|
>>>
is this displayed in PHD Log viewer ? yes, do just be clear i'm talking about the components of the guiding, not the?total guiding rms If you have a perfect mount with 0 error, you are still limited by other conditions (seeing, wind, vibrations, hardware tilting) i'm specifically talking about your notion of using PEMPro etc. to reduce the primary periodic error. in other words, what's the value of trying to implement PEC with your current setup on your 3hr run, your PE for the primary is around 4.3" - FYI you'll notice your drift is much higher, but that's even easier to guide out this PHD Log Viewer graph shows this: That number is the calculated unguided PE you can also choose to just analyze the guide data without backing out corrections: here you can see your two peaks are both around 0.3" - in other words "residual error" i.e., what can't be guided out given your settings, configuration, hardware, etc. The primary and 76 sec is prominent, but (here's the important part) they are both fractions of a pixel of your imaging camera.? can you reduce those values using PEC? sure will it make a difference? you're talking about error from PE going from maybe 1/3 of a pixel to maybe 1/4 or 1/8 of a pixel? you can decide if that's important to you ? FYI I would give period length of 76.1s a try on PPEC and see how that goes. maybe drop your exposure time to 1-1.5sec On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 3:18 PM Nick Ambrose <nick.a.ambrose@...> wrote: Yeah I think I get what you are saying (not sure how you can tell the "wasn't guided out" error -- where does that come from ? --
Brian? Brian Valente portfolio |
