Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Equipment Discussions
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 03-12-2014, 03:37 PM
5ash's Avatar
5ash (Philip)
Earthling

5ash is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hunter valley. nsw
Posts: 1,113
No tools collimation - what do you think??

This months "Australian sky and telescope " has an article "no tools collimation" which seems to show a simple way of final star collimation . The author describes the out of focus image as having a dark hole near its centre which he alludes to asi the shadow of the secondary. Is it really that ? If so what effect does secondary offset in a fast scope have on its central position? The technique looks so simple and obvious that final collimation of fast newtonians can be easily achieved using it??
Philip
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-12-2014, 06:51 AM
Jason D's Avatar
Jason D (Jason)
Registered User

Jason D is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: California USA
Posts: 117
I have not seen the article but star collimation is a well-known method. If it is done correctly, secondary offset should not be an issue.

The proper way to star collimate is to use high magnification and defocus by a small amount. If you defocus to the point where you can see the diffraction pattern of the spider vanes then you have dofocused too much. Secondary offset will be visible and will impact the accuracy of your collimation when the star is defocused too much.

Bear in mind that star collimation can only fix the primary mirror collimation. It does not fix secondary mirror. Besides, it can only be executed reliably on nights with acceptable seeing.

Personally, I prefer to use quality collimation tools. It is an easier and a more reliable method.

Jason
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-12-2014, 01:17 PM
barx1963's Avatar
barx1963 (Malcolm)
Bright the hawk's flight

barx1963 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Mt Duneed Vic
Posts: 3,978
There are a couple of limitations, which Gary touches on in the article. The main one is that for a large dob or if you are trying it alone, adjusting can be difficult unless it is motorised. This is exacerbated by the high poer required, if I following the recommendation of 25x per inch I would need 500x on my 20" so a star wouldn't stay centred very long.
Also seeing needs to be pretty good as Jason said.

That said, doing a star test at the end as a confirmation that everything is OK is still a good idea.

Malcolm
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 13-12-2014, 04:07 PM
Don Pensack's Avatar
Don Pensack
Registered User

Don Pensack is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 507
I might add that if your collimation tools are accurate, and the scope is meticulously collimated, I have never seen a star test that could improve on the collimation, even at very high powers.
and star collimation doesn't help with secondary alignment.
I have seen poorly-collimated scopes that could be improved with star collimation, however.
But, the primary downside to star collimation is that seeing needs to be very very good to see the near-focus, high-power image with enough resolution to check collimation.
I suppose that's one reason to have a tool for primary collimation.
No tool collimation works fairly well on f/10 and longer newtonians, but not on today's faster scopes.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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 12:56 PM.

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