Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Avalon M-UNO

mount
  • Please log in to reply
294 replies to this topic

#1 XSubmariner

XSubmariner

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 49
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2018
  • Loc: South Wales

Posted 10 April 2018 - 06:39 AM

Hi, I need some advice with my new (used) m-uno and the installation of my Altair Astro EDT-102 refractor.  

 

The challenge I am experiencing is the risk of collision between my zwo camera and the mounts structure. I have fitted an 80mm dec extension and the telescope camera transits above the mounts dovetail for the removable transit handle, see photo. 

 

Having moved the telescope as far forward as I am comfortable with (further movement would necessitate more additional weights on the back of the saddle plate to compensate) and having ballanced the complete arrangement, there is still a contact point between the camera and mount as the arm inverts, see photo. This only happens when the telescope is in line with the Arm and for about 12 degrees either side.

 

Will the scope setup would work safetly as long as I stay away from targets within a 12 degree radius of celestial north as outside this radius the camera avoids the mount structure, or is there a possibility the mount could collide while transiting between other targets.

 

Or is my only option to change to a shorter telescope (worst case). I would prefer to use this scope on this mount.

 

 My mount is a syncscan variant and I use EQMOD to control the setup. Anyone know of some user guidance with setting up mount limits that might support my requirement.

 

Thanks Martin

CC4C9ADF-9D42-41BB-AEBA-F14A89FB92DE.jpeg ED3865B7-BFEC-4812-87EA-E86931355B91.jpeg

 

 

 

 

 

 



#2 Ares69

Ares69

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 311
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2016

Posted 10 April 2018 - 07:39 AM

Maybe riser blocks?

By lifting the OTA up from the plate a few inches you may have enough clearance

 

I did the same to avoid hitting the tripod with the camera

 

raiser blocks.jpg


Edited by Ares69, 10 April 2018 - 07:44 AM.

  • Erik30 likes this

#3 KenS

KenS

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,024
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2015
  • Loc: Melbourne, Australia

Posted 10 April 2018 - 08:25 AM

I faced a similar problem with my RC8. If I use  focal reducer everything works but without it I have problems in a similar range to yours. With the FR in place I still need to push the scope as far forward as it will go. The end of the dovetail is in line with the  edge of the saddle clamp. I did consider replacing the saddle with a longer one just in case but that was not necessary (but would be useful when I'm not using the FR)

Looking at your setup I would have thought some extra weight on the dovetail would let you slide the scope further forward. The further back you place the weight the less you need. You only need a couple of cm so that the back of the camera is in line with the back of the fork. I also use a right angle USB connector so it doesn't snag.

Other options: use a FR when you are imaging close to the pole as this will reduce the back focus. Use a diagonal (again maybe just for when you are close to the pole)


  • rgsalinger likes this

#4 XSubmariner

XSubmariner

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 49
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2018
  • Loc: South Wales

Posted 10 April 2018 - 08:50 AM

Thanks Ares69 & Ken for your very prompt responses,

Ref the risers, I do have an Avalon 130mm dec extension which would raise the whole installation further, however I was uncomfortable with the large increase in below arm counterweights to compensate. Am I being too cautious?

As with me the inclusion of a 1.0 flattener or 0.79 reducer extend the overall telescope length and compound the problem. Ken I shall investigate moving the telescope further forward and compensate with an additional counterweight at the back of the saddle. Has anyone advice as to how this might effect the momentum of force exerted on the arm and its impact with guiding or is it negligible if the mount is accurately balanced?



#5 rgsalinger

rgsalinger

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 7,666
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Carlsbad Ca

Posted 10 April 2018 - 10:14 AM

Use counterweights if you can on the dovetail. That method keeps the moment arm of the RA axis short - a good thing. Riser blocks would be my second choice because of that and because they present another source of flexure  but might still work and have the advantage of keeping the weight down.

 

I have a very small OTA that is hard to balance - I use weights on the front - works really well. To me they could be used on other configurations which is another reason why I think I prefer to recommend them to you.

 

Rgrds-Ross



#6 KenS

KenS

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,024
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2015
  • Loc: Melbourne, Australia

Posted 10 April 2018 - 04:10 PM

Yes - put the weight on the dovetail as far back as you can. That way the overall mass is less and you'll need less weight compensation on the RA axis. The moment wont matter as long as everything is in balance. And you've got plenty of spare payload capacity on the M-Uno



#7 schmeah

schmeah

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,994
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Morristown, NJ

Posted 10 April 2018 - 04:11 PM

Hi Martin. What position is your fork arm assembly in? I believe mine is in A1 and appears to be lower relative the RA axis compared to yours. When I had an SVR90 mounted, I just moved the scope forward on the dovetail assembly and actually required counterweights on the scope side. Have you tried to adjust the fork arm base. I suspect you should be able to find a position where you could use the longer extenders and not require much counterweight.

 

Derek

 

6DBF18F4-DA9D-46AF-8E0C-E4614CBC2C5C.jpeg

 

 


  • KenS likes this

#8 XSubmariner

XSubmariner

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 49
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2018
  • Loc: South Wales

Posted 11 April 2018 - 09:40 AM

Thanks Ross, Ken & Derek for your advice. I will try a combination of your suggestions.

Regards Martin



#9 Mike7Mak

Mike7Mak

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,812
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2011
  • Loc: New York

Posted 12 April 2018 - 12:38 AM

On the chance that some M-uno owners will come back to this thread I have some questions about the mount.

 

First is one the OP asked but didn't get an answer. Regarding the ability to set slew limits, is this possible with the OP's Synscan and/or the newer Star-go system?

 

Next, I saved a copy of the March 2013 Astronomy Technology Today that contains a review article of the M-Uno mount by Theodore Saker. In it he says "The M-Uno comes equipped with absolute encoders so that it does not lose track of its position if moved manually by hand..." Is that true? I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere else including Avalon's promotional literature which I find a little strange given that absolute encoders would be a pretty big deal. They are generally an expensive option on even higher end mounts than this one. So do it, or don't it, have absolute encoders?

 

As you may have guessed I've been drooling over this mount for five years. I am very close to actually buying one. My intention is to dismount the 7" Mak from it's Lx200 fork mount and put it on one of these. The answers to my questions are not deal breakers but I am curious to know.



#10 EFT

EFT

    Vendor - Deep Space Products

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 6,128
  • Joined: 07 May 2007
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Posted 12 April 2018 - 01:23 AM

"The M-Uno comes equipped with absolute encoders so that it does not lose track of its position if moved manually by hand..." Is that true?

That would be "absolutely" no.  I wasn't involved with them back then so I have no idea how such a big mistake got through editing/review.

 

The answer to slew limits with StarGo is "no" as far as I know in the StarGo software.  Synscan models are no longer sold.

 

Make sure you have everything lined up with the Mak.  It is heavy and long.



#11 Mike7Mak

Mike7Mak

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,812
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2011
  • Loc: New York

Posted 12 April 2018 - 01:58 AM

Hi Ed, those are the answers I expected. You and I conversed about this mount back when you were selling them. Unfortunately my financial stars did not align back then.

 

Not sure what you mean by "lined up" regarding the Mak. I don't remember what the OTA is supposed to weigh but I'm sure it's well under the 44 lbs rating of the M-uno. As for being long I'm not too worried about that. I'm not quite sure what to make of this need to slew over the RA axis. The Mak was never able to slew through the forks but losing a few degrees around Polaris was never a big deal to me.

 

That reminds me of another question I forgot to ask. I read somewhere (perhaps in that same article) that having the scope in line with the RA axis and the fork arm under the OTA constitutes the M-uno's "park" position. So the question is can you set a custom park position?

 

Thanks for the info provided so far.



#12 torsinadoc

torsinadoc

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,255
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2013
  • Loc: Fayetteville AR

Posted 12 April 2018 - 03:22 AM

I have an ES102 and have to perform meridian flips when imaging northern targets.  



#13 XSubmariner

XSubmariner

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 49
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2018
  • Loc: South Wales

Posted 12 April 2018 - 05:04 AM

Hi Mike, the Avalon M-uno doesn’t have absolute encoders, what you are getting for your money is a beautifully finished, high engineered mount that performs to a high standard without the need for expensive customisation. I specifically sourced a used syncscan variant as I am used to EQMOD with my past NEQ6.  

 

 I realigned the mount arm to a higher setting and fitted additional counterweights to compensate. Now ballanced, I am looking forward to clear skies and an opportunity to see how the mount performs in this configuration.

 

Thank you to everyone who answered my questions.

 

DAE047EE-AA60-4767-B133-DD4CB33FC183.jpeg  

 

 

 

 


  • psandelle, torsinadoc and KenS like this

#14 Mike7Mak

Mike7Mak

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,812
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2011
  • Loc: New York

Posted 12 April 2018 - 12:52 PM

Hi. Yes having literally spent years 'tuning' the LX200 mount I was immediately sold on the M-uno concept. It retains the no-flip feature of a fork and eliminates all the issues of a gear driven mount. Aside from the price (which I'm sure it merits) the M-uno is an LX200 owners upgrade dream come true. I hesitate to say it out loud, but I can't believe there isn't a year long waiting list to get one of these.


  • psandelle likes this

#15 Salty_snack

Salty_snack

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 545
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2017

Posted 12 April 2018 - 01:34 PM

Hi. Yes having literally spent years 'tuning' the LX200 mount I was immediately sold on the M-uno concept. It retains the no-flip feature of a fork and eliminates all the issues of a gear driven mount. Aside from the price (which I'm sure it merits) the M-uno is an LX200 owners upgrade dream come true. I hesitate to say it out loud, but I can't believe there isn't a year long waiting list to get one of these.


OPT shows the m-uno in stock.

#16 Mike7Mak

Mike7Mak

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,812
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2011
  • Loc: New York

Posted 12 April 2018 - 01:46 PM

Heh, yeah that's the one I've got my eye on, but I haven't quite got my duck$ in a row yet. If they still have it next week (knock on wood) I should be good to go. Anybody know how long it does take to get one from Italy should it go out of stock?



#17 Mike7Mak

Mike7Mak

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,812
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2011
  • Loc: New York

Posted 12 April 2018 - 02:52 PM

I have an ES102 and have to perform meridian flips when imaging northern targets.  

I just noticed we have a similar compliment of scopes. In addition to the mak I have an old Meade 102 sitting on a 'smoked' LXD650 and a Tak FS78sv that was just a tad too much for the LX200 when piggybacked on the mak. Heck the FS78 might end up on the Avalon before the mak.



#18 schmeah

schmeah

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,994
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Morristown, NJ

Posted 12 April 2018 - 06:26 PM

@Martin Glad you got the balance and clearance worked. Looking forward to some early reports.

 

@ Mike:  I was a struggling LX200 imager as well, and couldn’t agree more that the M Uno is the perfect upgrade for commercial fork users. Since you mentioned it, my mount is the demo model that Ted Saker used for the ATT article ( and I can confirm ... no encoders smile.gif This mount remains one of my all time best purchases, and I’m not just talking astronomy. With regard to one of your questions, you can set custom home and park positions in StarGo. And check with Avalon. Maybe you can leave NEAF with a demo model smile.gif

 

Derek


Edited by schmeah, 12 April 2018 - 06:32 PM.


#19 Mike7Mak

Mike7Mak

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,812
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2011
  • Loc: New York

Posted 12 April 2018 - 08:50 PM

Hi Derek. Thanks for confirming the encoders thing. I was fairly certain that had to be a mistake. No manufacturer is gonna equip their mount with absolute encoders and keep it a secret.

 

Thanks too for answering the "park" question. I am so conditioned by Meade's Autostar control that I really don't know what to expect moving on to a completely different system. Such as, I imagine the Avalon cannot perform a go-to on cold start-up after being parked. I'm guessing you have to manually drive it to at least one alignment star before it has any idea where it's pointing, yes?

 

What planetarium program do you recommend for point and click control of the M-uno?

 

When is NEAF, and is it always at the same venue? I went to one once many years ago.



#20 schmeah

schmeah

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,994
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Morristown, NJ

Posted 12 April 2018 - 09:08 PM

It can perform a Goto from startup after a Park. I plate solve for precision regardless. I use Starry Night Pro Plus 7. I know it is not the most popular these days, but it works perfectly with the mount. NEAF is next weekend, at Rockland County Community College in Suffern.

 

Derek



#21 Mike7Mak

Mike7Mak

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,812
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2011
  • Loc: New York

Posted 12 April 2018 - 09:44 PM

It can perform a Goto from startup after a Park. I plate solve for precision regardless. I use Starry Night Pro Plus 7. I know it is not the most popular these days, but it works perfectly with the mount. NEAF is next weekend, at Rockland County Community College in Suffern.

 

Derek

Huh, I thought it was the Meade's gps receiver that gave it the ability to retain alignment on start-up from park. That's a pleasant surprise. Well, whether "next weekend" means the day after tomorrow or the weekend after I probably won't be able to make it. Guess I'll start planetarium shopping.

 

Thanks Derek



#22 EFT

EFT

    Vendor - Deep Space Products

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 6,128
  • Joined: 07 May 2007
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Posted 14 April 2018 - 12:06 AM

What I meant regarding the Mak is that it is fairly long and heavy so you will need to be sure of your RA clearances and possible counterweight needs.  It's been a while since I have seen one but I recall them being relatively long (compared to an SCT) and I know a lot of people have dealt with weight issues with that scope since there is an added counterweight in the back of the scope to balance the heavy meniscus.  Some people remove that but then the scope doesn't balance as well.



#23 EFT

EFT

    Vendor - Deep Space Products

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 6,128
  • Joined: 07 May 2007
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Posted 14 April 2018 - 12:11 AM

 

Anybody know how long it does take to get one from Italy should it go out of stock?

When things are in stock in Italy, the actual shipping can take as little as a few days.  Add time on the front and back for processing.



#24 Mike7Mak

Mike7Mak

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,812
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2011
  • Loc: New York

Posted 14 April 2018 - 12:33 PM

Phew, that was a rush. Well the dual/wi-fi model is no longer in stock at OPT. :)

 

Ed, thanks for the follow up comments. Yeah I think the internal counterweight will probably be an advantage in this case. As for the length I'm not all that concerned about being able to slew over the RA axis. Unless I'm missing something and it HAS to be set up to clear the RA axis.



#25 Mike7Mak

Mike7Mak

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,812
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2011
  • Loc: New York

Posted 23 April 2018 - 08:41 PM

Oooh Aaah, the new phonebook is here! smile.gif

 

 

UNO.jpg


  • PF9000, calypsob and XSubmariner like this


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: mount



Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics