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

Help identifying Edmunds mount

  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 mweir2

mweir2

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 24 March 2020 - 05:42 PM

Hi,

I'm a complete newcomer, so please be patient.  In particular, I'd appreciate suggestions whether this is properly a new topic or belongs in an existing one ("More Edmund Scientific" seems a likely place, but more about the telescopes than the mounts).  I did spend a couple of days browsing this forum and found tantalizing hints, and a wealth of knowledge, but not quite what I'm seeking.

A new neighbor found an Edmunds 8" reflector in a fence row when he bought the 80+ acre property.  It had been outside for years and was scheduled for scrapping when I expressed interest.  The 8" galvanized steel tube was crushed in several places, but the primary and its cell, secondary, eyepiece and finder are largely undamaged and usable or repairable.  The primary is evidently about f/9.  I'd like to show some of that later, but for now I want to sort out the mount.  My eventual intent is to put the telescope in demonstrable condition and donate it to a local astronomy club.  I'm an electrical engineer and machinist with a considerable workshop, and can make just about anything, but with limited optical experience and negligible telescope experience.

The mount resembles various ones I see in other threads at this forum.  Its pier legs are the heavy duty ones, connected with two bolts to the pier.  The head is an offset yoke, with provisions for a tangent arm.  Its elevation shaft bore is 7/8 inch.  There is no tangent arm nor driving screws.  No casting number is evident.

The moving head has a single lug or tongue, much narrower than the gap between the head yoke arms, a 5/8 inch elevation bore and an adjacent 3/8-16 hole presumably for a locking screw in a single-sided mount.  It has no provision for locking to a shaft as would seem to be necessary for the head trunion yoke.

The mechanism axles (right ascension and declination?) are 1" diameter.  There are no graduated circles or pointers, but there are white disks that may have had a projecting pointer at one time between the castings adjacent to machined spigots where graduated circles might be installed.  The two casting numbers are B-2089 and 612088.

The tube mount has places for four coplanar screws to pass through the wall of the telescope tube, rather than the (later?) cradle and strap method.  Its casting number is C-2121.

I can provide any relevant dimensions as needed.

Here are my questions:

-Do these mount pieces belong together, or are they a mixed bag?  

-Can someone point me to a manual showing a good parts diagram, so I can see what might be missing, and use the proper names for these parts when communicating?

 

Thanks,

Mike near Cincinnati

Attached Thumbnails

  • 100_2145.JPG
  • 100_2144.JPG

  • astro140, steve t and Bomber Bob like this

#2 PawPaw

PawPaw

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 217
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2013
  • Loc: West Central Missouri

Posted 24 March 2020 - 06:18 PM

Mike,

Welcome to CN.  This is a very proper topic for a new thread.  There are many Edmund experts here willing to help you out.  Here is a thread that could be very helpful for you:

 

https://www.cloudyni...nd heavy duty

 

Your first picture looks like an Edmund extra heavy duty polar cap pier with a 4 inch pipe attached.  The second picture is an Edmund heavy duty mount minus the polar cap pier.  They do not go together.  

 

Here is a link to an online edmund catalog.https://archive.org/...1_0046/mode/2up


  • Garyth64 likes this

#3 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 19,259
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 24 March 2020 - 06:21 PM

It is the 1.5" shaft heavy duty mount. My fav mount.



#4 PawPaw

PawPaw

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 217
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2013
  • Loc: West Central Missouri

Posted 24 March 2020 - 06:50 PM

The 1.5" diameter shaft mount is called the "Extra heavy duty mount".   The 1" is called the "Heavy duty mount".

 

Both the 1" and the 1.5" are very good mount designs.  I say this because so many are still in use after 50 or so years.

 

Here is the "Extra heavy duty" I have owned for many years.

Attached Thumbnails

  • IMG_2365A.jpg

Edited by PawPaw, 24 March 2020 - 06:51 PM.

  • L. Regira, photiost, steve t and 2 others like this

#5 apfever

apfever

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,538
  • Joined: 13 May 2008
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 24 March 2020 - 06:54 PM

It is the 1.5" shaft heavy duty mount. My fav mount.

To be less confusing:

 

The top picture is the pipe and cap of the 1.5" shaft mount. The rest of the mount is missing

The bottom picture is the 1" mount, and the cap and pipe and feet are missing.

What other parts do have?


Edited by apfever, 24 March 2020 - 06:55 PM.

  • Terra Nova and PawPaw like this

#6 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 19,259
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 24 March 2020 - 07:22 PM

To be less confusing:

 

The top picture is the pipe and cap of the 1.5" shaft mount. The rest of the mount is missing

The bottom picture is the 1" mount, and the cap and pipe and feet are missing.

What other parts do have?

Seems so. After i looked again i can tell.
 



#7 G-Tower

G-Tower

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 420
  • Joined: 24 Mar 2018

Posted 24 March 2020 - 08:03 PM

That's obviously a 1" Space Conqueror mount



#8 mweir2

mweir2

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 24 March 2020 - 09:02 PM

Gentlemen (apologies to any ladies who responded),

 

Thank you for such prompt and helpful replies.  It appears, as I assumed, a mismatch.  I apparently have a complete post or pier of the 1.5 inch mount (feet, column, head), which PawPaw's post #6 shows exactly, and the 1 inch mount from the "elevation" axis upwards.  There are some good photos of it, showing the reverse view with an elevation locking thumbscrew, and some even with the locking screw from which I assume the plastic handwheel has been broken away like mine at, I think it was,  https://www.cloudyni...ect/?hl=edmunds.

 

By the way, how do you capture and insert the abbreviated form of a link such as several of you did?

 

And thanks, too, PawPaw, for the links to the catalogs and the heavy duty mount.  I had found and examined the catalogs at https://wiki.telesco...ompany_Catalogs, finding tantalizing partial matches. I think mine must be earlier than any in those catalogs.  I hadn't found the one you identified at the Internet Archive.  What a delight:  I remember reading such catalogs in grade school and dreaming of things I could do!

I just examined it, and I found text on the equatorial mounts page asserting the 8" and the extra heavy duty mount are shown on page 125...which didn't get scanned in!  Aaaaw.

And I will go study the "heavy duty mount" topic.  However, I think since I have the "upper" of that and can study it to my heart's content, I really need the "extra heavy duty" mount information to devise an interface.  I could, of course, just make a stepped shaft and cantilever the upper to the side of (or even inside) the yoke, but that seems...inelegant.

 

Before I waste any of your time with the telescope tube and optics, can any of you point me to a good parts diagram or perhaps photos of the extra heavy duty mount components, particularly the joint to the pier or post cap?

 

Please accept apologies for my verbosity, but so many of you have concisely replied I feel I have little choice!

 

Best wishes,

MPW



#9 mweir2

mweir2

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 24 March 2020 - 09:03 PM

Oops, sorry, it appears the website performs the link abbreviations automatically.  Didn't realize that.

MPW



#10 PawPaw

PawPaw

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 217
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2013
  • Loc: West Central Missouri

Posted 24 March 2020 - 09:51 PM

Mike,

Edmund did not have a parts diagram for this mount that I am aware of.   Try this thread.....a lot of good info on the Edmund extra heavy duty mount.

 

https://www.cloudyni...lling all gem



#11 mweir2

mweir2

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 24 March 2020 - 10:59 PM

Thanks, PawPaw.  All these forums have contributed nuggets to my understanding.  You can probably answer the questions below, but I certainly invite others to chime in.

 

It seems your post cap has the right angle form, like mine, where Clamchip's has the isosceles form of the (presumably) later catalogs I've found.

 

My first post was mistaken:  there is a casting number adjacent the tangent arm screw web, heavily wrinkle finished that makes it hard to read.  It appears to be 612036.

 

Questions:

-post #66 at the site you previously suggested (https://www.cloudyni...nd heavy duty) shows a late model extra heavy duty assembly, I think.  It appears the lug on the polar shaft carrier is just a thicker, shorter version of the heavy duty, with a locking setscrew to couple it to the elevation shaft.  Given the evident desire for stiffness suggested by two locking setscrews in each yoke arm, and moments around the elevation axis are not generally balanced, I was expecting something more positive.  Post #21 at the last site you mentioned above shows what might be a second screw at this point.  How many set screws connect the elevation shaft to the polar axis carrier?

-are there any shims or Belleville or wave springs between the polar axis carrier and the inner faces of the post cap yoke?

-are there any bushings in the post cap yoke bores, or does the elevation shaft ride directly in them?

 

MPW



#12 apfever

apfever

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,538
  • Joined: 13 May 2008
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 25 March 2020 - 01:31 AM

The elevation shaft rides directly in all bores. There are no shims but I did add some adhesive foil to the two holes in the pier cap to reduce the clearance. The foil tape wasn't necessary, just an option during the build since I pretty much blue printed the whole mount. I didn't keep all the specs, just measured everything for the build. This shaft sees the least amount of movement or adjustment and no bushings are needed. 

 

The hole in the RA housing (polar axis carrier) is a closer fit that the others. Mine was right at zero requiring a little tap to insert the shaft. The RA housing and the altitude shaft are meant to be a permanent assembly in use, and the housing has two set screws to lock it to the shaft. This explains the close tolerance.  I left original barbaric style set screws in this location instead of replacing them with cap bolts. I can't recall for sure but I think they are the most aggressive single point type set screws. The combination of close tolerance and the two set screws is more than sufficient. None the less, I rotated some Locktite in as well because I could. 

 

There are no shims or washers or anything between the RA housing tang and the pier cap. They aren't needed.  Nothing in this area can move in use, if correctly tightened.  What is a Belleville besides a place?

 

You have to loosen 6 screws to make large adjustments for lattitude. There are the two in each yoke arm and two in the fine adjust side arm. I replaced the original 6 set screws with stainless cap bolts, and I smoothed the ends of all 6 bolts to keep from damaging the shaft. The shaft has to rotate in the cap and side arm since it permanent to the RA housing. Set screws that damage the shaft in these locations are not a good idea. It's a pet peeve of mine. That shaft isn't going to move with SIX smooth faced cap bolts locking it in position in three separate bores. 

 

These photos also show the needle thrust bearings I added to the RA and DEC shafts. 

The factory had one set screw to lock the cap to the pier after tightening the cap onto the pipe threads. I replaced that with a cap bolt, then added another cap bolt by drilling and tapping another hole. Each bolt has a fiber plug under it. This lets the mount have very smooth azimuth adjustment for polar alignment without galling out the pipe threads, and solid lock when tightened.

Attached Thumbnails

  • post-45234-0-02695800-1541642023.jpg
  • post-45234-0-46465500-1541642013.jpg

Edited by apfever, 25 March 2020 - 01:43 AM.

  • Bomber Bob likes this

#13 mweir2

mweir2

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 25 March 2020 - 09:52 AM

Thanks, apfever, beautiful photos, explanation absolutely clear and exceptionally detailed, everything I wanted to know.  I saw the socket head cap screws and guessed they weren't factory.  I applaud your treatment of their ends, and with using the cone point setscrews in the RA housing (thanks for giving me the proper name) lug.  Is the other movable part that carries the telescope cross axis called the "declination housing"?

 

I'd planned to put some leather, brass, Delrin or Celcon plugs under the axis locking handscrews.  Will probably do similarly, as you did, for the azimuth locks at the column threads. 

 

Belleville springs are slightly coned spring washers, giving compliance in the axial direction, used for preloading components and taking up clearances.

 

I'm going to machine a tangent arm and new elevation shaft.  I might epoxy and screw a plate alongside the present RA housing lug to widen it for improved bearing span on the shaft, accurately bore the lug for a close fit on the shaft, and add two setscrews at 90 degrees. The RA housing will still be usable with a lighter duty mount by simply sleeving its bore back to 5/8 inch.

 

Oops.  The RA housing lug, being extended for its lockscrew, interferes with the bottom of the slot in the column head if its pivot bore remains in its original position.  I could trim away the lug (may encroach on the lockscrew hole); move its bore (a future pivot bolt head may interfere with the lockscrew); use a smaller diameter elevation shaft with offset bushings in the yoke bores (finicky and reduces stiffness); or mill the slot in the head deeper (slightly reduces its cross axis stiffness).  I lean towards moving the RA housing bore, as an offset bushing can later put it back where it was.  Any counter-opinions?

 

Thanks to everyone.  If there's still interest, I'll show the mangled tube and report other activities later.

MPW


  • PawPaw and TSSClay like this

#14 apfever

apfever

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,538
  • Joined: 13 May 2008
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 25 March 2020 - 10:17 AM

It seems you have the know how and equipment to make that smaller mount go into the larger hub but it's not a typical adaption.  You'll mess up the mount for any future use in it's original application.  That extra small hole in the tang for an additional lock screw is essential for original application (welllllll…..see next post).  Edmund started that kind of mount with a smaller tang and no extra lock screw. They discovered the lack of holding with just the main bolt and then changed the mount to type you have.  

 

You can certainly make the combination work but it would be.....weird....and the whole assembly will be restricted to the load ability of the main mount assembly.  The extra heavy pier and cap will help, the mount will be the limiting factor.


Edited by apfever, 25 March 2020 - 10:40 AM.


#15 apfever

apfever

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,538
  • Joined: 13 May 2008
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 25 March 2020 - 10:33 AM

Here's the earlier version of the RA housing with the small tang, compared to the long type tang you have. These short ones DO work, just not as well.  That center bolt is quite large and can be tightened with a lot of extra grunch and large wrenches.  I'm sure plenty here can comment how their early version works fine with the 6" OTA. Just consider that there's a reason Edmund changed the casting.  The change must have come later as the longer tang with extra screw seems to be less common. Hate to see you destroy that one.  I'd swap you for one of my short tang housings that you wouldn't have to grind off. 

 

There isn't any big intrinsic value thing here between the two types. I'm not looking for some gain here. It's more a matter of convenience, and saving the type you have. I have a few of those short tang versions floating around loose. 

Attached Thumbnails

  • m.JPG

Edited by apfever, 25 March 2020 - 04:43 PM.


#16 mweir2

mweir2

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 25 March 2020 - 12:27 PM

Excellent, thanks for the photo and offer, apfever.  I just did some more careful measuring and concluded I need to do several of the operations I named above, or mill the slot between the yoke arms very deeply, because of the much-extended RA housing lug.  Evidently that's the difference between the D-2088 and D-2089 castings!

 

You can very probably address my next question, then.  I prepared to remove the declination shaft from the RA housing, in order to facilitate setting it up for precise measuring and machining.  A plastic sleeve bearing can be seen in the attached photo.  I pressed the shaft out a short distance and can see the same kind of bearing at the other end as well.  I'm very concerned about being able to reinstall the shaft.  Even though I can arrange some kind of guide sleeve for the sleeve when entering the larger end of the housing, it could expand after being pressed through the first journal and be unable to enter the second one.

 

Have you, or any others reading, removed and reinstalled the declination shaft in the RA housing?  Any tips or tricks?

 

If I can resolve my concern here, I'll be very happy to take you up on your offer to swap the housings, and cover any shipping costs.

MPW

Attached Thumbnails

  • 100_2148.JPG


#17 mweir2

mweir2

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 25 March 2020 - 12:59 PM

Sorry, apfever, I just noticed your penultimate post (#14).  Yes, I concur the end result won't be all that the EHD mount is, but it will return the components I have to usefulness, and that's all I'd hoped for.  I hope none are too offended.

MPW



#18 apfever

apfever

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,538
  • Joined: 13 May 2008
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 25 March 2020 - 05:14 PM

I don't think anyone will be offended. You'll no doubt get more admiration for your ingenuity and ability. As long as you don't make a lamp out of it (inside forum joke).

 

Most of what you ask is posted in old post. It can be a pain to do extensive searches, going through massive old post with a lot of repetitions. So, here's some more repetition.

You shouldn't have to press anything out, the shafts should just pull out of the housings. Don't worry about the Teflon 'bearings'. They aren't bad to keep in place. 

You can tightly roll them up and chill them in the fridge, no need to even freeze them. Maybe no need to chill them.  Let them sit rolled up for a while and they should then 'snap' around the groove in the shaft and stay snug in place. This can be convenient for the top Teflon as well even though you can reach that one to hand feed it in. Both Teflons enter their respective bores at the same time. If you can get the top one to snap in place, it will keep you from having to spend time fiddling with it. Fiddle time might allow the bottom one to loosen up. 

 

In my opinion, it is better to have the Teflon rotate WITH the shaft instead of the shaft rotating in the Teflon. I used a small piece of two sided tape across the Teflon seam to hold the Teflon to the shaft for this reason. A full piece of tape around the shaft was too thick. I have a leftover sheet of 1/32" Teflon that I was going to sell off in slices, but never got around to.  If your Teflon is wasted let me know. Cleaning isn't an issue but sometimes they get mangled. 



#19 mweir2

mweir2

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 25 March 2020 - 10:15 PM

Thanks for your patience in repeating the material.  Your remarks are very helpful.  I did spend a couple of evenings browsing before starting this topic, but I was probably too focused on identifying my mixed set of parts to register discussion of these bearings.

 

Given that the setting rings were apparently available as accessories, Edmunds must have expected that users could remove and reinstall the RA shaft without great concern:  thus with your reassurance I'll go ahead and take mine out.  The bearing seats may be somewhat rusty, making them tighter than usual, as it takes a light bit of pressing to get it to move.  Will report results.



#20 mweir2

mweir2

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 31 March 2020 - 09:45 PM

]OK, here's an update.  The attached photo doesn't show anything you haven't seen, but reflects a lot of progress.

One pier foot was broken.  I electrolytically cleaned the parts, then veed the broken edges.  After clamping them back together gently enough to allow thermal expansion, I brazed the pieces together by filling the vees with a nickel bronze alloy I like.  The other feet were just power wire brushed.  The 1/2-13 threads in the foot ends cleaned up by passing an old tap through them.

Removing the head from the column was a job.  I heated it to around boiling water temperature, then tried loosening it with a 3' pipe wrench.  It didn't budge.  I then took it to a friend with a grand-daddy of a pipe vise.  We heated the head to around 600 degrees, quick clamped it in the vise, and then both of us with 3' pipe wrenches broke it free.  I estimate we applied around 1100 ft-lbs.  All the lockscrew holes cleaned up with an old 5/16-18 tap.

I cleaned the head electrolytically, and wire brushed the column.  Everything has been given a light coat of an automotive primer surfacer which, being a lacquer cures by drying rather than chemical conversion, so can be removed fairly easily if the eventual owners want to do it differently.

The feet are attached in an unusual manner:  the screws are 3/8 inch thread forming types, very coarse pitch and extremely hard.  They were driven into unthreaded holes and form their own threads by displacing metal of the column.  Reinserting them takes a delicate touch to pick up the old threads.  I greased all threads upon assembly.

Finally, with previous encouragement, I forced the RA shaft out of its housing.  The reason for the tightness was apparently rust built up under the plastic (it feels like PTFE, but I don't have any literature or test for it) sleeves.  I gently debrided the rust particles and film from the plastic, and wire brushed rust from the reduced diameter segment of the shaft where they fit.  The shaft now goes in as easily as the declination shaft, and the shaft rotates in the plastic rather than the plastic moving with the shaft as before (evidently the rust locked the two together).

I imagine readers are appalled at the condition, but it DID sit outside for a number of years.  I'm surprised at the small amount of damage, none of which so far has been fatal.

I scaled the tangent arm from the photo in apfever's post #12, made a new drawing and am preparing to machine that out.

More later.

Attached Thumbnails

  • 100_2150.JPG

  • astro140, steve t and PawPaw like this

#21 mweir2

mweir2

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 31 March 2020 - 09:53 PM

I just realized this thread has diverged from the title and my original intent, which was to identify the thing I'd been given.  It's pretty clear it's a bit of a mongrel.  Would the moderator or anyone else prefer that I restart this topic, which is now more in the line of a restoration, in another forum, or under a different title, or anything else?  I'm very grateful for the interest and assistance offered so far by this community, and prefer to leave it here in the absence of objections.

Thanks,

MPW



#22 clamchip

clamchip

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,313
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Seattle

Posted 31 March 2020 - 10:07 PM

For Edmund Scientific I'd drop the 's' on the end of Edmund, it's

Edmund Scientific.

Sorry for being a mister know it all.

 

Robert



#23 mweir2

mweir2

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2020
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 31 March 2020 - 10:28 PM

No offense at all, I'd like to get it right.  Thanks!  I've read a lot of your posts.

Hadn't expected correspondence this late, but then noticed your location.  One of my oldest friends lives out in Sequim.

MPW


  • clamchip likes this

#24 apfever

apfever

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,538
  • Joined: 13 May 2008
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 31 March 2020 - 10:52 PM

Edmund dropped a lot of letters themselves. This is an 8" mount leg. As the molds wore down the letters were just filled in instead of having fractured letters cast. I still think of this as:

 

Edmund

South Carolina

East Tific County

Barrington, NJ

Attached Thumbnails

  • P6190006.JPG

  • astro140 and clamchip like this

#25 PawPaw

PawPaw

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 217
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2013
  • Loc: West Central Missouri

Posted 01 April 2020 - 08:03 AM

"Finally, with previous encouragement, I forced the RA shaft out of its housing.  The reason for the tightness was apparently rust built up under the plastic (it feels like PTFE, but I don't have any literature or test for it) sleeves.  I gently debrided the rust particles and film from the plastic, and wire brushed rust from the reduced diameter segment of the shaft where they fit.  The shaft now goes in as easily as the declination shaft, and the shaft rotates in the plastic rather than the plastic moving with the shaft as before (evidently the rust locked the two together)."

 

Fantastic work!  

 

The plastic sleeves are made of Teflon.  One trick I have used is to wrap them with a small amount of teflon plumbers tape when re-inserting the shaft into the housing.  It keeps them in place. 




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






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics