Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

177 Excellent

About carballada

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Location
    Barcelona Spain
  1. After few weeks running and some good weather I have some updates on that. Here you find the last picture taken with the mount and the RC10, ASI1600MM-C, Astrodon filters and Riccardi. (close to 27kg at 1500mm) all data of this capture at Flickr and Astrobin https://www.astrobin.com/slwz3t/ https://flic.kr/p/2hmHkMQ I could confirm that the mount runs well, the phd2 graphics are very good with long good guiding time, for sure, no frames are excluded because the guiding. Currently I started a dual column setup on the observatory with the idea to move the second telescope to the main column (mesu200 mount) in dual rig config. More info at http://astro.carballada.com/first-night-with-dual-column-ager/
  2. Well, we had some moon and that means I have more time for tests. Few days ago I passed Pempro for 98 minutes. This is the graph of capture, without any kind of guidance, of those 90 and a few minutes, the PointXP model stopped. There are 7 seconds captures using the main camera and with the telescope pointing near the meridian and equator. I think you can already see a reduced and spaced PE in the time. Pempro is designed to find PE in mounts with worm gear and we all know that MEsu does not have that, but you can use it to measure the PE of any mount and look for some frequency where you appreciate a higher PE. Here is the graph processed with the Pempro log viewer, applying drift correction to hunt the frequencies and get an idea of PE peak to peak. In that case the figures are: PE of 1.7 arc-sec (Pk-Pk) with a period of almost 1800s (half an hour), with all other frequencies with relatively much lower values. and here the same data applying drift and rotation correction In that case the numbers are: PE of 4.6 arc-sec (Pk-Pk) with a period of more than 2500s (more than 40 minutes), with very few additional frequencies and with very low values in them. I need more captures and more time to be able to make some comparison. And also see what the values are like with the PointXP active (to check its effectiveness) I'm looking to find some pattern in the PE and try to apply some PEC curve... but as I supposed: it not worth it, with guiding all these errors are corrected without problems, on the other hand, all errors are really small and prolonged in time. Another thing is to find out the value of drift in RA to adjust the values of the servos into the configuration and reduce/cancel it. For now it seems to be -0.402 arc-sec/minute in RA axis. But all it's about playing, isn't it? ;D By the way, if anyone is interested, ask me for the logs privately.
  3. I did the fine polar alignment and I found better results using the Phd2 drift alignment. The alignment with the drift procedure on Phd2 was more easy than expected. On the first step Phd2 ask you to move the Azimuth, in this case you need to use the two lower bolts on the wedge. (no difficult here, is very similar to other mount) on second step Phd2 ask you to move the Altitude alignment, in this case you need to adjust the top bolt and in this case you have the Azimuth ok and practically don't move that axis when you adjust the Altitude! It was necessary to do several iterations, of course, like with any other mount, but the result was really precise. and validated with the wizard (polar error 0.0 after 316s), also on this position the backlash was better (40ms)... and some drift on RA (about -3 arc-sec/min) that I will correct on the controller at some point. Regarding Sharpcap... the result was worst than with Polemaster and the Phd2 wizard reveals more that 1arc-minute error. Basically your are right, seems better the Phd2 drift procedure and I could say than is easy with the three bolts.
  4. Soon I will give some info about the results with 40kg....
  5. I prepared a video showing how easy is to balance the new mount.
  6. Exactly for that reason I want a Mesu, not limited weight capacity and really good guiding! my plan is set less weight, a RC10 and TS107.
  7. Thank you, I'll do this check, sure!!
  8. Just I upload a new version with less dominats, rgb stars, stars reduction and bigger FOV. I hope you like it
  9. Thank you Jonk, I am agree with you and Vlaiv I need to do more test with the backlash and see what happen. Regarding the PA, I am afraid that if you want to use the phd2 drift alignment process is not the best tool to choose because these 3 bolts, that's the reason to use Sharpcap. As you could imagine, with three bolts you never are moving the mount in one axis, only with the top bolt on Altitude. Still If you want to do only the alignment with phd2 drift routine probably it's necessary to do more iterations due this movement in Altitude when you try to adjust your Azimuth with the two bolts on the bottom. When I did the Polemaster routine I saw clearly how the two lower bolts move the alignment point in 2 axis. But, what I saw is a really good results with Sharpcap. Of course, at the end I could check the PA with drift routine in phd2 or the phd2 wizard. Also with the PointXP modelling is possible to obtain the accuracy of your PA. My plan is to record a PA routine with Sharpcap and I could add the results with the phd2 drift, maybe a super-fine adjustment could be done with phd2 but probably it will need to much time for not to much benefit in my case. Will see in three nights.
  10. graphically is like this (is from the same phd2 wizard session) I am not really concern (yet) because I need to check again the proper balance on Ra due to my problems with the counterweight bar, or could be something related to the seeing (test was done with 2sec when usually I use 10sec or 15sec for guiding). Anyway on the last pic.. I prefer the red line than the white, seems better? Due the nice moon, last two nights I run several long Pempro test that I am working on Pempro log viewer. If the weather allows, tonight I plane to do a long run phd2 wizard (with 10s frames) and another long run without guiding to analyse too. And I am thinking to concrete plans next 15th to go to the observatory and do the full mount load with the dual rig. All these previous test are ok, but the real ones will come with full load.
  11. I did a PA only with Polemaster. After some days I check again the polar alignement with phd2 wizard and here you could see the results. It's 0.4 arc-min, something that I need to improve with Sharpcap and enough time. I plan to go to the observatory on the next days to change the counterweight bar and the telescopes adding the RC10 to the current TS107. After that I will use the Sharpcap routine to find the better PA. I will try to take a video, specially showing Sharpcap routine and how easy (I think) could be the movements to achieve the better PA. As I told you, the Polemaster alignment was really easy with the three bolts, with very consistent movements to center the the green box and the red circle. How to explain, did you level a pier base with three bolts? it's a similar process, usually you could push and pull the right bolt to level with no troubles, with that is the same. Another example could be the collimation process with three bolts in any RC or SC...
  12. I know!! when I started to search information about Mesu mounts more that 4 years ago I was read a lot of info coming from you! Thank you for your comment
  13. First light SH2-86 Cloud Sculpting Star Cluster (NGC6820-3) in HST all info at Astrobin https://www.astrobin.com/420032 and Flickr https://flic.kr/p/2gTvVf1
  14. UPDATE: follow you will see the new version with rgb stars and other changes!! all info at Astrobin https://www.astrobin.com/420032 and Flickr https://flic.kr/p/2gTvVf1 First light of my new mount Mesu 200 mk2 !! Really happy when I compare with the same picture last year, under different skies and diferent mount.... I hope you like it, all comments will welcome
  15. You are right, I take pictures to show what I am doing, not marketing pictures He explain several reasons, but basically it was that servo I it’s enough for manage this mount, it’s cheaper and easy to connect to the computer (he received some complains with the II usb connections) and the connections to the motors and encoders are easy to manage (using rj connector) in a portable setups . Also I ask for myself on the Sitech forum and this was the answer: Both controllers use the same operation software SiTechexe. The differences are : 1. Price 2. Power to servos (Servo 1 is limited to about 2.5 amps, Servo II can handle about twice that.) 3. Processor speed - Servo I can handle mount encoders up to about 1 million tics/rev while Servo II can handle encoders up to 67 million tics/rev 4. Inputs on Servo I are modular cables, Inputs on Servo II are all screw terminals 5. Servo I can connect to PC only with a serial cable (4 pin modular plug) while Servo II can use either serial or USB cable. 6. Servo II has a guide port, Servo I does not but servo I can use a radio handpad to provide a guide port. Note that a guide port is not needed if you connect the guide camera software to the SiTech mount using ASCOM. 7. The setup software "ServoConfig" are different because the controllers use different processors internally. I evaluate seriously the option to ask the upgrade to servo II but finally I prefer not to do it, not enough differences because I am interested on PointXP model and home switches and both are possible with my controller. regarding the esthetics... ok, servo II is much beautiful / industrial finish but I have plan to cover the controller in any case to reduce the dew and dust.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.