|
annaski
Hi Marty, I'm not sure if you've platesolved with this camera before.
I have the 6200 and find that I have to bin at least 2x2 to get a successful platesolve.
|
|
|
|
Starting with counterweight up in SGPro
#Mach2GTO
David Johnson
Now that I've gotten my pointing issue fixed (thank you for that), I want to try starting CW up tonight, and M104 is an ideal candidate for this from my location. I do have a question about it. With meridian limits mapped out and enabled, there are two possible ways to point at many places in the sky - counterweight down or counterweight up. When I ask SGPro to center on my target, how do I make sure it picks the CW up position? I guess the more fundamental question is which does the Mach2 go to when asked to slew to these positions where there are two choices? is it the nearest one? I just want to avoid issues tonight. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Re: Pier for 1100GTO
#Guiding
Donald Gaines
Hi Len,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
That is a very nice pier. What you say makes a lot of sense. It looks like the sides were rolled to produce the shape. Thanks, Don
On Saturday, March 20, 2021, Len Fulham <lfulham@...> wrote: Embedded or bolt attached pipe piers are commonly and successfully used, but they have an inherent tendency to resonate vibration. Filling with sand or concrete changes the frequency and maybe amplitude without necessarily improving damping as might be expected.
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Ray. This is very helpful.
I am getting big images (17MB) but I did check 1/2 subframe and Auto Dark Subtract was unchecked. The computer itself is very fast (6-core Xeon processor at 2.7GHz) but I'll add time for the solution set. I'm surprised at the need for the USNO A2.0 (I do have it downloaded) given the focal length and thought the GSC11 would be enough. But I'll try USNO A2.0 tonight. Pixel scale is off for sure: closer to 0.9 than 1.6. (3.76 pixel and 819mm) so I'll make that correction. As for #3 (Recal Near Zenith at Start) my dome shutter configuration made that difficult so I gave up on that. When it moves to that position the telescope is on the same side of the mount as the unopened part of the shutter. So even though the shutter is open past zenith it still blocks about 1/2 of image. If I rotate the dome 180 degrees it would work. (Ironically, I got a good solution at one point at zenith even though the telescope was partially blocked.) I'll check everything else and give it a try. Many thanks. Marty
|
|
|
|
Re: Pier for 1100GTO
#Guiding
Len Fulham
Embedded or bolt attached pipe piers are commonly and successfully used, but they have an inherent tendency to resonate vibration. Filling with sand or concrete changes the frequency and maybe amplitude without necessarily improving damping as might be expected.
The best piers have a broad base tapering progressively to the top. This form minimises the tenancy to resonance and is self damping. It is not a good shape for embedding, but works extremely well for bolted applications (eg bolted to a concrete base). Look at this example: https://ap-ug.groups.io/g/main/photo/113262/13?p=Created,,,20,2,0,0 The pier has a 600mm square base bolted to a isolated concrete foundation. The pier tapers exponentially to 150mm square at the top. It is made of 6mm thick mild steel. It forms an extremely stable base for the vintage AP 706 mount and 6" AP scope. It takes more to organise a pier like this but it is appreciated in the long term. A simpler "tall pyramid" shape (ie tapered flat sides rather than curved & profiled)) would be much better than a pipe, and could more easily be made embeded. Something to consider, Regards, Len.
|
|
|
|
Re: Mach2 transport case?
Len Fulham
Jeff,
On my Mach I, with my case, I needed to bring the the saddle plate under but it was interfering with the altitude knob as you have experienced. I decided to modify the saddle plate by cutting a section out. Mine is the older D style 9" saddle plate. I resected about 20mm of plate while preserving the dovetail ways and I do not see any adverse effects from this. If you have the newer 10" D + V saddle you will need to consider if this is a useful approach. Just another way of not going to a larger case. (I realise some prefer not to modify their AP equipment). Cheers, Len
|
|
|
|
Re: Problem with pointing model
David Johnson
That fixed it. I’m imaging. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Re: Problem with pointing model
David Johnson
That makes sense. I was very careful to make sure I upgraded to the latest version on my other computer before using the Mach2, because I knew of the issue. However, PrimaLuceLab "helpfully" pre-installed ASCOM on this new Eagle, so I didn't think of getting the latest version. I hope that fixes the problem. Thanks very much for the help. It doesn't get hours of sleep back, but the good news is that tomorrow night is also supposed to be clear, so I hope this problem is behind me. I had a couple of other problems that had nothing to do with your software of the Mach2 that made it even more frustrating.
|
|
|
|
Re: Problem with pointing model
Ray i think that bug was 6.5 of ascom platform, and it was fixed in 6.5SP1, correct?
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 9:54 PM Ray Gralak <iogroups@...> wrote:
--
|
|
|
|
Re: Problem with pointing model
This looks like this could be the severe bug with the ASCOM platform I discovered months ago.
You should try updating to the latest version of the ASCOM Platform from here:
https://www.ascom-standards.org
-Ray
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of David Johnson
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2021 9:44 PM To: main@ap-gto.groups.io Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Problem with pointing model
Okay, this shows the effect of the JNow check box. Here are results with it checked. Note that RA Solved and Dec Solved don’t even change.
|
|
|
|
Re: Problem with pointing model
David Johnson
And here it’s is with just it unchecked. Not other changes.
|
|
|
|
Re: Problem with pointing model
David Johnson
Okay, this shows the effect of the JNow check box. Here are results with it checked. Note that RA Solved and Dec Solved don’t even change.
|
|
|
|
Re: Who Needs Guiding.....
Hi Barry,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I am glad the Declination Arc tracking feature is working so well for you. Thanks for posting! -Ray
-----Original Message-----
|
|
|
|
Re: Problem with pointing model
It shrunk itself and is locked up. It happens every time I try to move a pointing model into APCC.I can't explain why APPM would shrink itself in that case, but it seems like the model you loaded is bad. Can you attach it to post here so I can take a look? (Or email me privately). -Ray -----Original Message-----
|
|
|
|
Re: Problem with pointing model
David Johnson
It shrunk itself and is locked up. It happens every time I try to move a pointing model into APCC.
|
|
|
|
Re: Problem with pointing model
David Johnson
The check mark for J2000 to JNow definitely does make a difference. When it’s checked, my errors when using APPM are huge. If I uncheck it, they go way down to normal values. Also, APCC still locks up when I try to load a pointing model into it every time. Even simple models. See attached.
|
|
|
|
Re: Problem with pointing model
I can't see APCC's panel because it looks like you tried to shrink APCC's window much smaller.
I’m also having problems getting the pointing model into APCCDid you try loading a bad APPM model? That can cause really wild calculations, which the driver is going to reject, which explains the blank fields. -Ray -----Original Message-----
|
|
|
|
Who Needs Guiding.....
Barry Megdal
I know others have had good luck with unguided imaging, but we just got the first clear and stable night in Southern California in what seems like months, so I was able to try out my latest APPM model, using Ray's experimental "declination arc" feature and hundreds of mapped points.
Seeing was a bit under 2 arcseconds, which unfortunately is good for my location. AP1600 mount with encoders, and a very long and bendy AP206 scope. Most 10 minute subs never had a single guiding correction. Ray deserves a lot of credit for APPM being able to model a difficult scope so well across the sky. Typical Maxim guiding graph looked like this (and I think most of the variation was still due to less than excellent seeing):  - Barry Dr. Barry Megdal Shb Instruments, Inc. 19215 Parthenia St. Suite A
Northridge, CA 91324
www.shbinstruments.com
(818) 773-2000 (818)773-2005 fax
bmegdal@...
Faculty (retired)
Dept. of Electrical Engineering
Caltech
|
|
|
|
Re: Problem with pointing model
I took the check mark off of “Precess J2000 to JNow”, and that seems to have fixed the problem. I wish I couldI don't think that had anything to do with whatever issue you thought it fixed. Is this the first time you used the mount after the time change? Try homing the mount in APCC. -Ray -----Original Message-----
|
|
|
|
Re: Problem with pointing model
Hi David,
What are these RA (topo) and Dec (topo)? They are what are giving meNo... the error values have nothing to do with the RA/Dec (topo). Plate solve solutions return coordinates in J2000.0 coordinates, which roughly means where the stars were at the beginning of the year 2000. Because of precession those coordinates need to be precessed to where they actually are today. That is the RA/Dec topo coordinates. The error values are the delta between the mount coordinates and the plate solve coordinates. It might have just been a bad plate solve. -Ray -----Original Message-----
|
|
|