|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
guiding relays vs scope controls
I seem to have problems with the autoguiding relays of my sbig camera.
Haven't really objectivated the issue but it shows up with two different mounts using two different cables, so I guess there not much room for doubt. I have therefore switched my guiding from guider relays to telescope control. Is the performance going to be markedly different? So far, everything is fine, but I am using a very short focal length (540mm) and have had to cut the aggressivness in half, all other things being equal. Pierre |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
guiding relays vs scope controls
Pierre Vandevennne wrote:
I seem to have problems with the autoguiding relays of my sbig camera. Haven't really objectivated the issue but it shows up with two different mounts using two different cables, so I guess there not much room for doubt. I have therefore switched my guiding from guider relays to telescope control. Is the performance going to be markedly different? So far, everything is fine, but I am using a very short focal length (540mm) and have had to cut the aggressivness in half, all other things being equal. Pierre You'd probably getting more response to this on the SBIG list. And the only SBIG cameras that use relays are the ST-4 and STV. So I suspect that "guider relay" is a Maxim DL term ? Bill -- William R. Mattil : http://www.celestial-images.com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
guiding relays vs scope controls
"William R. Mattil" wrote in
. com: You'd probably getting more response to this on the SBIG list. True, but I thought putting some actual amateur astronomy question here couldn't hurt :-) And the only SBIG cameras that use relays are the ST-4 and STV. So I suspect that "guider relay" is a Maxim DL term ? Well, I have two ways to guide with the ST-2000XM / Maxim combo: one is throught the RJ11 guide cables and ports, both on my Vixen Atlux through the Skysensor and on the HEQ5 (with their respective appropriate cables of course), the second method goes through the PC serial port and has Maxim send commands to the go-to hand controller. I've already had problems with the guiding port on the SBIG two years ago, which I fixed with a soldering iron and a small logic analyzer :-) and that is probably the same issue again (a short circuit). But if the direct scope control is as good and the guiding port, maybe I'll just save the trouble. Yes, I know I could find out by trying different configs, but we have so few good nights around here that I do not want to sacrifice them to tests. -- Pierre |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
guiding relays vs scope controls
On 07 Sep 2006 23:49:28 GMT, Pierre Vandevennne
wrote: I seem to have problems with the autoguiding relays of my sbig camera. Haven't really objectivated the issue but it shows up with two different mounts using two different cables, so I guess there not much room for doubt. I have therefore switched my guiding from guider relays to telescope control. Is the performance going to be markedly different? So far, everything is fine, but I am using a very short focal length (540mm) and have had to cut the aggressivness in half, all other things being equal. There are two ways the guider logic can work. The "bad" way, which is very common, is that the guider software sends a command to start a correction, and then after some amount of time it sends another command to stop it. The reason this can be bad is because Windows is not a realtime operating system, and the timing between the two commands can end up quite different from what the guide correction duration should actually be. Another problem is that the commands can get fragmented during transmission, creating a timing error. This is particularly possible if the transmission interface is networked: Ethernet or USB (including serial over either of these). The "good" way of sending guide commands is to send a single command containing the direction and the time. This can't get fragmented, and isn't dependent on Windows for timing. Newer mounts increasingly have this type of guiding built into their interface. AFAIK, SBIG cameras don't manage guider timing internally. That means that they use the first sort of control, with all its possibilities for error. Whether you will do better using scope control depends on whether your mount supports internally timed guiding. If it does, your performance may be better. Otherwise, it should be pretty much the same either way. _________________________________________________ Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
guiding relays vs scope controls
"Pierre Vandevennne" wrote in message ... I seem to have problems with the autoguiding relays of my sbig camera. Haven't really objectivated the issue but it shows up with two different mounts using two different cables, so I guess there not much room for doubt. I have therefore switched my guiding from guider relays to telescope control. Is the performance going to be markedly different? So far, everything is fine, but I am using a very short focal length (540mm) and have had to cut the aggressivness in half, all other things being equal. How 'good' software guiding is, depends largely on your mount controller. 'Relay' guiding (actually only a real 'relay' on the ST4, and similar guiders, while on the SBIG cameras a 'pull down' transistor), gives less 'latency' (the mount is being controlled almost immediately, instead of having to wait for a longer serial command). How long the latency for serial guiding is, depends on the 'command set' of your mount. The original LX200, had a 'reasonable' nudge command. The latter GPS units, dropped this, and for a while gave poor responses, and then an 'undocumented' nudge command in a slightly different form was found, and now the control is generally good. Similarly, some other makes of scope, have better or worse nudge/move commands, with varying degrees of quality, and in some cases, a much slower 'move' command has to be used, often with relatively slow response, and poor accuracy. As another example, the Vixen SS2K, 'rounds' the position numbers fed from a serial command, and you cannot actually nudge to the resolution of the controller, with the serial control. However for shorter focal length scopes, both still work OK on this mount, and this only gives problems at high image scales. Though you have the system working, you do really need to find out what is wrong with the direct control. A number of questions/comments apply. First, some mounts need to be in the right 'mode' to respond to the guider input. For example, the Gemini controller, ignores the guide input, unless the controller is in 'photo', or 'all speeds' mode. Then check the actual pinout on the cable. Different cables are needed for some mounts (the Vixen SS2K, for example, does require a custom cable). Also some controllers do actually require a relay, or opto-coupler (on the Losmandy Gemini for example, the 'older' version, with telephone style motor connectors, requires the guider pins to be pulled 'up', not 'down' as the SBIG camera generates - this requires a relay adaper to work, and connecting without this, can damage the controller or camera). Also note that the correct cable, is normally a 'crossover' cable (pin1 to pin6), not a straight through cable. Best Wishes |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
guiding relays vs scope controls
The reason this can be bad is because Windows is not a
realtime operating system, and the timing between the two commands can end up quite different from what the guide correction duration should actually be. Another problem is that the commands can get fragmented during transmission, creating a timing error. This is particularly This is very interesting and explains some of my observations. With the ST-4 I use a very old Compact laptop (about 15 yrs old) in the DOS mode with CCDTrack. I never had any problems. Ive tried newer laptops in the Windows mode and coulden't get any performance reliability. Chris L Peterson wrote: On 07 Sep 2006 23:49:28 GMT, Pierre Vandevennne wrote: I seem to have problems with the autoguiding relays of my sbig camera. Haven't really objectivated the issue but it shows up with two different mounts using two different cables, so I guess there not much room for doubt. I have therefore switched my guiding from guider relays to telescope control. Is the performance going to be markedly different? So far, everything is fine, but I am using a very short focal length (540mm) and have had to cut the aggressivness in half, all other things being equal. There are two ways the guider logic can work. The "bad" way, which is very common, is that the guider software sends a command to start a correction, and then after some amount of time it sends another command to stop it. The reason this can be bad is because Windows is not a realtime operating system, and the timing between the two commands can end up quite different from what the guide correction duration should actually be. Another problem is that the commands can get fragmented during transmission, creating a timing error. This is particularly possible if the transmission interface is networked: Ethernet or USB (including serial over either of these). The "good" way of sending guide commands is to send a single command containing the direction and the time. This can't get fragmented, and isn't dependent on Windows for timing. Newer mounts increasingly have this type of guiding built into their interface. AFAIK, SBIG cameras don't manage guider timing internally. That means that they use the first sort of control, with all its possibilities for error. Whether you will do better using scope control depends on whether your mount supports internally timed guiding. If it does, your performance may be better. Otherwise, it should be pretty much the same either way. _________________________________________________ Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
guiding relays vs scope controls
On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 08:28:19 GMT, "Roger Hamlett"
wrote: How 'good' software guiding is, depends largely on your mount controller. 'Relay' guiding (actually only a real 'relay' on the ST4, and similar guiders, while on the SBIG cameras a 'pull down' transistor), gives less 'latency' (the mount is being controlled almost immediately, instead of having to wait for a longer serial command)... I don't think latency is a significant factor, for two reasons. First, the latency shouldn't be significantly different for a relay controller versus direct telescope control, since the relay controller itself is receiving a command string itself before it can interpret and act on it. But more important is the fact that the latencies are small compared with the guide camera integration and readout time. The former is on the order of milliseconds, the latter on the order of seconds. Precisely _when_ you issue your correction command is less important than its _duration_; a few milliseconds error in duration is much more significant than a few milliseconds of latency. I have moderate latency in my guiding because the commands are sent via Ethernet, and can be delayed by the protocol (which may delay transmission somewhat in an effort to construct a more efficient packet). Back when I used a start/stop guider protocol, guiding over the network caused me all sorts of problems. Once I switched to a guide-by-time protocol, all the problems disappeared, in spite of the fact that the latency is still there. _________________________________________________ Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
guiding relays vs scope controls
Hi:
Are you really using "relays," or do you just mean you're running from the guiding output of an SBIG camera to an SBIG compatible guide port on a scope? The alternative to the SBIG setup is to use a camera and a guide program that offers RS-232 guiding. Most folks report zero difference once everything (USB serial adapters, etc.) are set-up and working properly. Peace, Rod Mollise Author of: Choosing and Using a Schmidt Cassegrain Telescope and The Urban Astronomer's Guide http://skywatch.brainiac.com/astroland Pierre Vandevennne wrote: I seem to have problems with the autoguiding relays of my sbig camera. Haven't really objectivated the issue but it shows up with two different mounts using two different cables, so I guess there not much room for doubt. I have therefore switched my guiding from guider relays to telescope control. Is the performance going to be markedly different? So far, everything is fine, but I am using a very short focal length (540mm) and have had to cut the aggressivness in half, all other things being equal. Pierre |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
guiding relays vs scope controls
"Chris L Peterson" wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 08:28:19 GMT, "Roger Hamlett" wrote: How 'good' software guiding is, depends largely on your mount controller. 'Relay' guiding (actually only a real 'relay' on the ST4, and similar guiders, while on the SBIG cameras a 'pull down' transistor), gives less 'latency' (the mount is being controlled almost immediately, instead of having to wait for a longer serial command)... I don't think latency is a significant factor, for two reasons. First, the latency shouldn't be significantly different for a relay controller versus direct telescope control, since the relay controller itself is receiving a command string itself before it can interpret and act on it. But more important is the fact that the latencies are small compared with the guide camera integration and readout time. The former is on the order of milliseconds, the latter on the order of seconds. Precisely _when_ you issue your correction command is less important than its _duration_; a few milliseconds error in duration is much more significant than a few milliseconds of latency. I have moderate latency in my guiding because the commands are sent via Ethernet, and can be delayed by the protocol (which may delay transmission somewhat in an effort to construct a more efficient packet). Back when I used a start/stop guider protocol, guiding over the network caused me all sorts of problems. Once I switched to a guide-by-time protocol, all the problems disappeared, in spite of the fact that the latency is still there. I have to disagree slightly. You are thinking about the communication latencies only. These are generally small. However some mounts seem to have a significant 'command latency' on the serial commands. I have seen a unit, where when using serial commands, despite it having what appeared to be a working 'milli-second nudge' command - which is the ideal guiding command, there was a delay nearer to perhaps 1/3rd second, between receiving the serial command, and moving!. I have used serial guiding fine, on many scopes, but there can be a 'caveat' on some units. the 'longer serial command', is not just the time taken to actually send the data, but the time for the controller to interpret/respond to it. Best Wishes |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
guiding relays vs scope controls
"RMOLLISE" wrote in news:1157747220.303781.167430
@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com: Are you really using "relays," or do you just mean you're running from the guiding output of an SBIG camera to an SBIG compatible guide port on a scope? Yes, I am aware of the difference (I also own a ST4) but I was just using Maxim's terminology I was running the following setup ST2000XM guide port - skysensor guide port (to atlux) with a custom cable that has been working for a couple of years ST2000XM guide port - HEQ5 Pro guide port, with the bundled SBIG cable. That's the setup that doesn't work at all The alternative to the SBIG setup is to use a camera and a guide program that offers RS-232 guiding. Most folks report zero difference once everything (USB serial adapters, etc.) are set-up and working properly. Yup, and that is the setup I am now on. I wondered if there was any difference, good or bad. Your feedback reassures me! Thanks |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Orion 90mm AZ refractor - review, comparison, observing report | [email protected] | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | September 5th 05 02:51 PM |
APO or Mak? BE PATIENT please | Doink | Amateur Astronomy | 53 | April 21st 05 10:24 AM |
Moons as Disks, Shadow Transits and Saturn's Divisions | edz | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | March 10th 04 09:57 PM |
Titan | Martin R. Howell | Amateur Astronomy | 2 | March 9th 04 09:44 PM |
improving a really lousy scope? | Josh Gregorio | Misc | 5 | December 8th 03 10:27 AM |