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 | 2 | 3 | 4 | (show all)
Charlie B
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 03/22/08

Loc: Sterling, Virginia
Re: PECPrep help/Aeroquest question new [Re: cclark]
      #5599855 - 01/01/13 03:43 PM

Quote:

I am trying to decide if my mount (CGEM DX) would benefit from an aeroquest worm & ring gear replacement. My maine objective is to get a smoother PE curve that is more easily guided (a PE reduction would be nice, but I am mainly looking for smoother). I am using PECPrep to do a little analysis and could use some help understanding the data.





I'm not sure you got an answer to your question, although you got a lot of information on PEC analysis software. According to Ed Thomas at Deep Space Products in an email I sent asking the same question, a hypertune will generally remove about 40% of the PE from a bad mount and maybe less from a good mount. The aeroquest can potentially remove about 1/2 the remaining error, but that depends on other sources of error in the mount. His advice was that most people only need the hypertune and do not need the new worm and ring gear. However, if you want to get the best possible performance from the mount, get the better components.

From looking at your mount PE, which is close to mine, I would not get the new worm. If you are having problems balancing or other similar typical problems reported by CGEM owners, you may want to do a standard hypertune to the mount. However, I would train the mount first, using either Pempro or PECTool, and repeat the analysis that you show with PEC enabled. Your peak PE and rate of change may improve.

Regards,

Charlie B


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

Reged: 10/12/07

Re: PEPrep help new [Re: orlyandico]
      #5600105 - 01/01/13 06:34 PM

Hi. I am traveling and limited internet access with a droid so cannot respond much to this thread. I will just say that the goal of guiding is small fwhm and techniques that show measured improvement in star size are what interest me. For
Mid range mounts i focus on prompt corrections with low latency and accurate centroid.

Frank


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


Reged: 04/19/08

Re: PEPrep help new [Re: Alph]
      #5600591 - 01/02/13 12:36 AM

Quote:

Quote:

BTW, how did you determine that PECPrep is even accurate? The critical FFT routines are NOT open source. For all you know there could be a bug. The author seems to have a standing policy of letting the users test his code rather than always doing it himself.




The reason I touched on this subject is that PEMPro results in too many misfits. I have seen it on my own and other data. On the other hand I compared many results from PECPrep to Software Bisque's PEC software and they were in a pretty good agreement. Looks like we are digressing from the OP's question so this will be my last comment.



Just a reminder... if you have an example of what you state above I would like to see it (please post the logs). Maybe there's a bug that I need to fix but... if you can't give me an example, maybe you are mistaken?

-Ray


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


Reged: 11/23/06

Loc: Melmac
Re: PEPrep help new [Re: Ray Gralak]
      #5601625 - 01/02/13 05:24 PM

Quote:

Just a reminder... if you have an example of what you state above I would like to see it (please post the logs). Maybe there's a bug that I need to fix but... if you can't give me an example, maybe you are mistaken?



Ray,
There is no reason for a concern. Misfits that I was referring to are caused by (or related to) PE's that are not really periodic. I guess there isn't much one can do about it other than removing the 'bad' cycles from the analysis. However I am not aware of an easy way of doing it in PEMPro.


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


Reged: 04/19/08

Re: PEPrep help new [Re: Alph]
      #5602851 - 01/03/13 12:01 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Just a reminder... if you have an example of what you state above I would like to see it (please post the logs). Maybe there's a bug that I need to fix but... if you can't give me an example, maybe you are mistaken?



Ray,
There is no reason for a concern. Misfits that I was referring to are caused by (or related to) PE's that are not really periodic. I guess there isn't much one can do about it other than removing the 'bad' cycles from the analysis. However I am not aware of an easy way of doing it in PEMPro.



It depends on what you mean by bad cycles. You mean bad data points in the middle of an Acquire data? If that's the problem then I'm sure you would want to have a clean set of data (i.e. do a new "acquire data" in PEMPro) instead of trying to use compromised data. You should also also be able to delete the offending data (each line is a data point) from the file.

-Ray


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


Reged: 11/23/06

Loc: Melmac
Re: PEPrep help new [Re: Ray Gralak]
      #5603054 - 01/03/13 01:52 PM

Quote:

It depends on what you mean by bad cycles.



Worm cycles that appear quite different from others.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Chris Shillito
member


Reged: 07/03/08

Loc: UK
Re: PEPrep help new [Re: Ray Gralak]
      #5603657 - 01/03/13 08:20 PM

Quote:


FFT's are old-school. The techniques are easily found if you do searches for them but I consider the specific methods PEMPro uses as trade secrets (and there will be advances in PEMPro V3). I can tell you the techniques used are related to singular value decomposition. Many tool vendors, include the PECPrep author has copied PEMPro's ideas so I'm not about to give people more things to copy.

-Ray




Quote:


BTW, how did you determine that PECPrep is even accurate? The critical FFT routines are NOT open source. For all you know there could be a bug. The author seems to have a standing policy of letting the users test his code rather than always doing it himself.

-Ray




For the record PECPrep is an original work that was inspired by PEAs and the requests of our users. No reference to PEMPro was made during its development and PEMPro remains software which I have never installed or used (nor I doubt ever will). That said I am aware that the layout of the frequency spectrum screen in PECPrep has a remarkably similar equivalent in PEMPro ?? perhaps its just a case that two applications doing the same job will inevitably take on a similar appearance (unless you know otherwise?)

I have no interest in copying your work or in using experimental/unattributed algorithms. FFTs are an industry standard, well proven technique for vibration analysis and thus far have served us well in the analysis of telescope mount periodic error which is hardly the most challenging environment it which FFT analysis has been successfully applied.

PECPrep is tested by me before issue to our EQMOD group for further testing prior to full public release via sourceforge.

For a commercial vendor such as yourself to cynically attempt to discredit the efforts of a community based project is a disgrace and I trust all can see your true colours. I'm frankly surprised that the moderators here allow such behaviour.

Chris.


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


Reged: 04/19/08

Re: PEPrep help new [Re: Chris Shillito]
      #5603935 - 01/04/13 12:21 AM

Quote:

Quote:


FFT's are old-school. The techniques are easily found if you do searches for them but I consider the specific methods PEMPro uses as trade secrets (and there will be advances in PEMPro V3). I can tell you the techniques used are related to singular value decomposition. Many tool vendors, include the PECPrep author has copied PEMPro's ideas so I'm not about to give people more things to copy.

-Ray




Quote:


BTW, how did you determine that PECPrep is even accurate? The critical FFT routines are NOT open source. For all you know there could be a bug. The author seems to have a standing policy of letting the users test his code rather than always doing it himself.

-Ray




For the record PECPrep is an original work that was inspired by PEAs and the requests of our users. No reference to PEMPro was made during its development and PEMPro remains software which I have never installed or used (nor I doubt ever will). That said I am aware that the layout of the frequency spectrum screen in PECPrep has a remarkably similar equivalent in PEMPro ?? perhaps its just a case that two applications doing the same job will inevitably take on a similar appearance (unless you know otherwise?)

I have no interest in copying your work or in using experimental/unattributed algorithms. FFTs are an industry standard, well proven technique for vibration analysis and thus far have served us well in the analysis of telescope mount periodic error which is hardly the most challenging environment it which FFT analysis has been successfully applied.

PECPrep is tested by me before issue to our EQMOD group for further testing prior to full public release via sourceforge.

For a commercial vendor such as yourself to cynically attempt to discredit the efforts of a community based project is a disgrace and I trust all can see your true colours. I'm frankly surprised that the moderators here allow such behaviour.

Chris.



Sigh... here we go again... I didn't say anything that isn't true. If you think I did I would like you to tell me exactly what it is and I think I'll prove you wrong. You claim your source code is open source but the critical routines are not open source. How can you guarantee your routines say what you say they do? How is your guarantee any different than mine?

I'll tell you.. the difference is that the PEC curves created by PEMPro have been written back to thousands of mounts and the proof is in the results of happy customers. I have tried PECPrep and your PEC code in EQMOD and I have told you it does NOT work very well. You've refused to listen so what can I say. I've even asked if I could contribute fixes to the code base but you don't respond. How is it a community project if you are the only person that is allowed to contribute code?

And, Mon, who originally developed most of EQMOD, contacted me about making PEMPro work with EQMOD before you had even started work on your PEC code. I find it very hard to believe that you never looked at PEMPro's documentation nor even had any influence from Mon to try to copy some of the features of PEMPro. I think that PEMPro was, and still is, the leader in this area and for you to say you never heard of it or at least knew of what it does is quite astounding, especially since you heard of PEAS, which was created after PEMPro. Maybe you were you just really green in your knowledge of software for astronomy??

That said, PECPrep is not really a competitor to PEMPro. PEMPro has camera control and provides support and training capability for every type of mount with PEC. PECPrep is mostly an analysis tool for everything but some Synta mounts. PEMPro uses modern signal analysis techniques (not EXPERIMENTAL) as well as older techniques such as FFTs. If I wanted to use FFTs throughout PEMPro I could have used but I didn't. So you are welcome to remain ignorant of newer, better techniques, but I think that using new and better techniques often distinguishes a good software product.

-Ray

Edited by Ray Gralak (01/04/13 12:44 AM)


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

Reged: 08/10/09

Loc: Singapore
Re: PEPrep help new [Re: Ray Gralak]
      #5603961 - 01/04/13 12:46 AM

I wasn't expecting such acrimony to come out of this discussion.

PECPrep is a good tool, and one I use extensively.

But so is PEMPro. Different tools for different needs. To take an example from my line of work.. nobody would tell Bank of America to run their core banking system on MySQL.

In the same way, I doubt there would be many Software Bisque or Astro-Physics users who would use PECPrep. But EQMOD users (for whom the tool was originally designed) - sure.

I won't get into a value judgement over which is "better" - but PEMPro is definitely more complete and mostly automates the entire training process, including capturing PEC data. Not really comparable to PECPrep.


.. and on a tangent.. back when I was doing this sort of stuff, the "gold standard" open-source FFT implementation was libfftw. Last I checked that was available with source..


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


Reged: 04/19/08

Re: PEPrep help new [Re: Alph]
      #5603965 - 01/04/13 12:56 AM

Quote:

Quote:

It depends on what you mean by bad cycles.



Worm cycles that appear quite different from others.



The frequencies that cause worm cycles to be different are non-integer fundamentals because they don't repeat an even number of times in a worm cycle. PEMPro purposely and by design does not automatically include non-integer fundamentals because they cannot be corrected by PEC so there is no point to include them except if you want to measure them.

That said, you can add non-integer frequencies if you want, just for the purpose of measuring them.

-Ray


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

Reged: 08/10/09

Loc: Singapore
Re: PEPrep help new [Re: Ray Gralak]
      #5603972 - 01/04/13 01:03 AM

anecdotal evidence. I spent a good deal of last night PEC-training my Littlefoot controller with PEMPro.

according to PEMPro the fundamental was 11" to 13" p-p. PECPrep gave a similar figure, about 10" (the two programs also mostly agree on my CGEM mount).

however after PEC training PEMPro was now saying the PE was 3.5" but PECPrep said it was 15". Quite a head scratcher there - but it was glaringly obvious from an eyeball of the raw curve that the PE had been reduced.

I have been using PECPrep as a sanity-check on PEMPro. For example PEMPro reported a raw PE of 2.6" on my other mount, reduced to 0.42" after PEC; PECPrep reported 5" raw and 2.25" after PEC. While these two sets of figures don't agree that well, they do agree that the PE was reduced.

This was not the case with last night's exercise...


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


Reged: 11/23/06

Loc: Melmac
Re: PEPrep help new [Re: Ray Gralak]
      #5603985 - 01/04/13 01:23 AM

Quote:

That said, PECPrep is not really a competitor to PEMPro.



No, it is not, when it comes to programming mounts. However it is a formidable competitor when it comes to analyzing PEC and you know that very well. It is actually the best tool out of the box for analyzing PEC.


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


Reged: 04/19/08

Re: PEPrep help new [Re: Alph]
      #5604010 - 01/04/13 02:17 AM

Quote:

Quote:

That said, PECPrep is not really a competitor to PEMPro.



No, it is not, when it comes to programming mounts. However it is a formidable competitor when it comes to analyzing PEC and you know that very well. It is actually the best tool out of the box for analyzing PEC.



Analyzing PEC? Analyzing "Periodic Error Correction"? Is that really what you meant to say? Maybe you meant to say "analyzing PE (Periodic Error)"?

PEMPro was purposely designed to hide many unnecessary details. Have been developing commercial software for over 35 years I have seen many a person confused by tools with too much information. But maybe you're the 1 in 100 that likes that (good for you!).

If so, you may be interested in the free PE analysis tool I've been slowly working on for the last 2 years. It has a modern GUI and (I think) more power than any other free PE analysis tool. I plan to launch it simultaneously with PEMPro V3. Maybe you'll change your mind when you see the capabilities of that tool. Again, it will be free to the community and process logs in many formats, including PEMPro's own log files.

-Ray


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

Reged: 08/10/09

Loc: Singapore
Re: PEPrep help new [Re: Ray Gralak]
      #5604055 - 01/04/13 03:44 AM

I think PECPrep doesn't use the inputted # of worm teeth in the calculation. Because in my experience it never gets the worm periods correctly, even for the fundamental.

(and I can provide logs)

The calculated worm periods are always off by a bit (say 455 seconds vs 449 seconds). I am not sure if PEMPro "hard fits" the calculated periods into what it knows, or if PEMPro really manages to calculate them exactly.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ccdmaker
member


Reged: 11/15/11

Loc: Illinois, USA
Re: PEPrep help new [Re: orlyandico]
      #5842253 - 05/05/13 06:59 PM

Hi Orlyandico,
Do you mind posting the part number of the Vexta motor(/gearbox) that you picked up on ebay? I am thinking of retrofitting my Vixen GP. have already built a stepper driver that works well with the stock MT-1 motors, but the numerous gears in the motor housing (1:120)are introducing a lot of high frequency components. Beside, a smaller gear ratio and some microstepping should enable somewhat faster slew speeds too.
Thank you.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gray
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/31/11

Loc: Hixson, TN
Re: PEPrep help new [Re: ccdmaker]
      #5843940 - 05/06/13 04:29 PM

I'm not a moderator but that question should be asked here don't ya think?

http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Board/lxd55/Number/...

Also, I had to mark this post as a favorite


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


Extra information
21 registered and 41 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: 4097

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics