δ Scorpii in HA

[avandonk]

I have been waiting for any bit of cloud free sky to test the latest modification to my system. Managed to get some last night.

Below is an image of the rear of the optic train. I have added two turnbuckle tensioned wires to try to stop flexure. The bar the wires are attached to bears directly on the dovetail holding the ITS that holds the camera. This all then forms a stable triangle with no extra strain on the dovetail.

Does it work?

Large image 3x16 min in 3nm HA 7MB

http://d1355990.i49.quadrahosting.com.au/2013_06/dsco_test.jpg


Bert

[strongmanmike]

Looks like it :thumbsup:

...God I love your imaging setup :lol: :love:

Mike

[cfranks]

You must have been looking at my wiring setup! I hadn't thought about turnbuckles and G clamps though!

Love it! ;)

Charles

[trent_julie]

Wow Bert,
Looks like an industrial monster, are the rusty G-clamps going to be a permanent feature?

Trent

[avandonk]

They are just like me, old and rusty and rough around the edges but they can still do the job!

One is to hold the bar to stabilize it. The other is just my way of fine tuning mount balance. I may buy some new shiny G clamps when I get the chance.

I do not go for looks. I go for performance!

Those very old G-clamps belong to the very talented cabinetmaker that works in the very large shed in my backyard. I nicked them while he was not looking from his very large collection. They were most probably screwed tight before I was born!

Bert

[avandonk]

The image says it all Mike and stop calling me god!

Bert

[avandonk]

My next move was a whip!

Bert

[dvj]

I would bet the flexure is coming from the rear tip-tilt plate of the RH-200. The Altas should be able to support the CFW and Camera, but I don't like the mechanics of the RH tip-tilt plate. It's a thin piece of aluminum.

Your image looks very good corner to corner. Too bad it took that much mechanical modification to get this little bugger too work.

Everyone I know who has purchased this instrument knows the pain!

jg

[Paul Haese]

You still seem to have flexure related problems. Stars are not round at full res in every corner, but are very close. It makes me wonder what is going on here if you need to go to this extent to solve star shapes. Is the back of the scope not capable of supporting the load? Is the FLI gear flexing (most like as I have heard this before from other guys) particularly at the connections to the filter wheel? Or are you getting flexure from the dove tail setup. Also why not go 30 minutes on your subs? Doing subs at 1 minute, then 5 minutes, then 10 minutes, then 15 minutes, then 20 minutes, then 25 minutes and then finally 30 minutes will give you a clear idea of what is going on. Each image you have produced in the last 6 months has had elongated or odd stars near the corners. This one is about the best with stars approaching round, but still slightly elongated. I would be very reluctant to buy one of these scopes having seen these issues with a very expensive scope. Just my opinion though and each to their own.

[multiweb]

Great field. The rig scare the hell out of me though. :eyepop:

[marco]

It seems you eventually tamed your scope Bert, my compliments on the dedication on optimizing all the little details and get it fully operational :thumbsup:

Regards
Marco

[avandonk]

All the problems with flexure is due to one thing, F3. At F3 focus is very terse with a CFZ of about 10 to 20 micron.

The fully corrected field of a RH200 is 42mm diameter. The FLI PL16803 camera has a diagonal of 52mm. This further constrains how much flexure can occur before it is noticeable at the corners.

This then means that an OAG is not a practical proposition if there is ANY flexure present with this configuration.

I knew all this before I ordered the new system. The elimination of all flexure was the only way to go.

Nearly all the flexure I had was due to the weight of the focuser CFW and camera. I had flexure between the camera and RH200 and what was even more disturbing the dovetail holding the RH200 and ITS was twisting due to gravity with mount movement. In fact EVERYTHING was flexing. Blaming it on one component is self delusion.

I have not touched the factory alignment of the RH200 and as you can see by the almost flexure free images this alignment is still spot on!


Below is a picture where I have modified the steel plates at the end of the bar the turnbuckles are attached to. The tiny amount of flex due to bending in those plates were allowing the ITS with camera to move.

I now have almost no movement. The second image is of the output of DSS of four 32 minute exposures of Beta Centauri in 3nm HA without dither.

Note the DX and DY columns denoting movement between frames. This tells me I have about one pixel movement in two hours!

Here is a full res image 7MB

http://d1355990.i49.quadrahosting.com.au/2013_06/bcent.jpg


Bert

[avandonk]

Here is another test. NGC 6357 with a little mate 5x32 minute exposures without dither.

Full res image 4MB

http://d1355990.i49.quadrahosting.com.au/2013_06/6357_HA.jpg


Below is the DSS output showing the amount of movement.

Bert

[avandonk]

Here is an unstretched stack of 7x32 min 3nm HA dithered of the Helix Nebula. 15MB


http://d1355990.i49.quadrahosting.com.au/2013_06/HN_HA_7fr_.zip


With far more data I think this will show more faint stuff.


I would be interested to see what anyone else can squeeze out of this data.


Bert

[Shiraz]

that is already very deep Bert - much more and you are going to be seeing the blue end of the CMB! I have enough trouble at f4 and can only imagine how unforgiving of bendy metal f3 must be. That is the price you must pay for sensitivity though and your system has that in spades.

[Astromelb]

Dear Ice In Spacers,

As the owner of one of Australia's leading astronomy products suppliers, and exclusive Australian distributor for the Officina Stellare RH200 telescope that is being considered in this thread - I usually stay well away from adding to threads on Ice In Space.

I regard it as unsuitable for suppliers to comment on this forum - though some - particularly one - do it all the time.

Bert has done a leading job with getting this "system" to where it is today.

The magic word here is - "system".

John's comments from the US give the impression that this "telescope" is a difficult unit to use, this is not the case.

John knows this telescope unit quite capably - but he unfortunately does not have adequate detail about Bert's full system and what Bert has been doing with it over the last year, and his comments may be misconstrued by you the readers of I In S as criticism.

Without full knowledge and with inadequate data - which Bert and I both have - as we have lived this on a day to day process together for the last year - and thereby know how far "past the design of this system" he is running it, comments are quite unsuitable and misplaced.

Bert is running this system "over" it's design parameters, and is achieving the highest capability results with this system of anyone - globally.

Bert is trying to do something absolutely exceptional, system implementation that has never been actioned before, never attempted before, and never achieved before. With Bert's exceptional talents and capabilities he is achieving heady heights that are simply stated "unique" - never achieved before, globally.

Bert's target strategy is not for us all, as most of us are happy to work within the design parameters & specifications of the systems we select.

Bert is not of this mould, and has custom selected a comprehensive set of products that provide - each and every component - state of the art performance, of which his telescope is merely one component in a "system". The balance of his system is the same - all state of the art gear.

As a specialist globally leading optical physicist that spent his career with CSIRO working on cutting edge global leading technology in optical physics, Bert is in a unique position to stretch the boundaries, and "Go Where No Man Has Gone Before" - which is exactly what he is doing here. His talents are well above anyone that I know globally, and thereby his results reflect his unique capabilities.

The telescope he is using is NOT difficult to tame, it is actually a very easy system to achieve exceptional results.

With this F3 system you need to "vertically" assemble the imaging train, as this is necessary. John's comments are correct for those that do not wish to follow this instruction - and incorrectly assemble their system, and thereby achieve out of round star images. It's simple - if you follow the manufacturer's instructions you achieve the results.

Every purchaser in Australia of this telescope receives instruction as to the correct simple vertically assembly process for the imaging train, and with them doing this - they ALL achieve excellent results very quickly.

And thereby achieve the fastest imaging that is available - with imaging in 1/3 of the imaging duration of your typical f5 ultra premium quality advanced astroimaging system - simple as that :)

What John is saying may mislead some of you. John has one of these telescopes - but does not have the same full system as Bert.

In my humble opinion - there is an element of stiff cheddar in John's comments, and this is not isolated to this thread, this has been a theme for some time. John is a very experienced and very capable astroimager, but his "system" is not in the same class as Bert's, nor his capabilities with this particular telescope, thereby Bert's images are superior to John's using the same telescope - this is the crux of this issue.

Personally John, your comments are not welcomed on this forum by myself, you seem to be "on a mission" here, as your comments are giving the impression that you are trying to warn people away from this telescope ?

John - may I recommend that you issue a correction, as going around upsetting people, as you have achieved here - I suggest this is not your desired strategy. I suggest that the manufacturer will be less happy than I am when I provide this threads link to them.

Rgds,
Cris Ellis,
Astromelb,
Melbourne,
Australia.

[avandonk]

Many years ago my lecturer in mechanical dynamics always started a rigorous mathematical proof with the assumption 'that all bodies are regarded as perfectly rigid'. He then mumbled something about the mathematics falling apart when they flexed. He then said in the real world ALL bodies flex no matter how rigid they seem.

I try to deal with reality and it is not easy. Overcoming the limits of our less than perfect constructions is what it is all about.

This has been a long journey as there are no signposts. I had to make it all up on the way.

Bert

[Paul Haese]

Sounds like you have an agenda here too Cris. John has a perfect right in making his statements. I know of several people who have had trouble with this telescope. Your comments seem to suggest an interest in the outcome the capacity to image with this particular telescope.

Bert might well be an optician but his images have for a long time displayed flexure in the system and the steps he has had to undertake are to say the least not conventional for a 10K plus telescope and it is perfectly reasonable to suggest that something is not right if you have to add a turn buckle to a system and a mechanical holder to hold the camera, which are not standard appliances in astronomy imaging. Stability of the imaging train comes through the rear assembly of the scope and all the connections between various components, it is apparent to me at least that is not possible with this telescope. The AP version of this scope carrying the same load does not have this issue at all and required no mechanical control. Certainly going beyond the recommended imaging circle has contributed to this issue and I accept that, but the fact remains AP seem to have this right and everyone I know has had trouble with this particular scope. So people are not imagining things or misrepresenting things.

[avandonk]

That said it far better than I could Cris.

Cris has been very helpful all this time with my problems that were of my own making.

It was just a matter of identifying every REAL problem one at a time and then solving it.

I do use unconventional methods. One being the KISS method. Keep it simple stupid!

Why add more weight by making a fatter stronger ITS when a a couple of turnbuckles and a bit of stainless steel wire will do a better job.

I was at Woodonga at a vintage fly in and was admiring a beautifully restored biplane. It was all wood and cloth reinforced by piano wire. The 'old' bloke next to me started a conversation about the aircraft. He said his name was John. He seemed to know a lot about flying. It was then I realized he was John Gorton a once Prime Minister of Australia. He flew fighters in WW2. He owes his facial good looks to a crash in one in combat.

If piano wire can hold a plane together surely it can stabilize a mere bit of metal.

Bert

[avandonk]

Paul Imaging at F3 is NOT standard.

I have not seen many images from these mythical AP scopes. Even Peter Ward had trouble with orthogonality.

I am not an optician. They make glasses so people with limited vision can see clearly. My background is in Applied Physics. With a very strong emphasis on light optics and x-ray optics.

Standard image trains may work for far slower systems but I guarantee you they flex. You just do not see it.

So please cut out the speculation and misinformation when you do not know what you are even talking about.

Can you give me a list of EVERYONE you know who is having problems? I would like to start a self help group.

By the way F3.0 is far more terse than F3.8! In fact f/3.0 is 60% faster than f/3.8.



Bert

[Martin Pugh]

I entirely agree with Paul's comments here and indeed a user is entirely within his rights to post comments and opinions about any piece of equipment. People can make their own mind up.

Sorry Bert, but I have tracked back to your first light post of Apr 2012, and today (14 months later) you post further modifications in attempt to remove flexure. Despite your best efforts, in the image you have posted stars on axis appear fine, off axis, different story.

As the sole vendor for OS gear in Australia, Cris clearly has an agenda here as Paul suggests. If I were ever in the market for an OS telescope (unlikely) or any other piece of equipment for that matter, it is forums like these and advice from accomplished astrophotographers where I would form opinion and purchase decisions.

Martin

[Paul Haese]

Sorry for getting your specific knowledge set wrong Bert; it was an over sight on my behalf. One that I will not make again. Look forward to seeing an image that you produce which has good stars from corner to corner and that is not over stretched with mountains of noise. Good luck.

[avandonk]

I agree Martin it took a while to solve my flexure problems. They are all gone! Apparently lesser mortals than myself had just given up on ever mastering the new technology.

All I have to do now is image at nearly three times the speed of a F5 system.

Just went out to check on HER. The temperature of the optic train is at 16.0 C +- 0.1C. The UPS reports that all is well. The guide wires still have the same notes Bflat and Fsharp.

The system will be singing again tonight with one hour exposures!

Bert

[avandonk]

Thanks Paul. I promise not to show mountains of noise ever again. OK just a bit.

Bert

[strongmanmike]

Very deep Bert...far too much worrying about slight star shape issues and not enough time enjoying what the image really shows, and so easily I recon ;)

Mike

[Astromelb]

Thanks for your feedback Paul.

All I am trying to do is support someone who has expended a lot of time & effort and taken a system that is well past it's design intent & design criteria, and via - exceptional personal competence, capability and experience - achieved ground breaking success.

I am well aware that there are many that are able to achieve this task, as there are many experienced astro imagers out there.

What Bert has achieved has broken new ground that is being emulated by quite a number of other astro imagers overseas, and they are also having outstanding success with nearly identical systems.

But not in Australia.

Us Australians are innovation deficient - where we are very slow to respond to new technologies, and instead criticise new technology until it is so well established that we are unable to ignore it.

I have spent a life (38 years) in the global automotive industry in a specialist function - Science of Measurement (Metrology) - where the Australian industry is at least a decade behind Europe, US and Asia in our implementation of new processes in engineering.

Self fulfilling prophecy, where the demise of our auto industry is due to our reluctance to adopt new technology (well documented within the industry).

But this isn't restricted to the auto industry, it is of our countries major malaise issues.

I recommend those that are uncomfortable with the theme of f3 don't attempt it, and leave it to others whom are prepared to take things step by step and image at speeds that the balance of users of f5 and slower (most of you) simply are incapable of comprehending.

This is the central theme of all this banter, most of you do not understand this project, and thereby out of caution elect to criticise - a standard Australian idiosyncrasy (tall poppy).

Bert has broken new ground and shown what can be achieved with dedicated effort, and considered step by step implementation. He has not rushed into any of the tasks, and methodically taken each challenge as it comes.

This is a model for us all, as I see many astro imaging systems that people think are a simple plug and play, and will win them imaging awards within weeks of implementation.

What the :(

Plus they aren't kidding !!

A "System" is as strong as it's weakest link, and there's 20 odd suppliers in this system, why "must" the telescope be the target of all this criticism.

Bert's issues were NEVER with the telescope, they were with flexure in the CFW and it's mating connections, there's never ever been anything wrong with the telescope.

Bert puts up full res images - as such he is not able to hide any errors whatsoever, if there is any error it hits you in the face straight away. If you are putting up reduced images you are hiding your issues.

Whom of you put up full res images, I don't see anyone other than Mike S. So your data is hiding errors, not a balanced data set in the first place.

Only in full res is an image fully testable.

Bert's images also have an accuracy of 1 pixel movement in 2 hours, do yours ? This is only available from a system working correctly, with ultra precision optics working perfectly.

Yes, I rarely make any comments on Ice In Space, and why is this - I find nearly all of the comments are biased - and far too many pushing a barrow, whether it be free gear they get from suppliers (they know who they are), or free loan gear to trial. Not open enough to new technologies to open your eyes and actually learn something.

[avandonk]

I would have thought it was painfully obvious that the problem has always been differential flexure between the RH200 and the very heavy CFW and Camera. Even after getting the new rings for the RH200 I still had the same problem and it was only very marginally better. I suspect the Placebo effect was the only thing that was effective.

The engineering concept behind the the two turnbuckles and lateral bar at the bottom of the dovetail is that they form a triangle and with enough tension should minimise flexure due to changing lateral gravitational forces. So to make it VERY CLEAR we are stabilizing the CFW and Camera NOT the RH200! You do not want to know the tension those turnbuckles are at to get the movement down to one pixel per two hours. Yes that very solid ITS bends under the weight of the CFW and Camera!

The RH200 was never designed to take all this weight and far larger sensor. The Focuser, CFW and Camera weigh over eight kilograms.

I have two bars to hold the ends of the dovetail the optic train is on as this was twisting! This bar is 100mm wide and 12mm thick!

I would like to thank Cris for all his help and suggestions. He went as far as negotiating with FLI for a solution to the ten position CFW being the culprit. It was but not the only one.

Personally I am quite glad we have got over the line. Now I can just get on with imaging not engineering and optics. Till next time!


Bert

[dvj]

My point exactly. There is a very thin tip-tilt plate on the rear cell that holds all of the image train weight. I have "suggested" that this is most likely source of mechanical flexure with a very heavy camera and filter wheel like the Proline 16803. By holding the camera securely like you have Bert, (including the very heavy duty and precise Atlas digital focuser), you have removed the weight load off of the rear tip-tilt plate, in fact the entire telescope.

For the record, it was Bert's original work with the RH200 that inspired me to purchase a unit 2nd hand from a U.S. owner a year ago. I have no idea what this guy Chris is writing about. :shrug: I have only been imaging the sky since 1974 and have forgotten a few things about astrographs in my time.

I also know of 2 individulas who purchased this telescope on my recommendation and necessary cautions about F/3.


Regards,

John Gleason

[dvj]

Ok, here is my correction:

I suggest Chris, you are very funny guy and I don't even know who you are. And for the record, I don't even like cheddar. I suggest, that your email was not your serious intent, but one of great humor that Australian's are famous for.

All the best,

jg

[TerraPassenger]

This post has been moved to the equipment discussion section as requested.

[gregbradley]

This thread should really be moved to the equipment discussions section.

The key would be a lightweight imaging setup. I'd go an QSI583 or an older SBIG STL which has built in filter wheel and guider so you save on all that weight.

FLI ML29050 may be good, small well depth but pixel size would match the optics well. FLI Atlas sounds heavy though. ML29050 is 35mm sized sensor like KAI11002 but with smaller pixels.

OAG is also a key. I think if I were setting up that system I would go for a smaller chip say max size KAI11002 (35mm full frame) as the system is really designed with that corrected circle in mind.

An alternative would be to replace the focuser with an AP one. They are really solid and install a lightwieght Roboocus on it. Or replace the focuser with a Feathertouch (I think AP would be more solid).

Greg.

[avandonk]

Dave it depends on what YOU want to do.

If you are not trolling then I am sorry, but it looks like it to me.

Q. Please sir can I carry two tons of gravel in my Ferrari?

A. Yes you can. One ton in the left seat and one ton in the right seat.

This question should be moved to the thread where people exchange information totally irrelevant and useless to each other.

Bert

[TerraPassenger]

@avandonk
I've zero clue, Bert, as to why you think I'm trolling. But I guess I should have expected this sort of response from you. For whatever reason, you're unnecessarily antagonistic.

I'll repost the question in the equipment discussion group.

@GregBradley
RE - OAG - this is more weight on the image train and isn't, based on what I've read, necessary for the scope. Anyhow, I've moved to post to the equipment discussion section as recommended.

Dave

[avandonk]

So you are asking questions of people who have not a clue about the RH200.

That should be informative.

If you have zero clue why did you not append your question to a far later image of mine, say yesterday.

I still call you a troll.

Bert

[TerraPassenger]

Well Bert, I go out of my way to compliment your skill, effort and patience in getting the scope to work and your response is to attack me. I don't get it.

>> So you are asking questions of people who have not a clue about the RH200.
I was asked to move the post to the equipment discussion section. I've done so. My hope is that someone from Officina Stellare will provide the design weight limits for the image train. Failing that, I'd hope that someone who is using the scope as a portable instrument will answer with details about their experience.

>> If you have zero clue why did you not append your question to a far later image of mine, say yesterday.
The reason I appended my question to this thread is that it contains discussion about the tip-tilt plate and possible flexure in that component of the system. I thought my post pertinent here but was asked to move it - I've done so.

Maybe you're so antagonistic because you feel I'm attacking you or the scope? I assure you I'm not. You've obviously got the flexure eliminated and moreover have done so with an intentionally heavy image train. The quality of your images speaks for itself - you've done a great job and the scope is obviously very high quality.

But... is it suitable for portable use where one of the goals is that has to be fairly easy to transport and setup. It's not clear to me if this is the case.

Dave

[avandonk]

Greg Bradley has more answers than me. Ask him. He gives advice for free, just like he gets his optics.

If you are genuine then have a look at what Harel Boren is doing on Cloudy Nights with his RH200.

I am not antagonistic. I just find that idiots that should know better irritate me in places you would not understand.

Bert

[blink138]

i can not understand how someone with a start date of january 2014 and four posts can move a thread?
miiiiiiike................!?
pat

[TerraPassenger]

It's magic! ;)

BTW - Nice catchy tune on your website. I like it!

Dave

[blink138]

thanks dave............ consider yourself forgiven!
Dawn Penn, great reggae track, i also have the best glasses in Australia by the way ha ha!
pat

[dvj]

Uggh! RH-200. This thing never dies! :lol:

[gregbradley]

Yes it seems rather controversial. I did not know I get my optics for free. I look forward to my free AP RHA then!

Greg.

[Paul Haese]

Can you give it to me and get another one Greg?:lol: Sorry very off topic, but amusing.

[dvj]

Sure Paul. Greg already has too many telescopes. BTW, no tip tilt, or collimation needed with the AP 305 RHA. Worked perfectly out of the box. Clever guy that Roland. Made in Amerika too!

[avandonk]

If I have offended anyone I am not sorry. Have a little talk all amongst yourselves.

I look forward to more revelations.



Bert