Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> ATM, Optics and DIY Forum

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)
siriusandthepup
sage
*****

Reged: 02/14/06

Loc: Central Texas, USA
wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope
      #5644789 - 01/26/13 05:32 PM Attachment (67 downloads)

wsDK : A Dall Kirkham Cassegrain design suitable for general purpose observing. I will define this variant as generally having a primary F ratio above f/4 and secondary magnification between 1.5x to 2x.

What makes the wsDK different from "normal" DK's?
Traditional DKs have primary mirrors with F ratios in the 2 to 4 range and secondaries with 3 to 5x magnification. They are excellent for high power narrow field viewing. Traditional Dk's Achilles heal is off axis coma. The wsDKs have weak curves on the primary and secondary which minimizes the coma. Also, the weak curves greatly enhance ease of making the optical components. The weak curves greatly enhance the tolerancing aspect of matching secondary and primary mirrors. The weak curves greatly widen the positioning tolerances required for the physical build of the telescope. The lower system F ratio, f/8 to f/10 normally, allows achieving a 5 to 6mm exit eye pupil on the low power end with a 40mm eyepiece and a 0.5mm exit pupil on the high end with a 4mm eyepiece. The weak secondary is what makes this variant work well.

Purpose: Stand on the ground observing for scopes larger than 20". No ladder please! Scalable to at least 50" with minimal tradeoffs.

My project 25":

My 25" DK will have three optical elements: a 25" primary, an 8" secondary and a 3.5" diagonal to throw the light cone out the side of the OTA about half way up. This is a perforation-less design - no hole in the primary.
My original optical design plan parameters for the 25" f/8.3 DK:
primary: 25"
primary F ratio: 5
back focus: -28
secondary amplification: 1.66
Full Illuminated Field size: 0.75"

As constructed (f/8.1):
primary: 25"
primary F ratio: 4.92
back focus: -28
secondary amplification: 1.644
Full Illuminated Field size: 0.75"

I initially used the ATMOS demo freeware available from Astro-Physics http://www.astro-physics.com/index.htm?products/accessories/software/atmos/at... to explore the design and examine the aberrations.
It is a wonderful program. Thank you Astro-Physics!
Later I generated a Excel based spreadsheet to develop the final design.
I welcome cross checking from anyone based on the above parameters. Check the coma/spot diagrams with your favorite optical software please.
I massaged the design for about 4 years before finally settling on the current prescription. It is very tolerant of with respect to positioning of the optics.
It is also highly tolerant of variation in the production process. For instance, when it turned out that the primary would be a couple inches short (123" vs 125") due to the nature of the initial diamond generation of the blank, a change to the secondary design wasn't even warranted. The acceptable ROC of the secondary is of the nature of plus or minus 4 or 5 inches. I did make the spreadsheet changes to reflect the as built primary focal length and massaged the secondary magnification to get back to the same secondary ROC. This changed the required primary correction from 70.2 to 70.4% Negligible. We did, of course change the target correction during final figuring to 70.4%. I asked John Hall about the tolerance required for a really good mirror and he responded that +-1% of target would be a quite fine optic. He completed the mirror to scary good tolerance. We won't discuss that, because you wouldn't believe it anyway.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ed_turco
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 08/29/09

Loc: Lincoln, RI
Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: siriusandthepup]
      #5644799 - 01/26/13 05:41 PM

The weaker the secondary, the larger it has to be.

Sorry.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
siriusandthepup
sage
*****

Reged: 02/14/06

Loc: Central Texas, USA
Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: siriusandthepup]
      #5644816 - 01/26/13 05:54 PM

Design objectives(actual numbers refer to my 25" DK - Dob project):
1) Easy and cheap to build
Primary is f/5, figured to approximately 70% of the full parabola correction. No perforation required. Any of the modern mirror vendors can do one easily.
Secondary is of 1.66x magnification. Spherical. In the range of f/11.5 test plate.
Tertiary is a standard diagonal, 3.5" in the case of my 25" scope.
Secondary holder requires no tilting adjustments.
All other components are standard Newt/Dob components.

2) Quick to setup
Uses Truss poles to hold Secondary ring.
No exotic pieces - sets up as a normal Newt Dob.

3) Reasonable optical aberrations
Spot diagrams very closely approximate those of a same primary size f/6 Newt.
Can you live with Newt aberrations of an f/6? I can. No coma corrector required for visual use. Photo requirements still not defined. I trust the community will assist with that analysis. It is beyond my expertise.

What about the Secondary Size/Obstruction?
33%, which is in the range of Celestron Schmidt Casses. I like their planetary performance a lot. A good rule of thumb:
Primary diameter - Secondary Diameter = Unobstructed Contrast equivalent.
Let's see, 25" - 8" = 17". I can live with 17" unobstructed Contrast.
Optical Quality Rules - it is MUCH more important than secondary size.
Secondary obstruction is a factor in this design. Focusing on minimizing it unduly would lead to giving up something else more important. Believe me when I say that it was not ignored. Thanks, John Hall (Pegasus Optics) for keeping me in line here and helping me with optimizing the final version of this design. John talked me down from the 10" secondary. Changes were made to accomodate an 8" secondary = a real improvement.

4) Works with normal eyepiece set - It's an F/8.3
Normal? Let's say 4mm to 40mm range without barlow.
Exit eye pupil - 4mm = 0.5mm, 40mm = 4.8mm, 55mm = 6.6mm
Final system f ratio = 8.3, eyepiece heaven - no exotics required.

5) I want to see the Moon
Designed for a 1/2 degree field. The field size shrinks as the aperture increases. No magic here. But it is nice to achieve comparable field size to Newts of similar aperture.
Designed to fully illuminate a focal plane field size of 0.75"

6) Scalable aka "Delusions of Grandeur"
Originally I was designing it to be a 48 or 50". This is a very linear scaling design.
Yes, you can design a stand on the ground 48" DK Dob - view right thru the center of the side bearing. (I have a 7" tertiary diagonal if someone would really like to go there.)
Time/money/reality equation and we end up with the 25" prototype. But hey, it is the prototype for the 48".
I'd say the lower practical limit for this whole idea is about 18" to 20". Anything that size or less is probably better off as a standard Newt Dob with a couple steps on a short ladder if needed.

7) Will this work for other primary F ratios?
MMMM - yes, but.....as always, there will be trade-offs. An f/5 primary really seems to be the sweet spot for this variant.
I have a design spreadsheet I will share with anyone who wants to play around with it. PM me with your email address and I will send you a copy - Excel compatible.

8) A scope I can live with
Positional tolerances and spacings are very forgiving with this design because of the weak primary and secondary curvatures.
A better than average mirror cell is planned because I do not want the primary wandering as much as it would with a sling cell. http://www.jpastrocraft.com/ - Thanks, John Pratte.
Tilt adjustments are not necessary on the secondary (it's spherical). Just make sure the secondary is installed pretty square to the upper ring. Collimation should be trivial - laser the center of the tertiary diagonal, adjust the tertiary to return the beam (after bouncing off the secondary) to the center of the laser. Now adjust the primary collimation knobs on a star to give a nice concentric pattern. Done!
Note: This relative insensitivity DOES NOT apply to a Classical Cass - whole other story.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
siriusandthepup
sage
*****

Reged: 02/14/06

Loc: Central Texas, USA
Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: ed_turco]
      #5644832 - 01/26/13 06:03 PM

Ed, you are absolutely correct about the secondary size.

This whole process has been about trade-offs and compromises. I originally had designed with a 10" secondary. John Hall talked me down off the ledge and I ended up with an 8" secondary. Better. I could get a smaller secondary, but at a cost of higher secondary magnification with attendant stronger aberrations and less wide design and positioning tolerances.

It's all about the trade-offs.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
siriusandthepup
sage
*****

Reged: 02/14/06

Loc: Central Texas, USA
Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: siriusandthepup]
      #5644870 - 01/26/13 06:32 PM

25" DK construction status:

Primary: Figured by John Hall http://www.pegasusoptics.com/
96% Enhanced Coatings by OMI http://www.opticalmechanics.com/
Sitting in the box.

Secondary: not received yet - in the capable hands of master optician Robert Royce http://www.rfroyce.com/

Tertiary: 3.5" 98% C2 coating from Galaxy Optics. Thanks John Hudek. http://www.galaxyoptics.com/index.html

Primary mirror cell: completed this week, waiting on shipment. Thanks John Pratte http://www.jpastrocraft.com/

Dob building: scheduled for the 1st week of March in western Kentucky with my buddy and master woodworker - Ross Workman. Photos will follow initial construction for your viewing pleasure.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ajohn
sage
*****

Reged: 12/03/07

Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: siriusandthepup]
      #5644888 - 01/26/13 06:41 PM

I've been playing around with this and I think the Takahashi scope sums it up. For general purpose use the magnification has to be lowish. Some reckon in the region of 3 to 3.5 but I believe the tak uses 4. The reason for the low mag is the fact that the 2ndry just magnifies the coma more and more which is pretty bad anyway. As is often said they are primarily planet scopes. Personally I suspect that a very low mag is a sensible option for a scope of the size mentioned for general purpose use. I would be interesting to see what the obstruction does to contrast in relation to an un obscured scope.I did see a graph for the effects of a 30 odd % obstruction. What it boils down too is little difference at the limit of the scopes resolution but around the performance of a 5in apo or worse when compared against an 8in SCT to around 2/3 of the way along the mtf curve. Go to a 10in sct and it wins all the way down the curve. This is on axis contrast of course. Things aren't too good off axis with any simple arrangement, newton, cass or dk.

I've yet to find any free ware that accounts for central obstructions. Texereau makes a point about large ones. There is so much light in the 2nd ring of the diffraction pattern it's this that dances around due to the atmosphere so it must have a bad effect on resolution in practice. Pass. The same atmosphere problems have been used to justify the tak scope - the atmosphere has more effect than the design.

John
-


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
The bear
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 02/11/08

Loc: rushville, indiana
Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: Ajohn]
      #5644944 - 01/26/13 07:16 PM

can you draw us out a little diagram of how you did this and plan to do the mounts? or maybe you can send me some drafts so i can get some ideas for mine that would be great.
doc


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
siriusandthepup
sage
*****

Reged: 02/14/06

Loc: Central Texas, USA
Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: The bear]
      #5644964 - 01/26/13 07:27 PM

Yes Doc,
Will do - give me a few days. I will probably have to pencil sketch it and then scan it.

The mechanical design was not easy at all. I went through many redesigns until I arrived at a reasonable solution.

When you see it now though, I am guessing you will think its simple... It may be, but getting there wasn't.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
siriusandthepup
sage
*****

Reged: 02/14/06

Loc: Central Texas, USA
Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: siriusandthepup]
      #5645098 - 01/26/13 08:41 PM Attachment (58 downloads)

OK Doc, lets see if I've got this shrunk down enough. the squares are 4".

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
MKV
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 01/20/11

Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: siriusandthepup]
      #5645290 - 01/26/13 11:38 PM Attachment (42 downloads)

Ed, here is your design in OSLO. As predicted, large coma.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
GlennLeDrew
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/18/08

Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: MKV]
      #5645300 - 01/26/13 11:50 PM

And that's only a 0.2 degree field. A 2" eyepiece would provide up to a 0.56 degree field. Might a coma corrector be profitably employed, even though designed for a paraboloid of faster aperture? Or would it 'overcorrect'?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dave brock
professor emeritus


Reged: 06/06/08

Loc: Hamilton, New Zealand
Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: GlennLeDrew]
      #5645358 - 01/27/13 01:23 AM

Quote:

And that's only a 0.2 degree field. A 2" eyepiece would provide up to a 0.56 degree field. Might a coma corrector be profitably employed, even though designed for a paraboloid of faster aperture? Or would it 'overcorrect'?




The 16" DK that I refigured
here works surprisingly well with an "off the shelf" coma corrector.

Dave


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
siriusandthepup
sage
*****

Reged: 02/14/06

Loc: Central Texas, USA
Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: dave brock]
      #5645396 - 01/27/13 02:44 AM

Thanks MKV,

Could you do me a big favor and run the same thing through OSLO with the same field parameters for an 25" F/6 Newt?

A sanity check for me please. Thanks very much.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ajohn
sage
*****

Reged: 12/03/07

Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: siriusandthepup]
      #5645579 - 01/27/13 07:59 AM Attachment (27 downloads)

The coma correctors are aimed at F4.5 scopes usually but I did come across some one who was using a commercial one on a much faster scope for an astrograph so I suspect more coma can be corrected by varying it's position,

Looking at this I think the coma is a little worse than an F6 Newtonian.It's not as good as an F8 newtonian though. 1 Posted an F15 pure cass spot diagram in the oslo problem thread. The DK is useless for wider fields at that F ratio with a fast primary.

John
-


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ajohn
sage
*****

Reged: 12/03/07

Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: Ajohn]
      #5645595 - 01/27/13 08:20 AM

This image shows the effect that the central obstruction has on the diffraction spot and MTF. It's normalised so applies to any scope. 1 on the bottom axis is the resolution presented to the scope that will results in no contrast at all. The Rayleigh limit gives about 7 1/2% contrast.

http://www.telescope-optics.net/images/central_obstruction0.PNG

You can see clearly why so many scope have a central obstruction of around 30% and it's generally accepted that they shouldn't be any bigger.

John
-


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
MKV
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 01/20/11

Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: siriusandthepup]
      #5645599 - 01/27/13 08:23 AM Attachment (36 downloads)

Sure, Ed, here is a 25-inch f/6. The physical FOV is 0.75 inches, the same as in your 25-inch f/8 DK Dob, but do realize that the angular field is about 36% larger in the f/6, namely 0.27° vs 0.19° in the DK Dob. So, I've included two sets of spots. On the left are the spots for the same field coverage (0.75 inches), and the one on the right is for the same angular coverage (0.19° degrees). Hope this helps.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
kfrederick
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 02/01/08

Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: MKV]
      #5645638 - 01/27/13 09:00 AM Attachment (35 downloads)

Here is a 24 inch chief with the eyepiece 38 inches above the primary . I have the primary finished . Ed I like your design .Should be very nice .Better than a very fast newt I would think .Blocking stray light might not be easy .

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
MKV
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 01/20/11

Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: MKV]
      #5645663 - 01/27/13 09:24 AM Attachment (26 downloads)

Although this image is not to the same scale as the one for your dob, you can use the scale bar representing 0.004 in. to measure coma on both. From this, one can see that at the edge of a 0.75 inch FOV, the DK Dob has a total coma of 0.002 inches (of which 1/3, or sagittal portion of 0.0075 inches will be visible). By contrast, the f/6 over the same 0.75 inch field shows a total coma of 0.00137 inches (0.0006 in. sagittal), and for the same angular covera a coma of 0.00133 in. (0.0004 in sagittal). So, your DK Dob's coma is definitely worse than f/6 Newotnian.

Keep in mind that these are geometric optics and that the real image will include the diffraction effects as well. Nonetheless, the relative performance of the two can be assessed this way.

Give the extent and the nature of coma (being the same overcorrected type as in Newotnians) I don't see why a Newotnian coma corrector wouldn't be beneficial.

On the other hand, your central obstruction alone is very close to a 1/4 wave wavefront error, so I am not sure what this DK sytem would be good for. It's not really ideal for photography, or high power pleneteray observation or imaging due to diminished ocntrast.

If you look at the MTFs with central obstructions included, it's obvious that the DK Dob will perform ever so slightly worse than an f/6 Newtonian, but then some will say that an f/6 Newotnian is more than good enough! So, you're no worse off than f/6 Newotnian.

In fact, your configuration is much better in terms of its physical size. In this respect, your DK Dob will have a conveniently located focus and will be just over 7 feet long, whereas a Newt of the same size will have the focus 11 feet off the ground (!). So, given their nearly equal performance, I think your DK dob is a better solution than a Newt. Also, it won't require a heavy mount needed for traditional Cassegrain configurations. Good job, Ed!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
siriusandthepup
sage
*****

Reged: 02/14/06

Loc: Central Texas, USA
Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: MKV]
      #5645754 - 01/27/13 10:24 AM

Thanks everyone for running the spots. Wow!

First order of business - I must apologize to Ed Turco.

Ed, I apologize for saying you were wrong about the coma. You were correct. The coma is there and just because it doesn't bother me visually doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I am learning some new things here. I'm thinking that for photo applications it appears that even an f/6 Newt could use a little help with coma correction.

Thanks Ed.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike I. Jones
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 07/02/06

Loc: Fort Worth TX
Re: wsDK - weak secondary Dall Kirkham telescope new [Re: siriusandthepup]
      #5645800 - 01/27/13 10:49 AM

Ed, thank you for the courtesy of your public apology here to Ed Turco. I wish all skirmishes here could be resolved with similar grace.
Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | (show all)


Extra information
7 registered and 21 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  ausastronomer, richard7, Starman81 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 4531

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics