Date   

Re: APCC move axis question

Andy Ermolli
 

Here are my most recent logs. I tried move axis with NINA and tracking corrections enabled in APCC.
I pushed each direction button for about 15 seconds. The move axis speed was set to 3 degrees per second. NINA 64 bit 1.11 nightly #135. 
AP Mach1 GTOCP3 with V2 chip. The mount did not move.


Re: APCC move axis question

Dale Ghent
 

Certainly a good data point. Thanks Brent.

NINA's polar alignment plugin uses MoveAxis() because it's the only way to move a specific axis of the mount without another axis also moving by some mysterious (to the app) amount. Such things might happen with SlewToCoordinates() and pointing models or other such stuff in the mix.

On Aug 31, 2021, at 15:57, Brent Boshart <bboshart@gmail.com> wrote:

If this is helpful to the conversation, I have done extensive testing with APCC 1.9 with my Mach2 using the Moveaxis command with software I am working on. My software is satellite tracking at significant magnification so I am expecting precise responses from Moveaxis commands. Programming through the RS232 to the mount firmware (no APCC, no ASCOM), I get excellent responses with the :RR and :RD commands (moveaxis). Using APCC 1.9 and ASCOM, I get the same excellent responses using the ASCOM moveaxis command with "Enable Pointing Correction" checked only. If I check "Enable Tracking Correction" I get unexpected responses from the moveaxis command. For my application only pointing correction is important to me so I can tracking correction off. Another observation, if I turn sidereal tracking off (in the case of a geostationary satellite) then the position coordinates displayed no longer have pointing correction applied - this appears to be by design though.


Re: APCC move axis question

Brent Boshart
 
Edited

If this is helpful to the conversation, I have done extensive testing with APCC 1.9 with my Mach2 using the Moveaxis command with software I am working on. My software is satellite tracking at significant magnification so I am expecting precise responses from Moveaxis commands.  Programming through the RS232 to the mount firmware (no APCC, no ASCOM), I get excellent responses with the :RR and :RD commands (moveaxis).   Using APCC 1.9 and ASCOM, I get the same excellent responses using the ASCOM moveaxis command with "Enable Pointing Correction" checked only.  If I check "Enable Tracking Correction" I get unexpected responses from the moveaxis command.  For my application only pointing correction is important to me so I can turn tracking correction off.  Another observation, if I turn sidereal tracking off (in the case of a geostationary satellite) then the position coordinates displayed no longer have pointing correction applied - this appears to be by design though.


Encoder mount guiding with model active

Roland Christen
 

Hi All,

Per our recent discussions, I had a chance to image last night under fair to good seeing (3 out of 5 to 4 out of 5 on Clear Sky Chart). I'm doing 20 minute exposures, in this case M13, to test guiding with a model active. The settings are as follows:

Mount - Mach2 Encoder mount
Scope - 10 inch F6.3 Mak-Cass astrograph, 1600mm focal length
Model points - 8 points each on 2 Dec lines on either side of the object.
Guide settings - 5 second guide exposures, 0.02 sec (0.3 arc sec) Min move
Guider scale -  0.95 arc sec per pixel

The mount is not precisely polar aligned, so there is drift in both axes as the object moves toward the western horizon. The measured drift at the midpoint of my imaging session was 24 arc sec per hour RA and 60 arc sec per hour Dec. The model created a curve that compensated for this drift, and without guiding the 20 minute exposures had approximately 0.75 arc second drift error. Without the model the Dec would have drifted 20 arc seconds in a 20 minute period.

Adding the guider into the loop increases the accuracy somewhat, depending on the seeing. Last night varied a bit but was generally good until the object was down in the western sky at midnight. Below are some guide results along with guider settings that I was using. With .02 sec Min Move the system will only send a correction pulse when the guide star has exceeded 0.3 arc seconds of error. On perfect nights (which are extremely rare here) I can set the Min Move to .01 sec (0.15 arc sec) and can have guide graphs with well under 0.1 rms guide errors. On average to poor nights I set the Min Move to 0.03 seconds.

I hope this gives a bit of insight into the different ways you can set up your guiding during an imaging session. If polar alignment is good, and you are not far from the zenith, and your focal length is short, you might be able to get decent results without any kind of guiding. If you want better precision, then guiding by itself can produce good results. In my case I'm testing the resolution capabilities of a 1600 mm focal length instrument and want to have as tight a guiding as possible. In that case I'm willing to spend a bit of time creating a quick model so that the guider only has to tweak the guide star every once in a while.

First and second images show the settings and results of a typical 20 minute exposure. The 3rd image shows a 20 minute unguided exposure with just the model running.

Roland










20 minute unguided exposure:


--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: APCC move axis question

Ray Gralak
 

The APCC log you provided does not include any moves with tracking correction enabled.

So, please redo the test with tracking correction enabled and provide logs for both APCC and ASCOM. You do not need to perform tests with tracking correction disabled.

Also, as part of the test, press and hold the East and West buttons for several seconds each so that APCC has time to query RA and Dec values for several seconds in the log.

Thanks,

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Andy Ermolli
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2021 9:05 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC move axis question

Ray, yes the mount moved in all directions when I turned off the model correction. When I turned it back on
the mount did not move.

With the correction on, the driver was showing a custom rate but apcc did not register any movement and the
mount did not move.




Re: GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Jeff B
 

Interesting and thanks Roland.  

Jeff

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 11:53 AM Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
If you are under-mounted the encoders may not help much. They won't respond to high frequency vibrations but will damp out low frequency motions and always bring the axes back to the commanded positions.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff B <mnebula946@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Aug 31, 2021 10:36 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Thanks Roland, I'm a visual user for now and there are sometimes some vibrations while focusing, which, if the system is bouncy enough, can make focusing at high power a bit challenging, especially if it's a sort of high frequency ringing.   I was just wondering if the encoders might effectively dampen some of the jiggles.  

Jeff

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 11:22 AM Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
When you focus manually you are moving the camera. Ideally the focuser drawtube moves exactly back and forth and never side to side. However, the world is not ideal, sooo you will get some star motions but not necessarily axis motions. The encoder cannot pick up camera motion, only axis motion.

Also, the disturbance is at the end of a long moment arm and will always be somewhat erratic, so the encoders are chasing random motions that are coming fast and furious. When you let go of the focus knob and lock the focuser back down, then things settle and the guide star should appear on the same pixel again - unless locking down the focuser shifts the camera sideways a tiny amount. Again the encoders cannot pick this up either.

Practically speaking, I try not to focus manually while the camera is taking an image.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff B <mnebula946@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Aug 31, 2021 8:33 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Yes, a great description Roland and thanks.  Now if the encoders are engaged, do they also respond similarly to vibrations induced when manually focusing?  Curious.

Jeff

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 8:39 AM ap@... <ap@...> wrote:
Chris White wrote:
 
  • I've been flipping a coin about going with a Mach2 or an 1100GTO (Non-AE) for a while now, and the coin has not landed yet.  Since I dont expect to get a really big scope (Happy with my 130 and Edge 925) I'm likely leaning towards the M2.  Your description has been helpful to describe the real benefit of Encoders. 
 
Deciding by careful analysis, mathematical simulations, a bit of game theory.  Throw in some non-parametric probability theory to maximize the expected benefits….
 
Then ignore it all and do the obvious:  Both.
 
In all seriousness, unless that’s a magic coin, it’s not like you can get both at once anyway.  Take the one you can get first, use it while waiting on the second, you can always then switch easily as you would not have trouble selling the first if you decided, with that experience, you want the other, or if not, give up your place in line for the other for someone else.  Or by then you might actually want both.
 
Once you go ahead and get on both lists, you can celebrate with a nice dinner where someone will offer desert of Apple Pie or Ice Cream.  You will be prepared for this choice, and quickly say: Both.
 
😊
 
Linwood
 
 
 
 
 
 

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: APCC move axis question

Andy Ermolli
 

Ray, yes the mount moved in all directions when I turned off the model correction. When I turned it back on the mount did not move. 

With the correction on, the driver was showing a custom rate but apcc did not register any movement and the mount did not move.


Re: #APCC Pro 1.9 w/ASTAP platesolve test always fails #APCC

Sébastien Doré
 

 I start looking at my particular environment. I have to assume it's not the application. In this
case, I had to give controlled folder access to APCC, [...]
Yes, I did check my environment in the first place. That is also why, amongst other things, I put every test images directly in the APPM folder before I did my extensive solving tests. (I did also test with other directories BTW).

My understanding at this point (from what Ray explained earlier) is that the APPM calls to ASTAP use chosen FITS parameters which are "crafted" / included by APPM when acquiring images. When these parameters are not in the FITS header, whether the call fails or ASTAP can't find a solution... As it's been said before, ASTAP needs somewhat precise inputs to be able to solve. But when done correctly, it's sooo lightning fast.

Haven't got a chance to test under the stars yet though. So as others reported it works well with APPM's generated images, I've put a hold on troubleshooting those issues until then...

Thanks for the cue anyway. Might not be obvious to everyone out there...

Clear skies,
Sébastien


De : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> de la part de legendtrail via groups.io <legendtrail@...>
Envoyé : 29 août 2021 18:36
À : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Objet : Re: [ap-gto] #APCC Pro 1.9 w/ASTAP platesolve test always fails
 
To the OP,
A few weeks ago, I upgraded Windows 10 to 19043, and began having problems with a number of applications. This included the same
sort of problems you have mentioned. I installed APCC and tried running a model, and it just would not solve 2+2.  Whenever this happens
to me, and the whole user world isn't screaming, I start looking at my particular environment. I have to assume it's not the application. In this
case, I had to give controlled folder access to APCC, Maxim, and Pinpoint, and provide private firewall access to Pinpoint. Now everything
solves locally in about 15 seconds and my environment is still secure, as much as it can be.  I don't know anything about your environment,
but its worth looking at your security plan and making necessary changes.


Re: APCC move axis question

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Andy,

Yes I set it at 3 which I believe is three degrees per second. That’s what I used when I recorded the logs that I
uploaded. The version of NINA that I was using is 1.11 nightly#135 64bit.
The APCC log you posted shows there was moves commanded in both directions (East/West).

So, is the problem solved?

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Andy Ermolli
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2021 8:46 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC move axis question

Ray
Yes I set it at 3 which I believe is three degrees per second. That’s what I used when I recorded the logs that I
uploaded. The version of NINA that I was using is 1.11 nightly#135 64bit.


Re: GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Roland Christen
 

If you are under-mounted the encoders may not help much. They won't respond to high frequency vibrations but will damp out low frequency motions and always bring the axes back to the commanded positions.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff B <mnebula946@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Aug 31, 2021 10:36 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Thanks Roland, I'm a visual user for now and there are sometimes some vibrations while focusing, which, if the system is bouncy enough, can make focusing at high power a bit challenging, especially if it's a sort of high frequency ringing.   I was just wondering if the encoders might effectively dampen some of the jiggles.  

Jeff

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 11:22 AM Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
When you focus manually you are moving the camera. Ideally the focuser drawtube moves exactly back and forth and never side to side. However, the world is not ideal, sooo you will get some star motions but not necessarily axis motions. The encoder cannot pick up camera motion, only axis motion.

Also, the disturbance is at the end of a long moment arm and will always be somewhat erratic, so the encoders are chasing random motions that are coming fast and furious. When you let go of the focus knob and lock the focuser back down, then things settle and the guide star should appear on the same pixel again - unless locking down the focuser shifts the camera sideways a tiny amount. Again the encoders cannot pick this up either.

Practically speaking, I try not to focus manually while the camera is taking an image.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff B <mnebula946@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Aug 31, 2021 8:33 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Yes, a great description Roland and thanks.  Now if the encoders are engaged, do they also respond similarly to vibrations induced when manually focusing?  Curious.

Jeff

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 8:39 AM ap@... <ap@...> wrote:
Chris White wrote:
 
  • I've been flipping a coin about going with a Mach2 or an 1100GTO (Non-AE) for a while now, and the coin has not landed yet.  Since I dont expect to get a really big scope (Happy with my 130 and Edge 925) I'm likely leaning towards the M2.  Your description has been helpful to describe the real benefit of Encoders. 
 
Deciding by careful analysis, mathematical simulations, a bit of game theory.  Throw in some non-parametric probability theory to maximize the expected benefits….
 
Then ignore it all and do the obvious:  Both.
 
In all seriousness, unless that’s a magic coin, it’s not like you can get both at once anyway.  Take the one you can get first, use it while waiting on the second, you can always then switch easily as you would not have trouble selling the first if you decided, with that experience, you want the other, or if not, give up your place in line for the other for someone else.  Or by then you might actually want both.
 
Once you go ahead and get on both lists, you can celebrate with a nice dinner where someone will offer desert of Apple Pie or Ice Cream.  You will be prepared for this choice, and quickly say: Both.
 
😊
 
Linwood
 
 
 
 
 
 

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: APCC move axis question

Andy Ermolli
 

Ray
Yes I set it at 3 which I believe is three degrees per second. That’s what I used when I recorded the logs that I uploaded. The version of NINA that I was using is 1.11 nightly#135 64bit.


Re: GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Jeff B
 

Thanks Roland, I'm a visual user for now and there are sometimes some vibrations while focusing, which, if the system is bouncy enough, can make focusing at high power a bit challenging, especially if it's a sort of high frequency ringing.   I was just wondering if the encoders might effectively dampen some of the jiggles.  

Jeff

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 11:22 AM Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
When you focus manually you are moving the camera. Ideally the focuser drawtube moves exactly back and forth and never side to side. However, the world is not ideal, sooo you will get some star motions but not necessarily axis motions. The encoder cannot pick up camera motion, only axis motion.

Also, the disturbance is at the end of a long moment arm and will always be somewhat erratic, so the encoders are chasing random motions that are coming fast and furious. When you let go of the focus knob and lock the focuser back down, then things settle and the guide star should appear on the same pixel again - unless locking down the focuser shifts the camera sideways a tiny amount. Again the encoders cannot pick this up either.

Practically speaking, I try not to focus manually while the camera is taking an image.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff B <mnebula946@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Aug 31, 2021 8:33 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Yes, a great description Roland and thanks.  Now if the encoders are engaged, do they also respond similarly to vibrations induced when manually focusing?  Curious.

Jeff

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 8:39 AM ap@... <ap@...> wrote:
Chris White wrote:
 
  • I've been flipping a coin about going with a Mach2 or an 1100GTO (Non-AE) for a while now, and the coin has not landed yet.  Since I dont expect to get a really big scope (Happy with my 130 and Edge 925) I'm likely leaning towards the M2.  Your description has been helpful to describe the real benefit of Encoders. 
 
Deciding by careful analysis, mathematical simulations, a bit of game theory.  Throw in some non-parametric probability theory to maximize the expected benefits….
 
Then ignore it all and do the obvious:  Both.
 
In all seriousness, unless that’s a magic coin, it’s not like you can get both at once anyway.  Take the one you can get first, use it while waiting on the second, you can always then switch easily as you would not have trouble selling the first if you decided, with that experience, you want the other, or if not, give up your place in line for the other for someone else.  Or by then you might actually want both.
 
Once you go ahead and get on both lists, you can celebrate with a nice dinner where someone will offer desert of Apple Pie or Ice Cream.  You will be prepared for this choice, and quickly say: Both.
 
😊
 
Linwood
 
 
 
 
 
 

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Roland Christen
 

When you focus manually you are moving the camera. Ideally the focuser drawtube moves exactly back and forth and never side to side. However, the world is not ideal, sooo you will get some star motions but not necessarily axis motions. The encoder cannot pick up camera motion, only axis motion.

Also, the disturbance is at the end of a long moment arm and will always be somewhat erratic, so the encoders are chasing random motions that are coming fast and furious. When you let go of the focus knob and lock the focuser back down, then things settle and the guide star should appear on the same pixel again - unless locking down the focuser shifts the camera sideways a tiny amount. Again the encoders cannot pick this up either.

Practically speaking, I try not to focus manually while the camera is taking an image.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff B <mnebula946@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Aug 31, 2021 8:33 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Yes, a great description Roland and thanks.  Now if the encoders are engaged, do they also respond similarly to vibrations induced when manually focusing?  Curious.

Jeff

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 8:39 AM ap@... <ap@...> wrote:
Chris White wrote:
 
  • I've been flipping a coin about going with a Mach2 or an 1100GTO (Non-AE) for a while now, and the coin has not landed yet.  Since I dont expect to get a really big scope (Happy with my 130 and Edge 925) I'm likely leaning towards the M2.  Your description has been helpful to describe the real benefit of Encoders. 
 
Deciding by careful analysis, mathematical simulations, a bit of game theory.  Throw in some non-parametric probability theory to maximize the expected benefits….
 
Then ignore it all and do the obvious:  Both.
 
In all seriousness, unless that’s a magic coin, it’s not like you can get both at once anyway.  Take the one you can get first, use it while waiting on the second, you can always then switch easily as you would not have trouble selling the first if you decided, with that experience, you want the other, or if not, give up your place in line for the other for someone else.  Or by then you might actually want both.
 
Once you go ahead and get on both lists, you can celebrate with a nice dinner where someone will offer desert of Apple Pie or Ice Cream.  You will be prepared for this choice, and quickly say: Both.
 
😊
 
Linwood
 
 
 
 
 
 

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Roland Christen
 


you can celebrate with a nice dinner where someone will offer desert of Apple Pie or Ice Cream.  You will be prepared for this choice, and quickly say: Both.
Tada100Heavy check mark

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: ap@... <ap@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Tue, Aug 31, 2021 7:38 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Chris White wrote:
 
  • I've been flipping a coin about going with a Mach2 or an 1100GTO (Non-AE) for a while now, and the coin has not landed yet.  Since I dont expect to get a really big scope (Happy with my 130 and Edge 925) I'm likely leaning towards the M2.  Your description has been helpful to describe the real benefit of Encoders. 
 
Deciding by careful analysis, mathematical simulations, a bit of game theory.  Throw in some non-parametric probability theory to maximize the expected benefits….
 
Then ignore it all and do the obvious:  Both.
 
In all seriousness, unless that’s a magic coin, it’s not like you can get both at once anyway.  Take the one you can get first, use it while waiting on the second, you can always then switch easily as you would not have trouble selling the first if you decided, with that experience, you want the other, or if not, give up your place in line for the other for someone else.  Or by then you might actually want both.
 
Once you go ahead and get on both lists, you can celebrate with a nice dinner where someone will offer desert of Apple Pie or Ice Cream.  You will be prepared for this choice, and quickly say: Both.
 
😊
 
Linwood
 
 
 
 
 
 

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: APCC move axis question

ap@CaptivePhotons.com
 

Ray wrote:

I have confirmed that the move buttons seem to work correctly in SkyX build 13150.
Good to know, though for me TSX was just a hold over about to be deleted (which is why I let it get out of date).

This discussion has been an interesting education. Thank you for your patience.

Linwood


Re: APCC move axis question

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Linwood,

I have confirmed that the move buttons seem to work correctly in SkyX build 13150.

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of ap@CaptivePhotons.com
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2021 12:49 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC move axis question

Ray said:

It looks like you disconnected APCC before the mount could reach the limit.
That is very possible. I was in a bit of a panic when I couldn't stop it, and it was 3 rooms away from me.

So thinking out loud -- if it was moving slower and I disconnected, it would time out (60s I think) and then the
mount would park? But since it was moving fast, it had plenty of time to collide.

And the limits are solely inside APCC, so the mount itself does not enforce them.

And there's no stop-slew because TSX's movement was adjusting the tracking rate, not a slew; i.e. it was
tracking not slewing as far as it was concerned.

In theory I could have, if I knew all this, reset the tracking rate in APCC I suspect. Didn't occur to me.

But more to the point, I think what you are saying is if I just sat there, and let APCC keep running, it would
have stopped the fast-tracking before it went counterweight up. It was actually closing APCC that allowed the
collision.

Do I have it right?

I'm not sure I want to actually try it again to confirm. I think I was lucky the clutches were relatively loose. I
don't know that it would damage the mount, but it might have messed up the relatively light brackets on the
Pegasus.

Anyway, if I have my understanding correct, thank you for persisting to get me there.

And if not... help one more time?

Linwood




Re: APCC move axis question

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Andy,

Here are my most recent APCC and Driver logs. Not sure if this adds anything to the discussion but here they
are.
Did you try NINA's move buttons again with a lower tracking speed?

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Andy Ermolli
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2021 6:08 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC move axis question

Here are my most recent APCC and Driver logs. Not sure if this adds anything to the discussion but here they
are.


Re: GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Jeff B
 

Yes, a great description Roland and thanks.  Now if the encoders are engaged, do they also respond similarly to vibrations induced when manually focusing?  Curious.

Jeff

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 8:39 AM ap@... <ap@...> wrote:

Chris White wrote:

 

  • I've been flipping a coin about going with a Mach2 or an 1100GTO (Non-AE) for a while now, and the coin has not landed yet.  Since I dont expect to get a really big scope (Happy with my 130 and Edge 925) I'm likely leaning towards the M2.  Your description has been helpful to describe the real benefit of Encoders. 

 

Deciding by careful analysis, mathematical simulations, a bit of game theory.  Throw in some non-parametric probability theory to maximize the expected benefits….

 

Then ignore it all and do the obvious:  Both.

 

In all seriousness, unless that’s a magic coin, it’s not like you can get both at once anyway.  Take the one you can get first, use it while waiting on the second, you can always then switch easily as you would not have trouble selling the first if you decided, with that experience, you want the other, or if not, give up your place in line for the other for someone else.  Or by then you might actually want both.

 

Once you go ahead and get on both lists, you can celebrate with a nice dinner where someone will offer desert of Apple Pie or Ice Cream.  You will be prepared for this choice, and quickly say: Both.

 

😊

 

Linwood

 

 

 

 

 

 


Re: GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

ap@CaptivePhotons.com
 

Chris White wrote:

 

  • I've been flipping a coin about going with a Mach2 or an 1100GTO (Non-AE) for a while now, and the coin has not landed yet.  Since I dont expect to get a really big scope (Happy with my 130 and Edge 925) I'm likely leaning towards the M2.  Your description has been helpful to describe the real benefit of Encoders. 

 

Deciding by careful analysis, mathematical simulations, a bit of game theory.  Throw in some non-parametric probability theory to maximize the expected benefits….

 

Then ignore it all and do the obvious:  Both.

 

In all seriousness, unless that’s a magic coin, it’s not like you can get both at once anyway.  Take the one you can get first, use it while waiting on the second, you can always then switch easily as you would not have trouble selling the first if you decided, with that experience, you want the other, or if not, give up your place in line for the other for someone else.  Or by then you might actually want both.

 

Once you go ahead and get on both lists, you can celebrate with a nice dinner where someone will offer desert of Apple Pie or Ice Cream.  You will be prepared for this choice, and quickly say: Both.

 

😊

 

Linwood

 

 

 

 

 

 


Re: GTO vs AE/AEL data #Absolute_Encoders

Chris White
 

Great description Roland.  Thank you.  I've been flipping a coin about going with a Mach2 or an 1100GTO (Non-AE) for a while now, and the coin has not landed yet.  Since I dont expect to get a really big scope (Happy with my 130 and Edge 925) I'm likely leaning towards the M2.  Your description has been helpful to describe the real benefit of Encoders. 

5801 - 5820 of 86338