#1  
Old 02-02-2014, 11:21 PM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Galaxy hitchhiking guide

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 8,090
Flat field

I've been tinkering with my camera and RHA set-up for some time now, but finally decided to nail down the camera orthogonality over the last few nights.

It just took a bit of math, plus knowing the step increment of my focuser.

Mating various adapters, Filter wheel etc. basically meant the system had a residual tilt of 0.012mm. Some shim stock did the rest.

Have to say I'm pretty pleased with the results.
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (RHAcurveplot.jpg)
83.3 KB90 views
Click for full-size image (RHA3dcurve.jpg)
93.7 KB93 views
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-02-2014, 12:04 AM
Joshua Bunn's Avatar
Joshua Bunn (Joshua)
Registered User

Joshua Bunn is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Albany, Western Australia
Posts: 1,459
Looking good Peter how did the star field look?

Gee, the tolerances must be small with fast focal ratios. what did you do to find the residual 12 micron tilt?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-02-2014, 07:13 AM
Paul Haese's Avatar
Paul Haese
Registered User

Paul Haese is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post
I've been tinkering with my camera and RHA set-up for some time now, but finally decided to nail down the camera orthogonality over the last few nights.

It just took a bit of math, plus knowing the step increment of my focuser.

Mating various adapters, Filter wheel etc. basically meant the system had a residual tilt of 0.012mm. Some shim stock did the rest.

Have to say I'm pretty pleased with the results.
Still a bit to take out I reckon.

In all seriousness I had not noticed any tilt in your previous images. Looks pretty flat across the field too.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-02-2014, 07:22 AM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 22,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post
basically meant the system had a residual tilt of 0.012mm. Some shim stock did the rest.
Bummer... here goes my 0.012mm every time I pack and unscrew my camera.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-02-2014, 09:07 AM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Galaxy hitchhiking guide

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 8,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Bunn View Post
Looking good Peter how did the star field look?

Gee, the tolerances must be small with fast focal ratios. what did you do to find the residual 12 micron tilt?
Used CCD inspector to get the direction of the tilt, which thankfully was pretty much along the Y axis.

I focused on a star at the top edge of the frame, then refocused on the lower edge. The difference was 144 counts on the Atlas focuser or 0.012 mm....
(each atlas step is 0.08 micron)
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-02-2014, 09:19 AM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Galaxy hitchhiking guide

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 8,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by multiweb View Post
Bummer... here goes my 0.012mm every time I pack and unscrew my camera.
seems trivial, I know, but you could actually see the difference from top to lower edges.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-02-2014, 09:19 AM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 22,060
Ha... that's more like it. Hard to repeat for a nomad astronomer though. Will keep that in mind when/if I ever get an obs.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-02-2014, 09:21 AM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 22,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post
seems trivial, I know, but you could actually see the difference from top to lower edges.
Oh I totally agree. Theoretical tolerances are extremely tight. In practice it's hard to get (and stay) there. I have no doubt about the quality of field improvement. I've 'nailed it' a handful of occasion by luck but would be incapable of reproducing it. I remember reading in the book "Celestron - the early days" a paragraph written by Ceravolo when he was working there saying he got an SCT to 1/20th of a wave on a rig by centering the corrector on a test rig. Then went on saying "of course, 4 cork shims aren't going to keep you there".
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-02-2014, 09:42 AM
leon's Avatar
leon
Registered User

leon is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Warrnambool
Posts: 12,430
Looks impressive, just wish I knew what you were talking about

Leon
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-02-2014, 10:33 AM
Joshua Bunn's Avatar
Joshua Bunn (Joshua)
Registered User

Joshua Bunn is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Albany, Western Australia
Posts: 1,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post
I focused on a star at the top edge of the frame, then refocused on the lower edge. The difference was 144 counts on the Atlas focuser or 0.012 mm....
(each atlas step is 0.08 micron)
Ahh yes, thats an effective and simple method. in you're situation this works a treat because you dont have to collimate you're scope. With scopes that have adjustable collimation, this is not so easy because if the collimation is out a little, the focus distances will be a little different on oposite sides of the chip - regardless of tilt. this has been my experience.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-02-2014, 11:11 AM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Galaxy hitchhiking guide

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 8,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Bunn View Post
Ahh yes, thats an effective and simple method. in you're situation this works a treat because you dont have to collimate you're scope. With scopes that have adjustable collimation, this is not so easy because if the collimation is out a little, the focus distances will be a little different on oposite sides of the chip - regardless of tilt. this has been my experience.
Indeed I'd suspect you be chasing your tail if collimation had to be done as well.

By the way...real world result is here

I've also found that when you get down to these levels that, not just the star field used with CCD inspector, but also differing exposures of the same field show small tilt variations.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-02-2014, 11:17 AM
Joshua Bunn's Avatar
Joshua Bunn (Joshua)
Registered User

Joshua Bunn is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Albany, Western Australia
Posts: 1,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post

I've also found that when you get down to these levels that, not just the star field used with CCD inspector, but also differing exposures of the same field show small tilt variations.
True, thats why the final test for me is always the star test at high resolution, of which yours is looking the goods
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-02-2014, 11:53 AM
h0ughy's Avatar
h0ughy (David)
Moderator

h0ughy is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NEWCASTLE NSW Australia
Posts: 33,156
what a fine result - impressive, and not even a bee's XXXX in it
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-02-2014, 03:34 PM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Galaxy hitchhiking guide

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 8,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by h0ughy View Post
what a fine result - impressive, and not even a bee's XXXX in it
Ta Dave. I should point out the diffraction spike in bright star in the top tight corner was not due to any problem with the optics....is was due some tallish black-bamboo next to my Obs that got in the way during the exposure...
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-02-2014, 09:36 PM
ericwbenson (Eric)
Registered User

ericwbenson is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post
Indeed I'd suspect you be chasing your tail if collimation had to be done as well.

By the way...real world result is here

I've also found that when you get down to these levels that, not just the star field used with CCD inspector, but also differing exposures of the same field show small tilt variations.
That's right, and that's also why large aperture AO is limited in it's use. The isoplanatic patch (the area of the sky that has undergone the same atmospheric aberration) at most sites is pretty small, so large chips pickup focus differences from top-left to bottom-right etc. pretty easily (the atmosphere moves the star around on your chip AND causes defocus at the same time)

Best,
EB
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-02-2014, 11:50 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
That's very impressive.
I find the CDK17 is very good in this regard. But that's F6.8 which is a lot easier.

With the reducer it could do with a bit of this type of work but overall not bad.

Those tilt/tip adapters from Teleskop Service would be handy to have in the imaging train to make it repeatable for those who remove their cameras routinely.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-02-2014, 12:12 AM
Joshua Bunn's Avatar
Joshua Bunn (Joshua)
Registered User

Joshua Bunn is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Albany, Western Australia
Posts: 1,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Bunn View Post
Ahh yes, thats an effective and simple method. in you're situation this works a treat because you dont have to collimate you're scope. With scopes that have adjustable collimation, this is not so easy because if the collimation is out a little, the focus distances will be a little different on oposite sides of the chip - regardless of tilt. this has been my experience.
I realized this method can be used with scopes that require collimation too. Instead of moving the mount so the star is on the opposite side of the chip, you rotate the camera (providing there is no run out in the rotation). Now the star is on the other side of the chip and the collimation has no effect.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 07:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement