- “ Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people. ” — Hugh C. Cameron
Quote:I think the issue is that the resolution of the rotary encoder is 0.001 degrees, or about 3 arcsec. I do not know yet if this limitation of the stock system can be overcome.
------------------ Mert 42º49"N 1º38"W 3" Polarex refractor,6" F12 SW MCT,Moonlight "Stepperized" EQ6 + EQMOD,SPC900NC/DFK21AU04.AS/ASI120MC My web-page Still working to make it decent!
Quote: I certainly don't need the kind of torque this think can produce, nor do I want a C-14 slewing around at 20 degrees a second.
I lost count of my scopes. Now I just want mobility. I came, I saw, I bought some interesting accessories, and put names to faces: NEAF 2012, ASAE 2012, SWAP 2013, ASAE 2013.
Quote:Starhawk-THanks for your thoughtful response. If you just look at the unit from a mechanical perspective it is really no different than a mount axis. Agreed, the intended applications for these rotary stages are not ideal for astronomical tracking. However, I think those limitations are more or less contained in the existing controller, motor, and encoder. If you strip the stage down to its mechanical components, it seems like it must be adaptable to the task. I'm not sure how much effort it will be to re-engineer it from the bare mechanics. You are right about the loading and balancing. This stage does not have the load capacity mounted vertically as it does mounted horizontally.