Date   

Re: Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

Shailesh Trivedi
 

Roland,

Please point me to your simple polar alignment method. 

Shailesh


Re: GTOCP4 Control Box

Tom Blahovici
 

oops, the base is 3 feet in diameter.  The pier is from Software Bisque and is 10" in diameter.  It bolts to 4 stainless steel rods embedded in the concrete. In the summer I take the whole things down, replace the small hole with an upside down bucket covered in astroturf.  Can hardly see it at all.


Re: Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

Roland Christen
 

Pointing model comes automatic with APCC-APPM. It's not mount specific.

Polar alignment is so simple, almost anyone can do it with eyes closed if you use my method. It's also fast and quite accurate. I will probably turn it into an automatic keypad routine at some point. All you need is a scope and camera with crosshairs on the image - Maxim DL has this.

Not sure what user focused means.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: alan.dang@...
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2021 6:14 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

What can AP do that others cannot?
1. reliability/customer service
2. sophisticated pointing model
3. sophisticated polar alignment
4. user/focused (understands needs of users).

So in terms of picking 3 out of the 5.

1) Tracking performance should be good enough to make having an advanced pointing model worthwhile.  If the tracking performance is bad enough that a mount set at sidereal will give you the same result, it’s not taking advantage of the performance.

It is not clear to me how much guiding solves this.  My understanding is that a good model avoids the need for guiding.  
It is not clear to me how much clutches affect this target of performance.

it is not clear to me if corrections in DEC are needed after an AP model is created or if it’s just RA modifications.
I don’t know what pixel size to assume but I think 3-4 microns is a reasonable assumption.

2) You have hit it spot on that there are older hobbyists who would do better with lightweight mounts and there are plenty of young hobbyists who like to travel.

3) Make it as affordable as possible.  The Stowaway lets a lot more people enjoy your optics.  
Let’s call this the “AP Traveler GTO”.

4) if it is spec’d to meet the criteria of “good enough to benefit from a pointing model” versus just tracking with the 92/6.65 versus the 130GTX, how does that change the price and size?

Maybe for the 92/6.65 “good enough to benefit from a pointing model” it would still be “very good” with the overloaded 130GTX or C11.


--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

Roland Christen
 

Rough estimate ~ $15k.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Erickson <christopher.k.erickson@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2021 5:37 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

High precision abs encoder on RA. For precise homing, pointing and tracking.
Lower resolution abs encoder on DEC. Much cheaper and perfectly suitable for precise homing and pointing.
Servo motors. For lowest voltage and current requirements.
Operable on 8-20VDC.
Strain wave gears with electric brakes. For zero backlash, no reverse-driving when power is lost, and size/weight savings.
Super-lightweight and compact overall.
No clutches needed. I haven't missed having clutches on my RST-135 at all.
Motor-current-measuring-based balancing function.
New, dedicated hand controller with integral GPS & Bluetooth, and optionally WiFi, serial, USB and Ethernet.
Maybe have an XBee socket or two in the hand controller. Let users pick their own wireless frequency and protocol options.
Mount setup procedure optimized and simplified for travel. OLED display good to -40F/C
Built-in base adapter to put it on a carbon-fiber Gitzo 85 (or clone 85mm head) tripod.
Optional hollow composite counterweight. Fill with water when in the field.
Lightweight counterweight shaft. I am a strong believer in counterweights for strain wave mounts, whenever possible. I don't care what Rainbow pushes in their ads.
Lightweight, telescoping, two-section, aluminum pier with 85mm socket head option for travel. More rigid than a Gitzo CF tripod.
Ability to operate in Alt-Az as well as polar mode. Alt-Az is great for visual, solar and occultation use.
Options for both electronic as well as optical polar scopes.
Give the electronics enough horsepower to add cool stuff in the future, like Slo-Mo all-sky tracker features and the like.
Bubble levels in mount and pier. Optional compass.
Multi-star alignments with software ortho compensation.
Voltage and current displayed continuously on the hand controller.
If possible, through the mount power and USB3/USB-C. Or put cable securing points on the DEC axis and base so a springy umbilical channel can be used.
Optional custom, lightweight, wheelie travel case. Maybe have a stroller or diaper bag camouflage kit for it. LOL

"My advice is always free and worth every penny!"

-Christopher Erickson
Observatory Engineer
Summit Kinetics
Waikoloa, Hawaii


On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 12:01 PM Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
I guess if you need just an imaging mount with no clutches (no way to use manually without power), it can be very small and light weight.
A universal mount like the Mach2 or 10-Micron has more components than a non-clutched mount like the MYT or Rainbow mounts.
A non-clutched mount without encoders would be slightly less weight, and less cost, but will always require aggressive guiding.
A non-clutched mount with just an RA encoder to eliminate the periodic error would be medium cost and light weight.

There are a lot of permutations and possibilities, and it would depend on what you want to do with this mount. Some people just want a light weight mount that they can haul out from the basement to the driveway, put a scope on it, put an eyepiece on it and do a Moon Cruise or examine the planets. They don't need encoders or PE correction. Others want one as small as possible for airline travel and may or may not want to guide. Others want a precision universal mount that they can do anything with, but must have low weight because their back hurts. The possibilities are endless.

Low cost, medium or high cost. Medium weight low weight or ultra-low weight. Low tracking performance, medium or ultra-high performance. Clutched or non-clutched - universal or targeted. Single encoder or dual absolute encoders.

Pick any 3 out of 5.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: alan.dang@...
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2021 2:46 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

And not just older people, but young enthusiasts who just want a lighter no-fuss mount that more easily travels when going on a group road trip where you have limited space for the Astro gear along with clothes and other travel essentials.

A real question is what is the smallest mount that would work with a AP105 and have encoders?  You might not save production cost over a mount that handles a C11 or AP130EDT — but if the mount is dramatically smaller or lighter, it could be interesting.

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

Bill Long
 

Good point. Single RA encoder would be enough. Price would certainly come down that way. 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 4:31 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN
 
Do you need a Dec encoder for what? Remember, Dec doesn't have to track.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2021 4:07 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

Low weight, medium cost, dual absolute encoders.  🙂 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 2:01 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN
 
I guess if you need just an imaging mount with no clutches (no way to use manually without power), it can be very small and light weight.
A universal mount like the Mach2 or 10-Micron has more components than a non-clutched mount like the MYT or Rainbow mounts.
A non-clutched mount without encoders would be slightly less weight, and less cost, but will always require aggressive guiding.
A non-clutched mount with just an RA encoder to eliminate the periodic error would be medium cost and light weight.

There are a lot of permutations and possibilities, and it would depend on what you want to do with this mount. Some people just want a light weight mount that they can haul out from the basement to the driveway, put a scope on it, put an eyepiece on it and do a Moon Cruise or examine the planets. They don't need encoders or PE correction. Others want one as small as possible for airline travel and may or may not want to guide. Others want a precision universal mount that they can do anything with, but must have low weight because their back hurts. The possibilities are endless.

Low cost, medium or high cost. Medium weight low weight or ultra-low weight. Low tracking performance, medium or ultra-high performance. Clutched or non-clutched - universal or targeted. Single encoder or dual absolute encoders.

Pick any 3 out of 5.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: alan.dang@...
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2021 2:46 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

And not just older people, but young enthusiasts who just want a lighter no-fuss mount that more easily travels when going on a group road trip where you have limited space for the Astro gear along with clothes and other travel essentials.

A real question is what is the smallest mount that would work with a AP105 and have encoders?  You might not save production cost over a mount that handles a C11 or AP130EDT — but if the mount is dramatically smaller or lighter, it could be interesting.

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

Roland Christen
 

Do you need a Dec encoder for what? Remember, Dec doesn't have to track.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2021 4:07 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

Low weight, medium cost, dual absolute encoders.  🙂 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 2:01 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN
 
I guess if you need just an imaging mount with no clutches (no way to use manually without power), it can be very small and light weight.
A universal mount like the Mach2 or 10-Micron has more components than a non-clutched mount like the MYT or Rainbow mounts.
A non-clutched mount without encoders would be slightly less weight, and less cost, but will always require aggressive guiding.
A non-clutched mount with just an RA encoder to eliminate the periodic error would be medium cost and light weight.

There are a lot of permutations and possibilities, and it would depend on what you want to do with this mount. Some people just want a light weight mount that they can haul out from the basement to the driveway, put a scope on it, put an eyepiece on it and do a Moon Cruise or examine the planets. They don't need encoders or PE correction. Others want one as small as possible for airline travel and may or may not want to guide. Others want a precision universal mount that they can do anything with, but must have low weight because their back hurts. The possibilities are endless.

Low cost, medium or high cost. Medium weight low weight or ultra-low weight. Low tracking performance, medium or ultra-high performance. Clutched or non-clutched - universal or targeted. Single encoder or dual absolute encoders.

Pick any 3 out of 5.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: alan.dang@...
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2021 2:46 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

And not just older people, but young enthusiasts who just want a lighter no-fuss mount that more easily travels when going on a group road trip where you have limited space for the Astro gear along with clothes and other travel essentials.

A real question is what is the smallest mount that would work with a AP105 and have encoders?  You might not save production cost over a mount that handles a C11 or AP130EDT — but if the mount is dramatically smaller or lighter, it could be interesting.

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

Roland Christen
 

Ok, no problem for those 3.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: DFisch <manusfisch@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2021 4:06 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

1, low weight
2, Knows where it is at all times
3 High accuracy on both axes

TJF Mobile
please excuse grammar and spell errors

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 5:01:46 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN
 
I guess if you need just an imaging mount with no clutches (no way to use manually without power), it can be very small and light weight.
A universal mount like the Mach2 or 10-Micron has more components than a non-clutched mount like the MYT or Rainbow mounts.
A non-clutched mount without encoders would be slightly less weight, and less cost, but will always require aggressive guiding.
A non-clutched mount with just an RA encoder to eliminate the periodic error would be medium cost and light weight.

There are a lot of permutations and possibilities, and it would depend on what you want to do with this mount. Some people just want a light weight mount that they can haul out from the basement to the driveway, put a scope on it, put an eyepiece on it and do a Moon Cruise or examine the planets. They don't need encoders or PE correction. Others want one as small as possible for airline travel and may or may not want to guide. Others want a precision universal mount that they can do anything with, but must have low weight because their back hurts. The possibilities are endless.

Low cost, medium or high cost. Medium weight low weight or ultra-low weight. Low tracking performance, medium or ultra-high performance. Clutched or non-clutched - universal or targeted. Single encoder or dual absolute encoders.

Pick any 3 out of 5.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: alan.dang@...
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2021 2:46 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

And not just older people, but young enthusiasts who just want a lighter no-fuss mount that more easily travels when going on a group road trip where you have limited space for the Astro gear along with clothes and other travel essentials.

A real question is what is the smallest mount that would work with a AP105 and have encoders?  You might not save production cost over a mount that handles a C11 or AP130EDT — but if the mount is dramatically smaller or lighter, it could be interesting.

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

dvjbaja
 

But sadly, as soon as a notification list opens. Every ap fan boy has to get on it.  Production fills, and those who could really use it are waiting years.  Make no mistake, I'm a fan boy.   By the time the mount arrives,, my 80 year old eyes won't be able to see M13 through a telescope.  (I was on the mak 10 list 20 years)  :-)
J



Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note9, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: alan.dang@...
Date: 2/26/21 4:14 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

What can AP do that others cannot?
1. reliability/customer service
2. sophisticated pointing model
3. sophisticated polar alignment
4. user/focused (understands needs of users).

So in terms of picking 3 out of the 5.

1) Tracking performance should be good enough to make having an advanced pointing model worthwhile.  If the tracking performance is bad enough that a mount set at sidereal will give you the same result, it’s not taking advantage of the performance.

It is not clear to me how much guiding solves this.  My understanding is that a good model avoids the need for guiding.  

It is not clear to me how much clutches affect this target of performance.

it is not clear to me if corrections in DEC are needed after an AP model is created or if it’s just RA modifications.

I don’t know what pixel size to assume but I think 3-4 microns is a reasonable assumption.

2) You have hit it spot on that there are older hobbyists who would do better with lightweight mounts and there are plenty of young hobbyists who like to travel.

3) Make it as affordable as possible.  The Stowaway lets a lot more people enjoy your optics.  

Let’s call this the “AP Traveler GTO”.

4) if it is spec’d to meet the criteria of “good enough to benefit from a pointing model” versus just tracking with the 92/6.65 versus the 130GTX, how does that change the price and size?

Maybe for the 92/6.65 “good enough to benefit from a pointing model” it would still be “very good” with the overloaded 130GTX or C11.


Re: Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

Bill Long
 

Whatever it is, speculating about this hypothetical mount has been pretty fun. Putting it on something like a Rob Miller tri36L (8lb tripod) with a e160 or the GTX at a nice remote dark site sounds like a dream team combo.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of alan.dang@... <alan.dang@...>
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 4:14 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN
 

[Edited Message Follows]

What can AP do that others cannot?
1. reliability/customer service
2. sophisticated pointing and tracking model
3. sophisticated polar alignment
4. user focused (understands needs of users).

So in terms of picking 3 out of the 5.

1) Tracking performance should be good enough to make having an advanced sky model worthwhile.  If the tracking performance is bad enough that a mount set at sidereal will give you the same result, it’s not taking advantage of the performance.

It is not clear to me how much guiding solves this.  My understanding is that a good model avoids the need for guiding.  

It is not clear to me how much clutches affect this target of performance.

it is not clear to me if corrections in DEC are needed after an AP model is created or if it’s just RA modifications.

I don’t know what pixel size to assume but I think 3-4 microns is a reasonable assumption.

2) You have hit it spot on that there are older hobbyists who would do better with lightweight mounts and there are plenty of young hobbyists who like to travel.

3) Make it as affordable as possible.  The Stowaway lets a lot more people enjoy your optics.  

Let’s call this the “AP Traveler GTO”.

4) if it is spec’d to meet the criteria of “good enough to benefit from a sky model” versus just tracking with the 92/6.65 versus the 130GTX, how does that change the price and size?

Maybe for the 92/6.65 “good enough to benefit from a sky model” it would still be “very good” with the overloaded 130GTX or C11 but not show the same benefits.


Re: Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

alan.dang@...
 
Edited

What can AP do that others cannot?
1. reliability/customer service
2. sophisticated pointing and tracking model
3. sophisticated polar alignment
4. user focused (understands needs of users).

So in terms of picking 3 out of the 5.

1) Tracking performance should be good enough to make having an advanced sky model worthwhile.  If the tracking performance is bad enough that a mount set at sidereal will give you the same result, it’s not taking advantage of the performance.

It is not clear to me how much guiding solves this.  My understanding is that a good model avoids the need for guiding.  

It is not clear to me how much clutches affect this target of performance.

it is not clear to me if corrections in DEC are needed after an AP model is created or if it’s just RA modifications.

I don’t know what pixel size to assume but I think 3-4 microns is a reasonable assumption.

2) You have hit it spot on that there are older hobbyists who would do better with lightweight mounts and there are plenty of young hobbyists who like to travel.

3) Make it as affordable as possible.  The Stowaway lets a lot more people enjoy your optics.  

Let’s call this the “AP Traveler GTO”.

4) if it is spec’d to meet the criteria of “good enough to benefit from a sky model” versus just tracking with the 92/6.65 versus the 130GTX, how does that change the price and size?

Maybe for the 92/6.65 “good enough to benefit from a sky model” it would still be “very good” with the overloaded 130GTX or C11 but not show the same benefits.


Re: Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

Christopher Erickson
 

High precision abs encoder on RA. For precise homing, pointing and tracking.
Lower resolution abs encoder on DEC. Much cheaper and perfectly suitable for precise homing and pointing.
Servo motors. For lowest voltage and current requirements.
Operable on 8-20VDC.
Strain wave gears with electric brakes. For zero backlash, no reverse-driving when power is lost, and size/weight savings.
Super-lightweight and compact overall.
No clutches needed. I haven't missed having clutches on my RST-135 at all.
Motor-current-measuring-based balancing function.
New, dedicated hand controller with integral GPS & Bluetooth, and optionally WiFi, serial, USB and Ethernet.
Maybe have an XBee socket or two in the hand controller. Let users pick their own wireless frequency and protocol options.
Mount setup procedure optimized and simplified for travel. OLED display good to -40F/C
Built-in base adapter to put it on a carbon-fiber Gitzo 85 (or clone 85mm head) tripod.
Optional hollow composite counterweight. Fill with water when in the field.
Lightweight counterweight shaft. I am a strong believer in counterweights for strain wave mounts, whenever possible. I don't care what Rainbow pushes in their ads.
Lightweight, telescoping, two-section, aluminum pier with 85mm socket head option for travel. More rigid than a Gitzo CF tripod.
Ability to operate in Alt-Az as well as polar mode. Alt-Az is great for visual, solar and occultation use.
Options for both electronic as well as optical polar scopes.
Give the electronics enough horsepower to add cool stuff in the future, like Slo-Mo all-sky tracker features and the like.
Bubble levels in mount and pier. Optional compass.
Multi-star alignments with software ortho compensation.
Voltage and current displayed continuously on the hand controller.
If possible, through the mount power and USB3/USB-C. Or put cable securing points on the DEC axis and base so a springy umbilical channel can be used.
Optional custom, lightweight, wheelie travel case. Maybe have a stroller or diaper bag camouflage kit for it. LOL

"My advice is always free and worth every penny!"

-Christopher Erickson
Observatory Engineer
Summit Kinetics
Waikoloa, Hawaii


On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 12:01 PM Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
I guess if you need just an imaging mount with no clutches (no way to use manually without power), it can be very small and light weight.
A universal mount like the Mach2 or 10-Micron has more components than a non-clutched mount like the MYT or Rainbow mounts.
A non-clutched mount without encoders would be slightly less weight, and less cost, but will always require aggressive guiding.
A non-clutched mount with just an RA encoder to eliminate the periodic error would be medium cost and light weight.

There are a lot of permutations and possibilities, and it would depend on what you want to do with this mount. Some people just want a light weight mount that they can haul out from the basement to the driveway, put a scope on it, put an eyepiece on it and do a Moon Cruise or examine the planets. They don't need encoders or PE correction. Others want one as small as possible for airline travel and may or may not want to guide. Others want a precision universal mount that they can do anything with, but must have low weight because their back hurts. The possibilities are endless.

Low cost, medium or high cost. Medium weight low weight or ultra-low weight. Low tracking performance, medium or ultra-high performance. Clutched or non-clutched - universal or targeted. Single encoder or dual absolute encoders.

Pick any 3 out of 5.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: alan.dang@...
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2021 2:46 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

And not just older people, but young enthusiasts who just want a lighter no-fuss mount that more easily travels when going on a group road trip where you have limited space for the Astro gear along with clothes and other travel essentials.

A real question is what is the smallest mount that would work with a AP105 and have encoders?  You might not save production cost over a mount that handles a C11 or AP130EDT — but if the mount is dramatically smaller or lighter, it could be interesting.

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: How to Take Best Advantage of Partial APPM Model Runs #APCC

 

Greg there's an option in APPM under Camera to use a subframe. for that giant 6200 i suggest trying the 1/4 by 1/4 center frame option. it's still a pretty big file even at that size

I don't know how much APPM pays attention to any of your SGP camera settings re: plate solving etc. Ray would be the guy for that. 



On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 3:07 PM Greg Vaughn <gregvaughn@...> wrote:
Thanks, Brian and Luca;

I actually bin 2x2 for platesolving, but recognize they are still big files.   I haven't had any issue with the QHY 600, but the ZWO 6200 MM seems a little more temperamental.

I saw that there is a Beta version for SGP available and was hoping it would be a regular release before I used it - but a 64bit version sounds like it may help.   I had some frames dropped while imaging 1x1 (1 out of 4) with the new image train and hopefully that will stop with the Beta version.

Cheers,
Greg



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: How to Take Best Advantage of Partial APPM Model Runs #APCC

Greg Vaughn
 

Thanks, Brian and Luca;

I actually bin 2x2 for platesolving, but recognize they are still big files.   I haven't had any issue with the QHY 600, but the ZWO 6200 MM seems a little more temperamental.

I saw that there is a Beta version for SGP available and was hoping it would be a regular release before I used it - but a 64bit version sounds like it may help.   I had some frames dropped while imaging 1x1 (1 out of 4) with the new image train and hopefully that will stop with the Beta version.

Cheers,
Greg


Re: How to Take Best Advantage of Partial APPM Model Runs #APCC

Luca Marinelli
 

What Brian said. If you want to use SGP with the ASI6200, it will be much more reliable if you use SGP v4.657 beta 64bit. 

Luca

On Feb 26, 2021, at 5:41 PM, Brian Valente via groups.io <bvalente@...> wrote:


>>>the model is all-or-nothing, you can add on to an existing APPM model. 

EDIT: Sorry i mean to write you can *not* currently edit and add more points to an existing APPM model.

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 2:36 PM Brian Valente via groups.io <bvalente=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:
Hi Greg

just inserting a couple things i"ve learned from using APPM

the model is all-or-nothing, you can add on to an existing APPM model. 

Also your hanging may be due to the huge file sizes of the 6200, in which case you might try binning or using a subframe. Generally it's better for models to use bin 1, but those files are enormous

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 2:27 PM Greg Vaughn <gregvaughn@...> wrote:
I think this question is for Ray Gralak;

I've gotten very comfortable with APPM and use it every time I set up for imaging.  I only have a partial view of the sky and I set up runs of between 49 and 87 points.  I use SGP with ASTAP selected and I haven't had an issue in recent memory with my primary imaging set up on the Mach 2.

Last night, I was testing a new imaging train on a little bit larger scope.   Instead of the QHY full frame CMOS, I was using the newer ZWO ASI 6200 Mono.  I adjusted the image scale and ran the model builder in APPM.  In this case it was the 49 point model and when it got to #41, APPM just hung showing 'imaging' in the status block on the table of points.   I could see that nothing was happening in SGP and so I 'paused' the model run.   I was looking for a selection that allowed me to just use points collected so far to build the model, but couldn't find such a selection.  

So I restarted the process.  Everything seemed to be going swimmingly until I get to point #36 and the same hang occurred.   I could see that SGP was 'downloading' interminably (don't know why) and the image was not appearing.  So it appears to be an SGP issue that impacts APPM.   (I already have the camera's USB communications slider all the way to the left, which indicates '40' and is supposed to be best at ensuring USB comms.)

My question is:  If I run into this issue again (and haven't yet found the root cause), is there a selection sequence in APPM I can use to go ahead and accept the existing model points I've accumulated so far and build a model from them without reaching the end or starting over.

Equipment/Software:
-AP Mach2
-CP5 (VCP5-P-02-08)
-APCC Pro (1.8.8.15)  -  just realized I need to upgrade to 1.8.8.17 and have done so
-SGP (3.2.0.613)

Thanks in advance.

Cheers,
Greg

Greg Vaughn
Alexandria, VA



--
Brian 



Brian Valente



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: How to Take Best Advantage of Partial APPM Model Runs #APCC

 

>>>the model is all-or-nothing, you can add on to an existing APPM model. 

EDIT: Sorry i mean to write you can *not* currently edit and add more points to an existing APPM model.

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 2:36 PM Brian Valente via groups.io <bvalente=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:
Hi Greg

just inserting a couple things i"ve learned from using APPM

the model is all-or-nothing, you can add on to an existing APPM model. 

Also your hanging may be due to the huge file sizes of the 6200, in which case you might try binning or using a subframe. Generally it's better for models to use bin 1, but those files are enormous

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 2:27 PM Greg Vaughn <gregvaughn@...> wrote:
I think this question is for Ray Gralak;

I've gotten very comfortable with APPM and use it every time I set up for imaging.  I only have a partial view of the sky and I set up runs of between 49 and 87 points.  I use SGP with ASTAP selected and I haven't had an issue in recent memory with my primary imaging set up on the Mach 2.

Last night, I was testing a new imaging train on a little bit larger scope.   Instead of the QHY full frame CMOS, I was using the newer ZWO ASI 6200 Mono.  I adjusted the image scale and ran the model builder in APPM.  In this case it was the 49 point model and when it got to #41, APPM just hung showing 'imaging' in the status block on the table of points.   I could see that nothing was happening in SGP and so I 'paused' the model run.   I was looking for a selection that allowed me to just use points collected so far to build the model, but couldn't find such a selection.  

So I restarted the process.  Everything seemed to be going swimmingly until I get to point #36 and the same hang occurred.   I could see that SGP was 'downloading' interminably (don't know why) and the image was not appearing.  So it appears to be an SGP issue that impacts APPM.   (I already have the camera's USB communications slider all the way to the left, which indicates '40' and is supposed to be best at ensuring USB comms.)

My question is:  If I run into this issue again (and haven't yet found the root cause), is there a selection sequence in APPM I can use to go ahead and accept the existing model points I've accumulated so far and build a model from them without reaching the end or starting over.

Equipment/Software:
-AP Mach2
-CP5 (VCP5-P-02-08)
-APCC Pro (1.8.8.15)  -  just realized I need to upgrade to 1.8.8.17 and have done so
-SGP (3.2.0.613)

Thanks in advance.

Cheers,
Greg

Greg Vaughn
Alexandria, VA



--
Brian 



Brian Valente



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: How to Take Best Advantage of Partial APPM Model Runs #APCC

 

Hi Greg

just inserting a couple things i"ve learned from using APPM

the model is all-or-nothing, you can add on to an existing APPM model. 

Also your hanging may be due to the huge file sizes of the 6200, in which case you might try binning or using a subframe. Generally it's better for models to use bin 1, but those files are enormous

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 2:27 PM Greg Vaughn <gregvaughn@...> wrote:
I think this question is for Ray Gralak;

I've gotten very comfortable with APPM and use it every time I set up for imaging.  I only have a partial view of the sky and I set up runs of between 49 and 87 points.  I use SGP with ASTAP selected and I haven't had an issue in recent memory with my primary imaging set up on the Mach 2.

Last night, I was testing a new imaging train on a little bit larger scope.   Instead of the QHY full frame CMOS, I was using the newer ZWO ASI 6200 Mono.  I adjusted the image scale and ran the model builder in APPM.  In this case it was the 49 point model and when it got to #41, APPM just hung showing 'imaging' in the status block on the table of points.   I could see that nothing was happening in SGP and so I 'paused' the model run.   I was looking for a selection that allowed me to just use points collected so far to build the model, but couldn't find such a selection.  

So I restarted the process.  Everything seemed to be going swimmingly until I get to point #36 and the same hang occurred.   I could see that SGP was 'downloading' interminably (don't know why) and the image was not appearing.  So it appears to be an SGP issue that impacts APPM.   (I already have the camera's USB communications slider all the way to the left, which indicates '40' and is supposed to be best at ensuring USB comms.)

My question is:  If I run into this issue again (and haven't yet found the root cause), is there a selection sequence in APPM I can use to go ahead and accept the existing model points I've accumulated so far and build a model from them without reaching the end or starting over.

Equipment/Software:
-AP Mach2
-CP5 (VCP5-P-02-08)
-APCC Pro (1.8.8.15)  -  just realized I need to upgrade to 1.8.8.17 and have done so
-SGP (3.2.0.613)

Thanks in advance.

Cheers,
Greg

Greg Vaughn
Alexandria, VA



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


How to Take Best Advantage of Partial APPM Model Runs #APCC

Greg Vaughn
 

I think this question is for Ray Gralak;

I've gotten very comfortable with APPM and use it every time I set up for imaging.  I only have a partial view of the sky and I set up runs of between 49 and 87 points.  I use SGP with ASTAP selected and I haven't had an issue in recent memory with my primary imaging set up on the Mach 2.

Last night, I was testing a new imaging train on a little bit larger scope.   Instead of the QHY full frame CMOS, I was using the newer ZWO ASI 6200 Mono.  I adjusted the image scale and ran the model builder in APPM.  In this case it was the 49 point model and when it got to #41, APPM just hung showing 'imaging' in the status block on the table of points.   I could see that nothing was happening in SGP and so I 'paused' the model run.   I was looking for a selection that allowed me to just use points collected so far to build the model, but couldn't find such a selection.  

So I restarted the process.  Everything seemed to be going swimmingly until I get to point #36 and the same hang occurred.   I could see that SGP was 'downloading' interminably (don't know why) and the image was not appearing.  So it appears to be an SGP issue that impacts APPM.   (I already have the camera's USB communications slider all the way to the left, which indicates '40' and is supposed to be best at ensuring USB comms.)

My question is:  If I run into this issue again (and haven't yet found the root cause), is there a selection sequence in APPM I can use to go ahead and accept the existing model points I've accumulated so far and build a model from them without reaching the end or starting over.

Equipment/Software:
-AP Mach2
-CP5 (VCP5-P-02-08)
-APCC Pro (1.8.8.15)  -  just realized I need to upgrade to 1.8.8.17 and have done so
-SGP (3.2.0.613)

Thanks in advance.

Cheers,
Greg

Greg Vaughn
Alexandria, VA


Re: Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

Bill Long
 

Low weight, medium cost, dual absolute encoders.  🙂 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 2:01 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN
 
I guess if you need just an imaging mount with no clutches (no way to use manually without power), it can be very small and light weight.
A universal mount like the Mach2 or 10-Micron has more components than a non-clutched mount like the MYT or Rainbow mounts.
A non-clutched mount without encoders would be slightly less weight, and less cost, but will always require aggressive guiding.
A non-clutched mount with just an RA encoder to eliminate the periodic error would be medium cost and light weight.

There are a lot of permutations and possibilities, and it would depend on what you want to do with this mount. Some people just want a light weight mount that they can haul out from the basement to the driveway, put a scope on it, put an eyepiece on it and do a Moon Cruise or examine the planets. They don't need encoders or PE correction. Others want one as small as possible for airline travel and may or may not want to guide. Others want a precision universal mount that they can do anything with, but must have low weight because their back hurts. The possibilities are endless.

Low cost, medium or high cost. Medium weight low weight or ultra-low weight. Low tracking performance, medium or ultra-high performance. Clutched or non-clutched - universal or targeted. Single encoder or dual absolute encoders.

Pick any 3 out of 5.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: alan.dang@...
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2021 2:46 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

And not just older people, but young enthusiasts who just want a lighter no-fuss mount that more easily travels when going on a group road trip where you have limited space for the Astro gear along with clothes and other travel essentials.

A real question is what is the smallest mount that would work with a AP105 and have encoders?  You might not save production cost over a mount that handles a C11 or AP130EDT — but if the mount is dramatically smaller or lighter, it could be interesting.

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: GTOCP4 Control Box

Don Anderson
 

Very nice compact setup Tom. Your box on a post design is something. I am considering for my AP 900GOTO with an TV NP127is and SXVR H694/SX FW combination. What’s the diameter of your pier? I assume you meant 3 ft for the pier concrete block diameter. Can you un bolt the pier from the foundation?
Cheers
Don




On Friday, February 26, 2021, 2:36 PM, Tom Blahovici <tom.va2fsq@...> wrote:

Hi
Here you are.  This routinely works no issues down to -20C.  Actually the only issue is my darks are at -20 and should be set to -25 on these cold days.
You can see the NUC, which is an I5, bought last year so it is pretty current.  There are also two Goldenrod heaters, two desiccant chambers a IR webcam and Thunderbolt to 10G network adapter.
In the box under the unit, there is the IOT power strip, the power supply for the setup, network hub and Anderson power pole box. There is also another GoldenRod heater.
The pier is mounted to a concrete block 3" in diameter and six feet deep.
All comes down in the summer so my wife can enjoy her garden.
Tom


Re: Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

DFisch
 

1, low weight
2, Knows where it is at all times
3 High accuracy on both axes

TJF Mobile
please excuse grammar and spell errors


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 5:01:46 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN
 
I guess if you need just an imaging mount with no clutches (no way to use manually without power), it can be very small and light weight.
A universal mount like the Mach2 or 10-Micron has more components than a non-clutched mount like the MYT or Rainbow mounts.
A non-clutched mount without encoders would be slightly less weight, and less cost, but will always require aggressive guiding.
A non-clutched mount with just an RA encoder to eliminate the periodic error would be medium cost and light weight.

There are a lot of permutations and possibilities, and it would depend on what you want to do with this mount. Some people just want a light weight mount that they can haul out from the basement to the driveway, put a scope on it, put an eyepiece on it and do a Moon Cruise or examine the planets. They don't need encoders or PE correction. Others want one as small as possible for airline travel and may or may not want to guide. Others want a precision universal mount that they can do anything with, but must have low weight because their back hurts. The possibilities are endless.

Low cost, medium or high cost. Medium weight low weight or ultra-low weight. Low tracking performance, medium or ultra-high performance. Clutched or non-clutched - universal or targeted. Single encoder or dual absolute encoders.

Pick any 3 out of 5.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: alan.dang@...
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Fri, Feb 26, 2021 2:46 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small mount was Recent encoder discussion on CN

And not just older people, but young enthusiasts who just want a lighter no-fuss mount that more easily travels when going on a group road trip where you have limited space for the Astro gear along with clothes and other travel essentials.

A real question is what is the smallest mount that would work with a AP105 and have encoders?  You might not save production cost over a mount that handles a C11 or AP130EDT — but if the mount is dramatically smaller or lighter, it could be interesting.

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics

5721 - 5740 of 82250