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

Paramount ME II PEC Curve

astrophotography
  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Hamed-A

Hamed-A

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2020

Posted 06 July 2020 - 04:46 AM

Hi

Could you please have a look at my PEC curve with Paramount ME II ?!

I also attach the log file used for this fit.

 

The PEC log has been obtained in a 20 min period. When I get only 10 min logs, the results are not good, and pretty different from what one expects from a periodic fit.

 

I would like to know how accurate is the fit...Is it generally similar to other PMEII PEC curves?!

 

Thanks

Hamed

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • pec_1.JPG
  • pec_2.JPG

Attached Files



#2 Simcal

Simcal

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 401
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2018
  • Loc: Caledon, Ontario

Posted 06 July 2020 - 06:41 AM

Hi Hamed, while you will likely get response here as well, you're best to post this over on the Software Bisque forums. Quite active over there, and if any problems, same day response from SB staff.



#3 Madratter

Madratter

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,515
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2013

Posted 06 July 2020 - 08:38 AM

This curve is bad. What I don't know is why. I too would suggest taking this over to the SB forum for help.



#4 Hamed-A

Hamed-A

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2020

Posted 06 July 2020 - 09:06 AM

Thank you for responses.

OK then, I'm going to rise the problem within the SB forum. By the way, and help would be highly appreciated, especially from experienced P ME II users.

 

-Hamed



#5 Narrowbandpaul

Narrowbandpaul

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 225
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2013
  • Loc: Constrained by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle

Posted 07 July 2020 - 04:59 PM

Another paramount seemingly with potential issues. Will they learn? We had nothing but problems from day 1 with an MX+ and nothing much in the way of resolution from Bisque

#6 Hamed-A

Hamed-A

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2020

Posted 08 July 2020 - 12:18 AM

Another paramount seemingly with potential issues. Will they learn? We had nothing but problems from day 1 with an MX+ and nothing much in the way of resolution from Bisque

This is not good to hear. At least we are worthy to know the origin of our problems with these mounts.

Have you had a similar problem with your mount?!



#7 gregbradley

gregbradley

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 129
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2008

Posted 08 July 2020 - 04:29 AM

13 arc secs error peak to peak is out of spec. Don't they specify 7 arc second total error?

The PEC curve on my PME mount is more like a sine wave and fairly smooth. It works really well.

That graph looks like you have a bum worm. I had troubles with my PMX and SB sent me a new worm (at no cost) and that worked a LOT better and I got 3 arc sec errors after that.

 

Greg.



#8 Narrowbandpaul

Narrowbandpaul

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 225
  • Joined: 24 Dec 2013
  • Loc: Constrained by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle

Posted 08 July 2020 - 09:33 AM

SB sent us new worms (yes plural) and it didn’t track nor guide well before or after. At our own expense of course. Never again

#9 Ken Sturrock

Ken Sturrock

    Cardinal Ximenez (No one expects the Spanish Inquisition)

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 8,910
  • Joined: 26 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Denver, CO

Posted 08 July 2020 - 08:23 PM

UPDATE: Nevermind, I just saw that you've been working with Tom on this. Good. He's the man.

 

Sorry, late to this. Doing PEC for a Paramount can be a PITA.

 

You may have to describe what this log represents, I'm not sure that I'm following. You called it a PEC curve, so is it:

  1. A tracking log that you collected with PEC turned off in order to measure the PE of the mount so that you can create a PEC curve?
  2. A tracking log that you collected after applying a newly created PEC curve to the mount? In order to look at final performance.

As recommended, I'd post it over on the bisque site, if you haven't by now. It is a strange curve because:

  1. It's got that huge diagonal jump at the end. An artifact? A bump?
  2. If post-PEC application, it still has a very prominent PE.

So, if you took this after applying your PEC curve, how did you set the "west" checkbox in Bisque TCS when you uploaded the PEC curve? The naming of that setting is simplistic, you should actually think of it as a "180 degree position angle" box. If the tracking log to make the PEC curve is good and the curve is calculated and uploaded properly then you should get no PE. If, on the other hand, if the "west" box is applied incorrectly then you'll get twice the PE.

 

There's all kinds of things that I've bought that didn't work for me but worked fine for others. It always sucks when that happens. Most Paramounts seem to do OK (including mine) but it sometimes takes more effort than we'd desire. Others are more challenging.


Edited by Ken Sturrock, 08 July 2020 - 10:57 PM.


#10 Hamed-A

Hamed-A

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2020

Posted 09 July 2020 - 10:47 AM

Dear Ken,

 

>> A tracking log that you collected with PEC turned off in order to measure the PE of the mount so that you can create a PEC curve?

Yes, that is.

 

>> A tracking log that you collected after applying a newly created PEC curve to the mount? In order to look at final performance.

Yes, I also did it. The attached log file is a new one with earlier PEC in place.

 

 

>> It's got that huge diagonal jump at the end. An artifact? A bump?

It's because of rapidly decreasing signal because of transient clouds at the end. It's not related to the mount itself.

 

>> If post-PEC application, it still has a very prominent PE.

No the first one I brought to this thread is a pure first-time PEC run.

 

>> There's all kinds of things that I've bought that didn't work for me but worked fine for others. It always sucks when that happens. Most Paramounts seem to do OK (including mine) but it sometimes takes more effort than we'd desire. Others are more challenging.

I hope mine is also work good! In dead, I have to make it working. For some reasons (you may know from my origin!) I can not pay (I mean, send) money to get a new subscription to get the latest TXS version. I also can not sent my mount back to the factory to make any possible repairs. That is why I eagerly look for a solution to solve the problem with my own.

 

-Hamed


Edited by Hamed-A, 09 July 2020 - 10:56 AM.


#11 Hamed-A

Hamed-A

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2020

Posted 09 July 2020 - 10:57 AM

The log file of my previous post.

Attached Files



#12 Ken Sturrock

Ken Sturrock

    Cardinal Ximenez (No one expects the Spanish Inquisition)

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 8,910
  • Joined: 26 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Denver, CO

Posted 09 July 2020 - 12:14 PM

Yes. I did see your thread over on the Bisque Forum right after I posted to this one. I don't spend as much time over there anymore because their new site is so awkward to use. Regardless, though, it's still where the more Paramount-knowledgeable people (like THouse) hang out. I'll certainly defer to Tom's thoughts on the Bisque site, he's a lot more knowledgeable about the ME/ME2 than I am.




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: astrophotography



Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics