This is like the lawyer in you speaking, right? Skip over the main point and try to get me on a technicality. ...
So anyway, I never said that horizontal tension was not "applied". I said that there is none in the panel (after it is all put together and functioning). This is all in the first post, except the part in parenthesis which is implied and later expounded upon). I also did not say it is "impossible to put horizontal tension on a curved panel". I said it is impossible for a curved film to have tension in a particular direction [unless...] . Think about the difference between "applied", "put", and what the final result is.
Read this over and over again until you get it, or find a statement I made where I claim they do not "put" it in a tension rig and "apply" tension.
Fine, if you weren't talking about them not "applying" horizontal tension, please explain how your statement in the first part of this quote supports, in any conceivable way, your conclusion in the latter part of the post:
BTW, the panels only have tension in the vertical direction. They can't have tension in the horizontal direction because then you couldn't maintain a curved shape.
So I don't see how it is particularly harder to set the tension in this panel vs any other.
Your conclusion is talking about setting tension in the panel, is it not? The only reason you would conclude that it would be no harder to set tension in a wider panel is if your first statement implies they don't "apply" any horizontal tension. I stated this was false based on seeing them put panels together at the factory. You then went on a mathematical tirade to prove your point. Then Ken posted the video which clearly proved my point. Yet you persist . . .
Edit: funny how you never made the distinction that you were talking about final tension and not applying tension, or about how you make no distinction between none and very little tension, until after you saw the video where it is obvious that they are applying horizontal tension to the panel.
Last edited: