asaint
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/25/03
Posts: 2072
|
|
Howie Glatter BLUG
|
Peter Argenziano
Watcher of the Skies
Reged: 11/11/03
Posts: 2841
|
|
Dave, thanks for the review. Great collection of photos, which I always appreciate in a product review.
I must admit that I am quite surprised that it doesn't fit into a Feathertouch focuser properly. You would think that would have been one of the focusers it was tested on.  It's funny that I've never read this in any of the forums where I've seen the BLUG discussed. Thanks for the heads up.
And thanks for the installation description... I don't think I'd care to have this thing suspended over an expensive primary, secured by a piece of shim stock. There are other similar devices on the market that screw onto a laser collimator, which seems like a better idea.
I agree that modifying the BLUG in your machine shop is a lot of work for a $60 accessory.
I guess I'll just keep using my Kendrick and cheshire.
--------------------
Peter
Religion is about turning untested belief into unshakable truth through the power of institutions and the passage of time.
|
Tom Trusock
Reged: 02/26/02
Posts: 29219
|
|
Hmm -
I haven't actually used mine in my feathertouch yet (I knew I was going to have to shim it), but IIRC Howie's own scope has a feathertouch too. There didn't appear to be any issues in Howies scope at NEAF.
I'll admit I have been a little apprehensive about just sticking it into the focuser - but it seems like a good idea.
Thanks for the write up Dave.
T
--------------------
Time spent doing something you love is not wasted.
|
John Kocijanski
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 08/22/03
Posts: 1583
|
|
Good review. Did you contact Howie with the issues?
--------------------
Deep Space Observer 10 * SPC-8 * C102 HD f/10 * XT 4.5 * Orion 80ED * PST *
|
Vic Menard
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/21/04
Posts: 2903
Loc: Bradenton, FL
|
|
I've had a 2-inch prototype BLUG since this year's Winter Star Party. I let Howie know the next day that it would not work (without modification) on a FeatherTouch focuser. It seems to work well on most non threaded focuser drawtubes, and it's the perfect solution for the ubiquitous economy laser collimator.
--------------------
|
dave b
Post Laureate
Reged: 05/10/05
Posts: 3069
|
|
yeah, i told howie, CN does not allow a vendors response to a review to be included.
cutting threads was going to be too hard for the average guy, so i did something different.
here i have my fix:
a ring of kydex, (what eles are you going to do with this shiny, sparkly stuff, make a UTA shroud with it??) mached out to 2" ID and 2.5" OD.
--------------------
dave bonandrini
30" f/5.2 Dobsonian
President of GCAC
Astromart Moderator
|
dave b
Post Laureate
Reged: 05/10/05
Posts: 3069
|
|
here is the ring in place
--------------------
dave bonandrini
30" f/5.2 Dobsonian
President of GCAC
Astromart Moderator
|
dave b
Post Laureate
Reged: 05/10/05
Posts: 3069
|
|
now it works. with the pink shim behind the o-ring, this thing is rock solid.
--------------------
dave bonandrini
30" f/5.2 Dobsonian
President of GCAC
Astromart Moderator
|
dave b
Post Laureate
Reged: 05/10/05
Posts: 3069
|
|
oh yeah, the ring is 1/16" thick.
--------------------
dave bonandrini
30" f/5.2 Dobsonian
President of GCAC
Astromart Moderator
|
Tom Trusock
Reged: 02/26/02
Posts: 29219
|
|
Quote:
yeah, i told howie, CN does not allow a vendors response to a review to be included.
Actually, that's not exactly true - if you contacted the vendor about a problem, and if he has a response, it's good form to put it in the article, or at least summarize it in the discussion thread. This prevents misconceptions and helps people better see the intent of the product.
So - What did howie say?
T
--------------------
Time spent doing something you love is not wasted.
|
dave b
Post Laureate
Reged: 05/10/05
Posts: 3069
|
|
Post deleted by half meter
--------------------
dave bonandrini
30" f/5.2 Dobsonian
President of GCAC
Astromart Moderator
|
dave b
Post Laureate
Reged: 05/10/05
Posts: 3069
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
yeah, i told howie, CN does not allow a vendors response to a review to be included.
Actually, that's not exactly true - if you contacted the vendor about a problem, and if he has a response, it's good form to put it in the article, or at least summarize it in the discussion thread. This prevents misconceptions and helps people better see the intent of the product.
So - What did howie say?
T
in the webster telescope review, i had posted websters response to the problems i had pointed out. i was told by allister that cn does not allow vendors response, so i removed it. allister said the forums were the proper place for vendor response. tom, you may get more "leeway" than i do!
howie said he understood that the BLUG would not fit every single focuser and that he wished there was more of a standard. he also asked me to add a statement that the BLUG was patent pending; i forwarded that to the mods.
i sent my fix to howie, he is welcome to use it.
he could also make two different placements for the O-ring, one closer to the shoulder that would accomplish the same thing.
a few of you have asked about the shim. it is UNDER the o-ring, it cannot fall out. you dont even see it.
--------------------
dave bonandrini
30" f/5.2 Dobsonian
President of GCAC
Astromart Moderator
|
Tom Trusock
Reged: 02/26/02
Posts: 29219
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
yeah, i told howie, CN does not allow a vendors response to a review to be included.
Actually, that's not exactly true - if you contacted the vendor about a problem, and if he has a response, it's good form to put it in the article, or at least summarize it in the discussion thread. This prevents misconceptions and helps people better see the intent of the product.
So - What did howie say?
T
in the webster telescope review, i had posted websters response to the problems i had pointed out. i was told by allister that cn does not allow vendors response, so i removed it. allister said the forums were the proper place for vendor response. tom, you may get more "leeway" than i do!
howie said he understood that the BLUG would not fit every single focuser and that he wished there was more of a standard. he also asked me to add a statement that the BLUG was patent pending; i forwarded that to the mods.
i sent my fix to howie, he is welcome to use it.
While Allister is the head editor (and I may be missing a trick), this is my understanding of the subject - What we don't want to see is vendors influencing, justifying, or attempting to rewrite the reviews. To have any validity, it really has to be YOUR words and YOUR opinions, not the vendors.
I'd really have to see the initial article to get a better handle on why Allister edited like he did, but I think I may know what's going on.
I think there's a misunderstanding here, and suspect it's partly my fault because of how I worded it above. You're basically right. No, we don't allow the vendors to have a say in the article - however, if you wish to say you contacted them as a user seeking technical support and report their response - in the article - in your own words - there's generally nothing wrong with that. (I just kinda took that to be understood - my mistake.) In fact, it may give people a handle on how the company in question handles technical support - and that would be a good thing.
As I indicated above (and as we've done here), the forum is another place to discuss this type of thing - and sometimes it's more appropriate as the vendors can help make clarifications. Additionally, if the vendors comments are after the fact, this forum is most certainly the easiest and perhaps the best place to add an addendum.
It's always good form to include all the data you can in the interest of accuracy and best serving the readership.
Thanks for posting the fix and howies comments.
T
Edited by Tom Trusock (07/08/06 01:40 PM)
|
Howie Glatter
Vendor
Reged: 07/04/06
Posts: 155
|
|
I'd like to thank Dave for his Blug review. I think it was factual, fair, and very well illustrated.
There's a big variation in the dimensions of inner drawtube ends of the various makes of focusers; for example, I'm hearing that some older Feathertouch focusers have an even larger, and eccentric drawtube opening. I wish the draw tube openings were standardized at both ends :- ) The prototype Blug worked fine in my JMI and Moonlite focusers, so I crossed my fingers, supplied the shim kit, and warned people of possible fit problems.
I am going to measure all the popular drawtubes, and develop fit fixes for them as necessary. Also, I am correcting the finish problem mentioned by Dave. Dave's fit fix for the Feathertouch looks excellent, and I may, with due credit and permission, happily steal it from him.
Now that it fits his Feathertouch, I'd be interested in getting Dave's impressions after he's had a chance to use it by himself.
Clear skies - perfect collimation,
Howie
|
Tom Trusock
Reged: 02/26/02
Posts: 29219
|
|
Thanks Howie!
T
--------------------
Time spent doing something you love is not wasted.
|
Peter Argenziano
Watcher of the Skies
Reged: 11/11/03
Posts: 2841
|
|
Dave, thanks for posting your modification to the BLUG (again, the photos are much appreciated). I've got a couple of questions:
1. How did you cut the Kydex ring?
2. How is the Kydex ring secured to the BLUG? Is there a lip that it is resting against?
3. In your opinion, how does the BLUG + laser collimator differ from the Kendrick 2" laser collimator with the beveled face? I understand that the BLUG contains a barlow so that the spot is a larger diameter. The diameter doesn't seem to be an issue with the Kendrick due to its engraved pattern on the beveled surface.
Does the difference have more to do with the fact that the BLUG isn't physically attached to the collimator, instead being aligned with the focuser?
--------------------
Peter
Religion is about turning untested belief into unshakable truth through the power of institutions and the passage of time.
|
dave b
Post Laureate
Reged: 05/10/05
Posts: 3069
|
|
Quote:
Dave, thanks for posting your modification to the BLUG (again, the photos are much appreciated). I've got a couple of questions:
1. How did you cut the Kydex ring?
2. How is the Kydex ring secured to the BLUG? Is there a lip that it is resting against?
3. In your opinion, how does the BLUG + laser collimator differ from the Kendrick 2" laser collimator with the beveled face? I understand that the BLUG contains a barlow so that the spot is a larger diameter. The diameter doesn't seem to be an issue with the Kendrick due to its engraved pattern on the beveled surface.
Does the difference have more to do with the fact that the BLUG isn't physically attached to the collimator, instead being aligned with the focuser?
i cut the inner hole with a 2" spanner bit, then w/o moving the press or the piece, i made the outer cut with a 2.5" hole saw. i stopped just short of a full cut, and "punched" it out of the sheet. if you cut all the way through, you will distroy it or it will fly in your face; because there is no way to hold it down.
the ring is exactly the same size as the BLUG so it slides down snug. it wont fall off because of the o-ring.
the barlowed laser is better because it ignores focuser slop; you can shake the focuser and the shadow does not move. the shadow is more accurate to center than is the beam going back down the hole too.
google nils olofs article and see why its so much better.
--------------------
dave bonandrini
30" f/5.2 Dobsonian
President of GCAC
Astromart Moderator
|
Peter Argenziano
Watcher of the Skies
Reged: 11/11/03
Posts: 2841
|
|
Quote:
google nils olofs article and see why its so much better
Dave, were you referencing a specific article? Obviously Googling nils olof article will result in many pages referencing Mr. Carlin's work regarding collimation.
--------------------
Peter
Religion is about turning untested belief into unshakable truth through the power of institutions and the passage of time.
|
dave b
Post Laureate
Reged: 05/10/05
Posts: 3069
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
google nils olofs article and see why its so much better
Dave, were you referencing a specific article? Obviously Googling nils olof article will result in many pages referencing Mr. Carlin's work regarding collimation.
the sky and tel article that i referenced in my review.
PM me your email address if you cant find it online.
--------------------
dave bonandrini
30" f/5.2 Dobsonian
President of GCAC
Astromart Moderator
|
Peter Argenziano
Watcher of the Skies
Reged: 11/11/03
Posts: 2841
|
|
Thanks Dave... got it.
--------------------
Peter
Religion is about turning untested belief into unshakable truth through the power of institutions and the passage of time.
|
PlanetMan
sage
Reged: 12/20/05
Posts: 365
Loc: Upland, Ca.
|
|
I picked up a BLUG at RTMC in May and love it. It was a little sloppy in the drawtube of my Lightbridge, but I fixed that with a couple wraps of teflon tape under the o-ring (this was before the shims were available). I use it with a standard Glatter laser and can collimate in about 2 minutes.
--------------------
12" Lightbridge, OWL Optics
Vixen ED100sf
TV-85
A-T Voyager
|
MMICKELS
Aluminum Knight
Reged: 01/20/04
Posts: 26780
Loc: The Land of Shake and Bake
|
|
Great article Dave. I was wondering if anyone has tested the accuracy of the BLUG vs the more standard collimation devices?
--------------------
Mark
"Never eat more than you can lift"
Miss Piggy
|
Peter Argenziano
Watcher of the Skies
Reged: 11/11/03
Posts: 2841
|
|
Where does one get a BLUG? I looked at Howie's website, but don't see it as one of the available products.
--------------------
Peter
Religion is about turning untested belief into unshakable truth through the power of institutions and the passage of time.
|
Roger Greenwood
newbie
Reged: 07/09/06
Posts: 3
Loc: MA, USA
|
|
I recently tried Howie's Blug on my newly upgraded Frathertough on my 18" Obsession. I found it fit fine enough for me to use it with not worries. Fit a little loose, but not enough to affect use or safety. I think I will be trying a small tweak to see if it will fit better.
-Roger
18" Obsession #694
|
gubbenimanen
sage
Reged: 08/09/05
Posts: 271
Loc: Sweden
|
|
I would be worried of the collimation accuracy if the Blug doesn't center exactly.
--------------------
Roger
|
dave b
Post Laureate
Reged: 05/10/05
Posts: 3069
|
|
Quote:
Great article Dave. I was wondering if anyone has tested the accuracy of the BLUG vs the more standard collimation devices?
the barlowed laser has already shown to be superior because it takes the focuser slop out of the mix. it's a no guesswork kind of system. the blug is the next evolutionary step in the barlow/laser design, the design itself has already been proven.
Quote:
Where does one get a BLUG? I looked at Howie's website, but don't see it as one of the available products.
you have to call howie to get one, im sure he is waiting until he has a solution for every focuser, b4 putting it up on the site and becoming overloaded with calls.
Quote:
I would be worried of the collimation accuracy if the Blug doesn't center exactly.
you are right, of course it has to be tight and square in the focuser to be accurate.
if you are using a feathertouch, just cut a ring, or call howie for one, and you are all set.
Quote:
Now that it fits his Feathertouch, I'd be interested in getting Dave's impressions after he's had a chance to use it by himself.
well, i guess thats what is so great about it, i CAN use it by myself. many times i would have a bystander tell me what way to turn the primary bolts with the old barlow target. this saved me from walking up to check every adjustment, or squinting at the reflection in the secondary.
the weather has been cloudy and the moon full, but i used it in the garage during daylight (yes, the 635nm laser is bright enough to be seen in daylight), and it takes less that a minute to line up everything.
judging from my inbox, there seems to be some confusion on how the BLUG is used.
1. place a laser w/o the blug into the focuser. adjust the secondary knobs to make the laser beam shine EXACTLY into the center spot (that little paper hole reinforcement "donut" you most likely have already in the center of your primary) on the primary mirror.
2. now, place the BLUG in the INSIDE of the focuser tube, white side facing down towards the mirror box.
3. the laser beam is now expanded to about 10" around the primary mirror center spot.
4. the shadow of that paper donut, now is displayed as a dark ring on the white face of the BLUG, center this ring by adjusting the primary mirror knobs.
5. done. it takes less than a minute. unlike other collimation devices, you KNOW you are aligned, you can see it as plain as day.
the BLUG is a huge time saver, and would allow a beginner to have total confidence that they have their optics spot on.
--------------------
dave bonandrini
30" f/5.2 Dobsonian
President of GCAC
Astromart Moderator
|
Howie Glatter
Vendor
Reged: 07/04/06
Posts: 155
|
|
>Where does one get a BLUG? I looked at Howie's website,
>but don't see it as one of the available products.
Sorry, it's not in my ads or website yet, but it should be soon. I have 1 1/4" units, but I'm out of stock of 2" Blugs, and awaiting back-ordered material, so it may be two or three weeks until I'm shipping them again. In the interim I'll try to fix any fit problems. Interested parties can e-mail me at howieglatter@mindspring.com for more information, or to reserve a Blug.
I didn't read posting rules for vendors on the forums, so I hope I'm not violating the letter or spirit of any rules with the above statement. My gratitude goes out to the people who sponsor and put Cloudy Nights together.
I'll try to attach a shot I took today in my living room of the Blug in action. I'm thinking of an ad shot, and was trying to show sharpness and contrast of the shadow on the Blug screen. It was about a one second exposure taken in full daylight.
Howie
|
Howie Glatter
Vendor
Reged: 07/04/06
Posts: 155
|
|
Don't know why the file didn't attach. I'll try again.
H.
Edited by jrcrilly (07/10/06 01:21 PM)
|
Roger Greenwood
newbie
Reged: 07/09/06
Posts: 3
Loc: MA, USA
|
|
I checked the accuracty by removing the blug after aligning the donut image
and the laser was dead-spot on. Also, if you wiggle it, the donut image
doesn't move at all, so I suspect the slight wiggle doesn't make a difference
to the final alignment.
-Roger
|
gubbenimanen
sage
Reged: 08/09/05
Posts: 271
Loc: Sweden
|
|
In most telescopes you shouldn't collimate using the return beam of a plain laser. See (google for) Carlin's collimation page why a dead-spot on can give wrong collimation. That's one reason we instead use the barlowed laser for the primary mirror tilt. You center the donut silhouette around the exit hole of the Blug. If this hole is decentered then you will fail with the final alignment.
Roger
--------------------
Roger
|
Vic Menard
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/21/04
Posts: 2903
Loc: Bradenton, FL
|
|
Quote:
I checked the accuracy by removing the blug after aligning the donut image and the laser was dead-spot on.
As Roger has already commented, using the return beam of a simple point source laser can be misleading. What you did verify was that the focuser axis was accurately aligned!
Quote:
Also, if you wiggle it, the donut image doesn't move at all, so I suspect the slight wiggle doesn't make a difference to the final alignment.
Actually, the donut silhouette does move. If it didn't, when you wiggled the focuser drawtube a stationary donut silhouette wouldn't stay centered on the moving laser/Barlow aperture. The Barlow creates a virtual light source outside the drawtube pivot point, and the target is inside the pivot point. The two (source and target) travel in opposite directions, effectively cancelling out the motion observed at the target.
As Roger also pointed out, the laser/Barlow aperture must be coaxial with the focuser axis. Not only is the fit of the tool in the drawtube important--any lateral motion in the focuser axis as a result of drawtube travel in the focuser body can also impact the accuracy of the read. This isn't usually an issue with focal ratios f/5 and longer, but can be of some real concern for f/4 and shorter ratios. These inconsistencies are easily remedied with a quality focuser upgrade.
--------------------
|
PJ Anway
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 06/04/03
Posts: 1021
Loc: Michigan's U.P.
|
|
I purchased a BLUG from Howie at NEAF and have been using it in my Moonlite focuser on my 8". Fits perfect, works as advertised and saves me time. For my application, it's an excellent product. Thanks Howie!
--------------------
PJ
_________________
Lookum Observatory
Spooner 203
Showa 100
Tak 160
Tak 78
|
Lego Knight
sage
Reged: 05/16/05
Posts: 328
Loc: Sturbridge,MA
|
|
As an aside,
I welcome Roger to CN!
--------------------
Orion 4.5" ST EQ1
Deep Space Hunter - 10"
Nighthawk II on M1
|
tusweca
Vendor - Great Red Spot Astronomy Products
Reged: 07/21/05
Posts: 15
Loc: Romulus, Michigan
|
|
I have fount the BLUG at www.Greatredspot.com.
|
Roger Greenwood
newbie
Reged: 07/09/06
Posts: 3
Loc: MA, USA
|
|
I just tried Howie's black(new) shim and the Blug fits much better on my recently purchased Feathertouch! Thanks Howie!!
|
Gastronaut
journeyman
Reged: 05/14/05
Posts: 7
Loc: Hershey, PA
|
|
To ALL:
I purchased the BLUG in June and have used it flawlessly in by 18" Obsession (SN 1098 4/1/2005) that has a 2" Feathertouch focuser. I needed the thickest shim for it to fit snugly and square in the draw tube but it still can be rotated to face forward, if I wish, without alignment wobble in the draw tube.
Just yesterday, I used the BLUG to accurately collimate our club's classic 12.5" Cave newtonian on an equatorial MI-250.
Its focuser is a combination drawtube with helical insert hybrid, so old the age and manufacturer is unknowable. I had to remove the Blug's shim but it fit the drawtube snugly and true. I could look "around" the edge of the primary mirror cell and easily see the BLUG screen and collimate the center marked primary. This scope then gave views of Jupiter last night that were the best I ever had through it.
No tool is perfect.
I give kudos to Howie for attempting the creation of a "one size fits all" tool to solve real life collimation needs.
Robert in Hershey 
--------------------
Gastronaut
Inside: looking down and looking up; outside only UP! Observe Galaxies and Eat More Fiber and always have an extra Star Diagonal handy!
|
sixela
Postmaster
Reged: 12/23/04
Posts: 10413
Loc: Boechout, Belgium
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Great article Dave. I was wondering if anyone has tested the accuracy of the BLUG vs the more standard collimation devices?
the barlowed laser has already shown to be superior
Superior to an unbarlowed laser.
Not superior to a good Cheshire with a pupil small enough for you to centre your eye correctly (indeed, it's easier to put a Cheshire close to the focal plane than it is to put the focal plane in the middle of the BLUG's virtual laser point source and its screen, so the BlackCat - when there are no parallax issues due to eye placement - is less sensitive to focuser axial errors).
My BlackCat is just as precise as my BLUG. I tend to use the BLUG when setting up, and to use the BlackCat and autocollimator when I want to touch up my collimation just before looking at e.g. a planet -- and that's entirely of reasons of convenience, because of where I'm standing when I'm collimating.
--------------------
400mm f/4.46 David Lukehurst truss Dobsonian on Tom Osypowski equatorial platform
Orion Starblast (114mm f/4 reflector, Alt/Az)
|
bearkite
journeyman
Reged: 06/21/06
Posts: 8
Loc: Ambler, PA
|
|
Has anyone tried the fit of a BLUG in an AstroSystems Phase IV focuser?
I too am tired of the hike from back to front while collimating.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 
