tripod. One would look through the PVC pipe to sight the North Star and the other would see the angle detected by the Carpenter#s angle. Both angle and weather were recorded. For determining longitude,the sunrise and sunset were recorded. A sunrise/sunset table was used to determine the sunrise or sunset at zero degrees longitude. The time of sunrise/sunset at zero degrees longitude was than subtracted from the observed sunrise or sunset. Each hour was multiplied by 15 degrees and each minute by .25 degrees. Finally these calculations were added together to determine longitude. In part two five locations were selected containing the same longitude as Edwards, CA. The sunrises and sunsets were recorded for multiple days to demonstrate the use of GMT in determining longitude. Results After taking readings of the North Star, with the quadrant and sextant, the quadrant#s readings (AVG=35.06 Degrees N) were closer to the actual latitude (35.05 Degrees N). The Sextant#s readings were accurate as well (34.74 Degrees N), but clearly not as close to the actual latitude. In Part Two of the experiment the longitudes were not as close to the actual longitude of the various locations (when demonstrating GMT). Conclusions/Discussion Considering the data, the quadrant is easier to operate resulting in more accurate readings. The sextant worked well, though considering the conditions of early mariners and the precision of the procedures needed, the readings were less accurate. Both navigational tools are similar, but the results show that the quadrant was easier to operate, quicker, and produced more accurate readings. After determining longitude we were within about sixty miles (or 1 degree) of Edwards, CA. For part two the results were less accurate than part one. Overall, these methods used by early Mariners could be used to find a large area, like a big city, rather than a specific house.
Summary statement
A Navigational Study of the North Star using early Mariner Navigational Tools, and demonstrating the use of GMT (Greenwich Mean Time).
Help received
Col. Joseph Nichols
Competition history
- CSEF 2007
Resources
Related projects
CSEF · 2008
The Shadow Knows Where You Are
CSEF · 2010
Where in the World? Finding Your Location Using Gravity, the Earth's Magnetic Field, and a Sundial
CSEF · 2012
Creating a Global Positioning System: Determining Latitude and Longitude Based Upon Solar Azimuth and Elevation
CSEF · 2004
Stellar Parallax
CSEF · 2006
Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star: Adaptive Optics and Its Role in Stellar Scintillation
CSEF · 2004
Measurement of True Noon Time Using the Sundial Principle
CSEF · 2019
How Far to the Stars?
CSEF · 2011
Beginning Cartography
Closest projects by meaning, across every fair and year in the corpus.
Browse more like this
Source: California Science & Engineering Fair public projects