|
Staurt
The 1st curve with original worms is 25 pixels p/p*.8=20 arcs/secs. Thats awefull, and worse, not regular for each pass (not just the 76 sec problem, generally rough) its impossible to get a pec curve with that, there is no periodic data there to average out.
I had somewhat better curves, without the 76 problem (or small), of about 7-8 arcsecs P/P. So I gave up generating a pec curve and found guideing without pec gave me a slightly lower p/p, but RMS of between 1 and 2 because the error, although not that periodic, was smooth enough to guide out at 2 sec guide exposures.
I found, as some others have, that error (periodic and not) actually smooths out a bit with the G11 slightly overloaded, so I was lucky and got away with no pec.
The Ovision worm graph shows a p/p of what, 4-5 arcsecs (ignor the fact its pushed up the scale, the 1 st blue line did that, you know all this, Im just rabbiting on ;-), periodic and very smooth, in fact I dont think ive seen a G11 raw PE curve this small and smooth, and with 3 arcsec seeing, a fair amount of that would be seeing (what were the exposure times, that makes a big difference).
The raw, out of the box PE of a PME is about 5 arcsecs P/P, and 1-2 RMS, although with PEC, P/P gets to 2 or so and RMS less than 1. Its a bit hard to tell exactly what it is, seeing makes a big difference, as I suspect would be with your curves.
If you expand a raw Ovision curve and compare it with the final curve with PEC, they look the same!. I maybe wrong, but I dont think PEC is on, or its not working (or the "raw" graph has PEC on). The final curves still show the same PE on each pass, which should cancel out with PEC.
If thats the case, and you can correct out the PE showing on the final graph, then your G11 will be well tuned indeed ;-)
|