Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

IanL

Members
  • Posts

    1,357
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by IanL

  1. Inspired by this thread on the SolarChat forum, I built my own Solar Scintillation Seeing Monitor (SSSM).  I've written up a detailed build guide here to help those less electronically inclined to build their own: http://www.blackwaterskies.co.uk/2017/06/diy-solar-scintillation-seeing-monitor-sssm/

    What is an SSSM?  It's a simple device designed by E. J. Seykora at the Department of Physics, East Carolina University which uses a photo diode, amplifier and an Arduino-type board to monitor solar seeing conditions. (Note: This device is not suitable for monitoring night-time seeing).  Commercially built and supported models are made by Airylab in France and sold through various distributors at a cost of around £240 at the time of writing; the DIY version costs less than a tenth of this to make and is functionally identical as far as I can tell.

    Why would you want to monitor solar seeing conditions? Apart from scientific interest and perhaps comparing the quality of seeing conditions between locations, the main reason is to use Joachim Stehle's free FireCapture plugin (here).  The plugin will continuously monitor seeing and automatically start capturing images/video when they exceed a user-defined quality threshold.  This means you can set up your solar imaging rig and leave it to its own devices rather than having to fill up your hard disk with gigabytes of videos that you then have to sort through manually later.

    I have made a couple of small improvements in my version of the build, specifically refactoring the Arduino sketch to make it more readable and more modular, plus I've added support for graphical display of seeing quality over time by adding a cheap OLED display and supporting code.  (OLED modules can be had for less than £5.00 on eBay).

    Hopefully you'll find this an interesting project for the summer months!

    32785638720_f2173950e5_o.thumb.jpg.a7c43b257c13b0842cabef1ee295d3e7.jpg

    32352966663_5254180bd9_o.thumb.jpg.6f3083b0a0655a5d28068fab136d12f8.jpg

    33012569092_0369867461_o.thumb.png.7f01a93e0461420c8e1986805e8fb290.png

     

    • Like 8
  2. Ian,

    Can you help me with the focuser light-path difference of BDS vs SW crayford? Thanks

    There is a drawing with measurements on the Baader site here:

    http://www.baader-planetarium.de/sektion/s35/s35.htm

    There is no drawing for the SW adaptor though so you need to add a bit more. The Steeltack plus tube adaptor is a bit longer than the stock SW. I will try to measure tomorrow and report back. So you need to rack the tube in a bit more than with the stock focuser. There was still plenty of travel left though. What will you be using on the focuser?

    • Like 1
  3. That's a really great write up.

    I'm a bit surpised that with such a lifting capacity the lock screw is needed. I've never encountered a lock screw which didn't slightly (or less than slightly) affect fine focus but there's always a first time. WIth an R and P I think there's no danger in running the lock screw just partially when going for the last focus but would this be OK on a Crayford? Not sure.

    The old style Steeltrack we used on Yves 14 inch actually did very well. It was motorized and belt driven.

    Olly

    On most Crayfords the lock screw either bears directly on the draw tube or perhaps on the rear of the drive shaft centre 'bearing' (which on the SW focuser is a block with v shaped cut and Teflon pad in which the shaft sits if I recall), thus increasing the friction between the shaft and flat on the draw tube.  Either way there is a definite tendency to deflect the tube a bit or a lot.

    On the Baader the position of the lock screw is offset well to the side of the centre line of the focus tube, and it looks like it basically locks the shaft from rotating rather than trying to increase friction on the tube directly or indirectly.  The really high friction between the drive shaft and the steel rail attached to the bottom of the draw tube stops the tube from slipping when the shaft can't rotate.  I guess the mechanism must be similar to the Moonlite shaft brake; there is no deflection of the tube as you don't need to tighten the lock screw much, plus the roller bearings run on two flats at the 10 and 2 o'clock positions on top of the tube.  They look much better engineered than the two tiny bearings in the SW focuser so there is less opportunity for the tube to move out of line.  I assume any bearings in the drive assembly are similarly high grade.

    With regard to the drive shaft being driven by the tube when unlocked, there is no problem at 45 degrees with my approximately 2Kg of gear attached.  On the bench with the 5Kg weight sat on top of the tube, the drive shaft and knobs ran freely when released, so I'd assume with a really heavy setup at high elevations you would need the focus lock to avoid slippage.  You certainly can part apply it when near focus - I haven't seen the internals but from the feel of turning the knobs when it is part tightened there's no grinding feel or anything to suggest you shouldn't.  The marketing blurb says you can increase the bearing pre-load if needed for a heavy setup, but no idea which screws to adjust to achieve that.

    Of course if you were using a stepper motor drive and belt the motor should hold focus without locking.  If you thought the old Steeltrack was a good product, I don't think there would be any concerns with the new one.

    • Like 1
  4. Your thread has caused quite a stir in the industry because it suggests German retailers might have a head-start over UK retailers. Thomas Baader has made it clear in an email this is not the case. The new Baader SteelTrack focusers have not been released early. When they are released (later this month) stocks will leave Mammendorf at more or less exactly the same time and all distributers will receive stock.

    The German retailer received three pre-release samples to be displayed at the astronomy fair AME2015 in Germany. It is unclear why the retailer sold one of the samples but I guess it has at enabled IanL to post details and photos here at SGL, which is good :smile:

    HTH, 

    Steve 

    Well if that is the case I had better buy a lottery ticket this week then!

    • Like 1
  5. I must confess that this report has steered me toward the Moonlite purchase in due course. I have a Baader Steeltrack and really like it but the niggles with this one seem to suggest that for about the same price you can have a Moonlite and have less niggles? May be wrong.

    I can't say whether a Moonlite would be better, and perhaps I'm overstating the niggles but I did want the review to be honest rather than just focusing (!) on the good points.

    - The lack of documentation is not a big deal, just seems to me it wouldn't be hard to supply a basic set of instructions as a PDF on their web-site.

    - The Moonlites don't look to be rotatable as far as I can see, which would be a big downside for me as I can never get the framing right in my head when setting up, so the mechanism on the Baader is still a plus in my book.  It locks more than sufficiently well for imaging purposes, it is just a bit awkward keeping the right angle as you're reaching the final turn of the locking ring.  With the Moonlite you'd be forced to rotate the camera in the draw tube as far as I can see (?), and if you didn't like the Baader mechanism you can do the same thing.

    - Changing the adaptor at the camera/eyepiece end wasn't great, but with the kit in place I can't see any shifting around.  You could just go with the factory supplied compression ring and avoid the whole problem - again it looks similar to the Moonlite's one.

    -What I will say is that having used a couple of low-end Crayfords now, the new Baader mechanism is excellent by comparison.  It seems to combine unbreakable friction with uncanny smoothness.  I keep going to rack the thing in and out just for the feel of it.  I don't know how the Moonlite mechanism stacks up by comparison, but I cannot see how it would beat the Baader.

    At the end of the day you pay your money and go with what you prefer.  There isn't a huge difference in price and I guess this is one of those occasions where getting hands-on with both would be the only real way to decide.

  6. Great write-up Ian, cant wait to get mine delivered as well :Envy:

    Have you done any tests for "collimation" - orthogonality ?

    Looking forward to first light results!

    Clear skies

    Not yet, if it ever stops raining here I will try to get outside and give it a proper test.  I can't see that there will be any significant issue to be honest as the whole thing is very well put together.  I think you will be pleased.

    • Like 1
  7. Thank-you for the report Ian :smile:

    Unfortunately us UK retailers must wait until early-October for our first delivery of Baader SteelTrack focusers. Very frustrating!  :(

    Steve 

      

    Sorry I couldn't buy from you guys as well but I guessed they would be super popular and didn't want to miss my chance after a long wait.  Looks like TS are now on back-order too so I don't think there will be any shortage of orders when they do turn up here.

  8. After a long wait for the new version of the Steeltrack focuser to become available, I have finally obtained one from Teleskop-Express (Germany).

    I needed one to replace the stock focuser on my Skywatcher 80ED Pro. The old focuser proved serviceable when used with my lightweight DSLR, but it is not up to the job for my pre-loved Atik EFW2, SX CCD plus the Skywatcher 0.85x reducer. Despite trying to improve it by tightening up the mechanism and grinding flat the focuser tube bearing surface, it would not lift the new gear consistently or reliably. The Steeltrack looked like a good replacement but was no longer being made, and I didn't think a cheap and cheerful ED80 really warranted a new Moonlite or Feathertouch (I doubt my dear wife would have either).  Fortunately the new version of the Steeltrack has just been released after a long wait.

    I purchased:

    1 x Baader Diamond Steeltrack-RT Focuser (part number BA2957210)

    1 x Baader universal Adapter for TS ACUR2 and Steeltrack Refractor  (part number BA2957085)

    1 x Baader 2" Clicklock Clamp S58 (part number BA2956258)

    Total Cost 457.90 Euros including UPS shipping to the UK (£334 quid or thereabouts).

    The universal adaptor contains a number of parts that can be used to fit to a variety of refractors, including the ED80, but bear in mind there are other adaptors available for some tubes so I guess it should be called the "universal-ish adaptor".  The Clicklock clamp replaces the standard three-point compression ring fitting on the focus draw tube. Since I already use a (different) Clicklock and like it very much, I decided to go down that route, though the standard adaptor looks perfectly serviceable.

    Fitting was relatively straightforward, just a question of assembling the adaptors and focuser, undoing three screws at the back of the ED80, sliding out the stock focuser and sliding in the new one, and re-inserting the existing screws.  There were a few niggles, which I'll cover below.

    The Good Things

    - Overall, the build of the focuser is very solid and well engineered. Surfaces are well finished, anodising is good and there are lots of screws holding everything together.  Holding the stock SW focuser and the Baader in each hand, it is clear they are in different leagues engineering-wise.

    - The focus action is incredibly smooth, both on the normal and the 10:1 fine control knobs.  There is no slipping, jerking or friction apparent in the mechanism.

    - The lifting power is claimed to be 6Kg.  I tried the focuser with a 5Kg counterweight sat on top of the draw tube on the bench and it lifted and lowered it perfectly, no adjustment needed out of the box so I think the claim is justified.

    - The lock screw mechanism is definitely required to hold focus with heavy loads.  The Crayford drive mechanism doesn't slip at all, but a heavy weight pulling or pushing on the tube will quite happily drive the focus knobs.  (Oddly enough the old SW focuser wins here, as stiction in the mechanism tends to hold things in place when you release the focus knob). The lock screw appears to bear on the drive shaft rather than on the tube or somewhere else.  As far as I can see this means the image won't shift or tilt when locking, but that remains to be seen in practice.  Certainly it only requires a small amount of pressure to lock the mechanism solidly with a normal load applied.  In any event, focusing would likely require both hands if pointing high up, one to hold the focus knob still and one to tighten the lock.

    - There is a ruler scale on the draw tube; useful as I suspect this focuser will be used a lot by imagers looking to upgrade inferior kit.

    - The fine-focus knob has both a chunky knurled section for hand operation, plus a section profiled to take a small drive belt for the optional Steeldrive focus motor.  (I plan to make a DIY focus drive, but it is good that one doesn't have to remove the existing knobs to connect a belt).

    - The focuser body is rotatable, again very handy for imaging as one generally doesn't want to mess with the camera and draw tube adaptor in the dark for fear of accidents.

    - Allegedly the focus mechanism can be removed and reversed if you want the fine control knob on the other side of the tube.

    The Less Good Things

    - There is no manual or other documentation supplied or available on-line (even in German), other than marketing materials.  It took a bit of guesswork to figure out which parts I needed in the adaptor for my set-up - wasn't too hard to figure out but why not explain it?

    - Nor are there any instructions on reversing the focus mechanism for left-hand use or increasing the tension.  Not that either was necessary in my case, but the marketing blurb says you can do it.  There are a plethora of screws on the underside and top of the focuser, and I wouldn't like to have to guess which does what.

    - There is no finder shoe.  Apparently a separate kit is available to fix a finder, but bear that in mind if you are a visual observer (doesn't matter to me as an imager).

    - The focuser rotation mechanism works by loosening the large locking ring at the back of the OTA.  This has three knobs a bit like a capstan or ship's wheel so it is pretty easy to undo and tighten as needed.  The problem is that the locking relies on friction between anodised surfaces inside the locking ring and on the screw adaptor that fixes it to the focuser body.  It is a bit of a performance to hold the focuser body still at the desired angle whilst locking it, as there is a tendency for the body to rotate as you reach maximum tightness.  It is also possible to rotate the body with moderate force whilst locked - probably not an issue in practice but might be worth investigating whether a thin ring of friction material between the mating surfaces would help.

    The Bad Things

    - The "S58 dovetail clamping mechanism" for holding different adaptors on the draw tube turns out to be a ring of six tiny hex-head, cone tip grub screws.  These fit behind a very small circular dovetail ring. Changing the standard three-point clamp for the Clicklock was a horrible task (as is any job involving tiny hex-head screws in my view).  These tiny screws have a tendency to round out the head at the slightest provocation, even when using high-quality keys, and the threads on both the screws and the focuser body seemed to be poor compared to the rest of the piece.  I'm not super-happy with the fit - it doesn't look like the clamp has any chance of falling out but there is a tiny amount of play left despite my best efforts.  If I was more mechanically inclined, I'd be tempted to tap the holes out to M3 and use some bigger grub screws.  The threads on the existing ones appear to have a major diameter of 2.3mm which is not a common size as far as I can see, so don't lose any down the back of the sofa (they might be M2.5 since the hex head was 1.3mm so maybe my calipers are a bit off, but hard to tell really).

    - I'd have preferred to screw-fit my SW 0.85 reducer to the draw tube, but there doesn't appear to be an adaptor for that available (which is a bit of an oversight given the market this focuser is aimed at).

    Overall

    This is definitely a major step-up from the stock SW focuser on the 80ED.  Time will tell whether it works in practice but first impressions are generally good.

    post-18840-0-29800900-1442410374_thumb.p

    post-18840-0-64338000-1442410407_thumb.p

    post-18840-0-26616200-1442410428_thumb.p

    • Like 6
  9. What a brilliant beginner's guide - thank you so much Ian.

    A couple of questions re the pixel scale calculations.  I have a Canon EOS 700d, similar to the one you used as an example here.  Your EOS 500d has 15.5 megapixels (15.1 effective megapixels) and a chip size of 22.3 x 14.9mm.  That's a chip size of 22,300µm x 14,900µm = 332,270,000µm2, divided by 15,500,000 pixels, comes to 21.44µm2 per pixel (or 22µm2 per pixel if you're only counting the effective ones).  Yet you say the chip's pixels are 4.7µm2. 

    1/ Your number looks like the square root of mine.  Is that right and, if so, why?

    2/ Also if so, how come you are using the effective number of pixels rather than the total number?

    Thanks in anticipation.

    Ben

    Ben,

    1. I didn't say the pixels are 4.7µm2, I actually said the sensor has 4.7µm square pixels, meaning the pixels are square (not rectangular as some older cameras have) and 4.7µm on a side. We are using linear measurements to determine the pixel scale, not areas, so if you've calculated the area of one pixel you need to take the square root to determine the length of one side. Sorry if the bad choice of words caused any confusion, but too late to go back and edit the post now.

    2. I've used the effective pixel count since that is readily available to a beginner from images.  It is definitely more accurate to use the total pixel count and sensor area if you have that data available, but at the time I wrote the post I didn't.  Where I can get a data sheet for a sensor I will use it as the source for information in my imaging toolbox, but often one has to rely on incomplete information from supplier marketing materials and they may quote total or effective pixels (and indeed in some sensors you can have slightly fewer or more effective pixels depending on how you configure the electronics).  It's pretty immaterial in this context, the difference between using 4.7 (actually 4.69)µm and 4.63µm in my example results in a pixel scale of 1.88 arc seconds per pixel vs 1.87 arc seconds per pixel, a difference of 0.0243 arc seconds per pixel if you want the gory details without rounding up/down.  The difference matters more at longer focal lengths.

    If you want to get really down in to the weeds, you need to know the number of active rows and columns on the sensor, not just the difference in the total vs. active megapixels.  The inactive pixels will not be an equal number of rows/columns in most cases, and also there are more pixels in a row that a column on a typical rectangular sensor.

  10. Sounds very much like there is no star in the image and so PHD will just bes stretching the noise to produce the grainy white out you see. Things to check:

    - Focus. Start with the moon as it will be obvious when it is the frame and then get focus.

    - Framing. Next try a bright star or planet. You will still get a white or black snowstorm until you have a star in the frame. Bear in mind the guide scope may not be pointing at the same spot as the main one.

    - Gain/brightness. Test this on the moon too in order to get in a sensible range for night time use.

    - Exposure length. I don't know what the max length is for your webcam so do some testing. Bear in mind that a long exposure in PHD may still only end up in a short one at the camera if the hardware or driver don't support long ones.

  11. I have only had a small amount of experience with an OAG and not a lot of luck so any advice from me comes with a health warning. What occurs to me is:

    - A small pixel scale might lead to a lower SNR on the guide star, but this is likely to be offset to some extent by the bigger aperture of the main scope gathering more light. Nonetheless finding a guide star with the OAG may need you to pick a relatively faint one. So OAGs tend to need longer guide exposures, 7 seconds plus is not uncommon vs. 1 or 2 seconds for a guide scope.

    - That in turn means you need a mount that tracks better between guide corrections. So polar alignment becomes important, as does a lower periodic error. Using PEC can make a big difference but ultimately you will need a mount with good mechanicals, especially at longer focal lengths.

    - As for PHD settings, calibration should take care of most issues automatically provided you adjust the calibration step size. PHD 2 has a calculator to help work this out. You might want to increase the Min Motion setting if you are oversampling the seeing to avoid chasing it, but I suspect the longer exposures will average that away.

    - The main challenge is the gap between guiding commands due to the long exposure. I think you would want to use Resist Switch in declination, or guide in one direction only if you have slight drift, as backlash and constant changes of direction will be harder to control with long gaps. In RA I'd be inclined to use at least 100% of the correction for RA Aggressiveness and reduce the amount of hysteresis so that you are relying more on the current error than error from many seconds ago. From there tweak based on the guide graph, again PHD 2 has more options and tools for this but I am not sure I entirely trust it yet.

    Others may have some better ideas based on more experience.

  12. G'day, I have a G-Star x , It's not listed in the select camera list, which camera should I select, thanks.

    You need a guide camera with a suitable driver for use with PHD.  The new version of PHD (http://openphdguiding.org/) supports the following cameras (taken from the manual):

    Camera Selection

    The Camera drop-down list shows all the camera types currently supported by PHD2.  With the exception of ASCOM-compatible cameras, the camera drivers are bundled with  PHD2  and will reside on your system after the PHD2installation.  ASCOM-compatible camera drivers are available from the ASCOM web site or from the camera manufacturer, and the drop-down list will show only those ASCOM cameras that are already installed on your system, if any.

    The list of supported cameras at the time of writing is shown below - but users should consult web resources to see updates (e.g. Stark Labs)

    Supported cameras, December 2013:

    • ASCOM v5/6 compliant cameras (Windows)
    • Atik 16 series, 3xx, 4xx, 4000, 11000 (Windows)
    • CCD-Labs Q-Guider (Windows)
    • DCAM compliant Firewire (OS X)
    • Fishcamp Starfish (Windows and OS X)
    • Meade DSI series: I-III, color and Pro (Windows and OS X)
    • MagZero MZ-5 (Windows)
    • Orion StarShoot DSCI (Windows)
    • Orion Starshoot Autoguider (Windows)
    • Orion Starshoot Planetary Imager and Autoguider (Windows)
    • Opticstar PL-130 / PL-130C (Windows)
    • SAC4-2 (Windows)
    • SBIG (Windows and OS X, but see Help for details)
    • Starlight Xpress SXF / SXVF / Lodestar (Windows and OS X)
    • The Imaging Source (Windows and if Firewire, OS X)
    • Webcams (short and long-exposure - parallel port, serial port or LXUSB, Windows).
  13. What does it mean when while guiding PHD reports and error like this: Mass (some big number) vs (another big number). Also the screen flashes red and beeps.

    This is the star mass, which is basically a measure of how bright the star is.  If the brightness changes too much from one exposure to the next, you will get a warning like you are seeing and no guide command will be issued for that exposure,

    You need to figure out the cause of the problem if you can.

    - It may be that you are guiding on a faint star that is pretty marginal.  Poor seeing, high cloud or dewing on the scope might exacerbate brightness fluctuations in these cases leading to the warnings.  Try going for a brighter guide star if possible and ensure the scope is free of dew and well focused.

    - If you have a small aperture finder guider coupled with a not very sensitive guide camera (e.g. webcam) try increasing the exposure length a bit.  Obviously you want to keep the exposure as short as possible, but not if that produces a star that is badly affected by seeing, etc.

    - Of course a bigger aperture guide scope or better guide camera would also improve things.

    If all else fails, you can increase the tolerance of PHD to star mass changes, but this should only be done once you have exhausted other options as described above (well I'd maybe try the tolerance change before spending money):

    - Go in to the 'brain' icon and check the value of the "Star Mass Tolerance" box.  I think the default is 0.3.  If you increase it to 0.4 or 0.5 PHD will tolerate bigger changes in brightness and continue guiding.  From what I have read (never having had to change this parameter myself) going much over 0.5 is not necessarily a good idea.  PHD will continue to guide, but if the star is fluctuating that much it is likely you will have bad guiding anyway.  (It would be a bit like turning off the fire alarm in a burning building; you feel a bit better about things for a while, but not for very long).

    - If you set the tolerance to 1 then PHD doesn't bother checking at all and will just try to guide come what may.

    Hope this helps.

    • Like 1
  14. Great explanations Lan !!

    I do use the handset and not the EQMOD at this stage (and bought the standard Orion Starshoot Autoguider as you mentioned above).

    So, (only to make sure I understand the whole thing):

    1. If I use the handset on the mount (e.g. SynScan), which is the way I currently work, I should connect the ST4 cable from the cam to the mount (should I still connect

       the USB cable?) and set the PHD to "on Camera",

    2. If (in the future) I would start controlling the mount with EQMOD (following your instructions in this regard), then I should connect the USB (do not connect the ST4)

        and select 'ASCOM' from PHD's 'Mount' menu etc.

    You have truly simplified the technical process for me here.

    Thanks a lot.

    Romi

    Yes you have it right.  You always have to connect the USB cable from the camera to the laptop regardless.

  15. Hi Lan,

    Thank you very much for this excellent and detailed instruction guidelines.

    I plan to implement some (or all) of the above during my next observing session, as my gear for guiding is ready for setup.

    The only Q I have is regarding the SW installation procedure, as I got confused by the various components mentioned...

    i.e. PHD app., ASCOM app., EQMOD drivers, manufacturer drivers etc.

    Can you comment and advice on what is necessary to install (Win 7) and in what order?...

    I use NEQ6 and plan to attach the Orion's StarShoot cam connected to a separate small scope fixed to the side of the OTA.

    Thanks,

    Romi

    I am assuming you are using the standard Orion Starshoot Autoguider (http://www.telescope.com/Orion-StarShoot-AutoGuider/p/52064.uts)?

    Are you using the handset to control the mount, or are you using EQMOD?  (EQMOD runs on a laptop and replaces the handset for all mount control operations.  You would typically have an EQMOD adaptor plugged in between the laptop and the mount's handset port if so).

    I haven't used a Starshoot, but roughly speaking if you are using the handset you would set things up as follows:

    - Install PHD guiding.

    - Install the camera drivers from the supplied CD.

    - Connect the Starshoot's USB port to the laptop and complete the set-up procedure.

    - Connect the camera's ST4 port to the mount's ST4/auotguider port using the supplied ST4 cable (looks a bit like a telephone cable).

    - You'd then press the camera button to connect to the camera in PHD and select the Starshoot Autoguider from the camera driver list.

    - You would then select 'On Camera' from PHD's 'Mount' menu and then press the mount button to connect.

    Guiding commands will be sent from PHD via the camera through the ST4 cable directly to the mount.

    On the other hand if you are using EQMOD, then it is a bit more complicated:

    - You'd need to download the ASCOM V6 platform (http://ascom-standards.org/) and install it.

    - Then you'd need to download EQMOD (http://eq-mod.sourceforge.net/) and install it (specifically the EQASCOM software, everything else is optional).

    - Installing and setting up EQMOD is a bit beyond what I can cover in this post - there are manuals on the site and plenty of guidance.

    - You would then need an EQDIRECT adaptor to replace the handset (or use the handset in PC Direct Mode, but this is unsupported).  Details here http://eq-mod.sourceforge.net/reqindex.html.

    - Most likely you'd also want a planetarium (either Cartes du Ciel http://www.ap-i.net/skychart/start, or Stellarium http://www.stellarium.org/ AND Stellariumscope http://www.welshdragoncomputing.ca/ ), plus you'd probably also need a gamepad to control the mount via EQMOD (this is optional as you can use the buttons on screen, but it does make life a lot easier).

    - Once you have set up EQMOD and learned how to use it, which is probably several days of effort in its own right, then you can get on with guiding.

    - You'd install the Starshoot drivers, connect the camera USB and connect to the PC as above.

    - What is different this time is that you would select 'ASCOM' from PHD's 'Mount' menu, press the mount button and select your NEQ6 as the mount.

    In this scenario the guiding commands are sent via software from PHD through ASCOM to EQMOD, which processes them and sends the instructions via the EQDIRECT connection to the mount.

    As you can see, the ST4 option is the simplest way to get started, as there is far less software to install, test and learn.  If you already know how to use the mount handset then I would go down the ST4 route to get started since you'd have far less to learn and worry about at this stage.

    EQMOD is a really good way of controlling the mount as it opens up lots of other options (such as using a planetarium to find and slew to targets, or using Astrotortilla to do plate solving and find them automatically, etc.).  EQMOD has now got a new AutoPEC feature which makes it simpler to set up PEC without needing to use external software to record and analyse the mount's period error.  In the long run EQMOD is definitely worth the effort to learn, but there are definitely more things to go wrong up front.

  16. I changed the rate to 3000 but the steps didn't go over 5. But I tested on more than 10 different regions of the sky for 10 mins each and the stars were perfectly sharp. I even imaged M52 with the Bubble Nebula. Any suggestions or should I leave at as it is?

    As I said in the guide "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"  If you are getting reliable guiding at 5 steps then leave things as they are.  Calibration is a means to an end, not the objective.

    If you do run in to trouble later, then try reducing the step size more until you get the recommended 10-15 steps, but don't fiddle with it for no particular reason; plenty of other problems to solve further down the line so get on with imaging.

  17. I've set the Calib. Rate to 3500, but PHD only takes 3-4 steps in each direction. Nevertheless i managed to image for nearly 10 mins without star trails (Perseus Region). Next I slewed to Cepheus and had small trails. I presume that if i lower the rate more steps will be taken, right?

    Right.  Fewer than 7-8 steps is likely to result in a poor calibration.  As you've found, it might work sometimes.  I'd decrease the step size a bit (maybe try 3,000 and see) before you change anything else.

  18. What is a good SNR in PHD?

    Hard to say.  Even Craig Stark doesn't really say.  The bottom line is that bigger SNR numbers are better than smaller numbers. So when you are selecting a guide star, setting exposure/gain and focussing the guide scope just pick the combination that gives you the biggest SNR you can find that night.  If you get 'Star Saturated' errors then your chosen star is too bright, the gain/exposure is too high/long or maybe de-focus a tiny amount.  If you get 'Star Lost' errors a lot, then you need to do the opposite and try to get a brighter star, increase gain/exposure or focus better.  Make sure you don't have dew on the guidescope objective and check for high clouds.

    Hi! I calculated my pixel scale for my guiding rig and I get 4.28" ( Starlight Xpress Lodestar with ST-80). How big should my Calibration Step Size be? 4000?

    Yes I'd say that somewhere between 3,000 and 4,000 is a good starting point for that pixel scale.  Remember 15-20 steps in each direction should give a good calibration.

×
×
  • 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.