On 12/14/2020 1:33 PM, Brian Valente wrote:
i understand you are doing guiding without PE correction. But you are asking questions?related to the periodic errors. i.e., you are looking at periodic error through the lens of guiding. I can only say this so many times: it's not effective and masks issues
I think we are talking past each other here. I completely understand what you are saying. I only continue this line of inquiry because as far as I know, while guiding may mask PE issues it does not CREATE periodic error.... correct? So the periodic error I see in a guide log at the bearing frequency of 76s is real and only the relative magnitude is questionable, right?
So my question remains..... the PHD2 frequency analysis of a GUIDED session shows an 0.8" residual error at the bearing frequency of 76s. I assume that represents the remaining RMS amplitude of the guide star error after guiding corrections have been applied? If so, I am not all that concerned because that is better than my typical seeing. It may be (and probably is) worse uncorrected but for now I am interested in understanding and evaluating the CORRECTED performance since that is what ends up in my images.
In the absence of stars, all I can do at present is work with what I have, which are about ten guided sessions. I'd love to do a 30 minute unguided session but that does not look likely for many days.
I'm ready to just drop this and forge ahead alone, but seeking input from those who understand this more than I currently do seemed logical? I think I am asking rational questions?
Paul
--
Paul Goelz
Rochester Hills, MI USA
pgoelz@...
www.pgoelz.com
