Re: Scope Location and NINA
Russ
Is it possible you have Set Gemini time and location on connect in your Gemini application?
Constantly having the same issue when connecting scope to NINA, MAXIM and any other software.? Tonight for example, the G11 HC (physical device) shows my location (LAT/LONG/TIME) correctly.? However, when connecting to any software package (like NINA) and I look at the virtual Gemini HC on screen, shows my location as Hollywood with everything zeroed out.? When I then try to slew to a star it is way off.? Also, the Gemini Virtual HC will not let me enter a new LAT/LONG/TIME.
Anyone else come across this issue????
-- Brian?
Brian Valente portfolio
|
Constantly having the same issue when connecting scope to NINA, MAXIM and any other software.? Tonight for example, the G11 HC (physical device) shows my location (LAT/LONG/TIME) correctly.? However, when connecting to any software package (like NINA) and I look at the virtual Gemini HC on screen, shows my location as Hollywood with everything zeroed out.? When I then try to slew to a star it is way off.? Also, the Gemini Virtual HC will not let me enter a new LAT/LONG/TIME.
Anyone else come across this issue????
|
haha well i'll say it one more time?
"this doesn't directly address your question, but i think having a solid foundation is an important first step here"
Fixing symptoms with unknown?causes is always a process of elimination right? if we knew what it was, we'd just jump to the fix. But 99% of the effort is isolating the cause. So it makes sense to me that we want to make sure everything else is operating correctly, and eliminate one thing at a time
that's also why I mentioned the previous steps of doing an unguided run. if it shows up in the unguided results, we know it's the mount. if it's not we know it's not the mount, or at least not the mount by itself
i like your idea of testing without the SCT
I made a habit of making large steps for calibration sometime ago, and I honestly can't remember exactly why I did that... I think that PHD was complaining that my steps were too small, so I just increased them. I'll try and dial it in better tonight, but honestly I don't see how the calibration can account for the spikes, and that's my biggest issue.?
Jamie
-- Brian?
Brian Valente portfolio
|
?hmmm
well the prior one i showed was pretty much the same, but maybe you didn't see the second image on that post
What calibration problems are you having?
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 2:13 PM Henk Aling < haling@...> wrote: Hi Brian, that's not the same graph that you showed earlier.? Never mind though, I am just a disturbance trying to learn how to debug calibration problems.
-- Brian?
Brian Valente portfolio
|
Hi Brian, that's not the same graph that you showed earlier.? Never mind though, I am just a disturbance trying to learn how to debug calibration problems.
|
I made a habit of making large steps for calibration sometime ago, and I honestly can't remember exactly why I did that... I think that PHD was complaining that my steps were too small, so I just increased them. I'll try and dial it in better tonight, but honestly I don't see how the calibration can account for the spikes, and that's my biggest issue.?
Jamie
|
Re: Still working out polar alignment on my mount
Hi Jeff
Are you referring to a reset to default values?
from your hand controller main screen
MENU->SYSTEM->RESET HGM DEFAULTS
then power cycle the Gemini
After that I recommend doing a Quick Start and walking through the setup info
If you change your mount type (and I think you?will: you have a G11T correct?) you will want to power cycle your mount again after that
How do you do default setting for anything on Gemini 2. I haven¡¯t found a video that shows that yet. I have looked through the menu and I haven¡¯t seen it. It has to be something obvious I just missed.
-- Brian?
Brian Valente portfolio
|
Re: Still working out polar alignment on my mount
How do you do default setting for anything on Gemini 2. I haven¡¯t found a video that shows that yet. I have looked through the menu and I haven¡¯t seen it. It has to be something obvious I just missed.
|
Re: Still working out polar alignment on my mount
Jeff are you imaging or observing?
I have not tried those. I was thinking of getting a polemaster. On other mounts, I have used a polar alignment scope and it was usually close enough. I don¡¯t even know if there is such a thing for my G11T.?
-- Brian?
Brian Valente portfolio
|
Re: Still working out polar alignment on my mount
I have not tried those. I was thinking of getting a polemaster. On other mounts, I have used a polar alignment scope and it was usually close enough. I don¡¯t even know if there is such a thing for my G11T.?
|
Sorry
i should?have said
The DEC axis calibration?looks fine?
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 12:57 PM Brian Valente via <bvalente= [email protected]> wrote: Henk
the backlash calibration looks fine to me? southern movement is not part of the calibration
you're right they are both too big
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 12:53 PM Henk Aling < haling@...> wrote: From the calibration graphs, it's not just the RA that has steps that are too large but the DEC calibration steps are almost all backlash clearance (the ones labeled B).? There are just a few small steps South, then North finally acts half way normal.
So, major DEC backlash problems during the calibration at least.? The large RA steps indicate there's something wrong in the settings, and PHD2 will therefore use a gain that's way off.? That could explain it.
Now, if I could only fix my own guiding problems...
--
Brian?
Brian Valente portfolio
-- Brian?
Brian Valente portfolio
|
Re: Still working out polar alignment on my mount
Hi Jeff
Have you tried using PHD drift guiding, sharpcap, polemaster, or any of the other easy-to-use polar alignment tools?
The built in ones are fine, but i think any of the above might be easier
Brian
|
Henk
the backlash calibration looks fine to me? southern movement is not part of the calibration
you're right they are both too big
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 12:53 PM Henk Aling < haling@...> wrote: From the calibration graphs, it's not just the RA that has steps that are too large but the DEC calibration steps are almost all backlash clearance (the ones labeled B).? There are just a few small steps South, then North finally acts half way normal.
So, major DEC backlash problems during the calibration at least.? The large RA steps indicate there's something wrong in the settings, and PHD2 will therefore use a gain that's way off.? That could explain it.
Now, if I could only fix my own guiding problems...
-- Brian?
Brian Valente portfolio
|
From the calibration graphs, it's not just the RA that has steps that are too large but the DEC calibration steps are almost all backlash clearance (the ones labeled B).? There are just a few small steps South, then North finally acts half way normal.
So, major DEC backlash problems during the calibration at least.? The large RA steps indicate there's something wrong in the settings, and PHD2 will therefore use a gain that's way off.? That could explain it.
Now, if I could only fix my own guiding problems...
|
Re: Still working out polar alignment on my mount
Thanks, John. I can sure try the MI-250 settings. I had set the limits but didn¡¯t account for the difference in length between my new refractor and my C8.?
|
Yes, as I mentioned this doesn't directly address your bumps, but I think it's important to make sure everything else is working correctly
Another thing that would help is a longer unguided run like 30-45 min (guiding assistant or disable guide output)
If there's a problem in the mount, it will show there as well
might also doublecheck?PEC status and and TVC values
you have an SCT? ahhhh :)
Thanks, you're right, I don't have very good calibration. I'll do that next time I'm out. But I don't think that it's related to the issue that I'm seeing. I generally use similar settings for the calibration, and I've very reliable, and good guiding in the past. This spike is new, I don't think that I've ever seen it before. Tonight I'll be trying things out using the guide scope instead of the OAG. If the issue is still there, then I can eliminate possible issues with the SCT like mirror flop or some sort of looseness. If that fixes it, then there might be something going on with the SCT, or image train on the SCT.?
Jamie
-- Brian?
Brian Valente portfolio
|
Thanks, you're right, I don't have very good calibration. I'll do that next time I'm out. But I don't think that it's related to the issue that I'm seeing. I generally use similar settings for the calibration, and I've had very reliable, and good guiding in the past. This spike is new, I don't think that I've ever seen it before. Tonight I'll be trying things out using the guide scope instead of the OAG. If the issue is still there, then I can eliminate possible issues with the SCT like mirror flop or some sort of looseness. If that fixes it, then there might be something going on with the SCT, or image train on the SCT.?
Jamie
|
PHD recommended min limit for image scale is 0.5" so i would?bin 2 at a minimum
all of your calibrations are problematic?
here's a typical example
the calibration run should be 25 pix across 12 steps, which is shown in the outside circle of the target here:
you can see you have only one step in the circle
if i zoom way out i can see the rest of your calibration, which looks okay, but the step size is way too big
So i don't know what your settings are, but i recommend you bin 2 the guiding and start with a fresh equipment profile
this doesn't directly address your question, but i think having a solid foundation is an important first step here
Yes, using my 178 it should be 0.35 when using the 178. I have binned it in the past but found that it didn't seem to help, so I just leave it native.?
Using my 1600 it should be 0.55 according to , it should be 0.55 because of the 0.7 reducer.
?
I put in a focal length of 1471 in the PHD2 wizard. Which is not exactly the spec for the scope with the 0.7 reducer (1422). I did this because the solver complained that my calculated focal length was actually?1471, not?1422, so the image scale is slightly different than what astronomy.tools reports.??
I think that I calibrated a few times as I was trying things out, so there should be several in there.
Jamie
?
?
-- Brian?
Brian Valente portfolio
|
Yes, using my 178 it should be 0.35 when using the OAG. I have binned it in the past but found that it didn't seem to help, so I just leave it native.?
Using my 1600 it should be 0.55 according to https://astronomy.tools/calculators/ccd_suitability, it should be 0.55 because of the 0.7 reducer.
?
I put in a focal length of 1471 in the PHD2 wizard. Which is not exactly the spec for the scope with the 0.7 reducer (1422). I did this because the solver complained that my calculated focal length was actually?1471, not?1422, so the image scale is slightly different than what astronomy.tools reports.?? I think that I calibrated a few times as I was trying things out, so there should be several in there. Jamie
?
?
|
Jamie is your pixel scale really 0.34"?
the calibration looks really wonky too (or as a result)
Here it is.?
I believe that from 19273 seconds onward the scope was on the East side, and before that point it was on the west.?
Jamie
-- Brian?
Brian Valente portfolio
|
Jamie Amendolagine
jeff marston