#1  
Old 04-02-2018, 12:41 PM
Granada
The truth is out there

Granada is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 176
Tracking

OK, get ready for a proper noobie question. If you've bought a motorised mount that can do its own tracking, why do some people have an additional tracking camera piggybacked on the scope?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-02-2018, 01:47 PM
Huey (Michael)
Registered User

Huey is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cobar
Posts: 113
tracking

Welcome,
Tracking is probably good enough for visual observing but not for astrophotography if you want pinpoint star images. No mount is perfect and any guiding aid will help achieve better images when the picture has to be taken over several minutes.

Clear skies
Huey
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-02-2018, 07:07 PM
Wavytone
Registered User

Wavytone is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Killara, Sydney
Posts: 4,147
Granada,

Assuming the earth's rotation is constant (actually it isn't but we will get to that later), the rate at which objects move across the sky is not constant - it is affected by several things:

1. The motion of all objects is affected by atmospheric refraction, which causes them to appear higher in elevation, as a function of elevation. This produces an variable offset in both their apparent hour angle AND declination, and the offset varies as a function of elevation.

2. Atmospheric refraction is in influenced by site altitude, atmospheric pressure, the humidity of the air column along the optical path, hour angle and declination and ultimately its nontrivial to solve this.

if you want a fixed rate, a good approximation is known as the "king rate".

3. The moon moves visibly at a different rate to the stars and requires its own tracking rate (lunar, on most handsets). Basically it does one less orbit per lunar month than the number of days, so the lunar rate is about 3% slower than the nominal sidereal rate.

4. The sun does one less rotation per year so the solar rate is about 0.3% slower than the sidereal rate.

THE REAL SHOWSTOPPERS... however, are...

5. Periodic errors in the gear train,

6. Geometric errors within the mount; ie the angles between the RA and dec axis, and the dec axis and optical axis not being perpendicular, and

7. Flexure within the telescope OTA and mount as it moves. At the level of seconds of arc, most mounts are not much better than a block of Jello - they move and wobble all over the place.

8. Atmospheric effects (scintillation).

These are all to some extent unpredictable but can be measured empirically, ie by measurements.

And yes it is possible to compensate for scintillation - the gear to do it (adaptive optics) is within a few amateur budgets.

THERE IS, however, another way. Thanks to control-system theory, closed-loop feedback can be used to keep a telescope pointing at ANY target regardless of all of the errors above, by using a small telescope equipped with a guide camera ("auto guider") that provides signals to the drive electronics in response to any offset in hour angle or declination.

Last edited by Wavytone; 05-02-2018 at 07:18 PM.
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 06:12 PM.

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