Jump to content



  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by libraryman

  1. The question; has it improved is difficult to answer, this mount has its followers and its critics in equal measure. Its a known fact that you get what you pay for in this world. however with the eq8 you get a very good payload at a very reasonable cost that I doubt will be contested....the issue appears to be one of assembly or build quality.....it can vary! The components are good, the finish is acceptable to good, adjustment can be carried out to correct the variation in the backlash. in my personal opinion having owned one for 2years it is as good as I can get for the money, the mount in the video really did benifit from the work carried out on it. would I buy another, yes I would.......if .......I needed the capacity, I don't right now and it's a very heavy lump to move around. its currently sitting in my Motorhome waiting for this poor summer to improve but I know that when clear skies arrive; the eq8 will perform excellently and not really blink in the southern English coastal breeze. Ra
  2. Matt Foyle has made a list of the EQ8 screws that could be exchanged for stainless if anyone else carries out the strip down following the video.. Matt and I have now completed a second strip down and rebuild of my mount...some observations are worth noting! 1. The fit of the bearings on the Dec shaft was slightly better, however I have followed the same anodising procedure just to tighten the fit though it was not strictly nessasary in my case but anodising adds hardness and eliminates any potential for galvanic corrosion. 2. The wireing is shrink coated not flat ribbon in the later mounts, my RA worm indexer cable was so short, I had to disconnect the board fron the cover in order to refit it! 3. A different grease was used on mine, a clear white grease as opposed to a red Unknown grease in Matts... I have used https://www.amazon.co.uk/Finish-Line-Extreme-Fluoro-Syringe/dp/B006WH67JS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1465634481&sr=8-1&keywords=finish+line+extreme+fluoro no other differences of note... Ray EQ8 Fastner List 2016 Description Thread Length Type Quantity DEC Saddle Retainers M6 12mm Socket Head Cap Screw 1 off DEC Saddle Retainers M6 16mm Socket Head Cap Screw 2 off DEC Encoder Cover M3 10mm Socket Head Dome Screw 6 off DEC Worm Block Cover M3 10mm Socket Head Dome Screw 4 off DEC Motor Cover M3 10mm Socket Head Dome Screw 1 off DEC Motor Cover M4 30mm Cross Head Dome Screw 2 off DEC Worm Adjuster Blanking Plug M8 6mm Grub Screw 3 off DEC Worm Block Retainers M5 15mm Socket Head Cap Screw 4 off DEC Worm Block Adjusters M5 28mm Stainless Socket Head Cap Screw 2 off DEC Worm Block End Frame M5 20mm Socket Head Cap Screw 3 off DEC Worm Block End Plate M5 10mm Socket Head C/Sink Screw 3 off DEC Worm Block End Plate M5 15mm Socket Head Cap Screw 2 off DEC Worm Cover Plate M4 8mm Cross Head Dome Screw 4 off DEC Worm Adjuster Block M5 15mm Socket Head Cap Screw 2 off DEC Worm Adjuster Block M5 20mm Socket Head Cap Screw 2 off DEC Puck Retainers M6 15mm Socket Head Cap Screw 4 off DEC Clutch Lever M5 10mm Socket Head Cap Screw 1 off DEC Puck Side Retainers M5 10mm Socket Head C/Sink Screw 3 off DEC Indexer "L"bracket M4 10mm Socket Head Cap Screw 2 off DEC Indexer Cover M5 15mm Socket Head Cap Screw 2 off Counter weight Threaded Boss M6 16mm Stainless Socket Head Cap Screw 4 off Power Board Cover M3 10mm Socket Head Dome Screw 6 off DEC Wiring Cover M3 10mm Socket Head Dome Screw 2 off RA Motor Cover M3 10mm Socket Head Dome Screw 3 off RA Worm Block Cover M3 10mm Socket Head Dome Screw 3 off RA Worm Block Cover M3 10mm Socket Head Cap Screw 1 off RA Encoder Block M3 10mm Socket Head Dome Screw 2 off RA Stepper Adjustment Block Retainers M5 20mm Socket Head Cap Screw + Washers 3 off RA Lower Inder Cover M3 10mm Socket Head Dome Screw 4 off
  3. Hi Tim...the taper roller bearings are 32011.... The worm bearings are 608-2.... please post any improvement noted or indeed otherwise Regards Ray
  4. Yes it's a fair point Tony, my intuition tells me that there may be minor differences but it will be in the undoing of those infernal bolts with lock thread on them...good tools will be your friend here! the anodising (most likely required) is another issue, I could offer to assist here but it's not my intention to profit from it. However if you need advice pm me! Ray
  5. This is fundamentally; the difference between low cost manufacturing and high end! When you are producing a product in medium numbers as is the EQ8, I suppose saving costs allows them to undermine to opposition (China is so good at this) even the screws / set pins are missing essential washers..and cheese is used instead of a decent corrosion resistant material. But, it also has to be acknowledged that though it is built down to a price, it does (at least in this example) appear to have the very important bits well made... of course owners will have their own judgment and rightly so, dependant on their experiences and cost value. As one owner pointed out recently....it has through mount cabling ability subject to modification.....(again built down to a price and abandoned) It has base quality bearings and lack of attention to detail during assembly..all things that can be improved post sale ...if...the owner has sufficient skill? so ultimately the question is.......is this a good mount, worth the money?? ill leave it there ?
  6. Hi Tony...well, we did not expect the results that came out..when you consider how bad it appeared. so the first thing i did was to anodise the top bearing journal....this i estimated would add 10 to 15 microns to the diameter, i was cautious not to add too much....but that's average thickness for home anodising! and its quite tough as well.. The Worm Wheel bearing was a tad tighter than the taper roller inner race on the shaft but still a clearance fit. once the anodising was complete and i felt happy with the thickness gained, i put the shaft into the freezer overnight. the bearings were cleaned and smeared with TF2 Lithium grease not too much, just enough!...the wheel was cleaned and air blown too remove residue and anything else that might have been on it. The worm wheel, its attendant shim and the top inner race were fitted to the cold shaft, of course they fell on, after an hour warm up and stabilisation, i tested the fit of the bearing and wheel, it was just right in my opinion and crucially stayed put when inverted! that was it for the Main shaft...the dec worm bearings were replaced with SKF ABEC 1 bearings since these we already had, we could have purchased the ABEC 5 quality but clearly at this time it was not necessary.. we used a sparing amount of red thread lock to the worm bearing housing and fitted them along with the cleaned worm. on assembly of the main shaft, we preloaded the taper roller bearings to just ensure that end float and subsequent settling of the race would still leave a smooth running condition.. the loading of the worm bearings was just enough to remove the end float. other that that, the only other thing we did was to ensure that the worm lay parallel to the worm wheel, relying on the worm block back plate to ensure correct axial positioning of the worm relative to the wheel!...no reason to doubt that it is correct! Greased the worm wheel with TF2...we wanted to use Aeroshell 64..but it was on back order and didn't arrive in time.. however we did take some considerable time to ensure backlash was minimal and consistent around 360 degs of the wheel. That's it...careful assembly of the rest and it homed straight away, ......after.........a panic attack because Matt inadvertently put a slew speed of 2 in the hand set...thinking it was 9....but it was in hindsight the correct thing to do.. It sounded a lot smoother, ran like a dream and performed perfectly... Ray
  7. Just another point Olly, we have said that eccentricity of the worm wheel was not a factor.. however lots of mounts appear to show variability of backlash around the wheel. We feel that this is due to the clearance fit of the top bearing and the way the clutch operates on the wheel bearing boss. once the clearance fit was reduced to provide a tight transition fit, that movement was eliminated and the variability also eliminated! Ray
  8. Hi Olly...thanks for your comment...our measurement of the backlash is based upon how PhD assistant reports it.....I.e. Time to take up the backlash.. phd will send pulses of say....50 ms so for back lash of 2000 ms it take a considerable time to reverse the backlash. this is what you experienced with your mount! And PhD will not tolerate 2000 ms....as a compensation factor. however it will compensate for 300ms and in terms of physical movement; 300ms is very difficult to detect....2000ms is easily noted. i take your point about the position of the worm wheel, however..when measured we found little evidence of eccentricity in the worm wheel so we did not consider this to be a significant contributor to the backlash. it important to note that any measure of backlash has to be completed under specific conditions I.e. Without any imbalance wich would potentially hide it. So...the measurements were taken with neutral balance, repeated at Dec zero and at the zenith or near as damit..... several repeats showed similar figures, confirming as best we can that the improvement was consistent...in addition a measurement of the pe showed a smoother wave form after renewing the RA worm bearings and guiding appeared to show an improvement consistent with the other measures! Having said all that; I'm always cautious about these things and more tests will hopefully back up the current info... Regards Ray
  9. Hey Hugh, how have you got on with your eq8 set up, not heard from you for a while Ray
  10. Hi, i have uploaded a video of an EQ8 dec axis being dismantled! The reason for dismantling it was that it suffered from excess Dec axis Backlash. Prior to the strip down, this measured a range from 1.8 secs to 2.5 secs...too much for imaging at high declinations, after reassembly; several checks last night under clear skies showed a reduction to 330ms for the dec axis and 440ms for the Ra axis which was adjusted at the same time... NB: disclaimer....if the strip down video is followed carefully and reassembled with care; the results that we achieved are possible..however it is your responsibility if it goes wrong. the mount is not easy to dismantle, good Allen keys are needed and and a clean working environment with room and time to spare.. whilst we had the mount disassembled we took the opportunity to change the worm bearings on both axis...very similar to changing the EQ6 worm bearings so fairly easy to do that part.. It appears that for this mount, factory assembly was poor...and this was the main reason for the poor performance, however one we changed one aspect of the way we put it together, i.e. the top bearing on the main shaft was not tight enough !!!...the fit was a clearance fit that possibly allowed some radial movement of the worm wheel, in order to address this; we anodised the bearing journal to provide a Transition fit for the inner race..the lower bearing was left as a clearance fit... if anyone needs further advice PM me... also worth noting is that the initiative for this video was provided by Tony Owens who recently posted some information on the EQ8 Yahoo site.. further credits to the owner of this mount Mathew Foyle who provided the mount for dismantling.. follow this link for the video..
  11. To be honest, that's not the best of images to judge by, although I can see some elongation or what appears to be elongation, however as noted otation might be at play? Ray
  12. I find this an odd problem, I have an fsq106 and my subs show some elongation usually in one of the corners, both with a reducer and without. so...I carried out a number of tests taking short subs...10 secs maybe of a rich star field high altitude without guiding, say 20 subs. i combined them in CCD inspector and looked at the result...it looked very flat. I couldn't make sense of it but......if I then take say 20 X 20 min subs and combine them to form an image, I find the the image shows round stars in all corners. so..as far as my subs go, I just ignore the shape! baffled but happy Ray
  13. Hi Hugh, I use an eq8 with Eqmod and ccd, along with phd2. 1st off, I can tell you that they all work together very well but it's not as simple as "simple basic instruction" i feel the best approach is to PM me with specific questions as you approach them! ive not looked at the video posted by Gina, it may offer all you need but if not I will certainly guide through the set up! i run a portable set up so I'm very familiar with my equipment. however as a 1 st or initial step, I suggest that you make sure you are using all the latest software updates, that it the Eq8 driver phd2 and CDC, i assume that you want to image, and that you are using a laptop to connect to the mount with usb2 or later? Ray Ps ....forgive me Hugh, I've just re read your post and I see that you don't want to use PHD, that's o.k I can still take you through the eq8 set up.
  14. The statistics imply that you were guiding whilst gathering the pe data ( to my thinking at least) please correct me if I'm wrong. try using the PhD log ( unguided) and load that into PECprep... Ray
  15. A reprocess of my heart nebula date, I have enriched the tones! Ray
  16. Mmm, I'd go with that process 1st....the 583 is a great camera and works well with SGPro, I've never suffered a whiteout though. just as an additional thought, SGPro is updated quite often, it's worth making sure that you have the latest ver:2.5.23 I think.....ver: has a new focus routine which may be best avoided if the program is new to you. Ray
  17. Yup...raining here too.....please don't post anymore clear sky pictures with great telescopes least not till it's stopped raining here Ray
  18. Hi is anyone using a QSI camera on an FSQ ed with the extender? i have the reducer and I'm happy but I want to attach my 583 to an extender so before I buy I thought I'd ask! Ray
  19. You should really be guided by which set up gives you the best match to the scope you intend to guide! if the pixel size of the 2 cameras are the same then I doubt it will make a difference, however if they are substantially different then you would really be better of working out which set up suits your imaging scale! Ray
  20. Post your question on PhD Google group, they are great and will have your answer no doubt, just include your last log in your post Ray
  21. Ive just been contacted by a great mate who's taken me through it... Ray
  22. Yes I guess they are but only on the sulphur, 3nm Astrodons! Ray
  23. Hi all, can anyone give me a good method for removing these halos? Ray
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.