PDA

View Full Version here: : APCC Pro v1.5.0.18


Slawomir
25-12-2016, 05:54 AM
AP has recently released a new version of APCC and now pointing models can be build with SGP controlling the camera - happy days!

Will try it out as soon as we get a clear night in SE QLD.

peter_4059
25-12-2016, 08:23 AM
What is tje advantage of this if you have platesolving working?

Slawomir
25-12-2016, 10:16 AM
Hi Peter,

The manual states that APCC Pro allows for creating an advanced pointing model as well as a tracking rate model, and I am mostly interested in the former.

From the manual:

To help keep a target centered APCC Pro uses a Tracking Rate Model. Tracking rate correction is very important if you want to:

>Reduce required autoguider movements which will result in sharper images.
>Do long-exposure unguided images.
>Do long-duration autoguider cycles through a narrowband filter

>Accurately track comets and/or asteroids.

The tracking rate model uses the pointing model to calculate the necessary adjustments to the tracking rate to keep a target centered. The adjustments are made to both the Right Ascension and Declination tracking rates once every second.

With the new version I can use SGP to control the camera and to acquire necessary data to create the model. Previous versions of APCC did not allow for using SGP to control the camera, and I did not want to purchase additional software just for creating pointing and tracking models.

Not sure how much will it really reduce the required auto-guider movements, but I guess even a small tracking improvement is very welcome in this hobby of ours :)

RobF
25-12-2016, 12:07 PM
Glad to hear you now have the option Sauvi. I'll be interested to hear if you still feel the need for this long term. With my trusty little HEQ5Pro I learned a lot playing with pointing models (MaxPoint) about the idiosyncrasies of my mount and polar alignment.

Ultimately I realised in the long run decent polar alignment, one point sync and plate solving does the job except at extremes of northern DEC.

With your Rolls Royce mount (drool :P :D) expect it will be a very different situation, but still interested to hear updates.

peter_4059
25-12-2016, 12:50 PM
I can see the advantage if the mount is permanently installed in an observatory but it seems like a lot of fuss for a portable setup if you have autoguiding. Nothing like complification to waste your imaging time.

Slawomir
25-12-2016, 01:08 PM
Rob, I continue with the same routine - a decent PA and one point sync and it has served me well, but at the same time I am also curious about pointing models so want to try incorporating them into my hobby. I do not expect a significant difference in the quality of guiding, but small incremental improvements do add up and thus are always welcome :)

Peter - from what I understand making a model can take only 10-20 min and can be done before it gets completely dark. If such model can make a difference to the quality of data, then why not use it? I already have set limits and parameters for my location, so building a model should be a matter of a one mouse click and the entire process happens automatically. Will need to wait for a clear night anyway to check it out.

peter_4059
25-12-2016, 01:16 PM
Fair enough. Looking forward to seeing the results.

RobF
25-12-2016, 04:46 PM
Yes, will be interesting to see outcome with a high quality mount. I would expect pointing to be improved, but guiding wouldn't be any different (unless you used the pointing model info to fine tune your PA?).

Slawomir
25-12-2016, 06:19 PM
Rob, so far pointing has been very accurate with the new mount and I really do not feel that it needs to be improved. However, the manual for APCC suggests that guiding can also somehow benefit from creating a pointing model:

Because of flexure, polar misalignment, refraction, and other effects, the apparent tracking rate of stars and deep sky objects in the sky is not exactly equal to the sidereal rate. The reason is that the magnitude of these pointing errors change slightly as the position of the telescope changes. This causes the target to drift in the telescope's view over time.

It is my understanding then that a tracking rate model build upon a pointing model allows for a reduction of slow drift caused by the above mentioned factors. The question remains whether I will be able to notice any difference in guiding, which so far, without a tracking rate model, has been consistently excellent.

RobF
26-12-2016, 12:56 AM
Thanks for explaining Sauvi. Nothing wrong with chasing incremental improvements, even when things are already running well :)

(you haven't been hanging around Rick again have you? :D)

RickS
28-12-2016, 09:42 AM
IMO, being a little OCD is helpful for astro imaging, Rob ;)

RobF
29-12-2016, 07:29 PM
Sad but probably true for many of us :lol:

I'm still trying to figure out how you've incrementally improved your performance to way past 100% of what's possible though :D ;)

Slawomir
30-12-2016, 08:44 AM
I'm pleased to report that last night for the first time and with no issues APCC successfully built a modest 21-point model, and it eliminated any drift in the Dec over about 20 minutes of unguided tracking. I could not explore it further because of the clouds...

I will be certainly using pointing models from now on.

Also, earlier that night phd2 was reporting the total RMS as low as 0.27" - the lowest so far for me and I feel that as I learn more about the mount it may go lower still. Hopefully we will get a few clear(ish) nights before I will be back at work...

atalas
30-12-2016, 12:52 PM
Very good news Sauvi!

of cause with a larger model you will be able to deal with flecture and refraction more accurately....good things to come:thumbsup:

Spookyer
30-12-2016, 03:07 PM
APCC is a fairly substantial investment of $. I will be interested to see the benefits you obtain. Good luck and let us know how you go.

brett

Slawomir
30-12-2016, 04:31 PM
Thank you Louie. Yes, a larger model would be much more powerful, but even a modest pointing model seems to potentially be a useful tool for people like myself who need to set up for each session, as it eliminates/reduces some of the effects of imperfect PA for example.



Agreed Brett. I got it with the mount so had 30% discount, and I thought I may as well go all the way and get a complete package (mount, pier, software). Will be eating baked beans for the next few years before I financially recover :lol:

But more seriously, APCC has some useful tools, such as horizon and meridian limits, slewing to counterweight up positions for seamless imaging past the meridian, editable parking positions and more, and of course pointing and tracking models.

Could I live without APCC? Sure, but it adds several quite useful (but not essential) features and thus increases functionality of the mount.

DJT
30-12-2016, 08:59 PM
Hi Suavi

Interestingly I ran my Mach 1 up for the first time, in the field as they say, this week. I did the day time polar alignment routine then ran pempro to get PA right.

First slew was pretty close, but using Maxim DL and pinpoint light, the image was auto plate solved then the mount slew to put the object in the centre then plate solved again.

After focussing the mount was off doing its thing on an object for 4 hours and on integrating the data, 60 subs (guided using Sbig self guiding) there was no drift at all. No cropping needed. The object was NE to N and pretty low in the sky.

My point is am not sure what modelling will give you given you are breaking down each night anyway. If you are imaging I imagine you would only be hitting one or two targets at most during a session and I am assuming you would always be guiding?

The mount by the way will track through the meridian without the software. There is a feature in the handset for that. You can also define limits the same way.

Having said that, would love to know how well your fine tuning goes.

Enjoy

Slawomir
31-12-2016, 06:57 AM
Great news David with your successful first session in the field and that everything worked so well. This mount certainly makes AP fun :)

I did not get a handset as I am using the mount 100% for AP. Thus I need APCC to get access to some of these features. I agree PemPro is gold for PA, and with further practice I will hopefully learn how to get it spot on in a short time. These days I aim for no more than 1 arcmin error in PA with PemPro; perhaps with less restricted sky views it would be easier to get more accurate PA without fiddling for too long. That's why I see potential benefits of making a small model with APCC to supplement PA routine with PemPro; it does not take long at all to make one and it happens fully automatically and it seems to eliminate residual drift in the Dec due to imperfect PA.

Having said that, an occasional correction in the Dec in phd2 probably does not hurt the data, so I am not sure if I will see a measurable difference when using pointing model for correcting tracking accuracy. I feel that less guiding corrections is always better, so I will try implementing anything that will help improve tracking, within reason of course :lol:

DJT
31-12-2016, 07:38 AM
Aah, missed the bit about the handset. That makes sense. I have one handset between 2 mounts so have to keep reminding myself to pack it when I head off to the cabin.

Will look at guide corrections made next time I am out.

Cheers

Slawomir
31-12-2016, 07:57 AM
TWO astro-physics mounts :eyepop:

You know David you have just planted an idea in my mind that will never go away :lol:

RobF
31-12-2016, 11:20 PM
For goodness sake don't go anywhere near Brett then :)