Re: Adding grease to existing greased worm and wheel
Jim
it gets hard over time and also tends to spread out. if you search on this group you will find some examples (pics) of really bad consequences of lithium
On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 11:44 AM Jim Waters < jimwaters@...> wrote: On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 11:16 AM, Brian Valente wrote:
please do NOT use lithium grease.?
we use arctic lube here at the shop, and many others use superlube
I use SuperLube on my GM811G.? What are the specific issues with lithium grease?? Just want to know.? Thx
?
--
------------------------
Jim W
Phoenix, AZ. USA
Losmandy GM811G, NINA 1.11, ASI2600MC Pro, Sky-Watcher Scopes
-- Brian?
Brian Valente portfolio
|
Re: Service/Upgrade appointment request
UPDATE (sorry Keith, i thought you were sending me an email directly) I don't have that info - i did ask and it varies from month to month depending on how much demand is for new vs. additional so there's no one answer. We are still 10-12 weeks lead time on new mount orders, so i'm guessing for now they are allocated to new mounts. If you're waiting for one, I encourage you to call Tanya at the shop directly.? Brian?
?
?
Brian - any updates to this?
Thanks
Keith
?
?
?
--
Brian?
?
?
?
Brian Valente
portfolio
|
Re: Service/Upgrade appointment request
Brian - any updates to this?
Thanks
Keith
|
Re: Adding grease to existing greased worm and wheel
Hello,
I have done a study of the available greases.
Here is the data:
4-ball test coeff of friction:
CRC Brake and Caliper grease 4 ball wear scar 0.6 mm Timken load 60 lbs Copper corrosion 1B (shiny 100C 24 hr test)
Arctic Jetlube recommended by Losmandy Max weld 200 Load index 25 4 ball Wear scar 0.7 mm
Superlube with Syncolon ptfe 4 ball Wear scar 1.0 mm Timken load 40 lbs Copper corrosion 1B shiny 100C 24 hr test
Super lube high temp and pressure grease 4 ball Wear scar 1.0 mm Timken load 50 lbs Copper corrosion 1B shiny 100C 24 hr test
Shell AeroShell 33 (no MolyD) uses lithium.?? Copper corrosion 1B ( shiny 100C 24 hr test) No data on 4 ball test.
Shell AeroShell 33 MD (with MolyD) uses lithium.?? Copper corrosion 1B ( shiny 100C 24 hr test) No data on 4 ball test.
____ Conclusion: CRC Brake and Caliper grease has MolyD, Graphite, and Teflon. It has the highest Timken bearing result (60lbs) and shortest 4 ball test result (0.6mm).??
Experience: ?on the G11T (titan RA): ?Super lube showed "chattering" in one worm direction rotation.? CRC Brake and Caliper grease showed no chatter.?Others protect told me of better results on their G11 with the CRC than Super lube. I bought but did not try the Arctic jetlube.?
So...
I recommend you use a cotton cloth to wipe out the existing lube, and put in the CRC Brake and Caliper grease.? Here is a picture of the container. The top lid has a brush to apply the grease.? It has antocorrosion ingredients that prevent damage to the brass worm in case you were to get a worm upgrade.
Best regards, Michael ?
On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 11:16 AM, Brian Valente wrote:
please do NOT use lithium grease.?
we use arctic lube here at the shop, and many others use superlube
I use SuperLube on my GM811G.? What are the specific issues with lithium grease?? Just want to know.? Thx
?
--
------------------------
Jim W
Phoenix, AZ. USA
Losmandy GM811G, NINA 1.11, ASI2600MC Pro, Sky-Watcher Scopes
|
Re: Adding grease to existing greased worm and wheel
On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 11:16 AM, Brian Valente wrote:
please do NOT use lithium grease.?
we use arctic lube here at the shop, and many others use superlube
I use SuperLube on my GM811G.? What are the specific issues with lithium grease?? Just want to know.? Thx ? -- ------------------------ Jim W Phoenix, AZ. USA Losmandy GM811G, NINA 1.11, ASI2600MC Pro, Sky-Watcher Scopes
|
Re: Adding grease to existing greased worm and wheel
I recently switched from super lube to moly based CRC brake and
caliper lube.? The moly based stuff, to my senses, handles higher
friction loads considerably better.? I am using custom spring
loaded worms that have constant pressure, and no back-off bolt
like the OEM SLW has.? Due to the constant pressure of the spring,
I felt the super lube wasnt robust enough to stay in place over
time.?
However with a stock 2-piece worm block and static mesh, super
lube is cheap, readily available, and has been proven to work well
across many many mounts.? I'd also suggest steering clear of
lithium grease.
Good luck,
-Tony
On 7/6/2021 2:11 PM, Pete wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I have just finished taking out the backlash from my 1992 steel
wormed CG11.? I had the gearbox off and the Oldham connector.?
During this process I removed a small amount of lube from the
bearings (reduced to thick guck) and from the steel worm gear.?
Now it is all back together I see that the worms and gears
assemblies? look a bit under lubricated.? I do not wish to
dismantle the whole thing and clean off the old worm grease.? I
would rather add a small amount of lube to what's already there.?
Questions, what?
I quite like white lithium grease but am reluctant to mix it with
what has already been doing a fine job since 1992.
What product do I use on the worms please.
Thanks.
Pete
|
Re: Adding grease to existing greased worm and wheel
please do NOT use lithium grease.?
we use arctic lube here at the shop, and many others use superlube
I have just finished taking out the backlash from my 1992 steel wormed CG11.? I had the gearbox off and the Oldham connector.? During this process I removed a small amount of lube from the bearings (reduced to thick guck) and from the steel worm gear.? Now it is all back together I see that the worms and gears assemblies? look a bit under lubricated.? I do not wish to dismantle the whole thing and clean off the old worm grease.? I would rather add a small amount of lube to what's already there.? Questions, what?
I quite like white lithium grease but am reluctant to mix it with what has already been doing a fine job since 1992.
What product do I use on the worms please.
Thanks.
Pete
-- Brian?
Brian Valente portfolio
|
Adding grease to existing greased worm and wheel
I have just finished taking out the backlash from my 1992 steel wormed CG11.? I had the gearbox off and the Oldham connector.? During this process I removed a small amount of lube from the bearings (reduced to thick guck) and from the steel worm gear.? Now it is all back together I see that the worms and gears assemblies? look a bit under lubricated.? I do not wish to dismantle the whole thing and clean off the old worm grease.? I would rather add a small amount of lube to what's already there.? Questions, what?
I quite like white lithium grease but am reluctant to mix it with what has already been doing a fine job since 1992.
What product do I use on the worms please.
Thanks.
Pete
|
Yup, that's basically it. A few bigger popular galaxies here & there but mostly the bigger nebulae for now
Thanks for your help Edward !
|
I would not worry about the under-sampling per se.? At that image scale, you are probably going to target larger emission nebula. If you have enough subs, you can drizzle x2 or x3 and certainly improve the star shapes but unlikely to see much difference unless you are cropping the image down to a central target.
--
Edward
|
So after bashing my head a few times on the bahtinov mask I finally remembered it was a Carey mask and not a bahtinov after all !
Downside is that NINA can¡¯t analyze that for me. Upside is I feel less insane.?
I know my eyes are no computer but as far as I can see this is focus. Admittedly it¡¯s on Vega and ideally some kind of smaller art would be ideal but unless someone sees something off I¡¯m going to call this good
|
Thanks, I will post up a stretched version - the stars visually look good to me, so maybe I should just stop obsessing ?
Regarding the undersampling - I guess the only solution there is a smaller sensor or a longer FL scope (or a reducer) or maybe applying drizzle to the stack ?
I've been doing "CFA drizzle" to reduce the blur of the debayer process, but keeping scale=1 and not blowing up the image. Maybe it would be something to play with
|
Due to the image under-sampling, I am not sure the star sizes are really 6-7 arcsec.? I was hard pressed to find stars more than 2 pixels across in the image. Perhaps it would help to stretch the image to see what the star shapes look like.?
--
Edward
|
Thanks Edward. Yeah 3.5 pixels I believe is what NINA reports, that translates into 6-7 arc seconds (2.18 as/px scale)
Many people report getting 2-3 arc/sec which seems not achievable to me
That link is actually a 10 minute sub from my target. I dont think NINA saves the images it takes for AF (at least not that I know of)
This is a Nikon D5300 for the imaging camera
Without the duo-band filter, I can get into the high 2 "pixel" scale but it was still 5+ arc seconds which just seems huge - many people report tossing *any* sub over 4" for instance ... very odd
My skies are not great (Bortle 6 but also feel very "milky" for want of a better word
|
Nick,? Thanks for posting some curves.? You might temporarily bump up number of points it computes on either side of the minimum (keeping the AF step size the same) to make sure the curves continue to go up on each side.
Putting aside the actual absolute HFR values for a moment (which could be many things related to sampling, exposure etc), as well as the slight lumpiness and asymmetry (which is likely the ZWO mechanic), note that the curve looks well enough sampled that you are not likely to be jumping over a central position which has substantially better focus. Eyeballing the curve, your best achieved HFR appears to be about 3.5 (in what ever units of measure are being used here).? If that is the same HFR measure you are getting on the final AF test exposure NINA returns, you are probably at your best focuser position.?
The test image you said is 10 min exposure.? I assume you meant the 10 sec you are using for AF?? Anyway, this looks pretty under-sampled and no real evidence of star bloat.? I think you are done playing with AF at this point :-)
--
Edward
|
Nick,
A couple of things come to mind if you are not getting HFR low enough:
-Double check your sampling. If you are far less than one this could cause bloating. If you have a mono cam try binning 2X2 or 3X3 and see if the HFR changes.
-Try an object or area where no large stars are present. A bright star can alter the average HFR for the whole image and affect your V-curve.??
-With the ZWO EAF (what you have?) I have never found auto-focus to work that well (in SGPro) and the V-curves are pretty bumpy. My MoonLite CHL produces very symmetrical curves all the time. With the ZWO I usually just try to move in and out with the position controls and check the HFR number after each click and check where the lowest HFR is.
All the best,
John?
|
This is a link also to a 10 min test sub (NEF format) - no processing done on it
|
Good point. I have a couple of "normal" looking ones and the first one thats a bit odd - I think because I had changed the exposure time to 4 seconds which is not enough
HFR of my subis is around 3.2-3.6 pixels at a scale of 2.2
|
You might also post a picture of the AF curve you are getting.?
Definitely do your experiment with Bahtinov mask and have NINA measure all of the image HFR values.?
Goal here is to see whether there is a limit to what focus you can get or whether NINA is going back to a poor focal position due to backlash.
--
Edward
|
OK so I measured 1000 steps = ~4mm (no calipers but I have a set on order since I need them only)
= 4/1000 mm per step = 4um/step
My scope is an AT60ED so f/6 = 6 x 6 x 2.2 = 79.2um
Width of zone = 79.2/4 = 19.8 steps
So my step size starting point should be 19.8 * 1.5 = 30, so I am not far off at 25
Thanks again! I am going to run a few tests if the weather holds tonight.
I fail to believe 6a/sec is the best I can do here
|
Michael Herman
Pete
Edward Plumer