View Single Post
  #6  
Old 13-10-2020, 09:36 AM
mental4astro's Avatar
mental4astro (Alexander)
kids+wife+scopes=happyman

mental4astro is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 4,979
Peter,

Of course I am not familiar with how you built your scope, nor the pedigree of the optics (so I am assuming the primary is a good one), I have a couple of questions first.

How is your primary mirror held in its cell? Not glued into place I hope at any point.

Did you make the primary's cell too?

My thinking is not necessarily a coma issue. My thinking is two possible sources from the way the aberration in the stars shows itself.

My first thought from the image you've presented suggests a pinched primary mirror. Either the primary is squeezed in by the cell from the sides, but more from overtightened clip or other retention system being employed. If the primary has any glue holding it in place, there is your source of strain.

If coma is "worse" rather than improving, this suggests distorted optics. This is because the light is not going where it is supposed to if the optics were not under strain. Nor is the distribution of the aberration seen in the star a uniform pattern of being evenly distributed radially. The strain in the mirror is not evenly distributed, and this shows in the way the aberration comes off the stars - the primary mirror is not sitting passive in its cell. And it really does not take very much force at all to distort a primary by overtightening the clips! It is one thing I have come to learn very quickly.

Tilt has been suggested by Chris could be the second cause, to which it could be from the focuser not set square, or flex in the OTA, not the optics. If the focuser is square, then the collimation process fine tunes the optics, eliminating tilt. This could be a cause for persistent aberration, which again is not coma per se, but from a more fundamental misalignment. However, this does not necessarily explain the appearance of the aberration pattern we are seeing. If the OTA is a solid tube that has been perforated along its entire length, this could be introducing torque into the OTA because of the way Newts are loaded unevenly across their length - heavy primary, the coupling point to the mount, the focuser and camera assembly, and then it is rotated across three axis during its use meaning the loads are shifting and the way the OTA is experiencing the loads changes as does the way it flexes. Flex is diabolical and because we are talking about wavelengths of light, it does not take much. One easy we to figure out tube flex is to check collimation with the scope in many different positions across the sky. If it is flex then the collimation will change when the OTA is pointed to different directions, like to zenith and shifting the OTA from one side in RA and then over to the other side in RA. A laser may be enough to expose this flex. A perforated solid tube can be a good idea, but it needs to be done with consideration of the loads at play with the thickness of the tube.

My first suspicion remains with the primary mirror being under strain. I have seen the same thing with my scopes. The strain still allows you to collimate the scope, but when focused, the image of the stars is distorted, and not evenly across the FOV. It is the same as a poorly figured mirror - you can collimate it and achieve the same collimation quality as a finely figured mirror, but the final image reflects the poor figure. In this case it is showing the primary mirror is under strain. The primary must sit passive in its cell and not have overtightened retention clips or source of strain. Last point also relates to the cell's build in case the cell is not pushing evenly in its contact points on the primary. This can mean that the primary is under strain from flexing over the cell. These are all aspects that need to be examined, not just tweaking the collimation screws and cussing the coma corrector.

Alex.

Last edited by mental4astro; 13-10-2020 at 07:29 PM.
Reply With Quote