Date   

Re: APCC Modeling a pointing model

Konstantin von Poschinger
 

I forgot to mention, it is a El Capitan mount without encoders. 

Grüsse

Konstantin v. Poschinger


Hammerichstr. 5
22605 Hamburg
040/8805747
0171/1983476

Am 21.04.2019 um 14:41 schrieb 'Ray Gralak (Groups)' groups3@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>:

 

Hi Konstantin,

Which controller and version of firmware are you using?

-Ray Gralak
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): http://www.astro-physics.com/index.htm?products/accessories/software/apcc/apcc
Author of PEMPro V3: https://www.ccdware.com
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
> Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2019 3:26 AM
> To: ap-gto@...
> Subject: [ap-gto] APCC Modeling a pointing model
>
>
>
> Hi Ray,
>
> when I buid a pointing model, the mount do after a slew again a short slew. This, when I have points in the
> counterwight up position, ended in a big reslew to the meridian and back to the point that should be mesured.
> Sometimes the reslew happened more than one time.
> How can I prevent the big reslews?
> I use the latest APCC Pro 1.7.1.1 and AP-V2 5.20.09
>
> Grüsse
>
> Konstantin v. Poschinger
>
> Hammerichstr. 5
> 22605 Hamburg
> 040/8805747
> 0171/1983476
>
>
>


Re: APCC Modeling a pointing model

Konstantin von Poschinger
 

GTOCP4 with the newest firmware. 

Grüsse

Konstantin v. Poschinger


Hammerichstr. 5
22605 Hamburg
040/8805747
0171/1983476

Am 21.04.2019 um 14:41 schrieb 'Ray Gralak (Groups)' groups3@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>:

 

Hi Konstantin,

Which controller and version of firmware are you using?

-Ray Gralak
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): http://www.astro-physics.com/index.htm?products/accessories/software/apcc/apcc
Author of PEMPro V3: https://www.ccdware.com
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
> Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2019 3:26 AM
> To: ap-gto@...
> Subject: [ap-gto] APCC Modeling a pointing model
>
>
>
> Hi Ray,
>
> when I buid a pointing model, the mount do after a slew again a short slew. This, when I have points in the
> counterwight up position, ended in a big reslew to the meridian and back to the point that should be mesured.
> Sometimes the reslew happened more than one time.
> How can I prevent the big reslews?
> I use the latest APCC Pro 1.7.1.1 and AP-V2 5.20.09
>
> Grüsse
>
> Konstantin v. Poschinger
>
> Hammerichstr. 5
> 22605 Hamburg
> 040/8805747
> 0171/1983476
>
>
>


Re: ...and daytime polar alignment

Mike Dodd
 

On 4/21/2019 10:13 AM, Tyrel Smith tysmith747@gmail.com [ap-gto] wrote:


Just a thought. Instead of the level, why not just put marks on the RA
and dec axis so you always know where an accurate park position is?
Seems much more repeatable then eyeballing a level each time.
I'd be hard-pressed to match the accuracy of the machinist's level with tape or a mark.

The 21.5 arcsec accuracy of the level translates to about 0.0005 inches on the perimeter of the RA housing. 50 micro-inches! That's about 1/50 the thickness of a human hair.

I think I'll stick with my machinist's level. 8^)

--
Mike

Mike Dodd
http://astronomy.mdodd.com
Louisa County, Virginia USA


Re: ... and daytime polar alignment

Tyrel Smith
 

Just a thought. Instead of the level, why not just put marks on the RA and dec axis so you always know where an accurate park position is? Seems much more repeatable then eyeballing a level each time.

I did this once after a night of platesolving. Once you are well calibrated (platesolve and sync to remove zero position error) send the mount to your preferred park position.  Then just put some tape or some kind of mark across the axis that you can line up whenever you need to manually put the mount in park position. 

Maybe this doesn’t work for all mount, but I did this with my Mach1 just once. I’ve never needed to use a level. I’d like to know if I’m off-base with this, though. 

Ty Smith

On Apr 21, 2019, at 09:56, Mike Dodd mike@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

On 4/21/2019 8:38 AM, y.groups@... [ap-gto] wrote:
> 5) Using a carpenter's level, use pier adjustments to level the
> counterweight shaft.
> 6) Using a carpenter's level, use the mount's altitude adjustment to
> level the OTA.

I'd like to propose an alternative to a carpenter's level.

My AP1200 is pier-mounted and drift-aligned, so I don't have the same
situation you do. But I loosen the clutches to re-balance the mount
after changing imaging equipment. I use a level on the CW shaft and the
OTA to return to the Park 1 position after balance is achieved. (Yes,
I'm still using Park 1, not 4, and yes, I know the issues with Park 1.)

Instead of a carpenter's level, I use a Starrett #98-6 precision
machinist's level
<https://www.amazon.com/Precision-Machinists-NIST-Traceable-Calibration-Certificate/dp/B07579PWPL>.

This level is super-accurate! One division on the glass vial is 86
arc-seconds. It's easy to read to within 1/4 of a division, or 21.5
arc-seconds. That's MUCH better than I can get on my carpenter's bubble
level, or even on my electronic level that displays only to 1/10 degree.

Here's what I do:

1. Use the keypad to park the mount in Park 1.

2. Set the machinist's level on the CW shaft and take a photo of the
bubble position.

3. Set the level on the OTA and take a photo of the bubble position.

NOTE: Steps 2 and 3 record the MOUNT'S Park 1 position. So, if my
original Park 1 position was a bit off, I can return to the MOUNT'S
position.

NOTE: The level has a V-groove on the bottom that makes it easy to
position it accurately on the CW shaft and the OTA.

4. Remove the level, loosen the clutches, and do whatever I need to do.

5. Move the mount back close to the Park 1 position.

6. Set the machinist's level on the CW shaft and adjust the RA until the
bubble is in exactly the same spot as in the step-2 photo, then tighten
the RA clutches.

7. Set the machinist's level on the OTA and adjust the Dec until the
bubble is in exactly the same spot as in the step-3 photo, then tighten
the Dec clutches.

8. Power-up the mount, and select "Resume Ref-Park 1" on the keypad.

As a testament to the level's accuracy, when I complete this procedure,
I can GOTO a target star, and it will be within the central 15% of my
camera's sensor.

The Starrett #98-6 isn't cheap. I bought mine specifically for leveling
the telescope, and have never regretted spending the money.

I also use it to level the AP1200's mounting plate on my concrete pier:
<http://astronomy.mdodd.com/observatory.html#PierBolts>

Just a suggestion for an alternative to a carpenter's level....

--
Mike

Mike Dodd
http://astronomy.mdodd.com
Louisa County, Virginia USA


Re: ... and daytime polar alignment

Mike Dodd
 

On 4/21/2019 8:38 AM, y.groups@hilmo.net [ap-gto] wrote:
5) Using a carpenter's level, use pier adjustments to level the
counterweight shaft.
6) Using a carpenter's level, use the mount's altitude adjustment to
level the OTA.
I'd like to propose an alternative to a carpenter's level.

My AP1200 is pier-mounted and drift-aligned, so I don't have the same situation you do. But I loosen the clutches to re-balance the mount after changing imaging equipment. I use a level on the CW shaft and the OTA to return to the Park 1 position after balance is achieved. (Yes, I'm still using Park 1, not 4, and yes, I know the issues with Park 1.)

Instead of a carpenter's level, I use a Starrett #98-6 precision machinist's level <https://www.amazon.com/Precision-Machinists-NIST-Traceable-Calibration-Certificate/dp/B07579PWPL>.

This level is super-accurate! One division on the glass vial is 86 arc-seconds. It's easy to read to within 1/4 of a division, or 21.5 arc-seconds. That's MUCH better than I can get on my carpenter's bubble level, or even on my electronic level that displays only to 1/10 degree.

Here's what I do:

1. Use the keypad to park the mount in Park 1.

2. Set the machinist's level on the CW shaft and take a photo of the bubble position.

3. Set the level on the OTA and take a photo of the bubble position.

NOTE: Steps 2 and 3 record the MOUNT'S Park 1 position. So, if my original Park 1 position was a bit off, I can return to the MOUNT'S position.

NOTE: The level has a V-groove on the bottom that makes it easy to position it accurately on the CW shaft and the OTA.

4. Remove the level, loosen the clutches, and do whatever I need to do.

5. Move the mount back close to the Park 1 position.

6. Set the machinist's level on the CW shaft and adjust the RA until the bubble is in exactly the same spot as in the step-2 photo, then tighten the RA clutches.

7. Set the machinist's level on the OTA and adjust the Dec until the bubble is in exactly the same spot as in the step-3 photo, then tighten the Dec clutches.

8. Power-up the mount, and select "Resume Ref-Park 1" on the keypad.

As a testament to the level's accuracy, when I complete this procedure, I can GOTO a target star, and it will be within the central 15% of my camera's sensor.

The Starrett #98-6 isn't cheap. I bought mine specifically for leveling the telescope, and have never regretted spending the money.

I also use it to level the AP1200's mounting plate on my concrete pier: <http://astronomy.mdodd.com/observatory.html#PierBolts>

Just a suggestion for an alternative to a carpenter's level....

--
Mike

Mike Dodd
http://astronomy.mdodd.com
Louisa County, Virginia USA


Re: APCC Modeling a pointing model

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Konstantin,

Which controller and version of firmware are you using?

-Ray Gralak
Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): http://www.astro-physics.com/index.htm?products/accessories/software/apcc/apcc
Author of PEMPro V3: https://www.ccdware.com
Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver

-----Original Message-----
From: ap-gto@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ap-gto@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2019 3:26 AM
To: ap-gto@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [ap-gto] APCC Modeling a pointing model



Hi Ray,

when I buid a pointing model, the mount do after a slew again a short slew. This, when I have points in the
counterwight up position, ended in a big reslew to the meridian and back to the point that should be mesured.
Sometimes the reslew happened more than one time.
How can I prevent the big reslews?
I use the latest APCC Pro 1.7.1.1 and AP-V2 5.20.09

Grüsse

Konstantin v. Poschinger

Hammerichstr. 5
22605 Hamburg
040/8805747
0171/1983476



Question about absolute encoders and daytime polar alignment

W Hilmo
 

I've been using my non-encoder AP1100 mount since last fall, but just swapped it out for my AE equipped AP1600.  When I set up either of the mounts, I usually start off by doing a daytime polar alignment, and then refining it under the stars.


Since this is the first time I've used the mount since updating APCC to the version that integrates the encoder utility, I configured a new home position with the mount at Park 4.

In thinking about the workflow, it occurs to me that I can modify my setup a bit when I move the mount to a new physical location.  I wanted to post what I'm thinking, and see if you guys think it seems reasonable.

So consider that I have my mount calibrated with the sky and at Park 4, and I've defined this to be my home position.  Also, consider that I take break down the mount, transport it to a new location and set it up again.  Finally, assume that I am not releasing the clutches at any point.

When I set up at a new location, this is what I am planning to do:

1) Move the mount to Park 3 and park at current location before disassembling.
2) Set up the mount at new location in Park 3, with my Coronado PST mounted.
3) Start APCC and create new site from GPS coordinates.
4) Connect to the mount and do "Find Home".  I expect that the mount will move to Park 4.
5) Using a carpenter's level, use pier adjustments to level the counterweight shaft.
6) Using a carpenter's level, use the mount's altitude adjustment to level the OTA.
7) Unpark from current position and slew to the sun.
8) Use the mount's azimuth adjustment to center the sun in the PST.

I think that that point, that I'm now very close to the correct polar alignment at the new site.

Does this make sense?

Thanks,
-Wade



Re: External wiring method for your imaging equipment

Roland Christen
 

The stuff I used is 1" in diameter, but it comes in larger sizes too.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: jon swanson trapman66@... [ap-gto]
To: ap-gto
Sent: Sat, Apr 20, 2019 5:32 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] External wiring method for your imaging equipment



Thanks for this helpful info.  Out of curiosity, what diameter cable wrap did you use?




On Tuesday, April 16, 2019, 6:22 AM, chris1011@... [ap-gto] wrote:
 
Hello Astronuts,

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/ap-gto/files/Mach2%20External%20Wiring%20Method/

I uploaded a number of images in the following folder which shows my preferred method of wiring astro-gear to the mount. This type of external loop is very flexible in that you can add as many cables as you need for cameras, dew heaters and other stuff that you need to power on top of your mount. It is the only method approved by new Mexico Skies, since they don't want to deal with internal cable problems that inevitably arise.

Go to the above folder to see the various images I posted. If you have any questions, please ask.

The way I attach my cables prevents any possibility of snags, even when I start my scopes under the mount with counterweights up. I can slew to any position in the sky without ever having cables catch on anything. Some people attach a separate bar to the cradle plate which guides the cable back away from the mount. That works very well. What you don't want to do is just let the cable drop straight down from the back of the camera.

The bottom of the cable is attached to the pier via a 1/4-20 bolt using plastic cable tie. I wrapped mine in a plastic wire sleeve, which you can get at Graingers in any length.

Rolando



Re: External wiring method for your imaging equipment

jon swanson
 

Thanks for this helpful info.  Out of curiosity, what diameter cable wrap did you use?




On Tuesday, April 16, 2019, 6:22 AM, chris1011@... [ap-gto] wrote:

 

Hello Astronuts,

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/ap-gto/files/Mach2%20External%20Wiring%20Method/

I uploaded a number of images in the following folder which shows my preferred method of wiring astro-gear to the mount. This type of external loop is very flexible in that you can add as many cables as you need for cameras, dew heaters and other stuff that you need to power on top of your mount. It is the only method approved by new Mexico Skies, since they don't want to deal with internal cable problems that inevitably arise.

Go to the above folder to see the various images I posted. If you have any questions, please ask.

The way I attach my cables prevents any possibility of snags, even when I start my scopes under the mount with counterweights up. I can slew to any position in the sky without ever having cables catch on anything. Some people attach a separate bar to the cradle plate which guides the cable back away from the mount. That works very well. What you don't want to do is just let the cable drop straight down from the back of the camera.

The bottom of the cable is attached to the pier via a 1/4-20 bolt using plastic cable tie. I wrapped mine in a plastic wire sleeve, which you can get at Graingers in any length.

Rolando


Re: The CN Encoder Debate Continues...

Robert Sinitiere <bobstar9@...>
 

I agree with Toni.  Do not be so picky and do not lecture Astro-Physics as to how they should choose the details on operating their company.  They and their staff are good folks.  I purchased my 155mm/F/7 Starfire and go to 900 mount in1998.  I have no Regrets what-so-ever.
Bob S.


On Apr 20, 2019, at 9:55 AM, 'Tony Benjamin' tonybenjamin@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

Visit FB!!...scads of drama J

 

From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
Sent: April 19, 2019 11:53 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Re: The CN Encoder Debate Continues...

 

 

My god... I haven't seen this much drama and pettiness since high school, you are all equally to blame. This is going no where, move on. 


Re: Mach 1 Balance

Bruce Donzanti
 

ok- this is how I have done it in the past but was questioning myself as I noticed in Park 4 the OTA was not balanced.

Thanks much for the quick response


Re: Mach 1 Balance

Roland Christen
 

Assuming that you have the latest version of the Mach1 where you can disengage the gear via the lever on the side of the gearbox, here would be the steps for balancing:

1) send or set the mount in Park3 position.
2) disengage the Dec gears via the lever while holding onto the tube assembly.

The tube can now swing free on the Dec axis while RA is still held in place. 
Once the Dec is free to swing around, you can point the scope to the East or west horizon and do your balance by shifting the tube back and forth in the rings or via the dovetail plate. You can also add weights on the back or front as needed to get the Dec to balance.

Once balanced, simply move the scope back to Park3 by hand and lock the gearbox lever back into place. Don't try balancing the scope in Park4 position, that is not a good place to shift tubes in their rings or in the dovetail.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: donzantib@... [ap-gto]
To: ap-gto
Sent: Sat, Apr 20, 2019 4:32 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Mach 1 Balance



I have a couple of quick questions:

1-  If I am initializing from Park4, should I balance the Dec axis (scope horizontally) from that position?  I ask because I realized the OTA does not horizontally balance when you flip it 180 degrees and I had assumed it would.  

2-  Precise balance is best done with the heaviest weights up top and using the smallest weight for fine balance to address inertial moment arm effects.  Now with the accessories on my C11", 3 of the weights are low, one in the middle and 1 up top as that is the only way to balance the scope.  Anyway to be concerned or addressed it or is that simply the only way to do it?

Thanks



Mach 1 Balance

Bruce Donzanti
 

I have a couple of quick questions:


1-  If I am initializing from Park4, should I balance the Dec axis (scope horizontally) from that position?  I ask because I realized the OTA does not horizontally balance when you flip it 180 degrees and I had assumed it would.  


2-  Precise balance is best done with the heaviest weights up top and using the smallest weight for fine balance to address inertial moment arm effects.  Now with the accessories on my C11", 3 of the weights are low, one in the middle and 1 up top as that is the only way to balance the scope.  Anyway to be concerned or addressed it or is that simply the only way to do it?


Thanks


Re: The CN Encoder Debate Continues...

Joe Zeglinski
 

Bravo, and right on – Ray,
 
    Must admire Rolando’s needless patience,  and yours as well, with this (appropriately name-tagged) fellow and the now irrelevant exchanges.
Would the group moderator, risking accusation of being an AP mafia hit-man, please put this now pointless thread, out of its interminable misery – and ours as well.
 
Joe


Re: The CN Encoder Debate Continues...

Tony Benjamin <tonybenjamin@...>
 

Visit FB!!...scads of drama J

 

From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
Sent: April 19, 2019 11:53 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Re: The CN Encoder Debate Continues...

 

 

My god... I haven't seen this much drama and pettiness since high school, you are all equally to blame. This is going no where, move on. 


APCC Modeling a pointing model

Konstantin von Poschinger
 

Hi Ray,

when I buid a pointing model, the mount do after a slew again a short slew. This, when I have points in the counterwight up position, ended in a big reslew to the meridian and back to the point that should be mesured. Sometimes the reslew happened more than one time.
How can I prevent the big reslews?
I use the latest APCC Pro 1.7.1.1 and AP-V2 5.20.09

Grüsse

Konstantin v. Poschinger


Hammerichstr. 5
22605 Hamburg
040/8805747
0171/1983476


Re: The CN Encoder Debate Continues...

Eric M
 

My god... I haven't seen this much drama and pettiness since high school, you are all equally to blame. This is going no where, move on. 


Re: The CN Encoder Debate Continues...

Bill Long
 

Lay off the meth dude. I'm done here.


From: ap-gto@... on behalf of badgerz49@... [ap-gto]
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2019 11:00 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Re: The CN Encoder Debate Continues...
 
 

What I seek to prove?  


I clarified my claim encoders are a sensor and there's not 67 million notches machined into them or some other crazy feat of engineering.  I'm not sure why that was controversial.  I also responded to Roland's comment that "I'll be shocked" (I wasn't) when I learn the actual cost of encoders.  Beyond that I asked a couple questions about encoders which I thought were pertinent and followed up on them.  I also pointed out that due to his constant flattery of Roland and AP, it was no surprise Bill wanted to bring this to the AP User Group for a fight.

The AP mafia has spoken, toe the line or get publicly skewered.  That looming threat toward customers with honest questions is not how I would allow a company be run.


Re: The CN Encoder Debate Continues...

Bill Long
 

The absolute error. Over a one hour period of time the ABSOLUTE measured error is 0.25."

I dont know what you seek to prove here Badgerz49, and while I do root for Wisconsin to do well in College Football, I think you are trying to climb a vine that is a bit too much for you to grasp. No offense intended. 


From: ap-gto@... on behalf of chris1011@... [ap-gto]
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2019 9:45 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Re: The CN Encoder Debate Continues...
 
 


At the risk of "badgering" you, I'd be curious how you came up with the +/- .25" per hour figure.  It's almost as if you took the range of 2.69*2 = 5.38" and divided by 24 hours = .224" per hour.
We get an error report with each encoder. It shows exactly what the error is for any given amount of time.

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: badgerz49@... [ap-gto]
To: ap-gto
Sent: Fri, Apr 19, 2019 11:24 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Re: The CN Encoder Debate Continues...



At the risk of "badgering" you, I'd be curious how you came up with the +/- .25" per hour figure.  It's almost as if you took the range of 2.69*2 = 5.38" and divided by 24 hours = .224" per hour.

If you used a method to precisely measure the error every hour, you'd have to do that many times to get an accurate estimate.  I assume you've tested with a method similar to this - not the (probably incorrect) method I mentioned above.





Re: The CN Encoder Debate Continues...

Roland Christen
 


At the risk of "badgering" you, I'd be curious how you came up with the +/- .25" per hour figure.  It's almost as if you took the range of 2.69*2 = 5.38" and divided by 24 hours = .224" per hour.
We get an error report with each encoder. It shows exactly what the error is for any given amount of time.

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: badgerz49@... [ap-gto]
To: ap-gto
Sent: Fri, Apr 19, 2019 11:24 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Re: The CN Encoder Debate Continues...



At the risk of "badgering" you, I'd be curious how you came up with the +/- .25" per hour figure.  It's almost as if you took the range of 2.69*2 = 5.38" and divided by 24 hours = .224" per hour.

If you used a method to precisely measure the error every hour, you'd have to do that many times to get an accurate estimate.  I assume you've tested with a method similar to this - not the (probably incorrect) method I mentioned above.




16401 - 16420 of 81312