Sunday, July 09, 2006

Re-started Peacock Feathers

OK, it's a quiet Sunday afternoon, and Jon had to work today, so I've got the house to myself. I decided to spend some time working on the Peacock Feathers Shawl.

I just finished Row 34 out of 250 total rows. Each right-side row number matches the number of stitches to the center of the shawl, and then the subsequent wrong-side (purl) row has the same number of stitches as the previous RS row. So that means on Row 34, I've got 66 stitches on the needle (33 x 2 = 66 sts on RS row 33). (This probably doesn't make sense to anyone but me, but that's ok, I'm only tallying it for my own interest.)

So what does this mean I should expect?

Well, there are 250 rows of stitches. That means the last row will have 249 stitches to the middle of the shawl (full width = 498 sts). For the sake of my sanity, I'm calling these numbers 250 and 500 instead. Yes, it will make my final number "off" by a couple hundred or so, but I don't think that will matter too much in the big scheme of things.

Just looking at RS rows here first: The midpoint to 250 is 125. That means I can add 1+249, and 2+248, etc, etc, etc, to create "sets" of 250, all the way in to the middle number, so that I will end up with 124 sets of 250 stitches, plus 250 (that final row itself), plus 125 (the midpoint). That number is 31,375. This is the number of stitches to the MIDDLE of the row. So I double this to account for the full width of the shawl: 62,750.

Since I was only accounting for RS rows, I need to double this number again to account for the WS rows: 125,500 total stitches (approximately)

So yeah, I know I'm probably off by a bit because I was rounding, and because Row 1 actually started with 3 stitches, not 1 stitch, and various other factors, but it's close enough for me, and it's a nice round number.

Now, having just finished Row 34, I can estimate that I have probably knit about 2,380 stitches out of 125,500 - approximately 1.9%. And that is the number I have in my progress bar right now!

I'm traditionally pretty bad at math, and I'm almost positive I've made some kind of small but consequential mistake in these figures, so if anyone reading this actually knows a better way to figure these numbers out, please let me know! It's not that I actually care very much, but it would be interesting to find out! ;)

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home