Don't worry Jase. I have been looking and the purpose of this thread is to find out which is better. Price point is an important consideration, but I want the software to work more than the price. I wasted money on CCDsoft, so I have learnt my lesson here. Total smooth automation is my primary goal here. If it means I pay more for software then so be it.
Good to hear Paul. To be diplomatic, all observatory automation software packages will undoubtedly do what you are after. Completely automated imaging runs with everything in between, not to mention automated starts up, shutdown and bad weather recovery. How they execute the data acquisition process and perhaps the flexibility available will be the distinguishing points.
I liken CCDAP as a blackbox design where as ACP you can actually look under the bonnet to see its inter-workings. Don't like the flow of a control script? - you can make changes to it. For this reason alone, you'll find many research and education institutes utilise ACP. Not to mention it caters for multiple users on a system (commercial license required) and has a web interface which is ideal for operating over slow, high latency links. Of course, you can still use CCDAP in a similar manner via a remote desktop session. The leading rental telescope operations such as GRAS and Lightbuckets all run ACP but have heavily customised it to improve their operations. Bob is actively working on numerous new features listening to the ACP user base. You can view some of them here - http://dc3.ideascale.com/
Not good news Greg... Anyone know of any alternate stepper motors that are compatible with the Robofocus controller I already have?
DT
You looking to build a SuperRobo David? How good are your soldiering skills?
I'll let you in on a secret (of which I'm about to tell the world)... Having a heavy payload (ApogeeU16M with D9 cooling package along with 7 slot filter wheel) on the back of the FSQ, I killed the original robofocus motor. It died a glorious death with slipping, teeth grinding, crunching and a puff of smoke. Truth be told the original robofocus motors are crap. Their gear reduction is around 50:1 so don't have much torque and their step size is relatively large though but still sufficient for nearly all telescope critical focus zones.
Enter the SuperRobo... http://www.hurst-motors.com/lsg42geared.html
>>>>>>LSG42012E98P<<<<<<
These are the same form factor as the original robofocus motor, so no need for another mount bracket, 12vdc, small step size providing improved resolution and a massive 300:1 reduction...enough grunt to scare a troll. FocusMax V-curves are now text book perfect with a heavy payload.
Disclaimer: This configuration is not supported by Technical Innovations. Modifications are at your own risk.
Those look like the goods. Did you order the motor from the same place in the link ? Any pictures of how you wired it relative to the original robo focus serial pinout ?
I have been running my robo motors at 50% duty cycle to keep the payloads from slipping.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jase
You looking to build a SuperRobo David? How good are your soldiering skills?
I'll let you in on a secret (of which I'm about to tell the world)... Having a heavy payload (ApogeeU16M with D9 cooling package along with 7 slot filter wheel) on the back of the FSQ, I killed the original robofocus motor. It died a glorious death with slipping, teeth grinding, crunching and a puff of smoke. Truth be told the original robofocus motors are crap. Their gear reduction is around 50:1 so don't have much torque and their step size is relatively large though but still sufficient for nearly all telescope critical focus zones.
Enter the SuperRobo... http://www.hurst-motors.com/lsg42geared.html
>>>>>>LSG42012E98P<<<<<<
These are the same form factor as the original robofocus motor, so no need for another mount bracket, 12vdc, small step size providing improved resolution and a massive 300:1 reduction...enough grunt to scare a troll. FocusMax V-curves are now text book perfect with a heavy payload.
Disclaimer: This configuration is not supported by Technical Innovations. Modifications are at your own risk.
You looking to build a SuperRobo David? How good are your soldiering skills?
I'll let you in on a secret (of which I'm about to tell the world)... Having a heavy payload (ApogeeU16M with D9 cooling package along with 7 slot filter wheel) on the back of the FSQ, I killed the original robofocus motor. It died a glorious death with slipping, teeth grinding, crunching and a puff of smoke. Truth be told the original robofocus motors are crap. Their gear reduction is around 50:1 so don't have much torque and their step size is relatively large though but still sufficient for nearly all telescope critical focus zones.
Enter the SuperRobo... http://www.hurst-motors.com/lsg42geared.html
>>>>>>LSG42012E98P<<<<<<
These are the same form factor as the original robofocus motor, so no need for another mount bracket, 12vdc, small step size providing improved resolution and a massive 300:1 reduction...enough grunt to scare a troll. FocusMax V-curves are now text book perfect with a heavy payload.
Disclaimer: This configuration is not supported by Technical Innovations. Modifications are at your own risk.
I'm interested. Do you just have to solder a DB9 connector onto these motors? I can manage that (or if not my father-in-law can - he was an electronics tech in a past life)
I am looking at alternatives though with a kit for the TSA and autofocus from starlight instruments. It will cost a bit more but if I cannot have a robofocus quickly I will get that instead. I might be able to get a bit of a discount from them too. I have bought a few units from them now.
OK, here's the catch. Hurst don't ship international. You'll need to find a company that stocks them. There are a few distributors in the US. I couldn't find any in AU at the time so I got a an astro imaging friend in the US to ship a few over. They ordered direct from Hurst.
Super easy to wire up guys. You can strip the same DB connector off, but I simply bought another one. You can also heat up the brass collar to get it off the shaft and reuse that. The wiring colours are also also identical to the original robofocus stepper so you can't go wrong. Attached is a shotty phone camera picture to prove its the same profile. I used the same bracket and even the same mount screws to fasten it to the bracket.
PS, Paul apologies for hijacking the focus automation thread. I guess this is still focusing related... Happy to change the topic back on to automation again.
Aquire star is not used with an automation program, the automation program has it's own focus star selection routine.
Brett
ACP uses Aquire Star to select an appropriate star and then everything else to do with focusing is handled by Focusmax. I even thing it slews the scope back to the target.
I think that for a remote setup ACP is the way to go. I am just trialing it at the moment but due to various issues it is a lot more robust than CCD Commander that I was originally using. Although CCDC quite happily would run a 6 hour multiple target run with no problems, albeit without guiding.
For my setup in the back yard I think I will continue to use CCDC. I like the way that you can set up every step. It is a bit of a pain to set up but it is more efficient than ACP. The thing I really like about CCDC is that I can change anything in the run (other than what is currently being executed) without stopping the run. You can even pause the run if you like. With ACP these things are not possible and you have to kill the run if you want to change something.
Way cool Jase. I don't have a particularly heavy camera (QSI583) so I haven't had slipping issues thus far. The price of the motor is similar to the Robofocus motor alone, and you get the brackets and mating adapter too. If slipping is an issue, it might be worthwhile arranging a bulk shipment of these upgraded motors though.
The thing I really like about CCDC is that I can change anything in the run (other than what is currently being executed) without stopping the run. You can even pause the run if you like. With ACP these things are not possible and you have to kill the run if you want to change something.
Yep, you're right Rob. When you do terminate the run however, ACP writes into the plan where it got up to last so that when the plan is relaunched, it will kick off from where it was terminated.
You can modify chained plans however, providing the are not currently active. Any active plans can't be modified on the fly as they are put through a compiler at run time.
Last edited by jase; 10-10-2011 at 12:19 AM.
Reason: typos
ACP uses Aquire Star to select an appropriate star and then everything else to do with focusing is handled by Focusmax. I even thing it slews the scope back to the target.
I think that for a remote setup ACP is the way to go. I am just trialing it at the moment but due to various issues it is a lot more robust than CCD Commander that I was originally using. Although CCDC quite happily would run a 6 hour multiple target run with no problems, albeit without guiding.
For my setup in the back yard I think I will continue to use CCDC. I like the way that you can set up every step. It is a bit of a pain to set up but it is more efficient than ACP. The thing I really like about CCDC is that I can change anything in the run (other than what is currently being executed) without stopping the run. You can even pause the run if you like. With ACP these things are not possible and you have to kill the run if you want to change something.
I should have said that ccdap does not use aquire star as it has its own routine.
CCdap5 parameters can be changed on the fly, without having to start over on the imaging run.
As I mentioned to Paul privately, it depends what you are after. As far as my computers skills, I'm no IT expert, thus I find the interface of ccdap5 simple and has the options for what I need. ACP scripting/plans was beyond my skills/patience.
CCdap does have the ability to run scripts, if I ever get the knowledge to use it!
Happy to report that Robofocus are definitely still in business. Jeremy answered my e-mail overnight (as did Precise Parts, so the public holiday thing might not have been a big issue). He said he'd been away installing a dome.
Total smooth automation is my primary goal here. If it means I pay more for software then so be it.
Happy to change the topic back on to automation again. 
