Date   

Re: Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

Terri Zittritsch
 

Hi Wayne, I’ve not gotten any firm delivery dates yet, I’m just hoping that I can enjoy it a little before the numbing cold hits. 

I looked up the power source you’re using and it’s quite exotic.  I’m not sure I need anything quite like that yet.    Although, if the mount will really use 5A continuous, I’ll have to check what the draw is for my other components.   So far, I’ve been able to run everything (Camera, cooler, focuser, mount, guider) on the one battery as long as I’ve wanted without putting a dent it its capacity.   And been able to charge it back fully during the daytime.   But I know my current mounts don’t use anywhere near 5A continuous.    Most of the time I run off of AC at home, so it’s only when at a star party that I need the big battery, like at the WSP this year with the power still out due to Irma.   I do have a nice Maxoak Li-Ion battery pack with both 12 and 5 volt outputs, that I purchased for doing outreach.    And for outreach I use a meade SCT most of the time as it’s most convenient, low power,  and has a good susceptibility to bumps and tugs.  


Terri


On Sep 18, 2019, at 1:53 PM, wayneh9026@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

Hi Terri, I too am waiting for a Mach2 in November. Especially excited about the ‘always Knows where it is’ feature, allowing me to loosen the clutches for balancing and manual slewing without going through the ‘manually park in park 3, park to current position, unpark from
Park 3 and then realigning on a star or doing a platesolve to recover’ dance. 

Regarding power, Did you consider going to one of the new Lithium chemistry battery systems? All my Astro power headaches pretty much went away when I got a Renogy Lycan powerbox and 200 watt solar panel system. Now using a GoalZero Yeti 1400. Less than 50 lbs and about 100 aHours at 12v with more generous discharge characteristics allowing deeper discharge before recharging. Includes USB regular, USB-C high current, power pole 12v DC out and pure sine wave AC Inverter out. Expensive up front, but longer lifetime. Something to think about. 



Re: Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

mike.hambrick@...
 

OK Now I understand. I always wondered where Roland's Forum handle "uncarollo2" came from (still not sure about the 2 at the end though).


Best Regards

Michael Hambrick
ARLANXEO
TSR Global Manufacturing Support
PO Box 2000
Orange, TX 77631-2000
Phone: +1 (409) 882-2799
email: mike.hambrick@...




From:        "Karen karen@... [ap-gto]" <ap-gto@...>
To:        "ap-gto@..." <ap-gto@...>
Date:        09/18/2019 11:38 AM
Subject:        RE: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2
Sent by:        ap-gto@...




 

Hi Terri,

 

I’ll let the technical experts respond to most of your questions, but I can answer the last one.  When it comes to Roland’s name, you’re welcome to stick with whatever name you’re most comfortable with.  When he wants to sound official he signs his full name, Rolando is his more exotic persona, UncaRollo is what his nieces and nephews call him, and I refer to him as Dad.  He doesn’t stand on ceremony.  Use the moniker you like best.  Mr A-P might be my new favorite.  J

 

It’s great to hear from you, Terri, and we’re really looking forward to seeing the results from your Mach2!

Karen

 

From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
Sent:
Wednesday, September 18, 2019 8:28 AM
To:
chris1011@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>
Subject:
Fwd: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

 

 

A few more questions for the Mach2.

 

First, what is the counterweight need for the Mach2?  I was surprised about the larger mounts needing from 90-120% of the weight of the load.   Is this what I can expect for the Mach2 as well?  I do understand that part of this will depend on how far the load is from the axis, and right now I’m planning side-by-side mounting of scope/guide scope to keep things close to the axis.    I know this isn’t ideal and I’ll have to deal with unequal scope-saddle movement.

 

Secondly, I notice that the power needs show 12V/24V and 5A continuous.   Should this really be 60W continuous (12V, 5A) or will it really draw 120W (5A) at 24V?    Is this the result of the high holding current of micro-steppers on the mount?  I know when I saw the demo at NEAF the mount was resisting and correcting for bumps/wind.    I also remember hearing at some point that the mount will still track well with 20 pounds of imbalance, am I remembering this right?     I think I’ll be happy that I purchased the mighty-max sealed 55AH battery rather than the ubiquitous battery boxes with lights which contain tiny little batteries (although my arms and back will never forgive me).

 

Third, I’ve heard that the encoders will give me peace of mind because the mount will always know where it is.   I think I know what it means, but just to make sure my understanding is correct:    The mount knowing where it’s pointing, really only refers to knowing the absolute position of the shafts, and has nothing to do with knowing the absolute position of where the mount is pointing (the sky).   Even assuming perfect polar alignment, the mount still can’t understand where it’s pointing without some initial synchronization with at least a star or three or a model of the sky.   With a model plus the encoders, then you’ll know the absolute position (I think).  Am I thinking of this correctly?

And how practical is it to create a model of the sky when you’re using the mount in a non-permanent way?   Can I create a model in less than an hour, or is this a long process only really intended for permanent mounting and for mobile users we’ll just do a few star synchronization after polar alignment (I guess a model of sorts)?

 

Lastly for Mr. A-P himself, I’ve addressed you as both Roland and Rolando, and am getting uncomfortable with this ambiguity.   Everywhere outside of this forum, I’ve seen the name listed as Roland, but your signature here is shown as Rolando.   How do you prefer to be addressed?    It may seem a silly question, but I think it’s important to use the form/spelling of your name as you prefer.   I do understand they are forms of the same name.    

 

 

Terri

 

 
Begin forwarded message:

 

From: Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@gmail..com>

Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

Date: September 15, 2019 at 10:47:33 AM EDT

To: "chris1011@... [ap-gto]" <ap-gto@...>

 

Rolando, I’ve just placed my order for all accessories including a keypad with my vendor.    Should I have waited on the keypad until the Mach2 is shipping, or is this a pretty transparent change that I’ll just get software updates for?   Just want to make sure I’m not missing something by purchasing the keypad early.

 

 

Terri



On Sep 14, 2019, at 5:46 PM, chris1011@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

 

Nothing has changed on the keypad physically.. Some of the buttons may change function. We don't have a final software set yet. We are adding in some things that will be very useful to imagers.

 

Rolando

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Fischer
manusfisch@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>
To: ap-gto <
ap-gto@...>
Sent: Sat, Sep 14, 2019 3:14 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

 

Also will they be the same form factor,  i’ve just gotten used to the buttons

Tom Fischer

 

On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 12:42 deanjacobsen@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Roland.

 

When do you anticipate that the Mach2 manual and the CP5 manual will make its way to the support page?

 

Dean Jacobsen

 

 

 

 




Re: Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

Terri Zittritsch
 

Hi Karen, thank you for the response.. good to hear from you too.   So you satisfied my curiosity on this one.. as I was wondering if the signature was some kind of inside thing known only to long-time forum users, and given most users address your father as Roland, when he signs as Rolando, I just had to ask to make sure I wasn’t doing it wrong.   But it seems not, so exotic Rolando it will be.    I looked up Rolando, and at least one meaning for Spanish, Italian and Portuguese is "famous throughout the land", which seems appropriate in our hobby.  

I’m very excited to own one of your products and I’ll have to decide if I’m brave enough to post any of my AP results.… you have some incredibly talented users, including your father.  Being an early customer of Adam Block, when he was selling video’s out of the University of Arizona, I made the mistake of showing him some of my early DSLR AP work, and it brought me down to earth, kind of down to where the ants roam….     

One of the things I’m still wondering how to do, is how to alert my fellow astro-club members that they should expect 2-3 of months clouds around every new moon once I receive delivery.   


best, 
Terri

On Sep 18, 2019, at 12:35 PM, Karen karen@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:


Hi Terri,

 

I’ll let the technical experts respond to most of your questions, but I can answer the last one.  When it comes to Roland’s name, you’re welcome to stick with whatever name you’re most comfortable with.  When he wants to sound official he signs his full name, Rolando is his more exotic persona, UncaRollo is what his nieces and nephews call him, and I refer to him as Dad.  He doesn’t stand on ceremony.  Use the moniker you like best.  Mr A-P might be my new favorite.  J

 

It’s great to hear from you, Terri, and we’re really looking forward to seeing the results from your Mach2!

Karen

 

From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2019 8:28 AM
To: chris1011@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>
Subject: Fwd: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

 

  

A few more questions for the Mach2.

 

First, what is the counterweight need for the Mach2?  I was surprised about the larger mounts needing from 90-120% of the weight of the load.   Is this what I can expect for the Mach2 as well?  I do understand that part of this will depend on how far the load is from the axis, and right now I’m planning side-by-side mounting of scope/guide scope to keep things close to the axis.    I know this isn’t ideal and I’ll have to deal with unequal scope-saddle movement.

 

Secondly, I notice that the power needs show 12V/24V and 5A continuous.   Should this really be 60W continuous (12V, 5A) or will it really draw 120W (5A) at 24V?    Is this the result of the high holding current of micro-steppers on the mount?  I know when I saw the demo at NEAF the mount was resisting and correcting for bumps/wind.    I also remember hearing at some point that the mount will still track well with 20 pounds of imbalance, am I remembering this right?     I think I’ll be happy that I purchased the mighty-max sealed 55AH battery rather than the ubiquitous battery boxes with lights which contain tiny little batteries (although my arms and back will never forgive me).

 

Third, I’ve heard that the encoders will give me peace of mind because the mount will always know where it is.   I think I know what it means, but just to make sure my understanding is correct:    The mount knowing where it’s pointing, really only refers to knowing the absolute position of the shafts, and has nothing to do with knowing the absolute position of where the mount is pointing (the sky).   Even assuming perfect polar alignment, the mount still can’t understand where it’s pointing without some initial synchronization with at least a star or three or a model of the sky.   With a model plus the encoders, then you’ll know the absolute position (I think).  Am I thinking of this correctly?

And how practical is it to create a model of the sky when you’re using the mount in a non-permanent way?   Can I create a model in less than an hour, or is this a long process only really intended for permanent mounting and for mobile users we’ll just do a few star synchronization after polar alignment (I guess a model of sorts)?

 

Lastly for Mr. A-P himself, I’ve addressed you as both Roland and Rolando, and am getting uncomfortable with this ambiguity.   Everywhere outside of this forum, I’ve seen the name listed as Roland, but your signature here is shown as Rolando.   How do you prefer to be addressed?    It may seem a silly question, but I think it’s important to use the form/spelling of your name as you prefer.   I do understand they are forms of the same name.    

 

 

Terri

 

 

Begin forwarded message:

 

From: Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@gmail..com>

Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

Date: September 15, 2019 at 10:47:33 AM EDT

To: "chris1011@... [ap-gto]" <ap-gto@...>

 

Rolando, I’ve just placed my order for all accessories including a keypad with my vendor.    Should I have waited on the keypad until the Mach2 is shipping, or is this a pretty transparent change that I’ll just get software updates for?   Just want to make sure I’m not missing something by purchasing the keypad early.

 

 

Terri



On Sep 14, 2019, at 5:46 PM, chris1011@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

 

Nothing has changed on the keypad physically.. Some of the buttons may change function. We don't have a final software set yet. We are adding in some things that will be very useful to imagers.

 

Rolando

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Fischer manusfisch@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>
To: ap-gto <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Sat, Sep 14, 2019 3:14 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

 

Also will they be the same form factor,  i’ve just gotten used to the buttons 

Tom Fischer

 

On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 12:42 deanjacobsen@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Roland.

 

When do you anticipate that the Mach2 manual and the CP5 manual will make its way to the support page?

 

Dean Jacobsen

 

 

 

 




Re: Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

Wayne Hixson
 

Hi Terri, I too am waiting for a Mach2 in November. Especially excited about the ‘always Knows where it is’ feature, allowing me to loosen the clutches for balancing and manual slewing without going through the ‘manually park in park 3, park to current position, unpark from
Park 3 and then realigning on a star or doing a platesolve to recover’ dance.

Regarding power, Did you consider going to one of the new Lithium chemistry battery systems? All my Astro power headaches pretty much went away when I got a Renogy Lycan powerbox and 200 watt solar panel system. Now using a GoalZero Yeti 1400. Less than 50 lbs and about 100 aHours at 12v with more generous discharge characteristics allowing deeper discharge before recharging. Includes USB regular, USB-C high current, power pole 12v DC out and pure sine wave AC Inverter out. Expensive up front, but longer lifetime. Something to think about.


Re: Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

DFisch
 

Karen, this might be the sweetest post I have seen on this forum since i started a lowly couple of years ago.  Thanks for the humanization of Mr A-P

On Sep 18, 2019, at 12:35 PM, Karen karen@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:


Hi Terri,

 

I’ll let the technical experts respond to most of your questions, but I can answer the last one.  When it comes to Roland’s name, you’re welcome to stick with whatever name you’re most comfortable with.  When he wants to sound official he signs his full name, Rolando is his more exotic persona, UncaRollo is what his nieces and nephews call him, and I refer to him as Dad.  He doesn’t stand on ceremony.  Use the moniker you like best.  Mr A-P might be my new favorite.  J

 

It’s great to hear from you, Terri, and we’re really looking forward to seeing the results from your Mach2!

Karen

 

From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2019 8:28 AM
To: chris1011@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>
Subject: Fwd: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

 

  

A few more questions for the Mach2.

 

First, what is the counterweight need for the Mach2?  I was surprised about the larger mounts needing from 90-120% of the weight of the load.   Is this what I can expect for the Mach2 as well?  I do understand that part of this will depend on how far the load is from the axis, and right now I’m planning side-by-side mounting of scope/guide scope to keep things close to the axis.    I know this isn’t ideal and I’ll have to deal with unequal scope-saddle movement.

 

Secondly, I notice that the power needs show 12V/24V and 5A continuous.   Should this really be 60W continuous (12V, 5A) or will it really draw 120W (5A) at 24V?    Is this the result of the high holding current of micro-steppers on the mount?  I know when I saw the demo at NEAF the mount was resisting and correcting for bumps/wind.    I also remember hearing at some point that the mount will still track well with 20 pounds of imbalance, am I remembering this right?     I think I’ll be happy that I purchased the mighty-max sealed 55AH battery rather than the ubiquitous battery boxes with lights which contain tiny little batteries (although my arms and back will never forgive me).

 

Third, I’ve heard that the encoders will give me peace of mind because the mount will always know where it is.   I think I know what it means, but just to make sure my understanding is correct:    The mount knowing where it’s pointing, really only refers to knowing the absolute position of the shafts, and has nothing to do with knowing the absolute position of where the mount is pointing (the sky).   Even assuming perfect polar alignment, the mount still can’t understand where it’s pointing without some initial synchronization with at least a star or three or a model of the sky.   With a model plus the encoders, then you’ll know the absolute position (I think).  Am I thinking of this correctly?

And how practical is it to create a model of the sky when you’re using the mount in a non-permanent way?   Can I create a model in less than an hour, or is this a long process only really intended for permanent mounting and for mobile users we’ll just do a few star synchronization after polar alignment (I guess a model of sorts)?

 

Lastly for Mr. A-P himself, I’ve addressed you as both Roland and Rolando, and am getting uncomfortable with this ambiguity.   Everywhere outside of this forum, I’ve seen the name listed as Roland, but your signature here is shown as Rolando.   How do you prefer to be addressed?    It may seem a silly question, but I think it’s important to use the form/spelling of your name as you prefer.   I do understand they are forms of the same name.    

 

 

Terri

 

 

Begin forwarded message:

 

From: Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@gmail..com>

Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

Date: September 15, 2019 at 10:47:33 AM EDT

To: "chris1011@... [ap-gto]" <ap-gto@...>

 

Rolando, I’ve just placed my order for all accessories including a keypad with my vendor.    Should I have waited on the keypad until the Mach2 is shipping, or is this a pretty transparent change that I’ll just get software updates for?   Just want to make sure I’m not missing something by purchasing the keypad early.

 

 

Terri



On Sep 14, 2019, at 5:46 PM, chris1011@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

 

Nothing has changed on the keypad physically.. Some of the buttons may change function. We don't have a final software set yet. We are adding in some things that will be very useful to imagers.

 

Rolando

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Fischer manusfisch@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>
To: ap-gto <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Sat, Sep 14, 2019 3:14 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

 

Also will they be the same form factor,  i’ve just gotten used to the buttons 

Tom Fischer

 

On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 12:42 deanjacobsen@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Roland.

 

When do you anticipate that the Mach2 manual and the CP5 manual will make its way to the support page?

 

Dean Jacobsen

 

 

 

 




Re: Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

Karen Christen
 

Hi Terri,

 

I’ll let the technical experts respond to most of your questions, but I can answer the last one.  When it comes to Roland’s name, you’re welcome to stick with whatever name you’re most comfortable with.  When he wants to sound official he signs his full name, Rolando is his more exotic persona, UncaRollo is what his nieces and nephews call him, and I refer to him as Dad.  He doesn’t stand on ceremony.  Use the moniker you like best.  Mr A-P might be my new favorite.  J

 

It’s great to hear from you, Terri, and we’re really looking forward to seeing the results from your Mach2!

Karen

 

From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2019 8:28 AM
To: chris1011@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>
Subject: Fwd: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

 

 

A few more questions for the Mach2.

 

First, what is the counterweight need for the Mach2?  I was surprised about the larger mounts needing from 90-120% of the weight of the load.   Is this what I can expect for the Mach2 as well?  I do understand that part of this will depend on how far the load is from the axis, and right now I’m planning side-by-side mounting of scope/guide scope to keep things close to the axis.    I know this isn’t ideal and I’ll have to deal with unequal scope-saddle movement.

 

Secondly, I notice that the power needs show 12V/24V and 5A continuous.   Should this really be 60W continuous (12V, 5A) or will it really draw 120W (5A) at 24V?    Is this the result of the high holding current of micro-steppers on the mount?  I know when I saw the demo at NEAF the mount was resisting and correcting for bumps/wind.    I also remember hearing at some point that the mount will still track well with 20 pounds of imbalance, am I remembering this right?     I think I’ll be happy that I purchased the mighty-max sealed 55AH battery rather than the ubiquitous battery boxes with lights which contain tiny little batteries (although my arms and back will never forgive me).

 

Third, I’ve heard that the encoders will give me peace of mind because the mount will always know where it is.   I think I know what it means, but just to make sure my understanding is correct:    The mount knowing where it’s pointing, really only refers to knowing the absolute position of the shafts, and has nothing to do with knowing the absolute position of where the mount is pointing (the sky).   Even assuming perfect polar alignment, the mount still can’t understand where it’s pointing without some initial synchronization with at least a star or three or a model of the sky.   With a model plus the encoders, then you’ll know the absolute position (I think).  Am I thinking of this correctly?

And how practical is it to create a model of the sky when you’re using the mount in a non-permanent way?   Can I create a model in less than an hour, or is this a long process only really intended for permanent mounting and for mobile users we’ll just do a few star synchronization after polar alignment (I guess a model of sorts)?

 

Lastly for Mr. A-P himself, I’ve addressed you as both Roland and Rolando, and am getting uncomfortable with this ambiguity.   Everywhere outside of this forum, I’ve seen the name listed as Roland, but your signature here is shown as Rolando.   How do you prefer to be addressed?    It may seem a silly question, but I think it’s important to use the form/spelling of your name as you prefer.   I do understand they are forms of the same name.    

 

 

Terri

 

 

Begin forwarded message:

 

From: Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@gmail..com>

Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

Date: September 15, 2019 at 10:47:33 AM EDT

To: "chris1011@... [ap-gto]" <ap-gto@...>

 

Rolando, I’ve just placed my order for all accessories including a keypad with my vendor.    Should I have waited on the keypad until the Mach2 is shipping, or is this a pretty transparent change that I’ll just get software updates for?   Just want to make sure I’m not missing something by purchasing the keypad early.

 

 

Terri



On Sep 14, 2019, at 5:46 PM, chris1011@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

 

Nothing has changed on the keypad physically.. Some of the buttons may change function. We don't have a final software set yet. We are adding in some things that will be very useful to imagers.

 

Rolando

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Fischer manusfisch@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>
To: ap-gto <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Sat, Sep 14, 2019 3:14 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

 

Also will they be the same form factor,  i’ve just gotten used to the buttons 

Tom Fischer

 

On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 12:42 deanjacobsen@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:

 

Thanks Roland.

 

When do you anticipate that the Mach2 manual and the CP5 manual will make its way to the support page?

 

Dean Jacobsen

 

 

 

 


Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2

Terri Zittritsch
 

A few more questions for the Mach2.

First, what is the counterweight need for the Mach2?  I was surprised about the larger mounts needing from 90-120% of the weight of the load.   Is this what I can expect for the Mach2 as well?  I do understand that part of this will depend on how far the load is from the axis, and right now I’m planning side-by-side mounting of scope/guide scope to keep things close to the axis.    I know this isn’t ideal and I’ll have to deal with unequal scope-saddle movement.

Secondly, I notice that the power needs show 12V/24V and 5A continuous.   Should this really be 60W continuous (12V, 5A) or will it really draw 120W (5A) at 24V?    Is this the result of the high holding current of micro-steppers on the mount?  I know when I saw the demo at NEAF the mount was resisting and correcting for bumps/wind.    I also remember hearing at some point that the mount will still track well with 20 pounds of imbalance, am I remembering this right?     I think I’ll be happy that I purchased the mighty-max sealed 55AH battery rather than the ubiquitous battery boxes with lights which contain tiny little batteries (although my arms and back will never forgive me).

Third, I’ve heard that the encoders will give me peace of mind because the mount will always know where it is.   I think I know what it means, but just to make sure my understanding is correct:    The mount knowing where it’s pointing, really only refers to knowing the absolute position of the shafts, and has nothing to do with knowing the absolute position of where the mount is pointing (the sky).   Even assuming perfect polar alignment, the mount still can’t understand where it’s pointing without some initial synchronization with at least a star or three or a model of the sky.   With a model plus the encoders, then you’ll know the absolute position (I think).  Am I thinking of this correctly?
And how practical is it to create a model of the sky when you’re using the mount in a non-permanent way?   Can I create a model in less than an hour, or is this a long process only really intended for permanent mounting and for mobile users we’ll just do a few star synchronization after polar alignment (I guess a model of sorts)?

Lastly for Mr. A-P himself, I’ve addressed you as both Roland and Rolando, and am getting uncomfortable with this ambiguity.   Everywhere outside of this forum, I’ve seen the name listed as Roland, but your signature here is shown as Rolando.   How do you prefer to be addressed?    It may seem a silly question, but I think it’s important to use the form/spelling of your name as you prefer.   I do understand they are forms of the same name.    


Terri


Begin forwarded message:

From: Terri Zittritsch <theresamarie11@...>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2
Date: September 15, 2019 at 10:47:33 AM EDT
To: "chris1011@... [ap-gto]" <ap-gto@...>

Rolando, I’ve just placed my order for all accessories including a keypad with my vendor.    Should I have waited on the keypad until the Mach2 is shipping, or is this a pretty transparent change that I’ll just get software updates for?   Just want to make sure I’m not missing something by purchasing the keypad early.


Terri

On Sep 14, 2019, at 5:46 PM, chris1011@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:


Nothing has changed on the keypad physically. Some of the buttons may change function. We don't have a final software set yet. We are adding in some things that will be very useful to imagers.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Fischer manusfisch@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...>
To: ap-gto <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Sat, Sep 14, 2019 3:14 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Using the GTO keypad with the Mach2



Also will they be the same form factor,  i’ve just gotten used to the buttons 
Tom Fischer

On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 12:42 deanjacobsen@... [ap-gto] <ap-gto@...> wrote:
 
Thanks Roland.

When do you anticipate that the Mach2 manual and the CP5 manual will make its way to the support page?

Dean Jacobsen






Re: SGP/APCC meridian limits vs. Homing/limits

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Rodolphe,

SGPro will take care of the flipping the mount at the appropriate time. The flip offset value in APCC is there to prevent the mount from hitting the meridian limit and performing a Parkoperation or stopping tracking to protect the mount.

So, if you are taking 10-minute images, you should add an extra 5 minutes and thus set the flip offset to 15 minutes in APCC. This moves the flip time forward 15 minutes in the mount and also in the flip time that is sent to SGPro. This will give the mount 5 minutes of buffer time before the meridian limit is reached which should be more than enough time for SGPro to move on to the next target.

-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: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 1:59 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: [ap-gto] Re: SGP/APCC meridian limits vs. Homing/limits



Hi Rob,
Thanks for taking the time to answer.
To be frank, I'm even more confused :(

SGP seems to compute the time at which the meridian flip would theoretically occur. I let SGP manage the flip by
itself. I don't want to interfere with this - just want to ensure that the current frame is finished before the flip. I thus
changed the setting in SGP to wait for 10 more minutes,


But what should I do in APCC? Leave everything empty in APCC and the AP ASCOM driver? I noticed that setting
values there to what I believed were correct for what I wanted to achieve, ruined my session last night: the mount
has stopped in a weird position.


I wish a recommended approach / clea r directions were documented somewhere.

Thanks

Rodolphe




Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Chad,

The RA drift you're talking about didn't seem to affect my guiding. I'm pretty sure I was getting .4" or lower Total
RMS on both mounts for much of that night.
I didn't mean to imply that RA drift couldn't be guided out, if that's what you took from my post. Of course it can, and it's okay that you are happy with the autoguiding performance you are getting.

The point I was trying to make is that RA drift was overshadowing your PEM test. That is, there will be autoguider moves of about the same magnitude with or without PEM enabled. So, I believe you that you didn't see much difference in this particular case! However, if you could remove the drift it should drop the RMS error you are getting.

In addition to periodic error encoders can remove many other tracking anomalies like drift from eccentricity in the worm wheel, tiny variations in worm wheel teeth, declination backlash, wind, etc. You will still need a good pointing model however to remove drift from telescope flexure, slight errors in polar alignment, refraction, etc. If you remove those other sources of drift the average stellar FWHM and eccentricity in your images will go down.

-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: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 9:15 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: RE: [ap-gto] Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2



Ray,

The RA drift you're talking about didn't seem to affect my guiding. I'm pretty sure I was getting .4" or lower Total
RMS on both mounts for much of that night.

I don't care to waste any more time discussing this. I think skepticism is good and in short supply in this hobby. I
haven't seen evidence encoders improve guided imaging and I'll leave it at that. It's possible they make a big
difference, I don't know. Maybe it'll be hashed out someday. Regarding PEC, my tests have all been anecdotal
and I haven't concluded anything about how it affects guiding. I'm happy with my mounts and hope others are too.

Chad


Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2

Bill Long
 

If it's a waste, why bother bringing it up? 


From: ap-gto@... on behalf of badgerz49@... [ap-gto]
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 9:15 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: RE: [ap-gto] Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2
 
 

Ray,


The RA drift you're talking about didn't seem to affect my guiding.  I'm pretty sure I was getting .4" or lower Total RMS on both mounts for much of that night.

I don't care to waste any more time discussing this.  I think skepticism is good and in short supply in this hobby.  I haven't seen evidence encoders improve guided imaging and I'll leave it at that.  It's possible they make a big difference, I don't know.  Maybe it'll be hashed out someday.  Regarding PEC, my tests have all been anecdotal and I haven't concluded anything about how it affects guiding.  I'm happy with my mounts and hope others are too.

Chad


Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2

Chad A
 

Ray,

The RA drift you're talking about didn't seem to affect my guiding.  I'm pretty sure I was getting .4" or lower Total RMS on both mounts for much of that night.

I don't care to waste any more time discussing this.  I think skepticism is good and in short supply in this hobby.  I haven't seen evidence encoders improve guided imaging and I'll leave it at that.  It's possible they make a big difference, I don't know.  Maybe it'll be hashed out someday.  Regarding PEC, my tests have all been anecdotal and I haven't concluded anything about how it affects guiding.  I'm happy with my mounts and hope others are too.

Chad


Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2

Bill Long
 

I dont get why you feel the need, Chad, to continue along this path of trying to determine if Encoders provide better performance. I am pretty sure the image shared by Roland, put that to bed. 

I also dont get why you are persisting to attack Ray. The dude is trying to help.


From: ap-gto@...
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 7:51 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: RE: [ap-gto] Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2
 
 

Hi Chad,

> You showed images of a mount with "40 arc seconds PE." Assuming you ran a valid test it only demonstrates that
> PEC improves guiding if your mount has 40" PE. I fully expect it would. That doesn't begin to address whether
> PEC improves guiding on an AP mount with less than +/- 3" P-P smooth native PE.

As I said previously I have run many tests, including many at 5 arc-sec Peak-Peak that showed up to 10% improvement in FWHM.

> These logs will be very difficult to draw any conclusions from since I had zero intention of making them clear and
> intelligible. What I can tell you is:
>
> PEM was enabled near the end of the night on one of the two mounts. I believe it was enabled on the file that ends
> in 201308 but I don't remember for sure. Total RMS stayed right around Total RMS for the other mount which had
> PEM disabled. I also didn't notice a change from when PEM was off vs. on.

As I suspected the RA data is dominated by drift and mostly overshadows the periodic error. It's no wonder that you didn't notice much difference.

Are you using APCC Pro? If you are I think there is something wrong with the data model you are using. You should have little residual drift in RA and Dec.

> I will try and do a proper test tonight. If there's improvement, that's what I'll report. I hope there is.

If your mount still has that a lot of RA drift then any improvement will be diminished. Also, you must do the tests on the same mount because each mount may have different levels of drift. Drift will affect the RMS error, sometimes more so than periodic error.

So, please do your tests with the same mount. I will be able to isolate and analyze the drift and periodic error in the logs to determine exactly what is contributing to your RMS error.

-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: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 3:10 PM
> To: ap-gto@...
> Subject: RE: [ap-gto] Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2
>
>
>
> Ray,
> You showed images of a mount with "40 arc seconds PE." Assuming you ran a valid test it only demonstrates that
> PEC improves guiding if your mount has 40" PE. I fully expect it would. That doesn't begin to address whether
> PEC improves guiding on an AP mount with less than +/- 3" P-P smooth native PE.
>
> Regarding guide logs... here's a copy of the email I just sent you - with guide logs from both mounts on Sep. 4
> attached. I can't imagine they'll be helpful - it's just one of the times I've enabled PEM and noticed no difference. I
> can also provide you PEMPro logs from that same evening if such a thing exists. I plan to do a proper and much
> longer test when the weather cooperates - possibly tonight.
>
> --Email below---
>
> Ray,
> There was a lot going on this particular evening ... creating new PEC curves in PEMPro, running guiding assistant,
> testing various PHD2 settings, testing PEM on/off, etc.
>
> These logs will be very difficult to draw any conclusions from since I had zero intention of making them clear and
> intelligible. What I can tell you is:
>
> PEM was enabled near the end of the night on one of the two mounts. I believe it was enabled on the file that ends
> in 201308 but I don't remember for sure. Total RMS stayed right around Total RMS for the other mount which had
> PEM disabled. I also didn't notice a change from when PEM was off vs. on.
>
> I will try and do a proper test tonight. If there's improvement, that's what I'll report. I hope there is.
>
> Chad
>
>
>


Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Chad,

You showed images of a mount with "40 arc seconds PE." Assuming you ran a valid test it only demonstrates that
PEC improves guiding if your mount has 40" PE. I fully expect it would. That doesn't begin to address whether
PEC improves guiding on an AP mount with less than +/- 3" P-P smooth native PE.
As I said previously I have run many tests, including many at 5 arc-sec Peak-Peak that showed up to 10% improvement in FWHM.

These logs will be very difficult to draw any conclusions from since I had zero intention of making them clear and
intelligible. What I can tell you is:

PEM was enabled near the end of the night on one of the two mounts. I believe it was enabled on the file that ends
in 201308 but I don't remember for sure. Total RMS stayed right around Total RMS for the other mount which had
PEM disabled. I also didn't notice a change from when PEM was off vs. on.
As I suspected the RA data is dominated by drift and mostly overshadows the periodic error. It's no wonder that you didn't notice much difference.

Are you using APCC Pro? If you are I think there is something wrong with the data model you are using. You should have little residual drift in RA and Dec.

I will try and do a proper test tonight. If there's improvement, that's what I'll report. I hope there is.
If your mount still has that a lot of RA drift then any improvement will be diminished. Also, you must do the tests on the same mount because each mount may have different levels of drift. Drift will affect the RMS error, sometimes more so than periodic error.

So, please do your tests with the same mount. I will be able to isolate and analyze the drift and periodic error in the logs to determine exactly what is contributing to your RMS error.

-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: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 3:10 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: RE: [ap-gto] Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2



Ray,
You showed images of a mount with "40 arc seconds PE." Assuming you ran a valid test it only demonstrates that
PEC improves guiding if your mount has 40" PE. I fully expect it would. That doesn't begin to address whether
PEC improves guiding on an AP mount with less than +/- 3" P-P smooth native PE.

Regarding guide logs... here's a copy of the email I just sent you - with guide logs from both mounts on Sep. 4
attached. I can't imagine they'll be helpful - it's just one of the times I've enabled PEM and noticed no difference. I
can also provide you PEMPro logs from that same evening if such a thing exists. I plan to do a proper and much
longer test when the weather cooperates - possibly tonight.

--Email below---

Ray,
There was a lot going on this particular evening ... creating new PEC curves in PEMPro, running guiding assistant,
testing various PHD2 settings, testing PEM on/off, etc.

These logs will be very difficult to draw any conclusions from since I had zero intention of making them clear and
intelligible. What I can tell you is:

PEM was enabled near the end of the night on one of the two mounts. I believe it was enabled on the file that ends
in 201308 but I don't remember for sure. Total RMS stayed right around Total RMS for the other mount which had
PEM disabled. I also didn't notice a change from when PEM was off vs. on.

I will try and do a proper test tonight. If there's improvement, that's what I'll report. I hope there is.

Chad



Re: SGP/APCC meridian limits vs. Homing/limits

rob
 

well the problem is you've got 2 programs, each with potentially their own idea of when the meridian flip should happen. so Ray put in this feature that lets APCC tell SGP what the meridian delay should be. that way, APCC can be configured with some complex meridian limit surface and it can tell SGP how many minutes before that limit is reached that it should attempt a meridian flip.

if you don't want to use that feature (and in truth it's probably not necessary in a configuration like mine where i have the same limit for all declinations) you can just do something like set SGP to a 0 minute delay and set the meridian limit surface in APCC for 10 minutes past the true meridian at all declinations. i think perhaps that's not enough time though depending on what your subexposure length is.

so - how far past the meridian do you have your limits set in SGP? how far past the meridian can your mount track in the worst case before the camera hits the pier/tripod? what is your subexposure length?

rob


Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2

Michael Fulbright <mike.fulbright@...>
 

I haven't given it much thought but if you assume a Gaussian profile for your stars and the guide errors are normally distributed I would think the final FWHM of the star broadened by guide errors would add in quadrature.

sigma_F = sqrt( (sigma_*)^2 + (sigma_g)^2)

where sigma_F is the final sigma of the Gaussian star profile, sigma_* is the unbroadened star profile, and sigma_g is the error guiding.

If you have seeing like me and most stars are around sigma_*=2 arcsec and sigma_g=0.4 arcsec I get sigma_F = 2.04 arc sec.

I'm sure there is work on this in professional journals if someone really wanted to know the answer.

Just a quick search I  found this:

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1996ESOC...54..275J

Seems to consider many sources that must be controlled to give the best image resolution including atmospheric and guiding effects.

You could do a test and take a < 5 second exposure of a bright star cluster then take a 300s exposure of a fainter star field and compare FWHM.  Presumably the short exposure is roughly measuring your optics and short term turbulence while the longer would incorporate guiding errors as well.

Michael Fulbright


On 9/17/19 5:14 PM, badgerz49@... [ap-gto] wrote:
 

Ray, 

You showed images of a mount with "40 arc seconds PE."  Assuming you ran a valid test it only demonstrates that PEC improves guiding if your mount has 40" PE.  I fully expect it would.  That doesn't begin to address whether it improves guiding on an AP mount with less than +/- 3" P-P smooth native PE.

This is bizarre why someone can't run simple tests to hash out how much improvement in guiding encoders offer.  Nothing is stopping AP from testing it, or better yet, enlisting an unbiased source to do the testing.

Regarding guide logs... here's a copy of the email I just sent you - with guide logs from Sep. 4 attached.  I can't imagine they'll be helpful.  I can also provide you PEMPro logs from that same evening if such a thing exists.

--Email below---

Ray,
There was a lot going on this particular evening ... creating new PEC curves in PEM Pro, running guiding assistant, testing various PHD2 settings, testing PEM on/off, etc.

These logs will be very difficult to draw any conclusions from since I had zero intention of making them clear and intelligible.  What I can tell you is:

PEM was enabled near the end of the night on one of the two mounts.  I believe it was enabled on the file that ends in 201308 but I don't remember for sure.  Total RMS stayed right around Total RMS for the other mount which had guiding disabled.  I did not notice any improvement from when PEC had been disabled either.

I will try and do a proper test tonight.  If there's improvement, that's what I'll report.  I hope there is.

Chad

-- End Email --




Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2

Chad A
 

Ray, 
You showed images of a mount with "40 arc seconds PE."  Assuming you ran a valid test it only demonstrates that PEC improves guiding if your mount has 40" PE.  I fully expect it would.  That doesn't begin to address whether PEC improves guiding on an AP mount with less than +/- 3" P-P smooth native PE.

Regarding guide logs... here's a copy of the email I just sent you - with guide logs from both mounts on Sep. 4 attached.  I can't imagine they'll be helpful - it's just one of the times I've enabled PEM and noticed no difference.  I can also provide you PEMPro logs from that same evening if such a thing exists.  I plan to do a proper and much longer test when the weather cooperates - possibly tonight.

--Email below---

Ray,
There was a lot going on this particular evening ... creating new PEC curves in PEMPro, running guiding assistant, testing various PHD2 settings, testing PEM on/off, etc.

These logs will be very difficult to draw any conclusions from since I had zero intention of making them clear and intelligible.  What I can tell you is:

PEM was enabled near the end of the night on one of the two mounts.  I believe it was enabled on the file that ends in 201308 but I don't remember for sure.  Total RMS stayed right around Total RMS for the other mount which had PEM disabled.  I also didn't notice a change from when PEM was off vs. on.

I will try and do a proper test tonight.  If there's improvement, that's what I'll report.  I hope there is.

Chad


Re: SGP/APCC meridian limits vs. Homing/limits

Rodolphe G.
 

Hi Rob,
Thanks for taking the time to answer.
To be frank, I'm even more confused :(

SGP seems to compute the time at which the meridian flip would theoretically occur. I let SGP manage the flip by itself. I don't want to interfere with this - just want to ensure that the current frame is finished before the flip. I thus changed the setting in SGP to wait for 10 more minutes,

But what should I do in APCC? Leave everything empty in APCC and the AP ASCOM driver? I noticed that setting values there to what I believed were correct for what I wanted to achieve, ruined my session last night: the mount has stopped in a weird position.

I wish a recommended approach / clear directions were documented somewhere.

Thanks

Rodolphe


Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2

Ray Gralak
 

The logs should be from the same setup, not two different setups.

-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: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 10:36 AM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: RE: [ap-gto] Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2



I forgot I sold my duplicate ASI1600 last week, so the two rigs are identical except for the cameras. One will use
an ASI1600 and the other an ASI183.


Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2

Roland Christen
 

You will notice improvement with long focal lengths in good seeing. Otherwise you are limited by pixel resolution and atmospheric seeing.

Using the 180F9 refractor I was getting 1.2 to 1.3 arc sec FWHM all night during good seeing. The mount was guiding in both axes at 0.1 to 0.13 rms. I don't think that this would be possible with the non-encoder version of this mount - the Mach1. In our Chile observatory (1600 encoder mount) at LasCampanas we measured FWHM of 0.9 arc sec with the 305F8 Mak-Cass astrograph when we were setting it up.

As I indicated before, the Mach2 doesn't really work without the axis shaft encoders, just like your mount doesn't really work without the motor shaft encoders. Every decent mount has to have encoders somewhere, either on the motor shaft or on the axis shaft. The feedback from these encoders provides loop control and steady tracking rates. If the encoder is on the motor shaft then it does not account for errors in the geartrain. If it's on the output shaft then all errors are accounted for except for the encoder itself. Since we are opting to use high accuracy encoders on the output shaft, the errors are very very small, almost 5 times smaller than the best you can do with worm and spur gear reduction, even accounting for the use of PEM. You are then only limited by the atmosphere and your scope/camera resolution.

The encoders also provide a number of other benefits that people have wanted all along, so we are advancing the technology and raising the bar. The Mach2 is a very effective mount for high performing scopes and can handle larger loads better than its predecessor.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: badgerz49@... [ap-gto]
To: ap-gto
Sent: Tue, Sep 17, 2019 11:34 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2



Roland - so you are saying Total RMS will improve with encoders.  Back to the original question; how much improvement is there in Total RMS for guided imaging with typical 2-3 second guide intervals?

In limited testing I haven't noticed any improvement in Total RMS with PEC on vs. off, which is why I have doubts encoders will improve Total RMS much, if any.  That's with an excellent PEC curve that almost eliminated PE.  Seeing seems to be the limiting factor.  Fast oscillations, backlash, and PE are negligible.

Chad



Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2

Ray Gralak
 

Chad,

I ask because my experience has not been the same as you claim. I provided you with test results showing visible and measurable differences in FWHM and stellar eccentricity. The very least you can do is to provide guide logs that show no measurable difference in RMS when pec is enabled versus disabled. Please feel free to provide the logs alone. If they are phd2 logs my log viewer app can detect the moves and reconstruct periodic error to confirm pec was disabled in one of the logs (and thus a proper comparison).

-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: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 10:25 AM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: RE: [ap-gto] Re: Tracking and guiding with and without encoders - Part2



Ray, I have guide logs but the AP ASCOM driver Logs folders are empty. I don't recall unchecking the "Enable
Debug Log" option, so maybe it's unchecked by default. It wasn't checked on either of the laptops for my AP
mounts.

I shouldn't have to do it, but I'm happy to run a complete test of guided Total RMS with PEC enabled vs. disabled
and share the results. I have identical AP1100 and identical OTA/Imaging trains which get total RMS almost
exactly in sync with each other. This acts as a control against variations in seeing being the cause of (non)
differences with PEC on/off. I will also show in PEMPro that my PEC curve almost completely eliminates PE. I'll
do it tonight if it's clear.

Chad