|
Re : RE: APCC 1.6.0.2: Pier flip behavior
By
Yves Laroche
·
#57196
·
|
|
Re: APCC 1.6.0.2: Pier flip behavior
Hi Yves,
The pier flip value depends on the hour angle to which the scope is pointing at that time.
Can you fool it if you try to click too fast? There is no way to guarantee of 100% robustness. The
Hi Yves,
The pier flip value depends on the hour angle to which the scope is pointing at that time.
Can you fool it if you try to click too fast? There is no way to guarantee of 100% robustness. The
|
By
Ray Gralak
·
#57195
·
|
|
Re : APCC 1.6.0.2: Pier flip behavior
By
Yves Laroche
·
#57194
·
|
|
Re: APCC 1.6.0.2: ReCal failed because it is too far >5 degrees (VPort1 sub-system)
Chris,
Per your suggestion - Swapped the Y-Cables from anothermount – problem remains. That’s not to discount, your theory, that the CP4may have already suffered damage due to a possibly
Chris,
Per your suggestion - Swapped the Y-Cables from anothermount – problem remains. That’s not to discount, your theory, that the CP4may have already suffered damage due to a possibly
|
By
Joe Zeglinski
·
#57193
·
|
|
Re: APCC 1.6.0.2: ReCal failed because it is too far >5 degrees (VPort1 sub-system)
A Y-cable with an intermittent short can damage a servocontroller but work fine with another controller until the intermittent shorteventually kills that one too.
I am not saying your Y-cable
A Y-cable with an intermittent short can damage a servocontroller but work fine with another controller until the intermittent shorteventually kills that one too.
I am not saying your Y-cable
|
By
Christopher Erickson
·
#57192
·
|
|
Re: APCC 1.6.0.2: ReCal failed because it is too far >5 degrees (VPort1 sub-system)
Thanks Chris,
Howard has some inklings about the cause. I could sendin the Y-cable ... except that it never fails doing the same tests with the CP3,yet fails every time, the CP4 is swapped back
Thanks Chris,
Howard has some inklings about the cause. I could sendin the Y-cable ... except that it never fails doing the same tests with the CP3,yet fails every time, the CP4 is swapped back
|
By
Joe Zeglinski
·
#57191
·
|
|
Re: APCC 1.6.0.2: ReCal failed because it is too far >5 degrees (VPort1 sub-system)
If you decide to send in your CP4 I would strongly suggestsending in your motor Y cable as well. A pinched and damaged cable thatmight have intermittent internal shorting might not be obvious by
If you decide to send in your CP4 I would strongly suggestsending in your motor Y cable as well. A pinched and damaged cable thatmight have intermittent internal shorting might not be obvious by
|
By
Christopher Erickson
·
#57190
·
|
|
Re: AP Ascom minor issue with parking (Mach1GTO)
Thanks Howard for valuable information.
I looked at the release notes of latest Beta version 2.6.0.24 of SGP and I was surprised to see the following:
"Any park command issued through SGPro will now
Thanks Howard for valuable information.
I looked at the release notes of latest Beta version 2.6.0.24 of SGP and I was surprised to see the following:
"Any park command issued through SGPro will now
|
By
topboxman
·
#57189
·
|
|
Re: APCC 1.6.0.2: ReCal failed because it is too far >5 degrees (VPort1 sub-system)
Thanks Chris,
I searched through the various AP web pages, and couldNOT find the CP4 firmware download file posted anywhere. Maybe it is only linkedfor “Special” high tech customers, like
Thanks Chris,
I searched through the various AP web pages, and couldNOT find the CP4 firmware download file posted anywhere. Maybe it is only linkedfor “Special” high tech customers, like
|
By
Joe Zeglinski
·
#57188
·
|
|
Re: odd guiding-via-mount problem
Which axis is “X”?
Are you guiding via relays or using the driver (via Telescope)?
Have you tried taking the AO out of the equation? In troubleshooting the mount, it is simply a
Which axis is “X”?
Are you guiding via relays or using the driver (via Telescope)?
Have you tried taking the AO out of the equation? In troubleshooting the mount, it is simply a
|
By
Howard Hedlund
·
#57187
·
|
|
Re: AP Ascom minor issue with parking (Mach1GTO)
Quit does NOT mean “quit tracking.” It stops slews and directional moves (button moves). It also terminates a parked state or a stall condition. An emergency stop, for example, should contain
Quit does NOT mean “quit tracking.” It stops slews and directional moves (button moves). It also terminates a parked state or a stall condition. An emergency stop, for example, should contain
|
By
Howard Hedlund
·
#57186
·
|
|
odd guiding-via-mount problem
Hi,
I'm hoping someone has an idea on this: just as the new observatory setup, debug, and calibration was completed, a guiding problem has developed. Was working perfectly. Long story short, the
Hi,
I'm hoping someone has an idea on this: just as the new observatory setup, debug, and calibration was completed, a guiding problem has developed. Was working perfectly. Long story short, the
|
By
john
·
#57185
·
|
|
Re: APCC 1.6.0.2: ReCal failed because it is too far >5 degrees (VPort1 sub-system)
Go to the integral web page of the CP4 and it will show youits serial number and firmware version at the top of thescreen.
You can re-load the current firmware over top the existingimage in the
Go to the integral web page of the CP4 and it will show youits serial number and firmware version at the top of thescreen.
You can re-load the current firmware over top the existingimage in the
|
By
Christopher Erickson
·
#57184
·
|
|
Re: Installing 1100 on a pier - azimuth adjustment question
The 1100GTO has an integral precision adjust rotating pier adapter, as does the 1600GTO and Mach 1. You are projecting your 900 and 1200GTO onto a different, newer mount.
Mag. 7 Skies!
Howard
The 1100GTO has an integral precision adjust rotating pier adapter, as does the 1600GTO and Mach 1. You are projecting your 900 and 1200GTO onto a different, newer mount.
Mag. 7 Skies!
Howard
|
By
Howard Hedlund
·
#57183
·
|
|
Re: APCC 1.6.0.2: ReCal failed because it is too far >5 degrees (VPort1 sub-system)
Rolando,
If you reviewed the previous recent posts here, youwould have seen that:
To repeat:
My basic test of the CP4 problem was done with ALLoptional “peripherals” cables UNplugged,
Rolando,
If you reviewed the previous recent posts here, youwould have seen that:
To repeat:
My basic test of the CP4 problem was done with ALLoptional “peripherals” cables UNplugged,
|
By
Joe Zeglinski
·
#57182
·
|
|
Re: APCC 1.6.0.2: ReCal failed because it is too far >5 degrees (VPort1 sub-system)
You might want to try a separate 12 volt supply for the CP4 just to see if that clears up the problem you are having. A simple linear supply that can produce 1.5 to 2 amps is enough for the mount.
You might want to try a separate 12 volt supply for the CP4 just to see if that clears up the problem you are having. A simple linear supply that can produce 1.5 to 2 amps is enough for the mount.
|
By
Roland Christen
·
#57181
·
|
|
Re: APCC 1.6.0.2: ReCal failed because it is too far >5 degrees (VPort1 sub-system)
I would NEVER run dew heaters from the same power supply going to other electronics. Dew heaters suck a lot of current and the controllers are all square wave switchers that put a tremendous amount
I would NEVER run dew heaters from the same power supply going to other electronics. Dew heaters suck a lot of current and the controllers are all square wave switchers that put a tremendous amount
|
By
Christopher Erickson
·
#57180
·
|
|
Re: APCC 1.6.0.2: ReCal failed because it is too far >5 degrees (VPort1 sub-system)
Rolando,
I have ONE (excellent) 10 amp Motorola power supply, forthe entire scope, which operates:
AP-1200 with CP4
RCOS RC-14.5 TCC controller for – PIR Field Rotator, triple primary
Rolando,
I have ONE (excellent) 10 amp Motorola power supply, forthe entire scope, which operates:
AP-1200 with CP4
RCOS RC-14.5 TCC controller for – PIR Field Rotator, triple primary
|
By
Joe Zeglinski
·
#57179
·
|
|
Re: APCC 1.6.0.2: ReCal failed because it is too far >5 degrees (VPort1 sub-system)
Rolando, Howard,
I felt somewhat guilty about sending you all the raw logswithout pre-screening them. That would be losing vital information, sinceonly you know what event was important.
Rolando, Howard,
I felt somewhat guilty about sending you all the raw logswithout pre-screening them. That would be losing vital information, sinceonly you know what event was important.
|
By
Joe Zeglinski
·
#57178
·
|
|
Re: APCC and SGPro
I can help, feel free to email direct and provide your settings.
I can help, feel free to email direct and provide your settings.
|
By
Bill Long
·
#57177
·
|