Hi,
For what its worth: Tonight I commanded my scope to go
to Dec 90 and as close as I can make it go by nudging it
electronically is about 89 55 00. So my simple method
of setting scope to 90 and taking images and getting a
match looks infeasible. I still don't know why the scope
cannot be moved to Dec 90. :-)
I did do the Celestron built-in alignment method when I set up
the scope. But I need more precision apparently.
Anyway, thanks for all the ideas guys. I am still studying
all the alternatives.
Thanks,
Howard
Gray Olson wrote:
Haven't thought through your proposed method, but as far as PARot goes, you could try verifying an md5 or sha1 checksum if there are any, but I wouldn't worry too much about the "Trojan" thrown in the antivirus - the program does display Trojan-like behavior in its intended use case, since it hooks into MaximDL and controls it from an outside binary.
Gray
On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 9:01 PM Howard Anderson <handy13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:handy13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hi Jim and Gray,
Thanks. Not sure Polemaster is what I am looking for.
So far I am either looking for a procedure where I look through
the eyepiece and do mechanical corrections or use my camera to
do the viewing. Would prefer my camera if I can figure out
a way to use it...
Parot looks very interesting but parotsettings.exe, which is part
of the Parot system that must be installed, contains the Trojan.Gen.2
virus according to Norton Antivirus. I have sent a message to the
author on SourceForge. His documentation says he will provide
source code if you are worried about his software containing a virus.
Seems like I should be able to cobble something up that uses
Maxim DL and my camera... If I can figure out what I need to
do to determine exactly were the pole is and how far off I am
in Azimuth and Elevation.
I am having trouble visualizing what I would need to do
to use my camera to determine the error and then mechanically
correct it... Parot apparently does this but I need to figure
out exactly what the algorithm is that they are using.
Now, it suddenly occurs to me that what if I tell the scope to go to
Dec 90 and RA approximately the current UTC time, then
take an image and plate-solve it in Maxim DL. Won't that
tell me what the true RA and Dec is? Then I could do mechanical
adjustments and take new images until the RA and Dec of the center
of the image shows itself to be Dec 90 and RA the current UTC time. When they match, I am exactly polar aligned?
Can it be that easy?
What am I missing? I.e., if it is this easy, why isn't everyone doing
it this way? :-)
Thanks,
Howard
Jim Waters wrote:
Coming into this late... I am not sure if you want to realign
the mounts to achieve better polar alignment or something else. Check out QHY PoleMaster – URL below. In 4 to 5 minutes I can
align my CGEM to within 30 arc-seconds. Sometimes much better.
http://www.qhyccd.com/PoleMaster.html
Search on YouTube.
Jim
jimwaters@xxxxxxx <mailto:jimwaters@xxxxxxx>
From: sac-forum-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:sac-forum-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:sac-forum-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Howard Anderson
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2017 7:17 PM
To: sac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:sac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [sac-forum] Re: Polar Alignment of Celestron CGEM Mount
Hi Gray,
Thanks VERY MUCH! I was unaware of these tools.
I will study them and choose one or all to experiment with.
I usually think things through in great detail to be sure I have
everything I need with me and have things planned out as well
as possible before visiting the remote site.
Really appreciate your input!
Thank,
Howard
http://www.astroshow.com
Gray Olson wrote:
Hi Howard,
I would recommend a few different options, depending on how
your setup is working.
The first is Alignmaster, a piece of software that does
essentially exactly what you are talking about with the sync
method automatically. See http://alignmaster.de/
Second is using a piece of software to aid in alignment that
uses a plate solver. These include AstroTortilla which has a
tool that will calculate polar alignment error quickly by
solving an image taken through your telescope, after which
you can adjust your az and/or alt and then re-calculate until
the error is lower than whatever your desired threshold is.
The other is Ekos, a suite of astrophotography tools
integrated into Kstars, which does a very similar process but
works well with INDI / the Linux ecosystem in general if that
is what your controlling equipment is already using.
Finally, there’s a piece of software called PARot
(https://sourceforge.net/p/parot/wiki/Manual/) which offers
another method of software-aided polar alignment.
Hope you find one or more of these helpful!
Gray
On Feb 1, 2017, at 4:38 PM, Howard Anderson
<handy13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:handy13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
wrote:
Hi,
I am seeing a small amount of field rotation in 40 minute
images
I am taking with my remote TOA-130 on a CGE 800 (Older)
mount. Seems to be worse at high latitudes but seems to
diminish to zero when the object is near the Zenith. Does
not completely make sense to me but I have the images to
show that it is happening that way.
I believe this is because my mount is not precisely aligned.
I do not like the drift method.
Years ago I and others worked out a method for extremely
precise
rapid alignment of the LX-200 scopes using a SYNC operation
which moved the coordinate system so that it would sync
with a star that was centered in the field. I believe this
sync operation essentially "rotated" the celestial sphere
coordinates.
This is the procedure I use to get near-perfect polar
alignment of the LX-200:
http://www.astroshow.com/astrotip/align.htm#iterative%20alignment%20procedure
I would like to do something similar for the CGEM mount. It has
a SYNC operation in the menu.
Does anyone know if the Meade sync operation and the
CGEM SYNC operation do essentially the same thing?
If so I can use a similar procedure to what I use with the
LX-200.
It is 270 miles to my remote telescope so I would like to
think
this through in advance. I will probably go there within two
or three months...
Any suggestions not involving the drift method would be
welcome indeed...
Thanks,
Howard
