Date   

Re: Interesting Behavior with APCC Pro and Pegasus Astro UPBv2

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Wade,

Question for Ray: Would it be interesting to validate the current model before making a new one?
Remind me, which scope, image scale, and exposure duration are you using?

If you are going to do a validate, you would want to do a "Model 5x and Park", which is an option in APPM. This will repeat the points five times and then park. This provides a measure of pointing accuracy and repeatability. For instance, if something is loose or optics are moving, variations from each pass may indicate this.

After doing this, you would have to send your logs and PNT files to Howard or me for analysis.

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of W Hilmo
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2021 6:16 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Interesting Behavior with APCC Pro and Pegasus Astro UPBv2

One more update:

tl;dr: Inconclusive.

The last couple of nights has been tough. We had a weather change and Wednesday night was a loss. Early
evening was clouded over, so when NINA started the run, the centering and focusing failed. I stopped the
sequence, changed the start time to 1:00am and then started the sequence again. It should have been clear at
1:00, and it probably was, but the second run of the sequence failed. Specifically, it didn't unpark the mount.
This is probably my fault, for using the mount while NINA was paused waiting for time. I suspect that NINA
thought that it had already unparked the mount, but I had manually parked it to avoid it tracking past the
meridian, since my target transited just before midnight. Anyway, at least I learned a few things about my
automation software. I'll avoid changing the state of the system while NINA is waiting.

Last night was clear, but seriously windy. I have a few subs where the stars have tails in the RA direction on
both sides. I'm guessing that these were particularly strong gusts, and I'm seeing the encoder putting the
mount back where it belongs. The good news is that, even though the wind was howling all night long. Only
about 3, out of 48, ten minute exposures show this behavior. The system in general seems pretty resilient to
wind. Once I get the observatory built, I suspect that I won't have any wind problems.

As far as unguided tracking, I have a few subs with round stars, and I have lots of them with egg shaped stars,
elongated in a different direction that the RA oscillations I mentioned above. The magnitude of the elongation
seems smaller than it was before I discovered that refraction correction was disabled.

At this point, it's going to be a few days before we get clear skies again. I think that I'm going to redo the model
for the next run (and I did verify in the PNT files, that the temperature was correct at the time I made the current
one). I'm using a portable field pier, so it's possible some settling has occurred (but it's been there for a while).

Question for Ray: Would it be interesting to validate the current model before making a new one?

Thanks,
-Wade

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Dale Ghent
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2021 2:29 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Interesting Behavior with APCC Pro and Pegasus Astro UPBv2


Thanks for the update on this.

Wow, so I thought they had fixed this in the past because it was reported by some NINA users, then I was
informed that Pegasus fixed it. I guess not. I run my own gear in metric all the time so I never noticed that it
actually hadn't been fixed. I just tested on my UPBv2 and, yeah, the fahrenheit value does make its way
through the ASCOM driver.

Ugh. The hold-up for a fix really validates me putting my foot down and saying "no, get them to fix their bug"
whenever a user asks us to implement a workaround a vendor's bug. Downstack defects should be addressed
directly where they are, and here's a rather perfect illustration as to why. Getting it fixed might take longer, but
everyone upstream wins in the end. IMO Pegasus should just press on and issue a fix because it's critical data
that is impacting other apps in an operational way.

I will be very interested to see your refraction-compensated results. I'm now trying to convince my club to
spring for APCC Pro so we can do unguided imaging on the serviced 1200GTO. Brian's image was a fantastic
example of this, and you A/B'ing with refraction comp. might help drive home the point if it is indeed the source
of your slight tracking imperfection.

On Apr 21, 2021, at 16:12, W Hilmo <y.groups@hilmo.net> wrote:

I wanted to revisit this topic with an update.

I reached out to Pegasus Astro, and they are aware of the issue with unit in the temperature value. At this
time, they can’t fix it because SGP apparently has a dependency on the current behavior. They are reaching
out to the SGP folks to see if they can coordinate a proper fix.

Regarding my unguided imaging results, I switched the units back to metric in the Pegasus Astro software,
and that fixed the incorrect temperature in APCC Pro. I ran unguided again last night, and it was a slight
improvement over the previous unguided session, but still wasn’t satisfactory. I forgot to note yesterday that I
have my camera oriented so that declination in up/down in the frame. The elongation is diagonal, and flips 90
degrees after the meridian flip. That means that the components of drift are not isolated to either axis in
particular.

So I went back to take a closer look at the model in APCC. I played with setting and clearing different terms
to see the effect on the model. When I was doing this, I noticed that the “Correct for Refraction” checkbox was
cleared. When I checked that box, the east and west scatter plots dropped from 53.35 and 50.20 arc seconds,
respectively, to 9.42 and 6.32 arc seconds.

In my head, I assume that drift due to refraction will be aligned perpendicular to the horizon, instead of being
aligned with one of the axes. If that’s true, then my elongation might be up/down, relative to the horizon. I’m
going to give it another run tonight and see if I get better results with refraction correction enabled.

Thanks,
-Wade

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of W Hilmo
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 7:10 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Interesting Behavior with APCC Pro and Pegasus Astro UPBv2

Thanks for the response.

I’m using the latest version of the Pegasus Astro software for the UPBv2, so it sounds like I need to contact
them regarding the temperature reporting issue. I’ve not yet confirmed that after switching back to Celcius, that
it restores the unguided accuracy. I should be able to give that a try tonight.

As for the Advanced Sequencer, I saw it for the first time yesterday. I was expecting a UI similar to the
original sequencer, which it’s not – but I think that it’s better. I really like to flexibility. I’m already thinking
ahead to when Astro-Physics updates APCC to support the new few-stars tracking model that they introduced
with the Mach2. It would be really cool to write a script to sample and plate solve 6 or 8 points along the
target’s declination for unguided imaging, and then have NINA invoke the script at the start of an imaging
session.

-Wade

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Dale Ghent
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 4:34 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Interesting Behavior with APCC Pro and Pegasus Astro UPBv2

Hi Wade,

You may need to update your Pegasus software to fix this issue.

Older versions of the Pegasus UPBv2 console app and ObservingConditions driver will relay the Fahrenheit
temperature to downstream consumers such as NINA or APCC when the console app is set to display units in
Fahrenheit.

The ASCOM ObservingConditions interface specification specifies that the values for its various
meteorological properties must be in SI units (ie, Celsius when it comes to temperature), so that is what APCC
is expecting. Pegasus issued a fix for this last year so you might just need an update unless they’ve
reintroduced the bug in a recent version.

This issue was even more obvious to those who have NINA set to convert the SI units too imperial for
display. This caused NINA to convert the Fahrenheit temperature to Fahrenheit again, resulting in some
outlandish temperature values being reported.

Aside from that, your description is quite an interesting depiction of how much temperature can alter the
tracking of the mount under a model, though. Glad you were able to work out the cause. Hope you like the
Advanced Sequencer, too. It is of course a work in progress but it’s maturing nicely.


On Apr 20, 2021, at 00:35, W Hilmo <y.groups@hilmo.net> wrote:

I've been doing some unguided imaging with my AP1600 w/Absolute Encoders and APCC Pro and have seen
some interesting behavior with unguided imaging.

The first few nights that I run unguided after building a model of about 180 points, everything was great. I
was blown away by how well it worked. The last few nights, not so much. I am seeing elongated stars and
some image drift over the course of the night.

I do not believe that this is flexure. I'm imaging with my AP130GTX, and I've double checked all connections.
I've double checked to make sure that the pointing model is enabled. I verified that the polar alignment is still
spot on. It's a bit difficult to troubleshoot because, without guiding, there aren't any log files to examine. All I
have are the subs that I can inspect.

Since we're getting into more moonlight, I've done some software updates (switched to the daily builds for
NINA so that I can use the advanced scheduler). I've also set up for doing tonight's run with the guider enabled
so that I can get some logs. As I was watching the session get started, I noticed something odd. Specifically, I
noticed that APCC reported the temperature at over 40 degrees C, which is very wrong. I am using the
Pegasus Astro Ultimate PowerBox v2 as the weather sensor.

It occurred to me that I made a change to the Pegasus software a few days ago to change from reporting the
temperature in C, to reporting the temperature in F. It looks like both APCC and NINA are reporting the
Fahrenheit value as Celcius. I am wondering if the significantly incorrect temperature interpretation has
effected the model such that it's lost accuracy. I have reverted the Pegasus software back to reporting in C,
and after tonight's run, I'm going back to unguided operation to see if I get that great result back that I was
getting the first couple of nights.

-Wade










Re: Interesting Behavior with APCC Pro and Pegasus Astro UPBv2

W Hilmo
 

One more update:

tl;dr: Inconclusive.

The last couple of nights has been tough. We had a weather change and Wednesday night was a loss. Early evening was clouded over, so when NINA started the run, the centering and focusing failed. I stopped the sequence, changed the start time to 1:00am and then started the sequence again. It should have been clear at 1:00, and it probably was, but the second run of the sequence failed. Specifically, it didn't unpark the mount. This is probably my fault, for using the mount while NINA was paused waiting for time. I suspect that NINA thought that it had already unparked the mount, but I had manually parked it to avoid it tracking past the meridian, since my target transited just before midnight. Anyway, at least I learned a few things about my automation software. I'll avoid changing the state of the system while NINA is waiting.

Last night was clear, but seriously windy. I have a few subs where the stars have tails in the RA direction on both sides. I'm guessing that these were particularly strong gusts, and I'm seeing the encoder putting the mount back where it belongs. The good news is that, even though the wind was howling all night long. Only about 3, out of 48, ten minute exposures show this behavior. The system in general seems pretty resilient to wind. Once I get the observatory built, I suspect that I won't have any wind problems.

As far as unguided tracking, I have a few subs with round stars, and I have lots of them with egg shaped stars, elongated in a different direction that the RA oscillations I mentioned above. The magnitude of the elongation seems smaller than it was before I discovered that refraction correction was disabled.

At this point, it's going to be a few days before we get clear skies again. I think that I'm going to redo the model for the next run (and I did verify in the PNT files, that the temperature was correct at the time I made the current one). I'm using a portable field pier, so it's possible some settling has occurred (but it's been there for a while).

Question for Ray: Would it be interesting to validate the current model before making a new one?

Thanks,
-Wade

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Dale Ghent
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2021 2:29 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Interesting Behavior with APCC Pro and Pegasus Astro UPBv2


Thanks for the update on this.

Wow, so I thought they had fixed this in the past because it was reported by some NINA users, then I was informed that Pegasus fixed it. I guess not. I run my own gear in metric all the time so I never noticed that it actually hadn't been fixed. I just tested on my UPBv2 and, yeah, the fahrenheit value does make its way through the ASCOM driver.

Ugh. The hold-up for a fix really validates me putting my foot down and saying "no, get them to fix their bug" whenever a user asks us to implement a workaround a vendor's bug. Downstack defects should be addressed directly where they are, and here's a rather perfect illustration as to why. Getting it fixed might take longer, but everyone upstream wins in the end. IMO Pegasus should just press on and issue a fix because it's critical data that is impacting other apps in an operational way.

I will be very interested to see your refraction-compensated results. I'm now trying to convince my club to spring for APCC Pro so we can do unguided imaging on the serviced 1200GTO. Brian's image was a fantastic example of this, and you A/B'ing with refraction comp. might help drive home the point if it is indeed the source of your slight tracking imperfection.

On Apr 21, 2021, at 16:12, W Hilmo <y.groups@hilmo.net> wrote:

I wanted to revisit this topic with an update.

I reached out to Pegasus Astro, and they are aware of the issue with unit in the temperature value. At this time, they can’t fix it because SGP apparently has a dependency on the current behavior. They are reaching out to the SGP folks to see if they can coordinate a proper fix.

Regarding my unguided imaging results, I switched the units back to metric in the Pegasus Astro software, and that fixed the incorrect temperature in APCC Pro. I ran unguided again last night, and it was a slight improvement over the previous unguided session, but still wasn’t satisfactory. I forgot to note yesterday that I have my camera oriented so that declination in up/down in the frame. The elongation is diagonal, and flips 90 degrees after the meridian flip. That means that the components of drift are not isolated to either axis in particular.

So I went back to take a closer look at the model in APCC. I played with setting and clearing different terms to see the effect on the model. When I was doing this, I noticed that the “Correct for Refraction” checkbox was cleared. When I checked that box, the east and west scatter plots dropped from 53.35 and 50.20 arc seconds, respectively, to 9.42 and 6.32 arc seconds.

In my head, I assume that drift due to refraction will be aligned perpendicular to the horizon, instead of being aligned with one of the axes. If that’s true, then my elongation might be up/down, relative to the horizon. I’m going to give it another run tonight and see if I get better results with refraction correction enabled.

Thanks,
-Wade

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of W Hilmo
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 7:10 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Interesting Behavior with APCC Pro and Pegasus Astro UPBv2

Thanks for the response.

I’m using the latest version of the Pegasus Astro software for the UPBv2, so it sounds like I need to contact them regarding the temperature reporting issue. I’ve not yet confirmed that after switching back to Celcius, that it restores the unguided accuracy. I should be able to give that a try tonight.

As for the Advanced Sequencer, I saw it for the first time yesterday. I was expecting a UI similar to the original sequencer, which it’s not – but I think that it’s better. I really like to flexibility. I’m already thinking ahead to when Astro-Physics updates APCC to support the new few-stars tracking model that they introduced with the Mach2. It would be really cool to write a script to sample and plate solve 6 or 8 points along the target’s declination for unguided imaging, and then have NINA invoke the script at the start of an imaging session.

-Wade

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Dale Ghent
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 4:34 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Interesting Behavior with APCC Pro and Pegasus Astro UPBv2

Hi Wade,

You may need to update your Pegasus software to fix this issue.

Older versions of the Pegasus UPBv2 console app and ObservingConditions driver will relay the Fahrenheit temperature to downstream consumers such as NINA or APCC when the console app is set to display units in Fahrenheit.

The ASCOM ObservingConditions interface specification specifies that the values for its various meteorological properties must be in SI units (ie, Celsius when it comes to temperature), so that is what APCC is expecting. Pegasus issued a fix for this last year so you might just need an update unless they’ve reintroduced the bug in a recent version.

This issue was even more obvious to those who have NINA set to convert the SI units too imperial for display. This caused NINA to convert the Fahrenheit temperature to Fahrenheit again, resulting in some outlandish temperature values being reported.

Aside from that, your description is quite an interesting depiction of how much temperature can alter the tracking of the mount under a model, though. Glad you were able to work out the cause. Hope you like the Advanced Sequencer, too. It is of course a work in progress but it’s maturing nicely.


On Apr 20, 2021, at 00:35, W Hilmo <y.groups@hilmo.net> wrote:

I've been doing some unguided imaging with my AP1600 w/Absolute Encoders and APCC Pro and have seen some interesting behavior with unguided imaging.

The first few nights that I run unguided after building a model of about 180 points, everything was great. I was blown away by how well it worked. The last few nights, not so much. I am seeing elongated stars and some image drift over the course of the night.

I do not believe that this is flexure. I'm imaging with my AP130GTX, and I've double checked all connections. I've double checked to make sure that the pointing model is enabled. I verified that the polar alignment is still spot on. It's a bit difficult to troubleshoot because, without guiding, there aren't any log files to examine. All I have are the subs that I can inspect.

Since we're getting into more moonlight, I've done some software updates (switched to the daily builds for NINA so that I can use the advanced scheduler). I've also set up for doing tonight's run with the guider enabled so that I can get some logs. As I was watching the session get started, I noticed something odd. Specifically, I noticed that APCC reported the temperature at over 40 degrees C, which is very wrong. I am using the Pegasus Astro Ultimate PowerBox v2 as the weather sensor.

It occurred to me that I made a change to the Pegasus software a few days ago to change from reporting the temperature in C, to reporting the temperature in F. It looks like both APCC and NINA are reporting the Fahrenheit value as Celcius. I am wondering if the significantly incorrect temperature interpretation has effected the model such that it's lost accuracy. I have reverted the Pegasus software back to reporting in C, and after tonight's run, I'm going back to unguided operation to see if I get that great result back that I was getting the first couple of nights.

-Wade


Re: More APPM Results -- Can Someone Help Me Understand This?

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Don,

USNO-B1.0 has been taken off line by USNO. The only way to use B 1.0 is if you have a local version on you
computer.
USNO B1.0 is over 80 GBytes, consuming too much bandwidth to download from the USNO website.

Unfortunately, that leaves A2.0 as the outdated alternative, so UCAC4 is the better choice now.

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Don Anderson via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 2:08 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] More APPM Results -- Can Someone Help Me Understand This?

USNO-B1.0 has been taken off line by USNO. The only way to use B 1.0 is if you have a local version on you
computer.

Don Anderson


On Thursday, April 22, 2021, 01:32:49 p.m. MDT, Ray Gralak <iogroups@siriusimaging.com> wrote:


Ray i think that comment refers to USNO-SA2.0

USNO-SA2.0 is a subset of USNO-A2.0
Yes, that is true about SA2.0, but A2.0 has been superseded by USNO-B1.0.

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Brian Valente
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 12:17 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] More APPM Results -- Can Someone Help Me Understand This?

Ray i think that comment refers to USNO-SA2.0

USNO-SA2.0 is a subset of USNO-A2.0


On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 12:13 PM Ray Gralak <iogroups@siriusimaging.com> wrote:


> For small fields of view with Pin Point, the USNO-A2.0 catalog is recommended by DC3 Dreams.

Bad information maybe?

According to the navy.mil website, USNO A2.0 is outdated:

https://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/astrometry/information/catalog-info#usnoa2

-Ray



> -----Original Message-----
> From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of George
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 12:05 PM
> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
> Subject: Re: [ap-gto] More APPM Results -- Can Someone Help Me Understand This?
>
> For small fields of view with Pin Point, the USNO-A2.0 catalog is recommended by DC3 Dreams.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> George
>
>
>
> George Whitney
>
> Astro-Physics, Inc.
>
> Phone: 815-222-6538 (direct line)
>
> Phone: 815-282-1513 (office)
>
> Email: george@astro-physics.com <mailto:george@astro-physics.com>
>
>
>
> From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of mjb87 via groups.io
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 1:49 PM
> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
> Subject: Re: [ap-gto] More APPM Results -- Can Someone Help Me Understand This?
>
>
>
> BTW, I am using PinPoint and they do NOT recommend UCAV4.
>
>










--

Brian



Brian Valente
portfolio brianvalentephotography.com <http://brianvalentephotography.com>







Re: GTOCP4 Caps

M Hambrick
 

To Joe:

I believe I read or saw somewhere (Maybe Tony's video) that plugging the holes will keep bugs out. This would only be a factor for those who leave their mount set up in a permanent observatory. Interestingly enough, my GTOCP4 (purchased in 2017) has no drain holes in the bottom. I am going to have to go back and watch Tony's video again.

To Ken:

You are correct. The part number that Mouser is sending me is RM15TRD-C(71). It has the correct thread size (M20 X 2). When I entered the other part number (without the "D") in the Mouser search bar it must have brought up the one with the D in it, and I didn't notice. My apologies for any confusion. 

Mike


Re: GTOCP4 Caps

Ken Sablinsky
 

Thanks Mike, I'd be curious if your model number has a D in it, as I think there's maybe a confusion in model numbers between Mouser and Digi-Key?

Howard's link from yesterday was for "RM15TR-C(71)" from Digi-Key


But on Mouser, at least where I search for it:
RM15TR-C(71) shows a diagram with 19mm x 1 internal thread and obsolete
RM15TRD-C(71) (with a D in the model name) shows 20mm x 2 thread.

In any event, I didn't stop the shipment in time, so I ordered the version "TRD" today.  Looks like I'll have both 19mm and 20mm, to cover all bases!

-Ken


Re: GTOCP4 Caps

Joe Zeglinski
 

Question to the group.
 
    Can anyone think of a logical  reason to plug “drainage holes”  with those rubber cones?
Do we really want to make sure that any dew or other source of moisture  leaking into the controller, should be kept inside? 
The only thing I can think of is to keep any itsy-bitsy bugs out – but then why drill the two holes into the case, in the first place?
Perhaps that is covered somewhere in the user guide :-)
 
Joe
 

From: M Hambrick
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 8:50 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] GTOCP4 Caps
 
Hi Pete

Those cone shaped plugs are used to plug the drain / vent holes in the bottom of the GTOCP4 housing. Tony (a.k.a. Harley Davidson) made an excellent video a couple years ago about the need to have drain holes in the housing to allow condensate to drain out.

Mike


Re: GTOCP4 Caps

M Hambrick
 

Hi again Ken

I just received a shipment notice from Mouser for the RM15TR-C(71) caps. I was worried that they might substitute the same one that they recommended for you, but they are sending the ones that I ordered. I will find out when they arrive on Monday April 26. 

FYI - These caps shipped from Mouser Canada. I don't know if they have more than one location, but it is possible that they were only out of stock at the particular location you were trying to buy them from.

I will keep you posted.

Mike


Re: NASA's guide to Black Holes

Robert Sinitiere <bobstar9@...>
 

Thanks, Rolando.  Should I vacation near a Black Hole, I will “heed your advice”. Bob
⭐️👽😳


On Apr 22, 2021, at 7:12 PM, Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...> wrote:


Enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMTwtb3TVIk

Rolando

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: APPM model how many points portable?

Bill Long
 

What is the best way to test the accuracy level? 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 5:40 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APPM model how many points portable?
 
If it isn't accurate to 1 arc sec or better then it will impact unguided imaging in a negative way.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Grubb via groups.io <jimgrubb@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Thu, Apr 22, 2021 7:21 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APPM model how many points portable?

Hi Rolando,

I'm not sure how to measure how accurate ASTAP is.  I guess I could run a solve with ANSVR or pinpoint and measure the difference in results? 

Jim

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: GTOCP4 Caps

M Hambrick
 

Hi Pete

Those cone shaped plugs are used to plug the drain / vent holes in the bottom of the GTOCP4 housing. Tony (a.k.a. Harley Davidson) made an excellent video a couple years ago about the need to have drain holes in the housing to allow condensate to drain out.

Mike


Re: GTOCP4 Caps

Pete Mumbower
 

Just going thru my newly arrived 1100GTO boxes and I came across the bag of plastic caps that Karen mentioned above. Here is a picture of all that is included, though I am not sure what the two cone shaped items go to yet. Looks to cover every port on the CP4 that I received.


Re: APPM model how many points portable?

Roland Christen
 

If it isn't accurate to 1 arc sec or better then it will impact unguided imaging in a negative way.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Grubb via groups.io <jimgrubb@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Thu, Apr 22, 2021 7:21 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APPM model how many points portable?

Hi Rolando,

I'm not sure how to measure how accurate ASTAP is.  I guess I could run a solve with ANSVR or pinpoint and measure the difference in results? 

Jim

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: APPM model how many points portable?

Jim Grubb
 

Hi Rolando,

I'm not sure how to measure how accurate ASTAP is.  I guess I could run a solve with ANSVR or pinpoint and measure the difference in results? 

Jim


NASA's guide to Black Holes

Roland Christen
 

Enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMTwtb3TVIk

Rolando

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: 1200GTO servicing project notes

Joe Zeglinski
 

Good idea about using extractor bits, if the plugs are not “mushed” inside ..
 
    But, if the AP-900/1200 Delrin plugs are pushed in so far, that they “mushroom-head” into the space beyond the threads, then there is no way that the screw extractor bit, or even the AP Tool,  will unscrew the originally smooth, but now “thread-impressed Delrin”, or pull it out without fracturing the plastic plug. Happened to mine, requiring complete disassembly to get the plug pieces out.
 
Joe
 

From: fernandorivera3 via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 1:57 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 1200GTO servicing project notes
 
Dale thanks for commenting. I have a 1200 GTO that I bought brand new from AP in July 2009. No problems yet with delrin clutch plugs getting stuck or seized & hoping it stays that way 🤞

Fernando


Re: AP1100 park position question

Joe Zeglinski
 

I agree, Bryan.
 
    If I were to go with a dual lift PT3, and there was a possibility of any cold weather seizing problem, I would be concerned about one of the two piers, lagging behind its mate, unless there is an “overload-cutoff” sensor.
 
Joe
 

From: Worsel via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 5:39 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] AP1100 park position question
 
Joe

I live in western Colorado and have had the PierTech adjustable pier (which, AFAIK, is a Linak) for 6 years without any issues...and I bought it used from someone who lived in Silverton (I live in the colorado banana belt by comparison).  Temperature range here is frequently -5C to +25 and has been, on occasion, -15 to +30 over the course of a year.  That said, I have never operated it close to those extremes (my limit, not the equipment!) 8-).  Storage range is -20 to +70C, which I would equate to just sitting in the observatory without movement.

Also it will go through its full 50cm range of motion in 25s (2 cm/s); so the 19 minute pause after one minute is never a factor.  I do not try to fine-tune.  I have the operational height marked on the inner column.

If I was going to change anything, I would pay the additional $1000US over the PT2 and buy the dual pier (PierTech PT3) to ensure stability.

Bryan


Re: APPM model how many points portable?

Worsel
 

Greg

From APPC Pro manual

To use APPM with your mount you will need to have the following:

1) Camera Control Software and a camera supported by that software:
a) MaxIm DL Pro v5 or later -
b) CCDSoft V5
c) TheSkyX Pro Camera Add-on
d) AstroArt V3 or later
e) Any camera with an ASCOM Camera Driver
f) Sequence Generator Pro.
g) Meade DSI I-III cameras are also supported, but their sensors are usually not large enough to
capture enough stars for reliable plate solves.

2) Plate Solving Software:
a) The full version of DC3 Dreams PinPoint application. Version 6 of Pinpoint is preferred.
b) TheSkyX Pro
c) Plate solving using Sequence Generator Pro

Eventually Ray will integrate ASTAP into APPM.


Bryan


Re: GTOCP4 Caps

Joe Zeglinski
 

Hi Mike,
 
    I ordered the plastic caps set for mine. They really should come standard with any CPx controller, and the metal ones offered as a valuable option.
 
    Two things to keep in mind about sourcing the such caps elsewhere.
 
    First, the AP set also includes that ...  tiny plastic plug ... for the CP4/5 USB port (which I don’t use), and it isn’t one of the common PC caps listed in a recent vendor link. The USB and Ethernet socket protection plugs are essential, since these can - (in some perhaps rare cases, like older mount top-side placement), become “tiny water reservoirs”  exposed to dew rolling off an OTA slewing by, potentially  puddling inside the controller. My two unfortunate experiences.
The other  Mil-Spec Amphenol socket ports not only have hermetically sealed leak-proof pin bases inside their sockets, but are very firmly bolted from behind, preventing any panel seepage.
 
    Second, I wonder if the metal caps could become “FROZEN”, (perhaps) difficult to unscrew,  on  exceptionally cold northern winter days.
Guess I would have to either have a portable hair dryer or take the controller indoors, or into the heated vehicle to thaw out the caps.
 
    Tony’s detailed, excellent video  - as  his always are -  about sourcing these metal caps, mentions their underlying “rubber cushions” to provide some push-back, allowing the twist-bayonet cap locks to be snugged-up. But, another benefit of the rubber cushion is to hermetically seal up the exposed tops of the pins, during storage, so they don’t oxidize as easily.
 
    However, I would caution about snipping off the “cap chains” if the scope travels to a dark site. You might lose a cap in the snow or dark ground cover, if they aren’t at least tethered by a shared lanyard to the pier/mount. The black plastic caps are far easier to lose.
If I don’t opt for replacing some of them with the metal caps, I may paint the standard AP black ones with glow-in-the-dark paint. Red plastic “CAPLUGS”, like the AP reducer covers, etc.  would have been somewhat better in that regard, but round ones may not be commonly available in such a wide assortment.
 
Joe Z.
 
 

From: M Hambrick
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 11:58 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] GTOCP4 Caps
 
Hi Linwood

Actually, Astro-Physics offers a set of plastic covers for all of the connectors on the GTOCP4/5 and the mount motors. You will have to call them to order a set. The interest in the metal covers is because they are more durable, and they will stay put, but as a minimum you should get a set of the plastic ones. I think they run about $15.00.

Mike


Re: AP1100 park position question

Worsel
 

Joe

I live in western Colorado and have had the PierTech adjustable pier (which, AFAIK, is a Linak) for 6 years without any issues...and I bought it used from someone who lived in Silverton (I live in the colorado banana belt by comparison).  Temperature range here is frequently -5C to +25 and has been, on occasion, -15 to +30 over the course of a year.  That said, I have never operated it close to those extremes (my limit, not the equipment!) 8-).  Storage range is -20 to +70C, which I would equate to just sitting in the observatory without movement.

Also it will go through its full 50cm range of motion in 25s (2 cm/s); so the 19 minute pause after one minute is never a factor.  I do not try to fine-tune.  I have the operational height marked on the inner column.

If I was going to change anything, I would pay the additional $1000US over the PT2 and buy the dual pier (PierTech PT3) to ensure stability.

Bryan


Re: Time issues?

Pete Mumbower
 

Look like I need extra valium for tomorrow too. UPS delivered 4 of 6 boxes! At least it looks like the important ones (RA/Dec axis are here!) ;)

4381 - 4400 of 82432