|
Re: Rookie Question
Derek S
Thank you, that explains it.
|
|
|
|
Re: Rookie Question
ap@CaptivePhotons.com
Derek S wrote:
It’s the pocket powerbox, I’m not sure if the larger ones would fit as the RA axis rotates.
I used two 1/4x20 screws, and one of the two brackets it came with (or maybe it was extra I do not know, but from Pegasus). The bracket does not quite fit a 1/4x20 screw, so I reamed it out (it only takes a very little bit and plenty of metal).
I found two 1/4x20 holes, one was for a socket head, one for the countersunk angled head, and these happen to line up (I think there’s only two that do on one end only of the 16” saddle). It is not quite straight but pretty close. You have to slide the saddle back a step also.
With nuts on the bottom tight it holds the PPBadv straight enough I did not need anything else; I had planned thick double sided tape near the end, but didn’t use it. If I recall you need a specific length for one bolt or it sticks up and blocks the temp probe connector.
It’s outside working for a living right now (and not doing well, it’s attracting clouds!) or I’d send a photo, but can tomorrow if that doesn’t make sense.
|
|
|
|
Re: Rookie Question
Derek S
Linwoord,
How did you attach the powerbox? I was thinking 1 screw and velcro? Sincerely, Derek
|
|
|
|
Re: New JPL Format for Horizons Ephemeris #APCC - Format Causes Issue
#APCC
Ray Gralak
Hi Don,
The data from the web site just loaded okay for me. I think the default settings are a little different. See this screenshot for the settings I used. Also, it appears that you cannot use control-A followed by control-C to copy the data because the data doesn’t open up in a new window. You have to manually select and copy just the generated lines of the data. -Ray
> -----Original Message-----
> From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of dnakic via groups.io > Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 2:48 PM > To: main@ap-gto.groups.io > Subject: [ap-gto] New JPL Format for Horizons Ephemeris #APCC - Format Causes Issue > > This past Monday I was using Horizons and went to JPL Website to download Ephemeris. I did both the text > file download and the data and the format looks a bit different. Note, the website looks different too. The > data pull would not work in Horizons. Appreciate insight into issue. > > > Header format: > > ******************************************************************************* > Revised: July 31, 2013 Moon / (Earth) 301 > > GEOPHYSICAL DATA (updated 2018-Aug-15): > Vol. mean radius, km = 1737.53+-0.03 Mass, x10^22 kg = 7.349 > Radius (gravity), km = 1738.0 Surface emissivity = 0.92 > Radius (IAU), km = 1737.4 GM, km^3/s^2 = 4902.800066 > Density, g/cm^3 = 3.3437 GM 1-sigma, km^3/s^2 = +-0.0001 > V(1,0) = +0.21 Surface accel., m/s^2 = 1.62 > Earth/Moon mass ratio = 81.3005690769 Farside crust. thick. = ~80 - 90 km > Mean crustal density = 2.97+-.07 g/cm^3 Nearside crust. thick.= 58+-8 km > Heat flow, Apollo 15 = 3.1+-.6 mW/m^2 Mean angular diameter = 31'05.2" > Heat flow, Apollo 17 = 2.2+-.5 mW/m^2 Sid. rot. rate, rad/s = 0.0000026617 > Geometric Albedo = 0.12 Mean solar day = 29.5306 d > Obliquity to orbit = 6.67 deg Orbit period = 27.321582 d > Semi-major axis, a = 384400 km Eccentricity = 0.05490 > Mean motion, rad/s = 2.6616995x10^-6 Inclination = 5.145 deg > Apsidal period = 3231.50 d Nodal period = 6798.38 d > Perihelion Aphelion Mean > Solar Constant (W/m^2) 1414+-7 1323+-7 1368+-7 > Maximum Planetary IR (W/m^2) 1314 1226 1268 > Minimum Planetary IR (W/m^2) 5.2 5.2 5.2 > ******************************************************************************** > > > > Thanks, > Don > > >
|
|
|
|
New JPL Format for Horizons Ephemeris #APCC - Format Causes Issue
#APCC
dnakic@...
This past Monday I was using Horizons and went to JPL Website to download Ephemeris. I did both the text file download and the data and the format looks a bit different. Note, the website looks different too. The data pull would not work in Horizons. Appreciate insight into issue.
*******************************************************************************
Revised: July 31, 2013 Moon / (Earth) 301
GEOPHYSICAL DATA (updated 2018-Aug-15):
Vol. mean radius, km = 1737.53+-0.03 Mass, x10^22 kg = 7.349
Radius (gravity), km = 1738.0 Surface emissivity = 0.92
Radius (IAU), km = 1737.4 GM, km^3/s^2 = 4902.800066
Density, g/cm^3 = 3.3437 GM 1-sigma, km^3/s^2 = +-0.0001
V(1,0) = +0.21 Surface accel., m/s^2 = 1.62
Earth/Moon mass ratio = 81.3005690769 Farside crust. thick. = ~80 - 90 km
Mean crustal density = 2.97+-.07 g/cm^3 Nearside crust. thick.= 58+-8 km
Heat flow, Apollo 15 = 3.1+-.6 mW/m^2 Mean angular diameter = 31'05.2"
Heat flow, Apollo 17 = 2.2+-.5 mW/m^2 Sid. rot. rate, rad/s = 0.0000026617
Geometric Albedo = 0.12 Mean solar day = 29.5306 d
Obliquity to orbit = 6.67 deg Orbit period = 27.321582 d
Semi-major axis, a = 384400 km Eccentricity = 0.05490
Mean motion, rad/s = 2.6616995x10^-6 Inclination = 5.145 deg
Apsidal period = 3231.50 d Nodal period = 6798.38 d
Perihelion Aphelion Mean
Solar Constant (W/m^2) 1414+-7 1323+-7 1368+-7
Maximum Planetary IR (W/m^2) 1314 1226 1268
Minimum Planetary IR (W/m^2) 5.2 5.2 5.2
********************************************************************************
|
|
|
|
Re: Connection issues. . .. again
#ASCOM_V2_Driver
When troubleshooting USB connections... 1. Try a new, quality USB cable. 2. Try a different USB port. 3. See what Device Manager is saying. 4. This time, really do try a quality USB cable, and not just pretend to do so. 5. Try a different USB cable and a diff PC. 6. Come to this forum with your hat in hand.
Not to overwork it, but I also support Ethernet approach.
|
|
|
|
Re: Connection issues. . .. again
#ASCOM_V2_Driver
Worsel
Not to overwork it, but I also support Ethernet approach.
Once the mount is connected to a router, you should be able to see the address assigned to the mount by either 1. Logging into your router 2. Using the Enet-WiFi-Polling utility that A-P provides CP4 https://www.astro-physics.info/index.htm?tech_support/mounts/cp4-update/cp4-update CP5 https://www.astro-physics.info/index.htm?tech_support/mounts/cp5-update/cp5-update Bryan
|
|
|
|
Re: Hello All and pardon the newbie questions.....
Sébastien Doré
I have about 40 lbs of payload (EdgeHD 8in + SV70t + imaging gear) on my Mach2 and I use 2 x 18lbs at the very top of the shaft and 1 x 10 lbs for fine adjust about an inch below the second 18lbs (much like on Eric's photo).
I also bought a 5# in case I needed a little more versatility (and glad I did). For example, as an alternate balancing solution, while still placing both 18# at the top of the shaft, I omit the 10#, and add the 5# near the bottom. I actually find it easier to accurately achieve neutral balance this way... Hope this helps. Sébastien
|
|
|
|
Re: More basic mount questions
Worsel
Michael
I think if the scope is positioned face down and the dovetail could align with the saddle if dec clutches allow saddle to point vertical. This is how I load a 14.5" OTA; although I did not need the elevating table, because I have an elevating pier. I just built a table that is the right height for the front of the OTA when pointed down. Once the clutches are released, the Dec axis can rotate through a full 360 degrees. Bryan
|
|
|
|
Re: Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up
Bill Long
Awesome! Can you share some of the FITS from the testing?
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Howard Hedlund <howard@...>
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 10:17 AM To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up Hi Sébastien and group,
I am starting some serious testing on Ray's latest improvements to APCC's modeled pointing and tracking using our system in Chile. This system is a 305mm f/8 Mak Cass on a 1600GTO AE. With 2440 mm of focal length, this should provide enough challenge to give the improved modeling, and the Dec Arc Tracking a good evaluation. I went ahead and made a huge mapping run in APPM - 487 points. The mapping used Dec spacing of just 4° and RA spacing of 10° to provide full dec arc coverage over the entire sky. The mapping also included a large number of CW-up points to add to the challenge. The mapping run was unbelievable: 485 successful plate solutions out of 487 points, so I was really happy about that. The entire run only took a few hours which is not a bad time investment for a permanent setup. Preliminary tests using 10 min. unguided subs in several parts of the sky are yielding excellent results with flatness measurements below 0.1 and FWHM values that were as good as we ever get with guiding. Stay tuned! If the weather and the wife cooperate, I'll be collecting more data over the next couple nights. Mag. 7 or Better Skies! Howard Hedlund Astro-Physics, Inc. AP Phone: 815-282-1513 Direct Phone: 815-315-7015 https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.astro-physics.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7C%7C1d8edf759ae044aa83d908d984ff575a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637687054484212064%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=H8u8uABiDA%2BAu%2BmpTewmU71%2FdXb6M8H50AFc627xIHw%3D&reserved=0 Please include this e-mail with your response. Consider the environment before printing this e-mail. -----Original Message----- From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ray Gralak Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 7:35 To: main@ap-gto.groups.io Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up Hi Sébastien, Two rows of sky data points will work, but Howard's suggestion for three rows of sky data points will yield even better tracking rate accuracy for a target. > but I would like a confirmation > that both types of corrections are not conflicting with each other, > meaning that it is the Dec Arc algorithm that is actually the one being used to compute the tracking corrections. As Brian previously pointed out, you must enable tracking rate corrections to use Dec Arc tracking. > Also, would you recommend to "Enable Pointing Correction" in such a > case? Maybe since the model is generally rather small (< 50 pts) the pointing corrections would not be accurate enough across the sky ? The problem is not the number of sky points, but the lack of distribution of data points across the sky. The all-sky model will be much more accurate if there is a wide distribution of sky data points. > Would it harm to keep the pointing corrections enabled anyway in case > I would like to switch target in the same declination range for example ? What about a target outside of the "dec arc model" range? There is no definitive answer for this, as it depends on the setup as a whole. But usually, pointing will not be as good outside of the narrow range of sky points that were collected. However, that shouldn't be a problem as many of the imaging programs have a "plate solve and re-center" feature. -Ray > -----Original Message----- > From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf > Of Seb@stro > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 1:21 PM > To: main@ap-gto.groups.io > Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for > field set up > > Hello Howard, > > I'm also trying to learn the ropes of the new Dec Arc Tracking feature > for portable use (with a new model each night). Please keep in mind > I'm totally new at modeling in general. At this point, I believe I > have quite managed to understand the global idea from the a little > experimentation (did a complete Dec Arc mapping run successfully), reading the manual and some recent posts but I'm still left with the following questions about the pointing model tab in APCC. > > My general understanding is that the tracking corrections will use the > "all-sky algorithm" to compute the correction terms from the mapped > points unless the Dec Arc Tracking is also enabled in which case > another algorithm (taking also other variables into account) to compute more accurately the correction terms for the current declination arc. Am I getting this right ? > > > > If so, I was wondering if I should ONLY tick the "Enable Dec Arc > Tracking" checkbox or if I do also need to tick the "Enable Tracking > Correction" box for the Dec Arc tracking corrections to be actually > sent to the mount ? It seems the latter is required from what I see in > the Tracking Status window, but I would like a confirmation that both types of corrections are not conflicting with each other, meaning that it is the Dec Arc algorithm that is actually the one being used to compute the tracking corrections. > > Also, would you recommend to "Enable Pointing Correction" in such a > case? Maybe since the model is generally rather small (< 50 pts) the pointing corrections would not be accurate enough across the sky ? > Would it harm to keep the pointing corrections enabled anyway in case > I would like to switch target in the same declination range for example ? What about a target outside of the "dec arc model" range? > > > Thanks for your time, > > Sébastien > > > > ________________________________ > > De : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> de la part de > Howard Hedlund <howard@astro- physics.com> Envoyé : 30 septembre 2021 > 12:50 À : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> Objet : Re: > [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up > > > Hi Andrea, for portable setups, the APCC Dec Arc feature is amazing! It is perfect for your situation. > > > > I would definitely run 3 arcs if you can spare the time – one right on > the target declination, and two more – one a couple degrees north, and the other a couple degrees south of your target dec. > > > > As for the RA density, I would experiment a little. You presently do > 2 arcs each with 10 or so points giving 20 total. 3 arcs totaling between 25 and 30 should rock! > > > > Mag. 7 or Better Skies! > > > > Howard Hedlund > > Astro-Physics, Inc. > > AP Phone: 815-282-1513 > > Direct Phone: 815-315-7015 > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.astro-physics.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7C%7C1d8edf759ae044aa83d908d984ff575a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637687054484222024%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=Z5SDCCArwi5RAr00ZzAFQKXMJpngGrRYzcnITuLrLsc%3D&reserved=0 <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.astro-physics.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7C%7C1d8edf759ae044aa83d908d984ff575a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637687054484222024%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=Z5SDCCArwi5RAr00ZzAFQKXMJpngGrRYzcnITuLrLsc%3D&reserved=0> > > Please include this e-mail with your response. > > > > P Consider the environment before printing this e-mail. > > > > From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of > Andrea Lucchetti > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 6:16 > To: main@ap-gto.groups.io > Subject: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field > set up > > > > Hi, the new functionality is now more mature and I assume some of you have some good data to share. > > I usually shoot one subject per night. > Given the declination, what is the best combination of : > > -number of dec arcs > -total number of points > -RA spacing > > my present strategy is to run 2 arcs one degree north /south of the object declination for a total of 20 points. > But I wonder if there is a better approach. I think I can increase the > number of total points while still investing a reasonable amount of time. > it is better to increase the number of points in the two arcs or may > be have one middle arc running on the object declination? > > Also, Someone recommended a new feature to easily model these points: > I think that it would be very useful for people with a nomad set up. > > Thank you, > Andrea > >
|
|
|
|
Re: Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up
Sébastien Doré
Thank you Ray, Brian and Roland ! That pretty much covers the configuration part of my question. Now, does my understanding of the internal modeling "magic" seems about right ?
Also, speaking of forum étiquette in another thread, thanks to Andrea for posting this in the first place too. My apologies if I hi-jacked your post. I felt like my questions were relevant to the topic and may be complementary to yours and might be interesting to other portable imager new at modeling as well... Clear skies, Sébastien
|
|
|
|
Re: Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up
Hi Sébastien and group,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I am starting some serious testing on Ray's latest improvements to APCC's modeled pointing and tracking using our system in Chile. This system is a 305mm f/8 Mak Cass on a 1600GTO AE. With 2440 mm of focal length, this should provide enough challenge to give the improved modeling, and the Dec Arc Tracking a good evaluation. I went ahead and made a huge mapping run in APPM - 487 points. The mapping used Dec spacing of just 4° and RA spacing of 10° to provide full dec arc coverage over the entire sky. The mapping also included a large number of CW-up points to add to the challenge. The mapping run was unbelievable: 485 successful plate solutions out of 487 points, so I was really happy about that. The entire run only took a few hours which is not a bad time investment for a permanent setup. Preliminary tests using 10 min. unguided subs in several parts of the sky are yielding excellent results with flatness measurements below 0.1 and FWHM values that were as good as we ever get with guiding. Stay tuned! If the weather and the wife cooperate, I'll be collecting more data over the next couple nights. Mag. 7 or Better Skies! Howard Hedlund Astro-Physics, Inc. AP Phone: 815-282-1513 Direct Phone: 815-315-7015 www.astro-physics.com Please include this e-mail with your response. Consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ray Gralak Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 7:35 To: main@ap-gto.groups.io Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up Hi Sébastien, Two rows of sky data points will work, but Howard's suggestion for three rows of sky data points will yield even better tracking rate accuracy for a target. but I would like a confirmationAs Brian previously pointed out, you must enable tracking rate corrections to use Dec Arc tracking. Also, would you recommend to "Enable Pointing Correction" in such aThe problem is not the number of sky points, but the lack of distribution of data points across the sky. The all-sky model will be much more accurate if there is a wide distribution of sky data points. Would it harm to keep the pointing corrections enabled anyway in caseThere is no definitive answer for this, as it depends on the setup as a whole. But usually, pointing will not be as good outside of the narrow range of sky points that were collected. However, that shouldn't be a problem as many of the imaging programs have a "plate solve and re-center" feature. -Ray -----Original Message-----
|
|
|
|
Re: Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up
Ray Gralak
Hi Sébastien,
Two rows of sky data points will work, but Howard's suggestion for three rows of sky data points will yield even better tracking rate accuracy for a target. but I would like a confirmationAs Brian previously pointed out, you must enable tracking rate corrections to use Dec Arc tracking. Also, would you recommend to "Enable Pointing Correction" in such a case? Maybe since the model isThe problem is not the number of sky points, but the lack of distribution of data points across the sky. The all-sky model will be much more accurate if there is a wide distribution of sky data points. Would it harm to keep the pointing corrections enabled anyway in case I would like to switch target in theThere is no definitive answer for this, as it depends on the setup as a whole. But usually, pointing will not be as good outside of the narrow range of sky points that were collected. However, that shouldn't be a problem as many of the imaging programs have a "plate solve and re-center" feature. -Ray -----Original Message-----
|
|
|
|
Re: Connection issues. . .. again
#ASCOM_V2_Driver
Peter Nagy
I agree with Thomas about using Ethernet cable and IP address. Always connects 200% of the time.
Peter
|
|
|
|
Re: Connection issues. . .. again
#ASCOM_V2_Driver
ap@CaptivePhotons.com
Thomas Giannaccini wrote:
Yeah, I did that first, never tired USB at all. Worked first time and every time since, none of this COM-ports-musical-chairs windows is prone to. 😊
Thank you AP/Ray for providing IP!
|
|
|
|
Re: Connection issues. . .. again
#ASCOM_V2_Driver
Thomas Giannaccini
Is it not easier to use an Ethernet cable and the IP address?
--
CN: HasAnyoneSeenMyNeblua
|
|
|
|
Re: Connection issues. . .. again
#ASCOM_V2_Driver
Roland Christen
My 1100GTO mount is back to its old tricks. Believe me, it's not the mount that's not connecting. It's strictly a computer issue. You have to go into Device Manager and find out which com port is available to the mount and then set the ASCOM driver to that com port.
I know, it always seems like the mount won't connect, but unfortunately it's the computer in every case.
Rolando
-----Original Message-----
From: David Woolf <go4itbass@...> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io Sent: Thu, Sep 30, 2021 6:35 pm Subject: [ap-gto] Connection issues. . .. again #ASCOM_V2_Driver My 1100GTO mount is back to its old tricks. It has been connecting fine for weeks, and all I did was change out the battery in the laptop, and last night all I got was “No response from mount” Restarted APCC, laptop, mount, traded out USB ports, cables, even connected to the mount WIFI.
I'm no computer whiz. Is there a troubleshooting “flow” for this error? My mount is in an off-the-grid observatory. Could I take home the GTOCP4 and test connections that way, or does it need to be connected to motors and such? -- Roland Christen Astro-Physics
|
|
|
|
Connection issues. . .. again
#ASCOM_V2_Driver
My 1100GTO mount is back to its old tricks. It has been connecting fine for weeks, and all I did was change out the battery in the laptop, and last night all I got was “No response from mount” Restarted APCC, laptop, mount, traded out USB ports, cables, even connected to the mount WIFI.
|
|
|
|
Re: More basic mount questions
michael mccann
Lots of ideas. I’m liking the hydraulic table from harbor freight because I’m loading a truss tube RC, 14”, about 65lbs without focuser and the rest. So no tube rings just dovetail. I’m out in the country, listening to some roosters crowing now, and my neighbors are more than a mile away. So most of my Astro-buddies are 20 plus miles away.
I think if the scope is positioned face down and the dovetail could align with the saddle if dec clutches allow saddle to point vertical. The tricky part is adding gear (camera, focuser guide camera, etc.) and CW . I can predetermine the center of gravity on the OTA and gear. Still working on that. I plan to get help from my friends, but I also trying to make it easier for all of us. Cheers
|
|
|
|
Re: More basic mount questions
Worsel
Michael
There was a thread a while back on loading a heavy OTA on a tall pier/mount. https://ap-gto.groups.io/g/main/topic/82488870#78246 Useful approaches from several people, including Roland stating "Park2 is usually recommended for easy loading. Open the rings, lift the scope up into the rings and close them. Trying to load a scope that has the dovetail already attached to the scope is a nightmare. Put the dovetail into the cradle instead of trying to slide the scope with dovetail into the cradle.
Bryan
|
|
|
