Dave Smith Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 The data for the following phase diagram for the binary star TZ Lyr was collected during 7 clear nights between 11 April and 2 May 2017. The two stars comprising this binary orbit around each other with a period of approx 12 hours (12.69) Images of the star field were 60s duration and one taken around every 2 minutes. The images were standardised and processed in the free software Muniwin which produces file suitable for uploading to the BAA database or the aavso database. The phase diagram was produced using Peranso software. Dave 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laudropb Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Another very nice piece of work Dave. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyS Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Nice tight light curves, Dave. Well done! Jeremy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Smith Posted May 4, 2017 Author Share Posted May 4, 2017 Thank you for your comments John and Jeremy. One problem I still have to sort out is why my range of values doesn't agree with those given on the aavso chart. They say the magnitude varies between 10.87 and 11.85 V. I was using a V filter and get 10.6 and 11.3 ? Dave 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 Regardless of any discrepancy Dave, that's a brilliant piece of work, I had no idea that was possible! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DHEB Posted May 6, 2017 Share Posted May 6, 2017 Excellent work, Dave. I have no idea about the origin of your discrepancy. Nevertheless, it seems to me that it is not unusual for magnitude ranges to be somehow discrepant in different databases, say AAVSO's VSX vs GCVS. I assume that instrument calibration may have something to do with that. What happens if you measure Arcturus and Vega, just to see what you get and calibrate your instrument? I understand Vega was nominally assigned mag 0.0 as a reference (see Wikipedia article about Vega ). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Smith Posted May 8, 2017 Author Share Posted May 8, 2017 On 06/05/2017 at 20:09, Cinco Sauces said: Excellent work, Dave. I have no idea about the origin of your discrepancy. Nevertheless, it seems to me that it is not unusual for magnitude ranges to be somehow discrepant in different databases, say AAVSO's VSX vs GCVS. I assume that instrument calibration may have something to do with that. What happens if you measure Arcturus and Vega, just to see what you get and calibrate your instrument? I understand Vega was nominally assigned mag 0.0 as a reference (see Wikipedia article about Vega ). Thank you. That is very helpful. Dave 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Smith Posted May 9, 2017 Author Share Posted May 9, 2017 It turns out that my values agree with others on the aavso database so there is no problem to solve. Dave 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DHEB Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 33 minutes ago, Dave Smith said: It turns out that my values agree with others on the aavso database so there is no problem to solve. Dave Good! One less thing to worry about 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave In Vermont Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 Aside from the scientific fascination embodied in this exceptional work - it's just, plain WOW! You've ignited my imagination on many levels! I thank you! Dave 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyS Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 On 2017-5-9 at 08:21, Dave Smith said: It turns out that my values agree with others on the aavso database so there is no problem to solve. Pleased to hear it Dave. There can sometimes be small differences as even if a V filter is used, they can have slightly different characteristics. Same for the CCD chip response. It's not normally a problem as any differences can be calibrated out quite easily when combining observations from different observers. Keep up the good work! Jeremy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Smith Posted May 13, 2017 Author Share Posted May 13, 2017 Thanks Jeremy Dave 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now