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 | (show all)
ch-viladrich
member


Reged: 07/14/13

Loc: France
OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ?
      #6113348 - 10/02/13 03:15 PM

I am looking for an OSLO model of the C14 Edge-HD.

The ressourcefull book "Telescopes, eyepieces, astrographs" by Smith, Ceragioli and Berry gives a number of Zemax models in the 8" size, but none in larger sizes (11" or 14").

I would be very interested if someone have got something for the C14 Edge-HD.

The objective is to compare the performances of both versions for high resolution imaging with 2k x 2k sensors (spherochromatism, Strelh ratio over the sensor frame, variation of focus with wavelenght).

Thanks !


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wh48gs
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/02/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: ch-viladrich]
      #6116670 - 10/04/13 07:55 AM

Assuming that the 8-inch on p257 is it, you can just upscale it. It does fit the corrector configuration I've seen published, but it is not the best possible. Placing negative lens first, both elements BK7, gives better of axis performance, including less lateral color. I'm sure Celestron's opticians could figure that out, so kind of wonder if the published versions were accurate.

Beside, the version in the book has neutral zone at 0.866 radius, which more than doubles spherochromatism vs. 0.707 zone.

Vla


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ch-viladrich
member


Reged: 07/14/13

Loc: France
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: wh48gs]
      #6117452 - 10/04/13 03:08 PM

Thanks for your answer.
By "upscaling" do you mean just a linear upscale (X 355/202 factor) ?
I would have assumed the coefficients of the Schmidt plate would have been different ? But I am not an expert.


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

Reged: 02/28/05

Loc: Hellertown, PA
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: wh48gs]
      #6117771 - 10/04/13 06:19 PM

Quote:

I'm sure Celestron's opticians could figure that out,






And about that Edge focal reducer?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wh48gs
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/02/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: ch-viladrich]
      #6117836 - 10/04/13 07:09 PM

Yes, right clicking on the surface data table, scale lens>scale lens by constant... Aspheric parameters adjusts automatically.

Vla


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: ch-viladrich]
      #6118460 - 10/05/13 03:39 AM

The different EdgeHD sizes are not scaled versions, as can be seen from the layouts in the whitepaper available here.

In addition, the 14" version uses a different type of glass for one of the corrector elements.

The design described in Smith, Ceragioli, Berry is not the actual Edge8 design, but their own tweaked version of it based on the original design. I don't think the actual numbers for any of the designs is available, but you can get an approximate starting design by looking at the layout diagrams and noting the glass types used in each size.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BYoesle
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 06/12/04

Loc: Goldendale, Washington USA
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: freestar8n]
      #6118498 - 10/05/13 04:29 AM

I don't have the "Telescopes, Eyepieces, Astrographs" book in front of me right now, but I seem to recall that Celestron did supply the actual prescriptions for the Edge HD. Whether or not these were the numbers used in the books example I don't recall off the top of my head...

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: BYoesle]
      #6118503 - 10/05/13 04:46 AM

Yes - they explicitly say Celestron provided the actual design, but they altered it a bit for the design shown in the book. So - I don't know of a public source for the actual design.

The design itself would need to be optimized for the specific purposes of visual, planetary, and deep sky imaging, while at the same time it needs to conform to some other constraints:

It needs to maintain a mechanical backfocus of 5.25" for the Edge8 and 5.75" for the others to allow space for the imaging train.

It needs to work for Hyperstar, which means I think the Schmidt corrector and primary are unchanged from the non-Edge designs. The secondary spacing can be made slightly shorter, but not longer.

The field size does not scale and instead targets fixed detector sizes. This size is roughly 42mm diameter. The field needs to be diffraction limited in the center for planetary work, but beyond that the relevant limit is deep sky imaging with stellar fwhm's of around 1-2 arc-seconds.

With the 0.7x reducer, the backfocus should remain the same - except for Edge8 where it is shorter.

I'm not sure if the secondary is identical with the non-Edge version. If so, that is another constraint.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BYoesle
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 06/12/04

Loc: Goldendale, Washington USA
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: freestar8n]
      #6118897 - 10/05/13 11:40 AM

As I recall the corrector and the primary remain the same, and I believe Smith et.al. stated the secondary ROC was changed. I called Celestron a while back and they stated they could not sell the new secondary or the corrector optics separately in order to upgrade an older version.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wh48gs
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/02/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: freestar8n]
      #6118978 - 10/05/13 12:35 PM Attachment (27 downloads)

Thanks for the file, Frank. That gives pretty much all the info short of prescription. Here's two prescriptions that are close to what Edge 14 is, and can be used for performance evaluation. For minimum spherochromatism, LA curves should intersect at 0.71 radius, which for the 14-inch implies about 133,000mm corrector radius w/o corrector. These two examples are for the effective 0.87 zone and 0.75 zone, the former needs -104,000mm radius to eliminate lateral color, the other 144,000mm. It implies that if they use 0.71 zone (-133,000mm radius) w/o corrector, with the corrector it would be effectively 0.78-0.79 zone. That would increase spherochromatism ~50% compared to the minimum w/0.71 neutral zone. Maybe it's because I used N-BALF4 instead of N-BALF2 cited by Celestron. But in any instance, this is about as close as it gets without actual prescription.

It's funny that the arrangement with a negative lens in front does not require radius adjustment for lateral color, needs only BK7, has plentiful 167mm backfocus at 8-inch and has 1/3 of the astigmatism of this corrector.

Vla


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: wh48gs]
      #6119065 - 10/05/13 01:42 PM

Interesting. I'd be surprised if they overlooked a simpler approach given their constraints. That doesn't mean they didn't - but given the various different layouts and the choice of special glass for the 14" version, I thought they would have explored a wide parameter space including the combinatorics of different glass options.

Two other factors I didn't mention are the avoidance of pupil ghosts and related reflections/flares, and the associated alignment/fabrication tolerances.

I can believe that a simpler overall design is possible if you allow the corrector to be changed - but they are leaving that the same. I guess the secondary radius and spacing are changed. I'm not sure if the corrector distance is changed or not, but Hyperstar does require a special spacer when used with Edge. I'm not sure if this is due to a mechanical issue in how it attaches, or if the corrector spacing is actually different. If it did move, it moved toward the primary.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ch-viladrich
member


Reged: 07/14/13

Loc: France
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: freestar8n]
      #6120048 - 10/06/13 04:09 AM

Thanks for all of these information :-)
I 'm going to try some tests with the two models you kindly gave Vla.
This is what they say in "telescopes, Eyepices, Astrographs" :

""when we requested more detailed data from Celestron, the company obliged""


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wh48gs
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/02/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: freestar8n]
      #6121137 - 10/06/13 07:06 PM

No surprise - the omission was mine The reversed BK7 corrector was only correcting for coma, not field curvature. It could be used for the complete job but, since it employs milder curves and generates less of Petzval-correcting power, it leaves more field curvature in the system, and requires adding more astigmatism (50%+) to flatten the field than the arrangement used by Celestron. In addition to using BK7, it's positive is that it has more relaxed tolerances and less sensitivity to misalignment, but the design correction factor probably prevailed.

Hyperstar may only need spacer with c14 and c925 if it is designed for f/2 primary. Just a guess.

Vla


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wh48gs
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/02/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: ch-viladrich]
      #6121181 - 10/06/13 07:34 PM Attachment (21 downloads)

I took a closer look at the drawing in the Celestron's file, and there the primary is not f/2, but about f/2.15. Also the system is f/11, not f/10 as I went with previously. Here's two systems that replicate the design as given by Celestron, except for the location of the corrector which is somewhat closer to the primary. This is most likely due to a different glass used for the second element (Schott N-BALF5 instead of N-BALF2, which seems to be pretty elusive).

One of the systems is for 0.707 radius original corrector, and the other for 0.866 radius. The former effectively acts as ~0.75 zone corrector, and the latter is about the native 0.866 zone performance. Both has nearly identical off-axis astigmatism, but the latter has nearly double the spherochromatic error of the former. I don't know which neutral zone Celestron uses; I thought it was 0.707 since it's easier to manufacture and gives less spherochromatism, but who knows? Maybe they like the appearance of those small compact circles produced by 0.866 zone.

The 0.866 system blurs are more alike the ones presented by Celestron, only the astigmatism is about 50% larger. I kind of doubt that it can be achieved just by using BALF2 (since the curvature to correct is generated by mirrors, and corrector lenses of a given shape and similar glass do not normally differ significantly in the amount of Petzval they generate), but cannot say it wouldn't work like that. So if you trust Celestron, use 0.81 ratio to the nominal field angle to evaluate field performance at that field height. It will go with the Celestron's astigmatism, and spherochromatism is quite similar.

BTW the design in the book is not accurate.

Vla


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

Reged: 01/20/11

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: wh48gs]
      #6122197 - 10/07/13 11:21 AM

Good job, Vla! I think the 0.866 correction has a slightly better image, and seems to be unaffected by astigmatism up to about a 25 mm FOV diameter.

But, a simple dialyte version with all spherical surfaces and BK7 componenets would most likely outperform the C14-Edge by a loooong shot. Why bother with aspherics?

regards,
Mladen


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wh48gs
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/02/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: MKV]
      #6123391 - 10/07/13 07:11 PM

Mladen, did I ever do poorly? I don't remember 0.866 zone blurs do look neater, but the sherochromatism is nearly doubled. Between the neater blur and half the wavefront error I opt for the latter.

Two-mirror dialyte would have astigmatism corrected, but may not be easy to make up to high standards. I remember Roland was making prototype some time ago, and the price mentioned was quite high (much more optical-quality glass, although I'm sure his SCT too would be more expensive than these run-of-the-mill varieties). He also sounded concerned if his fabrication/assembly capabilities will be up to the task. On the other hand, SCT corrector aspheric is for all practical purposes as easy to make as a sphere. And who doesn't love good old SCT?

Vla


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

Reged: 01/20/11

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: wh48gs]
      #6124007 - 10/08/13 01:52 AM Attachment (19 downloads)

Vla, I don't know if you ever did poorly. If you're human, you should have! The question is how much of that greater spherchormatism would be visible as opposed to "cross-like" star images.

From a fabricaiton point of view, making Schmidt-type correctors is no different than making a sphere. You're spot on there, but so is producing spherical surface. A Mangin is no more of a challenge than a Maksutov meniscus corrector, so they do require more precise manufacturing, especially in larger sizes. If you want a superb scope you pay for it.

Below is an example of a 14-inch f/11.9 dialyte Cassegrain with two Mangin mirrors based on a design oriignally proposed by Mike I. Jones on CN for a 200 mm diameter configuration.

The images are without a field flattener, and over the same off-axis angle as the C14 Edge-HD. On a curved filed, or with a suitable field flattener, the FOV can be as large as 2-inches across with pinpoint images.

Note the use of N-BK10 for the secondary. Judging from the chromatic residual, the configuration is not even fully optimized at this setting. This can be easily tweaked.

All in all, a much better product than the C14 in question.


Mladen


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: MKV]
      #6124108 - 10/08/13 04:05 AM

Hi-

I'm interested in these explorations and I like to see what else is possible. But if you really want a challenge, it is actually very important to keep the length of the OTA short. If you can keep the length the same or less than the Edge14 and keep the field the same at the same ease of manufacturing, then it's more interesting.

For guided imaging and general mounting considerations, the nearly f/2 primary is very important - both in usage (wind, weight, rotational torque, carrying, flexure) and in potential sales.

Also, for planetary work, the secondary can't get too big.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Loren Chang
member


Reged: 04/28/09

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: wh48gs]
      #6124152 - 10/08/13 05:30 AM

Quote:

Schott N-BALF5 instead of N-BALF2, which seems to be pretty elusive.




Did N-BALF2 ever exist? Can'nt found in OSLO.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Dave O
sage
*****

Reged: 12/21/11

Loc: Sri Lanka
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: Loren Chang]
      #6124182 - 10/08/13 06:30 AM

In their 'White Paper' on the EdgeHD telescopes, Celestron states that the 14 inch EdgeHD corrector uses N-SK2 and N-BALF2 glasses. So yes, it seems to exit.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wh48gs
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/02/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: MKV]
      #6124248 - 10/08/13 07:47 AM Attachment (12 downloads)

Mladen, that's clever to try to eliminate positive field lens with Mangin secondary, but the system is not flat field. It still has somewhat less of defocus (curvature) error than c14e would have due to astigmatism, but not really significantly.

And I agree with Frank that we should compare systems of similar length. Not only for the length itself, but for the performance level. An SCT with slower primary will have lower aberrations, both off axis and spherochromatism. This is what an f/3.5/12.2 14-inch Edge would put out, e,F,C lines.

Edited by wh48gs (10/08/13 07:49 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Loren Chang
member


Reged: 04/28/09

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: Dave O]
      #6124337 - 10/08/13 08:48 AM Attachment (8 downloads)

Quote:

In their 'White Paper' on the EdgeHD telescopes, Celestron states that the 14 inch EdgeHD corrector uses N-SK2 and N-BALF2 glasses. So yes, it seems to exit.




Hello Dave,

That's the problem. I tried to google N-BALF2 but found nothing. And here is C8 EHD prescription in book. The mirrors system is f/8.5 if you remove corrector. I wonder why using corrector to increase focal length.


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

Reged: 01/20/11

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: wh48gs]
      #6124469 - 10/08/13 09:50 AM Attachment (10 downloads)

Vla, a C14 EdgeHD with an f/3.5 primary rivals a (simulated*) field-flattened dilayte counterpart. The question remains: if an ATM were to make one of these which would be easier. I think the one with all spherical surfaces wins, even if its Mangin mirrors require greater precision. It doesn't require extra tooling.

regards,
Mladen

*simulated using a curved imaged field since OSLO.edu doesn't allow more than 10 surfaces in all


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Dave O
sage
*****

Reged: 12/21/11

Loc: Sri Lanka
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: MKV]
      #6124551 - 10/08/13 10:31 AM

Hello Loren,

Yes, the smaller EdgeHD scopes (8", 9.25", and 11") use N-SK2 and K10 glasses in their corrector; only the 14" uses the N-BALF2 glass per the "White Paper" put out by Celestron.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Loren Chang
member


Reged: 04/28/09

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: Dave O]
      #6124851 - 10/08/13 12:42 PM

Dave,

Vlad said location of the corrector is closer to primary in N-BALF5(longer BFL). I'd like to see if N-BALF2 will do the right job. SK2/K10 combination intruduces lateral color off-axis. It can be defeated by using N-BALF.

Edited by Loren Chang (10/08/13 12:44 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wh48gs
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/02/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: Loren Chang]
      #6126237 - 10/09/13 01:14 AM Attachment (6 downloads)

Quote:

I tried to google N-BALF2 but found nothing. And here is C8 EHD prescription in book. The mirrors system is f/8.5 if you remove corrector. I wonder why using corrector to increase focal length.




I don't think they had complete prescription. Why tweak otherwise? Their lenses are noticeably different (thickness, radii) than what Celestron gives in its file. The closest I can come to it - with all the dimensions nearly identical as in Celestron's drawing - is if I go with 0.707 neutral zone radius (not 0.866 as in the book). No lateral color to speak of, and pretty close blur-size-wise.

With 0.866 zone there has to be more lateral color, or a slight longitudinal chromatism (and that with the corrector pulled a half inch, or so, out). Another possibility is that they go with 0.866 zone and somewhat more relaxed Schmidt radius, giving them ~0.87 zone and minimized lateral color. The secondary is also different than in the standard SCT, so they are not a perfect match for the standard SCT attachments for prime focus imaging anyway.

Vla


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
freestar8n
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: wh48gs]
      #6126286 - 10/09/13 02:27 AM

They say that,
Quote:

we optimized the design for the largest possible field of good correction.




That makes me think the original design was targeted more at highest performance in the center, for planetary and visual work, while reducing the Strehl farther out. This is consistent with the white paper, which makes the point that deep sky imaging is seeing limited.

I don't think they are just talking about a choice of focus, since they say "optimized the design."

Since Smith/Ceragioli/Berry compare scopes based on Strehl across the field, a design optimized more for the center would not look as good. But for the intended usage modes of this scope, it would make sense to me. Minimal sacrifice of on-axis performance, while maintaining overall performance adequate to maintain small deep sky fwhm's across the field in long exposures.

That's my interpretation anyway.

Frank


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wh48gs
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/02/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: freestar8n]
      #6127025 - 10/09/13 01:40 PM Attachment (7 downloads)

Quote:

That makes me think the original design was targeted more at highest performance in the center, for planetary and visual work, while reducing the Strehl farther out. This is consistent with the white paper, which makes the point that deep sky imaging is seeing limited.




What doesn't feet in is that the paper design (according to the blurs shown) has less astigmatism and less lateral color. Thus it can only be superior to the book "optimized" variant, not the other way around (center field is not discernibly different). The book variant would have been slightly better overall if some 5mm closer to the secondary.

When compared based on their design performance, tweaked and original corrector configurations do not show significant differences in any respect, except when the original configuration is matched with 0.707 neutral zone corrector (bottom). The blur shapes then are also quite close to Celestron's. It suggests that the standard C8s are made with 0.707 neutral zone, and that the actual C8 Edge corrector is similar to this variant.

Vla


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BYoesle
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 06/12/04

Loc: Goldendale, Washington USA
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: wh48gs]
      #6133180 - 10/12/13 02:23 PM

It seems activity on this thread has subsided, so at the risk of hi-jacking it, Id like to know if anyone has pursued similar improved optical performance from a standard C8 and C14?

"Telescopes, Eyepieces, Astrographs" shows significantly improved performance from the standard SCT optics via relocation of the corrector plate -- close to the Edge HD levels. But this seems it would necessitate significant mechanical modifications including some sort of spider assembly to maintain the position and alignment of the secondary.

Has anyone explored design of a lens corrector system similar tho the Edge HD for the standard Celestron SCT designs which could be located in the OEM primary baffle tube? Could these be modeled in the OSLO edu version?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ch-viladrich
member


Reged: 07/14/13

Loc: France
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: BYoesle]
      #6134719 - 10/13/13 10:43 AM

Hi all,

Thanks a lot for this very interesting discussion.

I have been playing with the two OSLO models Vla derived for the C14 Edge-HD:
http://www.astrosurf.com/viladrich/astro/instrument/sensitivity/sensitivity-a...

Remember my point of view here is from high resolution imaging on large size sensors ;-)
The C14 Edge-HD seems to give lower Strelh ratio than the classic C14 over 650 nm, which is not good news for us. Maybe this is due to the corrector ?

On the blue side, they seems to be equivalent.

http://www.astrosurf.com/viladrich/astro/instrument/sensitivity/SC14-Strelh.jpg

The version with a neutral zone at 0.866 gives less change of focus with wavelenght which is nice when changing filters in LRGB imaging :
http://www.astrosurf.com/viladrich/astro/instrument/sensitivity/SC14-focus.jpg

The major drawback of these large size SC for planetary / lunar imaging is the fast degration of optical quality in blue and UV.
The CDK seems a promising alternative. Smith/Ceragioli/Berry gave the description of a 300 mm F-3-F7 optimized for deep sky imaging with a diffraction limited field of over a 1 field from 410 to 800 nm.

Of course this design with a 46% obstruction would make no sense for high resolution imaging.

So, I was wondering if it would be possible to design a CDK 350 mm F3-12 optimised for high resolution, with a 30% obstruction, and a flat diffraction limited field of say 7 arcmn in diameter, from 350 to 800 nm ?

The all spherical surfaces would be easy to manufacture and collimate(much easier than the hyperbolic secondary of a Cassegrain). While the absence of the Schmidt corrector would gives access to blue and UV with good image quality.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wh48gs
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/02/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: ch-viladrich]
      #6135001 - 10/13/13 01:20 PM Attachment (6 downloads)

Quote:

I was wondering if it would be possible to design a CDK 350 mm F3-12 optimised for high resolution, with a 30% obstruction, and a flat diffraction limited field of say 7 arcmn in diameter, from 350 to 800 nm ?




It can be done. Since it is relatively small aperture and long focal ratio, it can't use the simplest arrangement with two plano lenses (too much higher order astigmatism), but what can be used is still within the reach of the advanced amateurs. The system pictured, 350mm f/3/11.2 is not fully optimized, but it shouldn't make appreciable difference. The 350nm diffraction limited field is about quarter of a degree, and 800nm about half a degree.

Vla


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Alph
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 11/23/06

Loc: Melmac
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: ch-viladrich]
      #6135021 - 10/13/13 01:31 PM

Quote:

I have been playing with the two OSLO models Vla derived for the C14 Edge-HD:



I haven't found any C14 Edge-HD OSLO files there.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wh48gs
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/02/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: BYoesle]
      #6135045 - 10/13/13 01:42 PM Attachment (2 downloads)

Quote:

Has anyone explored design of a lens corrector system similar tho the Edge HD for the standard Celestron SCT designs which could be located in the OEM primary baffle tube? Could these be modeled in the OSLO edu version?





The problem here is that inducing coma in simple correctors always comes with some undercorrection, so if a corrector is to be used in otherwise well corrected system, that is a price to pay. In this example corrector cuts coma nearly in half, but induces some 1/10 wave of undercrrection. More coma corrected, more undercorrection. For an SCT with 1/4 wave of overcorrection this would, however, work perfectly, correcting both, coma and residual spherical (rear lens is deliberately made thicker to allow possible use of two thin plano lenses).

Vla


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ch-viladrich
member


Reged: 07/14/13

Loc: France
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: wh48gs]
      #6135111 - 10/13/13 02:09 PM

Many thanks a lot Vla :-)
I'll have a look it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ch-viladrich
member


Reged: 07/14/13

Loc: France
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: ch-viladrich]
      #6135306 - 10/13/13 04:03 PM

Hi Vla,
You've find an amazing design :-)
- Strelh ratio on axis is 0.99 at 300 nm, then 1 from 350 to 1000 nm !!
- the focal shift from 350 nm to 1000 nm is a mere 0.01 mm !!
With a F/3 primary ratio, the optical tube will be arround 100 - 110 cm, which is still nice.
You've just designed the perfect large and still portable planet/ moon killer :-)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BYoesle
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 06/12/04

Loc: Goldendale, Washington USA
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: wh48gs]
      #6135318 - 10/13/13 04:08 PM

Thank you very much Vla - it will be fun to explore the possibilities...



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


Reged: 08/31/09

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: wh48gs]
      #6135330 - 10/13/13 04:17 PM

Quote:

Vla




Looking at the spot diagrams closely, I see some similarities between the book figure and the corrector 5mm closer, and some similarities between book and 0.866 null zone.

The 5mm closer overcorrects blue <spots> wrt book and undercorrects red.
The 0.866 corrector null undercorrects the blue <spots>

What would happen it fyou split the difference and tried 0.80 null zone and 2.5mm corrector spacing?

http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/attachments/6127025-edg.PNG


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ch-viladrich
member


Reged: 07/14/13

Loc: France
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: MitchAlsup]
      #6135353 - 10/13/13 04:29 PM

BTW, is there a way to display the Strelh ratio accross the field with OSLO-LT ?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wh48gs
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/02/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: MitchAlsup]
      #6135469 - 10/13/13 05:40 PM

Quote:

The 5mm closer overcorrects blue <spots> wrt book and undercorrects red.
The 0.866 corrector null undercorrects the blue <spots>





It only appears so. They are all overcorrected in the blue. Look at the lateral color graphs at right. It would take a zone below 0.7 to get them together. In effect, it is inducing some longitudinal color error in order to minimize lateral - can't have both with this glass combination.

Vla


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wh48gs
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/02/07

Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: ch-viladrich]
      #6135485 - 10/13/13 05:46 PM

Hi -

Quote:

is there a way to display the Strelh ratio accross the field with OSLO-LT ?




Not that I know. But it should have the RMS OPD under Spot diagram>>Spot size and OPD vs. field. Just as good for monitoring diffraction limited field.

Vla


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ch-viladrich
member


Reged: 07/14/13

Loc: France
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: wh48gs]
      #6141232 - 10/16/13 04:29 PM

Hi,
I've done some more simulations.
The CDK 350 F3-F12 is clearly sensitive to the backfocus. This won't be a problem for deepsky imaging, but it might be more tricky with planetary imaging.
I have to check out the range of backfocus I use on my C14 depending on filter wheel, ADC, focal length of Barlow lens, etc.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ch-viladrich
member


Reged: 07/14/13

Loc: France
Re: OLSO model of the C14 Edge-HD ? new [Re: ch-viladrich]
      #6141237 - 10/16/13 04:30 PM

... the simulation is at the end of this page :
http://www.astrosurf.com/viladrich/astro/instrument/sensitivity/sensitivity-a...


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


Extra information
11 registered and 20 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: 1525

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics