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 >> Mounts

Pages: 1
orlyandico
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 08/10/09

Loc: Singapore
Guiding Performance - why PE isn't everything
      #5589078 - 12/25/12 11:59 PM

Here are three guiding graphs, all of Capella, all with a 50mm finder guider and Meade DSI.

1) 0.28 px RMS (@ 9.71"/px) = 2.72" RMS




2) 0.11 px RMS = 1.07" RMS




3) 0.05 px RMS = 0.49" RMS




So #3 is not leaps and bounds ahead of #2 - but the difference is, #3 guides like that practically forever. No deviations, no jumps, no backlash...


I think this is something that is overlooked when talking about mount performance... periodic error isn't everything. Having smooth and low PE will give you decent guiding performance, but...

1) is the PE the same on both sides of the meridian? (unless you move the CW to be always east heavy) i.e. how sensitive is the PE to balance

2) how is declination guiding performance? is there a large dead spot? (this information is useful because if the scope gets nudged by wind or cable drag, how long does it take to reverse direction and correct the DEC issue)


3) do you have to watch the mount like a hawk to ensure that guiding performance is always within acceptable limits?


my #1 above is the best case I could get with that mount. Worst case is much worse (huge DEC deviations that don't correct...)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Tandum
sage


Reged: 03/01/10

Loc: Brisbane, Australia
Re: Guiding Performance - why PE isn't everything *DELETED* new [Re: orlyandico]
      #5589614 - 12/26/12 12:10 PM

Post deleted by Tandum

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

Reged: 04/13/09

Loc: Scranton, PA
Re: Guiding Performance - why PE isn't everything new [Re: Tandum]
      #5589643 - 12/26/12 12:25 PM

Did you happen to take long exposure photographs with each setting? I'd be interested in seeing the difference in star shape.

It's also odd that the OSC index isn't switching in the third test. Based on the graph, I'd thinking #3 is the best, but look at the OSC. It doesn't seem so good.

The most important thing is the pictures.


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

Reged: 08/10/09

Loc: Singapore
Re: Guiding Performance - why PE isn't everything new [Re: Footbag]
      #5589675 - 12/26/12 12:47 PM

Adam, that was due to misalignment in altitude. So the RA runs away in one direction.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ray Gralak
Vendor (PEMPro)


Reged: 04/19/08

Re: Guiding Performance - why PE isn't everything new [Re: orlyandico]
      #5589751 - 12/26/12 01:23 PM

Quote:

Adam, that was due to misalignment in altitude. So the RA runs away in one direction.




This RA drift might invalidate your test. If there is significant drift then the difference in guiding performance with and without PEC is reduced. Also, by using Capella for your test, which is about 44 degrees declination cuts the effective periodic error down by about 0.7x.

A proper test of the effects of PEC on image quality should be done when RA/Dec drift is minimal, seeing is good, and on a star near Dec=0 near the meridian. That will separate the effects of periodic error from other tracking error sources.

-Ray


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1


Extra information
10 registered and 23 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Dave M, richard7, bilgebay 

Print Thread

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


Thread views: 785

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics