|
Greg and Ernie,
Thanks both for your input!
Greg, I did generate a curve from the PE data I put up in the first photo, and yes it does look like a gentle sine wave as you describe, though perhaps not so gentle due to the pinion gear error. I did save it to the mount first with "west" selected (which made things 2x as worse, then with "west" unselected. That is the 2nd curve I posted. I don't think it is too swift.
Ernie, yes I have clicked "clear" though in one of the photos you can still see the raw tracking data in the background.
Reading what you wrote though perhaps I've made a mistake. What I did is simply collect tracking data with CCDSoft. After I generated the curve I selected the west box, or unselected it. This just appears to invert the curve. I saved each of these versions in turn to the mount and measured the improvement, or lack of improvement by collecting new data using CCDSoft. I saved each of these new curves with a different name so that I could compare afterwards, though it was immediately obvious that one was far worse. It's just that one is not seemingly far better! Have I messed up something?
I'm thinking that perhaps I should use my ST-i camera together with a 2x barlow which might get me in the neighborhood of .8 arcsec/pixel. But maybe I'm chasing something that can't be corrected in this manner, namely the pinion; those changes seem so relentless and fast. I don't know enough about this to know. Whilst my uncorrected PE seems really good it seems chuck full of peaks and valleys. I have not seen enough other curves to know if this is very different from other MX mounts.
|