VintageBigBlue.org

 

Re: [Losmandy_users] Re: Ovision worm gear assembly does it have a spring washer...may be mssing on mine


May 2, 2008

 


----------------------------

#37434 May 2, 2008

Franck Valbousquet has informed me that the Ovision worm upgrade is

priced at U.S. $499 regardless of which way the Euro and dollar move,

at least for the near and medium terms. The price includes shipping to

CONUSA and so is about $100 less than what we were discussing earlier.



Apparently I might be getting mine sometime this week. I'm shopping

around for someone to test the PE. This is sort of a silly thing I'm

doing "for the heck of it." (since I don't image. But who knows, a

digital rebel might be in my future)



Ovision (optique et vision) can be googled or else follow the link in

our LINKS section.



regards

Greg N



----------------------------

#37441 May 2, 2008

Very interested in hearing all about the installation and how well it

works. Especially how it reduces PE.

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@...> wrote:

>

> Franck Valbousquet has informed me that the Ovision worm upgrade is

> priced at U.S. $499 regardless of which way the Euro and dollar move,

> at least for the near and medium terms. The price includes shipping to

> CONUSA and so is about $100 less than what we were discussing earlier.

>

> Apparently I might be getting mine sometime this week. I'm shopping

> around for someone to test the PE. This is sort of a silly thing I'm

> doing "for the heck of it." (since I don't image. But who knows, a

> digital rebel might be in my future)

>

> Ovision (optique et vision) can be googled or else follow the link in

> our LINKS section.

>

> regards

> Greg N

>



----------------------------

#37443 May 2, 2008

Regrettably I'm not a photographer so I'm going to have to scrounge up

someone to do the P.E. check. Interested parties in upstate NY

(capital district), lower VT, western MA might wish to contact me. I

have a buddy to stay with in Boston so I could go even that far.

Hopefully I can find someone right here. In fact there's a c14er with

an observatory I should contact. I think he images and might be

willing to help. One of the good things about this is that it can be

done during a full moon. I guess I need to do a before and after.



Greg N

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Very interested in hearing all about the installation and how well it

> works. Especially how it reduces PE.

> Floyd

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@> wrote:

> >

> > Franck Valbousquet has informed me that the Ovision worm upgrade is

> > priced at U.S. $499 regardless of which way the Euro and dollar move,

> > at least for the near and medium terms. The price includes shipping to

> > CONUSA and so is about $100 less than what we were discussing

earlier.

> >

> > Apparently I might be getting mine sometime this week. I'm shopping

> > around for someone to test the PE. This is sort of a silly thing I'm

> > doing "for the heck of it." (since I don't image. But who knows, a

> > digital rebel might be in my future)

> >

> > Ovision (optique et vision) can be googled or else follow the link in

> > our LINKS section.

> >

> > regards

> > Greg N

> >

>



----------------------------

#37445 May 2, 2008

Would really like to see closeup photos of the installation steps and

any tricks you find in the process. TIA Loren Banbury (contemplating

buying one asap for new moon in june)



gnowellsct wrote: >

> Regrettably I'm not a photographer so I'm going to have to scrounge up

> someone to do the P.E. check. Interested parties in upstate NY

> (capital district), lower VT, western MA might wish to contact me. I

> have a buddy to stay with in Boston so I could go even that far.

> Hopefully I can find someone right here. In fact there's a c14er with

> an observatory I should contact. I think he images and might be

> willing to help. One of the good things about this is that it can be

> done during a full moon. I guess I need to do a before and after.

>

> Greg N

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

> >

> > Very interested in hearing all about the installation and how well it

> > works. Especially how it reduces PE.

> > Floyd

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Franck Valbousquet has informed me that the Ovision worm upgrade is

> > > priced at U.S. $499 regardless of which way the Euro and dollar move,

> > > at least for the near and medium terms. The price includes shipping to

> > > CONUSA and so is about $100 less than what we were discussing

> earlier.

> > >

> > > Apparently I might be getting mine sometime this week. I'm shopping

> > > around for someone to test the PE. This is sort of a silly thing I'm

> > > doing "for the heck of it." (since I don't image. But who knows, a

> > > digital rebel might be in my future)

> > >

> > > Ovision (optique et vision) can be googled or else follow the link in

> > > our LINKS section.

> > >

> > > regards

> > > Greg N

> > >

> >

>

>







----------------------------

#37448 May 2, 2008

The instructions I can provide. I will upload them to the FILES

section. But I can't give you my results, at least not for a while,

and there is the additional conundrum, that one must be nice to the

worm and not damage it. So I might botch it, and my results would be

meaningless in that case. In fact it's one of those bizarre cases

where only a positive experience has any meaning.



regards

Greg N



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, Loren lbanbury@...> wrote:

>

> Would really like to see closeup photos of the installation steps and

> any tricks you find in the process. TIA Loren Banbury (contemplating

> buying one asap for new moon in june)

>

> gnowellsct wrote:

> >

> > Regrettably I'm not a photographer so I'm going to have to scrounge up

> > someone to do the P.E. check. Interested parties in upstate NY

> > (capital district), lower VT, western MA might wish to contact me. I

> > have a buddy to stay with in Boston so I could go even that far.

> > Hopefully I can find someone right here. In fact there's a c14er with

> > an observatory I should contact. I think he images and might be

> > willing to help. One of the good things about this is that it can be

> > done during a full moon. I guess I need to do a before and after.

> >

> > Greg N

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>, "Floyd Blue" fblue@>

wrote:

> > >

> > > Very interested in hearing all about the installation and how

well it

> > > works. Especially how it reduces PE.

> > > Floyd

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>, "gnowellsct"

tim71pos@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Franck Valbousquet has informed me that the Ovision worm

upgrade is

> > > > priced at U.S. $499 regardless of which way the Euro and

dollar move,

> > > > at least for the near and medium terms. The price includes

shipping to

> > > > CONUSA and so is about $100 less than what we were discussing

> > earlier.

> > > >

> > > > Apparently I might be getting mine sometime this week. I'm

shopping

> > > > around for someone to test the PE. This is sort of a silly

thing I'm

> > > > doing "for the heck of it." (since I don't image. But who knows, a

> > > > digital rebel might be in my future)

> > > >

> > > > Ovision (optique et vision) can be googled or else follow the

link in

> > > > our LINKS section.

> > > >

> > > > regards

> > > > Greg N

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

>



----------------------------

#37450 May 2, 2008

Cool. Solid overcast here at Lake Tahoe tonight - no astro :-(

Loren



gnowellsct wrote: >

> The instructions I can provide. I will upload them to the FILES

> section. But I can't give you my results, at least not for a while,

> and there is the additional conundrum, that one must be nice to the

> worm and not damage it. So I might botch it, and my results would be

> meaningless in that case. In fact it's one of those bizarre cases

> where only a positive experience has any meaning.

>

> regards

> Greg N

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>, Loren lbanbury@...> wrote:

> >

> > Would really like to see closeup photos of the installation steps and

> > any tricks you find in the process. TIA Loren Banbury (contemplating

> > buying one asap for new moon in june)

> >

> > gnowellsct wrote:

> > >

> > > Regrettably I'm not a photographer so I'm going to have to scrounge up

> > > someone to do the P.E. check. Interested parties in upstate NY

> > > (capital district), lower VT, western MA might wish to contact me. I

> > > have a buddy to stay with in Boston so I could go even that far.

> > > Hopefully I can find someone right here. In fact there's a c14er with

> > > an observatory I should contact. I think he images and might be

> > > willing to help. One of the good things about this is that it can be

> > > done during a full moon. I guess I need to do a before and after.

> > >

> > > Greg N

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>, "Floyd Blue" fblue@>

> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Very interested in hearing all about the installation and how

> well it

> > > > works. Especially how it reduces PE.

> > > > Floyd

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>, "gnowellsct"

> tim71pos@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Franck Valbousquet has informed me that the Ovision worm

> upgrade is

> > > > > priced at U.S. $499 regardless of which way the Euro and

> dollar move,

> > > > > at least for the near and medium terms. The price includes

> shipping to

> > > > > CONUSA and so is about $100 less than what we were discussing

> > > earlier.

> > > > >

> > > > > Apparently I might be getting mine sometime this week. I'm

> shopping

> > > > > around for someone to test the PE. This is sort of a silly

> thing I'm

> > > > > doing "for the heck of it." (since I don't image. But who knows, a

> > > > > digital rebel might be in my future)

> > > > >

> > > > > Ovision (optique et vision) can be googled or else follow the

> link in

> > > > > our LINKS section.

> > > > >

> > > > > regards

> > > > > Greg N

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

>







----------------------------

#37579 May 17, 2008

Someone is owner of this Ovision worm yet?....Is there a very long

time to get one of these worms from Ovision?....I wrote an email to

Ovision last month but I did not receive any answer. Can someone put

the right mail to contact to Ovision? Thank you everybody in

advance...





Regards

Tony



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@...>

wrote: >

> The instructions I can provide. I will upload them to the FILES

> section. But I can't give you my results, at least not for a

while, > and there is the additional conundrum, that one must be nice to the

> worm and not damage it. So I might botch it, and my results would

be > meaningless in that case. In fact it's one of those bizarre cases

> where only a positive experience has any meaning.

>

> regards

> Greg N

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, Loren lbanbury@> wrote:

> >

> > Would really like to see closeup photos of the installation

steps and > > any tricks you find in the process. TIA Loren Banbury

(contemplating > > buying one asap for new moon in june)

> >

> > gnowellsct wrote:

> > >

> > > Regrettably I'm not a photographer so I'm going to have to

scrounge up > > > someone to do the P.E. check. Interested parties in upstate NY

> > > (capital district), lower VT, western MA might wish to contact

me. I > > > have a buddy to stay with in Boston so I could go even that

far. > > > Hopefully I can find someone right here. In fact there's a

c14er with > > > an observatory I should contact. I think he images and might be

> > > willing to help. One of the good things about this is that it

can be > > > done during a full moon. I guess I need to do a before and

after. > > >

> > > Greg N

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>, "Floyd Blue"

fblue@> > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Very interested in hearing all about the installation and how

> well it

> > > > works. Especially how it reduces PE.

> > > > Floyd

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>, "gnowellsct"

> tim71pos@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Franck Valbousquet has informed me that the Ovision worm

> upgrade is

> > > > > priced at U.S. $499 regardless of which way the Euro and

> dollar move,

> > > > > at least for the near and medium terms. The price includes

> shipping to

> > > > > CONUSA and so is about $100 less than what we were

discussing > > > earlier.

> > > > >

> > > > > Apparently I might be getting mine sometime this week. I'm

> shopping

> > > > > around for someone to test the PE. This is sort of a silly

> thing I'm

> > > > > doing "for the heck of it." (since I don't image. But who

knows, a > > > > > digital rebel might be in my future)

> > > > >

> > > > > Ovision (optique et vision) can be googled or else follow

the > link in

> > > > > our LINKS section.

> > > > >

> > > > > regards

> > > > > Greg N

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#37582 May 17, 2008

Everything is in the LINKS section and there is also in FILES an order

form. The form can be printed out, filled out, scanned and sent as a

pdf back to ovision. I do have such a worm but I'm waiting for the

right weather to take it over to a friend's house where we will (a)

establish the baseline on the stainless steel worm vintage 2000 and

(b) install the replacement.



The pdf for the order form contains (a) a sample showing you what to

write - since the form is in French. and (b) there is a blank copy of

the form immediately after. How cool is that? And of course the

company's email is on the form as well.



regards Greg N



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "alto6290es" alto6290es@...>

wrote: >

> Someone is owner of this Ovision worm yet?....Is there a very long

> time to get one of these worms from Ovision?....I wrote an email to

> Ovision last month but I did not receive any answer. Can someone put

> the right mail to contact to Ovision? Thank you everybody in

> advance...

>

>

> Regards

> Tony

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@>

> wrote:

> >

> > The instructions I can provide. I will upload them to the FILES

> > section. But I can't give you my results, at least not for a

> while,

> > and there is the additional conundrum, that one must be nice to the

> > worm and not damage it. So I might botch it, and my results would

> be

> > meaningless in that case. In fact it's one of those bizarre cases

> > where only a positive experience has any meaning.

> >

> > regards

> > Greg N

> >

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, Loren lbanbury@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Would really like to see closeup photos of the installation

> steps and

> > > any tricks you find in the process. TIA Loren Banbury

> (contemplating

> > > buying one asap for new moon in june)

> > >

> > > gnowellsct wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Regrettably I'm not a photographer so I'm going to have to

> scrounge up

> > > > someone to do the P.E. check. Interested parties in upstate NY

> > > > (capital district), lower VT, western MA might wish to contact

> me. I

> > > > have a buddy to stay with in Boston so I could go even that

> far.

> > > > Hopefully I can find someone right here. In fact there's a

> c14er with

> > > > an observatory I should contact. I think he images and might be

> > > > willing to help. One of the good things about this is that it

> can be

> > > > done during a full moon. I guess I need to do a before and

> after.

> > > >

> > > > Greg N

> > > >

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > > > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>, "Floyd Blue"

> fblue@>

> > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Very interested in hearing all about the installation and how

> > well it

> > > > > works. Especially how it reduces PE.

> > > > > Floyd

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > > > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>, "gnowellsct"

> > tim71pos@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Franck Valbousquet has informed me that the Ovision worm

> > upgrade is

> > > > > > priced at U.S. $499 regardless of which way the Euro and

> > dollar move,

> > > > > > at least for the near and medium terms. The price includes

> > shipping to

> > > > > > CONUSA and so is about $100 less than what we were

> discussing

> > > > earlier.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Apparently I might be getting mine sometime this week. I'm

> > shopping

> > > > > > around for someone to test the PE. This is sort of a silly

> > thing I'm

> > > > > > doing "for the heck of it." (since I don't image. But who

> knows, a

> > > > > > digital rebel might be in my future)

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Ovision (optique et vision) can be googled or else follow

> the

> > link in

> > > > > > our LINKS section.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > regards

> > > > > > Greg N

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>







----------------------------

#37620 May 20, 2008

Hello Tony



Very sorry i missed you message

the NS kit are avaliable

cheers



Franck







--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "alto6290es" alto6290es@...>

wrote: >

> Someone is owner of this Ovision worm yet?....Is there a very long

> time to get one of these worms from Ovision?....I wrote an email to

> Ovision last month but I did not receive any answer. Can someone

put > the right mail to contact to Ovision? Thank you everybody in

> advance...

>

>

> Regards

> Tony

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@>

> wrote:

> >

> > The instructions I can provide. I will upload them to the FILES

> > section. But I can't give you my results, at least not for a

> while,

> > and there is the additional conundrum, that one must be nice to

the > > worm and not damage it. So I might botch it, and my results

would > be

> > meaningless in that case. In fact it's one of those bizarre cases

> > where only a positive experience has any meaning.

> >

> > regards

> > Greg N

> >

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, Loren lbanbury@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Would really like to see closeup photos of the installation

> steps and

> > > any tricks you find in the process. TIA Loren Banbury

> (contemplating

> > > buying one asap for new moon in june)

> > >

> > > gnowellsct wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Regrettably I'm not a photographer so I'm going to have to

> scrounge up

> > > > someone to do the P.E. check. Interested parties in upstate NY

> > > > (capital district), lower VT, western MA might wish to

contact > me. I

> > > > have a buddy to stay with in Boston so I could go even that

> far.

> > > > Hopefully I can find someone right here. In fact there's a

> c14er with

> > > > an observatory I should contact. I think he images and might

be > > > > willing to help. One of the good things about this is that it

> can be

> > > > done during a full moon. I guess I need to do a before and

> after.

> > > >

> > > > Greg N

> > > >

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > > > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>, "Floyd Blue"

> fblue@>

> > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Very interested in hearing all about the installation and

how > > well it

> > > > > works. Especially how it reduces PE.

> > > > > Floyd

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > > > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>, "gnowellsct"

> > tim71pos@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Franck Valbousquet has informed me that the Ovision worm

> > upgrade is

> > > > > > priced at U.S. $499 regardless of which way the Euro and

> > dollar move,

> > > > > > at least for the near and medium terms. The price includes

> > shipping to

> > > > > > CONUSA and so is about $100 less than what we were

> discussing

> > > > earlier.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Apparently I might be getting mine sometime this week. I'm

> > shopping

> > > > > > around for someone to test the PE. This is sort of a silly

> > thing I'm

> > > > > > doing "for the heck of it." (since I don't image. But who

> knows, a

> > > > > > digital rebel might be in my future)

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Ovision (optique et vision) can be googled or else follow

> the

> > link in

> > > > > > our LINKS section.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > regards

> > > > > > Greg N

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#37683 May 24, 2008

Anybody used the Ovision worm upgrade on a GM-8? If so I would would

like to hear what you think.



I'm tearing my hair out here trying to set up the gears and am looking

for other options.



Peter



----------------------------

#37712 May 30, 2008

I'm not an imager but I do have an Ovision down in the ol' kitchen. I

intend to install it and get a measurement. I am doing this with

someone who does a lot of imaging.



Last night we established the baseline PE of my year 2000 mount with

stainless steel worms (the old version worms) and so next time around

we can establish the new worm's effect.



Sorry I can't make it all happen at once between family, sky, and

other commitments.



regards

Greg N



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "peterjchance"

peterchance@...> wrote: >

> Anybody used the Ovision worm upgrade on a GM-8? If so I would would

> like to hear what you think.

>

> I'm tearing my hair out here trying to set up the gears and am looking

> for other options.

>

> Peter

>



----------------------------

#37713 May 30, 2008

I forgot to mention that with 180 teeth on the worm gear of the G8

you'll get 1/2 the accuracy of a G11 with 360 teeth, according to

Ovision. So if you might get 4 arc second accuracy on a G11 you'll be

around 8 arc seconds with a G8. Not much of a way around that since

the machining of the head is one of the things that differentiates the

two mounts' respective prices.



regards

Greg N





--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "peterjchance"

peterchance@...> wrote: >

> Anybody used the Ovision worm upgrade on a GM-8? If so I would would

> like to hear what you think.

>

> I'm tearing my hair out here trying to set up the gears and am looking

> for other options.

>

> Peter

>







----------------------------

#37829 Jun 10, 2008

Well I don't have the quantitative data yet (Harvey is working on all

that) but we got a crude sense of the Ovision worm's performance last

night. Y'all may remember (look in files, Losmandy vs. Ovision & see

for yourselves) I had 14 arc seconds peak to peak on the vintage 2000

Losmandy worm test and no one here was particularly surprised.



The Losmandy 2000 worm star trail clearly shows a double peaked PE

(one big peak and one small one) which you can see from across the

room. Now imagine you're looking at the Ovision star trail also from

across the room. The Losmandy star trail shows its wobbles. The

Ovision star trail looks like a straight line. If you get up real

close you can see some very small deviations but you would have a hard

time saying how much those deviations are relative to the Losmandy

2000 PE. It would be hard because it's hard to estimate fractions

that are below fairly easy values like 1/2, 1/3, 1/4 etc. Frankly to

me it seemed like 1/4 the amplitude would greatly overstate the

perceived movement of the Ovision compared to the Losmandy 2000 worm

but I don't want to get your hopes up.



So my guess is the Ovision will show less than 5 arc seconds peak to

peak, and possibly much less. Our first look at the results suggest

my G11's PE is now in the range of "as good as anyone has ever heard

of and maybe a tad better." Harvey said it was better than his AP1200

and expressed a great deal of surprise. Harvey is a very low-key guy

with decades of experience in high end scientific equipment

manufacturing. This is about as "blown away" as he gets IMHO.



We know people a certain number of machinists and intrepid folks here

have used a variety of custom parts and also custom methods to reduce

their PE. But it is remarkable that a shmoe like me would get a

result like that. I put this thing on, set it so the backlash was

around 1mm (as the instructions ask), and here we are.



It might even be better than Ovision's results. There could be a

reason: I left the mount on for over 120 hours and thus logged in the

neighborhood of 22,000 revolutions on the worm so perhaps it got

lapped in better than Ovision's typical results.



Now mind you, with the polar alignment only approximate (from the

polar scope) we did a five minute UNGUIDED exposure of M27 which came

out pretty good--only slight trailing from the polar alignment drift.

You have to be an imager I think to appreciate what the picture is

saying because most people would look at the very slight star arc and

say the picture is not as good as it could be.



I feel guilty about keeping this mount for visual use but what the

heck there's all kinds of expensive GEMs out there that are used

visually while other folks struggle with their guiding. I'm sure

cautious folks will want to see the actual data but I would suggest

checking the piggy bank to see where you've got $500 stashed before

you waste it all on gasoline.



When I get the pics I'll post them here and put them out somewhere

where they can do some good for the greater public.



regards

Greg N







--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@...> wrote:

>

> Well gang I'm heading over to Harvey's tonight to try to get an star

> trail from the Ovision worm. I sure hope the installation went OK and

> that we get a nice result. "I have my worries." But then, I always do.

>

> I will report back when the results are in....

>

> regards

> Greg N

>



----------------------------

#37830 Jun 10, 2008

I should mention that Harvey got the last round of quantitative data

by taking the output data from Software Bisque's track & accumulate

and then running a least squares line through the data to get the

error dimensions. regards Greg N





--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@...> wrote:

>

> Well I don't have the quantitative data yet (Harvey is working on all

> that) but we got a crude sense of the Ovision worm's performance last

> night. Y'all may remember (look in files, Losmandy vs. Ovision & see

> for yourselves) I had 14 arc seconds peak to peak on the vintage 2000

> Losmandy worm test and no one here was particularly surprised.

>

> The Losmandy 2000 worm star trail clearly shows a double peaked PE

> (one big peak and one small one) which you can see from across the

> room. Now imagine you're looking at the Ovision star trail also from

> across the room. The Losmandy star trail shows its wobbles. The

> Ovision star trail looks like a straight line. If you get up real

> close you can see some very small deviations but you would have a hard

> time saying how much those deviations are relative to the Losmandy

> 2000 PE. It would be hard because it's hard to estimate fractions

> that are below fairly easy values like 1/2, 1/3, 1/4 etc. Frankly to

> me it seemed like 1/4 the amplitude would greatly overstate the

> perceived movement of the Ovision compared to the Losmandy 2000 worm

> but I don't want to get your hopes up.

>

> So my guess is the Ovision will show less than 5 arc seconds peak to

> peak, and possibly much less. Our first look at the results suggest

> my G11's PE is now in the range of "as good as anyone has ever heard

> of and maybe a tad better." Harvey said it was better than his AP1200

> and expressed a great deal of surprise. Harvey is a very low-key guy

> with decades of experience in high end scientific equipment

> manufacturing. This is about as "blown away" as he gets IMHO.

>

> We know people a certain number of machinists and intrepid folks here

> have used a variety of custom parts and also custom methods to reduce

> their PE. But it is remarkable that a shmoe like me would get a

> result like that. I put this thing on, set it so the backlash was

> around 1mm (as the instructions ask), and here we are.

>

> It might even be better than Ovision's results. There could be a

> reason: I left the mount on for over 120 hours and thus logged in the

> neighborhood of 22,000 revolutions on the worm so perhaps it got

> lapped in better than Ovision's typical results.

>

> Now mind you, with the polar alignment only approximate (from the

> polar scope) we did a five minute UNGUIDED exposure of M27 which came

> out pretty good--only slight trailing from the polar alignment drift.

> You have to be an imager I think to appreciate what the picture is

> saying because most people would look at the very slight star arc and

> say the picture is not as good as it could be.

>

> I feel guilty about keeping this mount for visual use but what the

> heck there's all kinds of expensive GEMs out there that are used

> visually while other folks struggle with their guiding. I'm sure

> cautious folks will want to see the actual data but I would suggest

> checking the piggy bank to see where you've got $500 stashed before

> you waste it all on gasoline.

>

> When I get the pics I'll post them here and put them out somewhere

> where they can do some good for the greater public.

>

> regards

> Greg N

>

>

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@> wrote:

> >

> > Well gang I'm heading over to Harvey's tonight to try to get an star

> > trail from the Ovision worm. I sure hope the installation went OK and

> > that we get a nice result. "I have my worries." But then, I

always do.

> >

> > I will report back when the results are in....

> >

> > regards

> > Greg N

> >

>







----------------------------

#37837 Jun 11, 2008

Having completed my Ovision worm tests I decided last night to adjust

out most of the backlash. The Gemini system needs backlash; I don't.



It turns out that the adjustment operation is MUCH easier with the

Ovision than with the default worm block set up.



I think this is for several reasons. First of all there's no squish in

the system. That means where you set it is where it is, whereas with

a bit of slop in the worm blocks where you set it is not necessarily

where it is.



Let me put this another way. You've got a worm, there is a bit of

play in the bearings and the blocks. So, now, you adjust the

position, but as the worm turns and shifts the "feel" gets looser and

tighter.



I think this is *part* of what people like myself were trying to

adjust out when we laboriously cranked through the entire worm gear

testing for high spots to reduce play.



What I noticed last night was that there was *some* differences

depending on what part of the worm gear was engaging the worm, but not

nearly as much as I had encountered when trying to adjust the worm blocks.



Now this might be due to a lot of things, including seven years of use

since the last time I messed with the worm adjustment.



However, it seems to me that the very rigid positioning of the Ovision

makes the adjustment process easier and that the net effect is less

variability in the backlash adjustment as the worm gear turns round

the worm.



This means that part of the system's advantage lies in an improved,

easily adjusted, and less variable backlash adjustment. I don't know

how many visual observers are willing to pay $500 for that, but it

makes life a lot easier, and it means, among other things, that as the

mount turns you don't hit a "loose spot" that's as exaggerated as

before.



That's the way it seems now anyhow.



regards

Greg N



----------------------------

#37845 Jun 11, 2008

Greg, Thanks for sharing your results with us. I have purchased a Ovision worm block/worm Assembly SN: NS01601008 about 3 weeks ago for my G-11 mount. I was wondering how you "left the mount on for over 120 hours and thus logged in the neighborhood of 22,000 revolutions"? How did you do this? Was the mount "loaded"? Did you use any special lapping compound? I plan to mount mine this weekend with my new Maxon motors that I just received from Losmandy.

Regards, Larry





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#37846 Jun 11, 2008

I depressed the button on the paddle (gently) with a c-clamp and let

the thing go for five days with the hand paddle setting at 16x. The

mount had only the counterweight shaft in place, nothing else. I used

a bungee cord to keep the mount from bumping against its "natural stop

point." The mount just tugged against the bungee and the clutch

slipped allowing everything to proceed.



With Gemini you could do the same number of revolutions I did, at

500x, in three or four hours. I would be interested to know how you

get the paddle to "agree" to do this without doing three hours of

repetitive slewing. (I'm not familiar enough to know if there is a

way to trick the paddle: perhaps if the clutch is very loose?)



I just used the regular lubricant and let it do its thing. This is

the mildest possible form of lapping: just use of the worm.



Separate announcement incoming!



greg n





--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, LARRY MOSS larry-moss@...> wrote:

>

> Greg, Thanks for sharing your results with us. I have purchased a

Ovision worm block/worm Assembly SN: NS01601008 about 3 weeks ago for

my G-11 mount. I was wondering how you "left the mount on for over 120

hours and thus logged in the neighborhood of 22,000 revolutions"? How

did you do this? Was the mount "loaded"? Did you use any special

lapping compound? I plan to mount mine this weekend with my new Maxon

motors that I just received from Losmandy.

>

Regards, Larry

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>



----------------------------

#38127 Jul 1, 2008

A reminder that some time ago I uploaded a pdf in FILES of the Ovision

Order form. It's the French copy but I filled it out with English

helping notes, as a "sample form" and then included a fresh, blank

form as well.



What I did was print the form, fill it out, scan and send it in as an

attached file to ovision-at-aol.com, and about two weeks later I had a

worm (times vary because they star test each worm). I'm sure you

could send the form in via snail mail or fax.



There are TWO Ovision files in the FILES section. They are at top

level, no folder. One is the aforementioned English helper form. The

other is the instructions on how to install it.



regards

Greg N







--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, R Hamlett ttelmah@...> wrote:

>

> > Hi all: this is exactly the address I used. Tried several times from

> > two different accounts.

> > Can anybody suggest something?

> It worked OK for me.

> Check the spam filters on the accounts you used. A lot of companies

have

> 'blanket' spam filters affecting a lot of AOL accounts.

> Otherwise, ring them. Their email is 'broken Franglish' at best, but

> they all speak English better than they type it.

>

> Best Wishes

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@>

> wrote:

> > >

> > > ovision-at-aol.com

> > >

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "ecrins666" gimmi@> wrote:

> >> > >

> >> > > Hello list:

> >> > > I have tried to get in touch with Ovision, of the worm kit fame,

> for

> >> > > over two month now but they never replied to my mail.

> >> > >

> >> > > Anybody has had any luck with them? Anybody has a

functioning email

> >> > > address?

> >> > >

> >> > > Thanks, gimmi

> >> > >

> > >

>







----------------------------

#38148 Jul 1, 2008

I am very interested in this worm, but somewhat reluctant to send

credit card info via email. I had a bad experience of getting the

credit card info stolen within an hour after I emailed it to someone

else in Europe.

CK



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@...>

wrote: >

> A reminder that some time ago I uploaded a pdf in FILES of the

Ovision > Order form. It's the French copy but I filled it out with English

> helping notes, as a "sample form" and then included a fresh, blank

> form as well.

>

> What I did was print the form, fill it out, scan and send it in as

an > attached file to ovision-at-aol.com, and about two weeks later I

had a > worm (times vary because they star test each worm). I'm sure you

> could send the form in via snail mail or fax.

>

> There are TWO Ovision files in the FILES section. They are at top

> level, no folder. One is the aforementioned English helper form.

The > other is the instructions on how to install it.

>

> regards

> Greg N

>

>

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, R Hamlett ttelmah@> wrote:

> >

> > > Hi all: this is exactly the address I used. Tried several

times from > > > two different accounts.

> > > Can anybody suggest something?

> > It worked OK for me.

> > Check the spam filters on the accounts you used. A lot of

companies > have

> > 'blanket' spam filters affecting a lot of AOL accounts.

> > Otherwise, ring them. Their email is 'broken Franglish' at best,

but > > they all speak English better than they type it.

> >

> > Best Wishes

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@>

> > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > ovision-at-aol.com

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "ecrins666" gimmi@>

wrote: > > >> > >

> > >> > > Hello list:

> > >> > > I have tried to get in touch with Ovision, of the worm

kit fame, > > for

> > >> > > over two month now but they never replied to my mail.

> > >> > >

> > >> > > Anybody has had any luck with them? Anybody has a

> functioning email

> > >> > > address?

> > >> > >

> > >> > > Thanks, gimmi

> > >> > >

> > > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#38178 Jul 7, 2008

You can snail mail or fax the form. Or telephone the information.

You're not going to run much of a security risk with a scanned form

filled out in handwriting, which is what I recommended. There is no

way to read the jpeg except manually.



Theft of credit card data can occur on rigged servers that are

relaying information from another server to yet another server. The

rogue server uses software to scan emails for credit card numbers.



When you order something via email, it is wise to break the credit

card number into two separate parts of 8 digits, and send two separate

emails with (1) in the header and then (2) in the following header.

You can send your name and other information in a third email. This is

a significant obstacle to interception of the information since theft

scanning protocols on rogue servers typically look for sixteen digits

to weed out phone numbers and other random numeric data. Avoid using

the "credit card." Simply tell the vendor I'm sending my information

in two parts. The vendors I have dealt with have not had problems

understanding this so far. These are typically very small vendors who

haven't had the resources to set up secure ordering sites.



regards

Greg N



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "chukchen" chukchen@...> wrote:

>

> I am very interested in this worm, but somewhat reluctant to send

> credit card info via email. I had a bad experience of getting the

> credit card info stolen within an hour after I emailed it to someone

> else in Europe.

> CK

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@>

> wrote:

> >

> > A reminder that some time ago I uploaded a pdf in FILES of the

> Ovision

> > Order form. It's the French copy but I filled it out with English

> > helping notes, as a "sample form" and then included a fresh, blank

> > form as well.

> >

> > What I did was print the form, fill it out, scan and send it in as

> an

> > attached file to ovision-at-aol.com, and about two weeks later I

> had a

> > worm (times vary because they star test each worm). I'm sure you

> > could send the form in via snail mail or fax.

> >

> > There are TWO Ovision files in the FILES section. They are at top

> > level, no folder. One is the aforementioned English helper form.

> The

> > other is the instructions on how to install it.

> >

> > regards

> > Greg N

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, R Hamlett ttelmah@> wrote:

> > >

> > > > Hi all: this is exactly the address I used. Tried several

> times from

> > > > two different accounts.

> > > > Can anybody suggest something?

> > > It worked OK for me.

> > > Check the spam filters on the accounts you used. A lot of

> companies

> > have

> > > 'blanket' spam filters affecting a lot of AOL accounts.

> > > Otherwise, ring them. Their email is 'broken Franglish' at best,

> but

> > > they all speak English better than they type it.

> > >

> > > Best Wishes

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@>

> > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > ovision-at-aol.com

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "ecrins666" gimmi@>

> wrote:

> > > >> > >

> > > >> > > Hello list:

> > > >> > > I have tried to get in touch with Ovision, of the worm

> kit fame,

> > > for

> > > >> > > over two month now but they never replied to my mail.

> > > >> > >

> > > >> > > Anybody has had any luck with them? Anybody has a

> > functioning email

> > > >> > > address?

> > > >> > >

> > > >> > > Thanks, gimmi

> > > >> > >

> > > > >

> > >

> >

>







----------------------------

#38182 Jul 7, 2008

Thanks for the suggestions.

CK

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct"

tim71pos@...> wrote: >

> You can snail mail or fax the form. Or telephone the information.

> You're not going to run much of a security risk with a scanned form

> filled out in handwriting, which is what I recommended. There is no

> way to read the jpeg except manually.

>

> Theft of credit card data can occur on rigged servers that are

> relaying information from another server to yet another server. The

> rogue server uses software to scan emails for credit card numbers.

>

> When you order something via email, it is wise to break the credit

> card number into two separate parts of 8 digits, and send two

separate > emails with (1) in the header and then (2) in the following header.

> You can send your name and other information in a third email. This

is > a significant obstacle to interception of the information since theft

> scanning protocols on rogue servers typically look for sixteen digits

> to weed out phone numbers and other random numeric data. Avoid

using > the "credit card." Simply tell the vendor I'm sending my information

> in two parts. The vendors I have dealt with have not had problems

> understanding this so far. These are typically very small vendors who

> haven't had the resources to set up secure ordering sites.

>

> regards

> Greg N

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "chukchen"

chukchen@> wrote: > >

> > I am very interested in this worm, but somewhat reluctant to send

> > credit card info via email. I had a bad experience of getting the

> > credit card info stolen within an hour after I emailed it to someone

> > else in Europe.

> > CK

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct"

tim71pos@> > > wrote:

> > >

> > > A reminder that some time ago I uploaded a pdf in FILES of the

> > Ovision

> > > Order form. It's the French copy but I filled it out with English

> > > helping notes, as a "sample form" and then included a fresh,

blank > > > form as well.

> > >

> > > What I did was print the form, fill it out, scan and send it in as

> > an

> > > attached file to ovision-at-aol.com, and about two weeks later I

> > had a

> > > worm (times vary because they star test each worm). I'm sure

you > > > could send the form in via snail mail or fax.

> > >

> > > There are TWO Ovision files in the FILES section. They are at

top > > > level, no folder. One is the aforementioned English helper form.

> > The

> > > other is the instructions on how to install it.

> > >

> > > regards

> > > Greg N

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, R Hamlett

ttelmah@> wrote: > > > >

> > > > > Hi all: this is exactly the address I used. Tried several

> > times from

> > > > > two different accounts.

> > > > > Can anybody suggest something?

> > > > It worked OK for me.

> > > > Check the spam filters on the accounts you used. A lot of

> > companies

> > > have

> > > > 'blanket' spam filters affecting a lot of AOL accounts.

> > > > Otherwise, ring them. Their email is 'broken Franglish' at best,

> > but

> > > > they all speak English better than they type it.

> > > >

> > > > Best Wishes

> > > >

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct"

tim71pos@> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > ovision-at-aol.com

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "ecrins666"

gimmi@> > > wrote:

> > > > >> > >

> > > > >> > > Hello list:

> > > > >> > > I have tried to get in touch with Ovision, of the worm

> > kit fame,

> > > > for

> > > > >> > > over two month now but they never replied to my mail.

> > > > >> > >

> > > > >> > > Anybody has had any luck with them? Anybody has a

> > > functioning email

> > > > >> > > address?

> > > > >> > >

> > > > >> > > Thanks, gimmi

> > > > >> > >

> > > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#38782 Aug 12, 2008

Hi,

please see the first light image obtained with my new astrograph on the

G11 with the Ovision block.



icehome.in.cnr.it/icefalls/Astro/Star%20Clusters/m13%20ASA%

20first%20light.jpg



906 mm focal, 4 and 8 min subs. Autoguided.





As I have already reported it was very easy to install the new block

and it improved tracking enormously.



icehome.in.cnr.it/icefalls/Losmandy.htm



Diagrams might be boring but they are useful.

gimmi



----------------------------

#38783 Aug 12, 2008

try to stick you links between brackets like this long link here>

that way they stay together and we don't have to cut 'n' paste.

thanks Greg N

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "ecrins666" gimmi@...> wrote:

>

> Hi,

> please see the first light image obtained with my new astrograph on the

> G11 with the Ovision block.

>

>

icehome.in.cnr.it/icefalls/Astro/Star%20Clusters/m13%20ASA%20first%20light.jpg>

>

> 906 mm focal, 4 and 8 min subs. Autoguided.

>

>

> As I have already reported it was very easy to install the new block

> and it improved tracking enormously.

>

> icehome.in.cnr.it/icefalls/Losmandy.htm

>

> Diagrams might be boring but they are useful.

> gimmi

>







----------------------------

#38785 Aug 12, 2008

That looks pretty good to me. I spent some time picking out very dim

stars that are basically touching each other, and looked for pairs at

different position angles. Looks to me like the guiding is dead on.



If one goes out to the corners I see some *tiny* signs of elongation

that are probably the usual optical issues of field curvature and what

not (looks like it is mostly controlled, though, you have to really

look). But looking in the center quadrant I don't see any signs of

tracking deviations at all.



I'd say you got your money's worth!



And it speaks well since your scope is pretty big (if memory serves)

and therefore a challenge for the mount. People with four and five

inch refractors, SCTs, etc. should have an easier time.



Your picture does a great job with the glob and also picks out NGC6207

and IC4617 really well.



regards

Greg N



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "ecrins666" gimmi@...> wrote:

>

> Hi,

> please see the first light image obtained with my new astrograph on the

> G11 with the Ovision block.

>

> icehome.in.cnr.it/icefalls/Astro/Star%20Clusters/m13%20ASA%

> 20first%20light.jpg

>

> 906 mm focal, 4 and 8 min subs. Autoguided.

>

>

> As I have already reported it was very easy to install the new block

> and it improved tracking enormously.

>

> icehome.in.cnr.it/icefalls/Losmandy.htm

>

> Diagrams might be boring but they are useful.

> gimmi

>



----------------------------

#38787 Aug 12, 2008

I am new to this forum, although I have had a G-11 for six years, using

it with my 6" AP refractor for visual only. I know all about the worm

gear problems!



It seems that Mr. Knowle is very enthusiastic about the Ovision worm,

so I have to wonder if he has any financial interest in it. Don't get

me wrong, I am "all for" being excited for G-11 worm improvements, but

he sure is posting a lot.



Mr. Knowle, do you have any financial interest or otherwise in this

product.



Thanks,



Dan



----------------------------

#38790 Aug 12, 2008

Daniel,



I will let Greg speak for himself, but I believe he has stated that he

is in no way affiliated with the Ovision folks. Greg is just a

passionate person and when he finds something of merit he likes to

push it out to others. I think that is all there is to this, but I

will let Greg say so too. I think if you read much in the archives

you will find strong evidence of Greg's passion for the hobby g>.



Frank Barrett

celestialwonders.com



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Hanon" drshanon@...>

wrote: >

> I am new to this forum, although I have had a G-11 for six years, using

> it with my 6" AP refractor for visual only. I know all about the worm

> gear problems!

>

> It seems that Mr. Knowle is very enthusiastic about the Ovision worm,

> so I have to wonder if he has any financial interest in it. Don't get

> me wrong, I am "all for" being excited for G-11 worm improvements, but

> he sure is posting a lot.

>

> Mr. Knowle, do you have any financial interest or otherwise in this

> product.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Dan

>



----------------------------

#38798 Aug 12, 2008

That looks pretty good, do you have an image taken with the same rig

before the worm was installed?

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "ecrins666" gimmi@...> wrote:

>

> Hi,

> please see the first light image obtained with my new astrograph on the

> G11 with the Ovision block.

>

> icehome.in.cnr.it/icefalls/Astro/Star%20Clusters/m13%20ASA%

> 20first%20light.jpg

>

> 906 mm focal, 4 and 8 min subs. Autoguided.

>

>

> As I have already reported it was very easy to install the new block

> and it improved tracking enormously.

>

> icehome.in.cnr.it/icefalls/Losmandy.htm

>

> Diagrams might be boring but they are useful.

> gimmi

>



----------------------------

#38814 Aug 12, 2008

And Roland is well acquainted with Franck so I haven't a clue how to

work out these subtleties. Franck also sells AP mounts and is the guy

who deployed a half dozen of them, maybe more, for some kind of study

in the Antarctic where they were (are?) kept operational through the

winter. "I throw up my hands." People have different views. Rainer

has his own design and is not on board for any of the alternatives,

leastaways, not 100%. regards Greg N

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Well, I would be willing to spend $500 on my new G-11 if I thought

> that the returns would warrant the investment. Perhaps it would? I

> guess I will just have to give it some more thought and see if I can

> get some more input.

> The tight nature of the worm assembly still does not seem right to me.

> Roland Christian told me that the one thing that would definitely

> cause PE was if the worm was too tight and the gear was riding too

> deep in the wheel.

> Floyd

>







----------------------------

#38817 Aug 12, 2008

Hey, I am not saying the worm block doesn't work or is too tight. I am

just saying that being tight and rough to turn just doesn't seem

right. I just don't understand how the roughness would not be

transmitted into the system. But, I am willing to ge convinced and

perhaps to bu one.

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@...> wrote:

>

> And Roland is well acquainted with Franck so I haven't a clue how to

> work out these subtleties. Franck also sells AP mounts and is the guy

> who deployed a half dozen of them, maybe more, for some kind of study

> in the Antarctic where they were (are?) kept operational through the

> winter. "I throw up my hands." People have different views. Rainer

> has his own design and is not on board for any of the alternatives,

> leastaways, not 100%. regards Greg N

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > Well, I would be willing to spend $500 on my new G-11 if I thought

> > that the returns would warrant the investment. Perhaps it would? I

> > guess I will just have to give it some more thought and see if I can

> > get some more input.

> > The tight nature of the worm assembly still does not seem right to me.

> > Roland Christian told me that the one thing that would definitely

> > cause PE was if the worm was too tight and the gear was riding too

> > deep in the wheel.

> > Floyd

> >

>



----------------------------

#38824 Aug 13, 2008

Hi Greg,



> Rainer

> has his own design and is not on board for any of the alternatives,



I have been reading this and it has been proven (astrokattner did

exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with radial ball

bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you press

them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball bearings but still

some problems.



I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks do not

integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS enough

space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.



Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design and I

told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)



Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end of the

wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible balls

makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball axial

bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really do not

need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis running

smoothly.



I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago and the

price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm included but

with 2 axial bearings.



The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass worm. I

immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.



regards Rainer



----------------------------

#38827 Aug 13, 2008

Hi Greg,



I just checked an image send by the builder of the first RS-Wormblock.

It is dated May 3rd 2005 :-)



rainerehlert.com/astro/worm/PPWB02.jpg



Already more then 3 Years ago :-))



regards Rainer



>

> Hi Greg,

>

>

> > Rainer

> > has his own design and is not on board for any of the alternatives,

>

> I have been reading this and it has been proven (astrokattner did

> exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with radial ball

> bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you press

> them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball bearings but still

> some problems.

>

> I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks do not

> integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS enough

> space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.

>

> Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design and I

> told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

> integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)

>

> Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end of the

> wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible balls

> makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball axial

> bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really do not

> need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis running

> smoothly.

>

> I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago and the

> price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm included but

> with 2 axial bearings.

>

> The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass worm. I

> immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.

>

> regards Rainer

>



----------------------------

#38829 Aug 13, 2008

Hi Rainer,

You have brought up the same concern as I did, why is the Ovision set

up so tight as to be rough and stiff? Just can not figure out why this

would be a good thing.

I would have to agree that the axial ball bearing sound like a better

idea. So, you think that a person could insert a set of bearings in

the Ovision without modification?

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Rainer" rsbfoto@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Greg,

>

>

> > Rainer

> > has his own design and is not on board for any of the alternatives,

>

> I have been reading this and it has been proven (astrokattner did

> exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with radial ball

> bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you press

> them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball bearings but still

> some problems.

>

> I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks do not

> integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS enough

> space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.

>

> Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design and I

> told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

> integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)

>

> Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end of the

> wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible balls

> makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball axial

> bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really do not

> need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis running

> smoothly.

>

> I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago and the

> price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm included but

> with 2 axial bearings.

>

> The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass worm. I

> immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.

>

> regards Rainer

>







----------------------------

#38831 Aug 13, 2008

Rainer



As I have stated before, I personally do not believe that axial bearings are

required nor necessarily desirable in this application as the deep groove

ball races require a degree of pre-load to keep them running true. The

results from the OVision block and my preliminary results with Martins block

would seem to bear this out. There are also some other fine (more expensive)

mounts out there that only use deep groove radial ball race bearings on

their worms too.



Regards

Mark



2008/8/13 Rainer rsbfoto@...>

> Hi Greg,

>

> > Rainer

> > has his own design and is not on board for any of the alternatives,

>

> I have been reading this and it has been proven (astrokattner did

> exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with radial ball

> bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you press

> them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball bearings but still

> some problems.

>

> I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks do not

> integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS enough

> space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.

>

> Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design and I

> told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

> integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)

>

> Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end of the

> wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible balls

> makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball axial

> bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really do not

> need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis running

> smoothly.

>

> I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago and the

> price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm included but

> with 2 axial bearings.

>

> The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass worm. I

> immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.

>

> regards Rainer

>

>

>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#38833 Aug 13, 2008

Hi Floyd,

> I would have to agree that the axial ball bearing sound like a better

> idea. So, you think that a person could insert a set of bearings in

> the Ovision without modification?



I think it is not possible without modification as you need on each

side +- 6.5mm or 7mm deeper bores in order to allocate the axial bearings



My assumption is that the stiffness in turning the worm comes from the

lateral pressure applied on the radial ball bearings ...



regards Rainer



----------------------------

#38834 Aug 13, 2008

Hi Mark,



Got it, but what makes me wonder is the usage of the words ...



... believe ... and ... seem ...



So you are not sure, right ? but I am sure because i went thru all of

it allready ... :-)



Anyhow, there are many different designs, but honestly I have never

seen deep into an AP worm or a Takahashi worm or a Paramount worm or

whatever other good ecuatorial mount assembly so I can not assure how

they are built ...



If you ahd a chance to have a look into it that is good and so you

know more about it then me :-)



That is all I can say and I will not comment on this anymore :-) It is

just a waste of time for me as I am very busy building my new

observatory :-)



rainerehlert.com/ObsReal14/cons/Pano-Obser-02.jpg



Have a nice time and good luck ...



regards Rainer



>

> Rainer

>

> As I have stated before, I personally do not believe that axial

bearings are > required nor necessarily desirable in this application as the deep

groove > ball races require a degree of pre-load to keep them running true. The

> results from the OVision block and my preliminary results with

Martins block > would seem to bear this out. There are also some other fine (more

expensive) > mounts out there that only use deep groove radial ball race bearings on

> their worms too.

>

> Regards

> Mark

>

> 2008/8/13 Rainer rsbfoto@...>

>

> > Hi Greg,

> >

> > > Rainer

> > > has his own design and is not on board for any of the alternatives,

> >

> > I have been reading this and it has been proven (astrokattner did

> > exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with radial ball

> > bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you press

> > them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball bearings but still

> > some problems.

> >

> > I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks do not

> > integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS enough

> > space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.

> >

> > Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design and I

> > told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

> > integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)

> >

> > Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end of the

> > wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible balls

> > makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball axial

> > bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really do not

> > need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis running

> > smoothly.

> >

> > I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago and the

> > price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm included but

> > with 2 axial bearings.

> >

> > The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass worm. I

> > immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.

> >

> > regards Rainer

> >

> >

> >

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>







----------------------------

#38836 Aug 13, 2008

Hi Rainer



Nothing in life is certain (except as they say death and taxes :-), and we

are not talking about research grade mounts but mid-range amateur mounts.

Since I got interested in the 76 second error I have looked at how the worms

in Mountain Instruments, Vixen Atlux, Paramounts, and even LX200's are

mounted. Some use axial bearing devices some don't, none of them seem to

have the G11 problems with 76s, however they all have monolithic block

arrangements.



I cannot guarantee that the 76 second will be 100% eliminated, but from what

I have seen from Martins block - and the OVision results other people are

posting - it will be reduced to the level where it no longer concerns us.

Can you see evidence for it not being controlled in the results?



So why add more engineering complexity and potential for problems. Do you

warrant that adding axial bearings will not introduce another source of

error?



Thanks for the luck - we may need a pinch ;-)



Regards

Mark



2008/8/13 Rainer rsbfoto@...>

> Hi Mark,

>

> Got it, but what makes me wonder is the usage of the words ...

>

> ... believe ... and ... seem ...

>

> So you are not sure, right ? but I am sure because i went thru all of

> it allready ... :-)

>

> Anyhow, there are many different designs, but honestly I have never

> seen deep into an AP worm or a Takahashi worm or a Paramount worm or

> whatever other good ecuatorial mount assembly so I can not assure how

> they are built ...

>

> If you ahd a chance to have a look into it that is good and so you

> know more about it then me :-)

>

> That is all I can say and I will not comment on this anymore :-) It is

> just a waste of time for me as I am very busy building my new

> observatory :-)

>

> rainerehlert.com/ObsReal14/cons/Pano-Obser-02.jpg

>

> Have a nice time and good luck ...

>

> regards Rainer

>

> >

>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#38841 Aug 13, 2008

Well the only proof is that we have three people operating G11s with

these worms. They seem to be getting good results. Although in the

case of mine, I only did one set of tests. What we haven't had is

someone coming on and saying: "I just tried this and it totally bombed."



I think some people think: well what the hell I'll jump in, and

other's think: I'll wait till there are a dozen or so units in the

field. I can respect that. Usually I try not to order the first of

anything, mainly out of concern about shake-down problems. In this

case however there is sort of a public need for people who want to

deal more aggressively with PE to take the lead. So partly I'm

arguing for a bit of willingness to get ahead of the pack, and

possibly do some public service in the process. In any case it's

easily reversible (unlike some of the procedures discussed here, such

as lapping to deal with the same issues). So the risk is all in the

dough. The $500 is admittedly a potential loss, but what the hell. I

can think of real stoopid stuff I've blown $500 on and no I won't say.

I don't think this is stoopid or completely unknown at this point.

But it is correct that it is not completely established.



I do these things sometimes, it's how I find stuff out. People always

say go to a star party and see what other folks are doing. Well I'm

the guy that people go to see. In my local club there aren't any

vanguard elements so that I can hang back. I just ordered a Zeiss

16.7mm 2" eyepiece that no one has heard of. No one. Only report

I've got is someone who knew someone who said.... Bought a Televue

dioptrx not because I was confident I'd be able to use it on my

Pentaxes, but because I'd fiddle with it and see if I could find a

way. Sail forth, bold Floyd, into the ocean blue!



The amount of money I blew on the Zeiss is less than the Ovision, but

not that much less. OTOH I expect the funds to be 50 - 75%

recoverable if I don't want it. It is after all a zeiss eyepiece.



regards

Greg N

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Hey, I am not saying the worm block doesn't work or is too tight. I am

> just saying that being tight and rough to turn just doesn't seem

> right. I just don't understand how the roughness would not be

> transmitted into the system. But, I am willing to ge convinced and

> perhaps to bu one.

> Floyd

>



----------------------------

#38843 Aug 13, 2008

Hi Greg,

Yeah, if the Ovision turns out to be the best bang for the buck, it

will become an asset when you sell the mount, I am certain of that. If

it does not gain popularity, it will not devalue the mount, again I am

sure of that.

I am considering this option myself, just because I believe the G-11

is a pretty good mount and possibly quite underated and could become a

real sleeper if the Ovision lives up to its literature.

As I stated earlier, the $500 is not a big expense in this hobby. I

have eyepieces that cost more and I certainly have scopes sitting

around not being used that cost a heck of a lot more. :^)

When you think about it, $500 is only 15% of the cost of the G-11

Gemini new. So, not a bad bargain if it improves the performance by

even 15-30%.

I have the order form here, filled out, now I just have to decide

whether to email it to them. ;^)

Floyd

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@...> wrote:

>

> Well the only proof is that we have three people operating G11s with

> these worms. They seem to be getting good results. Although in the

> case of mine, I only did one set of tests. What we haven't had is

> someone coming on and saying: "I just tried this and it totally bombed."

>

> I think some people think: well what the hell I'll jump in, and

> other's think: I'll wait till there are a dozen or so units in the

> field. I can respect that. Usually I try not to order the first of

> anything, mainly out of concern about shake-down problems. In this

> case however there is sort of a public need for people who want to

> deal more aggressively with PE to take the lead. So partly I'm

> arguing for a bit of willingness to get ahead of the pack, and

> possibly do some public service in the process. In any case it's

> easily reversible (unlike some of the procedures discussed here, such

> as lapping to deal with the same issues). So the risk is all in the

> dough. The $500 is admittedly a potential loss, but what the hell. I

> can think of real stoopid stuff I've blown $500 on and no I won't say.

> I don't think this is stoopid or completely unknown at this point.

> But it is correct that it is not completely established.

>

> I do these things sometimes, it's how I find stuff out. People always

> say go to a star party and see what other folks are doing. Well I'm

> the guy that people go to see. In my local club there aren't any

> vanguard elements so that I can hang back. I just ordered a Zeiss

> 16.7mm 2" eyepiece that no one has heard of. No one. Only report

> I've got is someone who knew someone who said.... Bought a Televue

> dioptrx not because I was confident I'd be able to use it on my

> Pentaxes, but because I'd fiddle with it and see if I could find a

> way. Sail forth, bold Floyd, into the ocean blue!

>

> The amount of money I blew on the Zeiss is less than the Ovision, but

> not that much less. OTOH I expect the funds to be 50 - 75%

> recoverable if I don't want it. It is after all a zeiss eyepiece.

>

> regards

> Greg N

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > Hey, I am not saying the worm block doesn't work or is too tight. I am

> > just saying that being tight and rough to turn just doesn't seem

> > right. I just don't understand how the roughness would not be

> > transmitted into the system. But, I am willing to ge convinced and

> > perhaps to bu one.

> > Floyd

> >

>







----------------------------

#38844 Aug 13, 2008

BTW you did catch the post that says the Ovision can be adjusted to

turn freely if that's your desire? However we don't know what the

performance effect would be. regards Greg N

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Hey, I am not saying the worm block doesn't work or is too tight. I am

> just saying that being tight and rough to turn just doesn't seem

> right. I just don't understand how the roughness would not be

> transmitted into the system. But, I am willing to ge convinced and

> perhaps to bu one.

> Floyd

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@> wrote:

> >

> > And Roland is well acquainted with Franck so I haven't a clue how to

> > work out these subtleties. Franck also sells AP mounts and is the guy

> > who deployed a half dozen of them, maybe more, for some kind of study

> > in the Antarctic where they were (are?) kept operational through the

> > winter. "I throw up my hands." People have different views. Rainer

> > has his own design and is not on board for any of the alternatives,

> > leastaways, not 100%. regards Greg N

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Well, I would be willing to spend $500 on my new G-11 if I thought

> > > that the returns would warrant the investment. Perhaps it would? I

> > > guess I will just have to give it some more thought and see if I can

> > > get some more input.

> > > The tight nature of the worm assembly still does not seem right

to me.

> > > Roland Christian told me that the one thing that would definitely

> > > cause PE was if the worm was too tight and the gear was riding too

> > > deep in the wheel.

> > > Floyd

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#38848 Aug 13, 2008

Sit on the form till next week. You have a reputation of "being

tough" to uphold! Greg N

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Greg,

> Yeah, if the Ovision turns out to be the best bang for the buck, it

> will become an asset when you sell the mount, I am certain of that. If

> it does not gain popularity, it will not devalue the mount, again I am

> sure of that.

> I am considering this option myself, just because I believe the G-11

> is a pretty good mount and possibly quite underated and could become a

> real sleeper if the Ovision lives up to its literature.

> As I stated earlier, the $500 is not a big expense in this hobby. I

> have eyepieces that cost more and I certainly have scopes sitting

> around not being used that cost a heck of a lot more. :^)

> When you think about it, $500 is only 15% of the cost of the G-11

> Gemini new. So, not a bad bargain if it improves the performance by

> even 15-30%.

> I have the order form here, filled out, now I just have to decide

> whether to email it to them. ;^)

> Floyd

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@> wrote:

> >

> > Well the only proof is that we have three people operating G11s with

> > these worms. They seem to be getting good results. Although in the

> > case of mine, I only did one set of tests. What we haven't had is

> > someone coming on and saying: "I just tried this and it totally

bombed."

> >

> > I think some people think: well what the hell I'll jump in, and

> > other's think: I'll wait till there are a dozen or so units in the

> > field. I can respect that. Usually I try not to order the first of

> > anything, mainly out of concern about shake-down problems. In this

> > case however there is sort of a public need for people who want to

> > deal more aggressively with PE to take the lead. So partly I'm

> > arguing for a bit of willingness to get ahead of the pack, and

> > possibly do some public service in the process. In any case it's

> > easily reversible (unlike some of the procedures discussed here, such

> > as lapping to deal with the same issues). So the risk is all in the

> > dough. The $500 is admittedly a potential loss, but what the hell. I

> > can think of real stoopid stuff I've blown $500 on and no I won't say.

> > I don't think this is stoopid or completely unknown at this point.

> > But it is correct that it is not completely established.

> >

> > I do these things sometimes, it's how I find stuff out. People always

> > say go to a star party and see what other folks are doing. Well I'm

> > the guy that people go to see. In my local club there aren't any

> > vanguard elements so that I can hang back. I just ordered a Zeiss

> > 16.7mm 2" eyepiece that no one has heard of. No one. Only report

> > I've got is someone who knew someone who said.... Bought a Televue

> > dioptrx not because I was confident I'd be able to use it on my

> > Pentaxes, but because I'd fiddle with it and see if I could find a

> > way. Sail forth, bold Floyd, into the ocean blue!

> >

> > The amount of money I blew on the Zeiss is less than the Ovision, but

> > not that much less. OTOH I expect the funds to be 50 - 75%

> > recoverable if I don't want it. It is after all a zeiss eyepiece.

> >

> > regards

> > Greg N

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hey, I am not saying the worm block doesn't work or is too

tight. I am

> > > just saying that being tight and rough to turn just doesn't seem

> > > right. I just don't understand how the roughness would not be

> > > transmitted into the system. But, I am willing to ge convinced and

> > > perhaps to bu one.

> > > Floyd

> > >

> >

>







----------------------------

#38849 Aug 13, 2008

What was the Precise Parts design? anyone know? How many were sold?



I heard it was a "floating worm" but I'm now not so sure what that

means. I used to think it meant spring loaded in such a way that

spring pressure was needed to make contact with the mount.



regards

Greg N

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Rainer" rsbfoto@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Greg,

>

> I just checked an image send by the builder of the first RS-Wormblock.

> It is dated May 3rd 2005 :-)

>

> rainerehlert.com/astro/worm/PPWB02.jpg

>

> Already more then 3 Years ago :-))

>

> regards Rainer

>

>

> >

> > Hi Greg,

> >

> >

> > > Rainer

> > > has his own design and is not on board for any of the alternatives,

> >

> > I have been reading this and it has been proven (astrokattner did

> > exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with radial ball

> > bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you press

> > them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball bearings but still

> > some problems.

> >

> > I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks do not

> > integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS enough

> > space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.

> >

> > Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design and I

> > told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

> > integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)

> >

> > Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end of the

> > wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible balls

> > makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball axial

> > bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really do not

> > need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis running

> > smoothly.

> >

> > I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago and the

> > price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm included but

> > with 2 axial bearings.

> >

> > The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass worm. I

> > immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.

> >

> > regards Rainer

> >

>



----------------------------

#38850 Aug 13, 2008

Floyd I think you should write to Franck and ask him. He's very

forthcoming. Share the answer with us. Greg N

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Rainer,

> You have brought up the same concern as I did, why is the Ovision set

> up so tight as to be rough and stiff? Just can not figure out why this

> would be a good thing.

> I would have to agree that the axial ball bearing sound like a better

> idea. So, you think that a person could insert a set of bearings in

> the Ovision without modification?

> Floyd

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Rainer" rsbfoto@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Greg,

> >

> >

> > > Rainer

> > > has his own design and is not on board for any of the alternatives,

> >

> > I have been reading this and it has been proven (astrokattner did

> > exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with radial ball

> > bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you press

> > them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball bearings but still

> > some problems.

> >

> > I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks do not

> > integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS enough

> > space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.

> >

> > Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design and I

> > told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

> > integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)

> >

> > Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end of the

> > wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible balls

> > makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball axial

> > bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really do not

> > need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis running

> > smoothly.

> >

> > I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago and the

> > price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm included but

> > with 2 axial bearings.

> >

> > The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass worm. I

> > immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.

> >

> > regards Rainer

> >

>



----------------------------

#38851 Aug 13, 2008

Yes:



In off-list email with Franck, he said that he understood what Rainer

was saying but considered that there was more than one way to skin

this cat.



The problem here is that when we're looking at these very fine

executions with different design concepts behind them, the average

person really can't judge. Franck understood Rainer's point but

evidently felt in his own tests that he could proceed in the way he

did. If the Ovision worms perform consistently over time, then I guess

that's the main thing. Nonetheless when you see the kind of work that

Rainer does you wish all these guys could agree on the fine details.



But what I'm really enjoying is that we're getting an education in the

design aspects of high performance equipment. Reasonable people can

disagree about what can be done, what is needed, and what is cost

effective. This is great stuff in the sense that part of what I've

enjoyed about astronomy is that virtually all the equipment

considerations constitute an introduction to basic engineering

principles: function, cost, technical limits, etc. We are seeing this

in action on this worm debate.



I wouldn't be surprised if Franck alters the design at some point.

The current Ovision worm is actually the 2nd model they put out.

Someday there may be an O-3. We're certainly in a better place than

last year when all we could do is send letters to Scott and hope for

the best.



regards

Greg N



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Crossley" public@...> wrote:

>

> Rainer

>

> As I have stated before, I personally do not believe that axial

bearings are

> required nor necessarily desirable in this application as the deep

groove

> ball races require a degree of pre-load to keep them running true. The

> results from the OVision block and my preliminary results with

Martins block

> would seem to bear this out. There are also some other fine (more

expensive)

> mounts out there that only use deep groove radial ball race bearings on

> their worms too.

>

> Regards

> Mark

>

> 2008/8/13 Rainer rsbfoto@...>

>

> > Hi Greg,

> >

> > > Rainer

> > > has his own design and is not on board for any of the alternatives,

> >

> > I have been reading this and it has been proven (astrokattner did

> > exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with radial ball

> > bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you press

> > them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball bearings but still

> > some problems.

> >

> > I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks do not

> > integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS enough

> > space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.

> >

> > Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design and I

> > told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

> > integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)

> >

> > Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end of the

> > wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible balls

> > makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball axial

> > bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really do not

> > need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis running

> > smoothly.

> >

> > I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago and the

> > price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm included but

> > with 2 axial bearings.

> >

> > The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass worm. I

> > immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.

> >

> > regards Rainer

> >

> >

> >

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>







----------------------------

#38853 Aug 13, 2008

Yup! Plus I am reviewing the data from the last tests I did on my

mount and comparing it to the data that is now available. My worm and

all right now looks pretty good. But, maybe the Ovision would have

some improvement?

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@...> wrote:

>

> Sit on the form till next week. You have a reputation of "being

> tough" to uphold! Greg N

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Greg,

> > Yeah, if the Ovision turns out to be the best bang for the buck, it

> > will become an asset when you sell the mount, I am certain of that. If

> > it does not gain popularity, it will not devalue the mount, again I am

> > sure of that.

> > I am considering this option myself, just because I believe the G-11

> > is a pretty good mount and possibly quite underated and could become a

> > real sleeper if the Ovision lives up to its literature.

> > As I stated earlier, the $500 is not a big expense in this hobby. I

> > have eyepieces that cost more and I certainly have scopes sitting

> > around not being used that cost a heck of a lot more. :^)

> > When you think about it, $500 is only 15% of the cost of the G-11

> > Gemini new. So, not a bad bargain if it improves the performance by

> > even 15-30%.

> > I have the order form here, filled out, now I just have to decide

> > whether to email it to them. ;^)

> > Floyd

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Well the only proof is that we have three people operating G11s with

> > > these worms. They seem to be getting good results. Although in the

> > > case of mine, I only did one set of tests. What we haven't had is

> > > someone coming on and saying: "I just tried this and it totally

> bombed."

> > >

> > > I think some people think: well what the hell I'll jump in, and

> > > other's think: I'll wait till there are a dozen or so units in the

> > > field. I can respect that. Usually I try not to order the first of

> > > anything, mainly out of concern about shake-down problems. In this

> > > case however there is sort of a public need for people who want to

> > > deal more aggressively with PE to take the lead. So partly I'm

> > > arguing for a bit of willingness to get ahead of the pack, and

> > > possibly do some public service in the process. In any case it's

> > > easily reversible (unlike some of the procedures discussed here,

such

> > > as lapping to deal with the same issues). So the risk is all in the

> > > dough. The $500 is admittedly a potential loss, but what the

hell. I

> > > can think of real stoopid stuff I've blown $500 on and no I

won't say.

> > > I don't think this is stoopid or completely unknown at this point.

> > > But it is correct that it is not completely established.

> > >

> > > I do these things sometimes, it's how I find stuff out. People

always

> > > say go to a star party and see what other folks are doing. Well I'm

> > > the guy that people go to see. In my local club there aren't any

> > > vanguard elements so that I can hang back. I just ordered a Zeiss

> > > 16.7mm 2" eyepiece that no one has heard of. No one. Only report

> > > I've got is someone who knew someone who said.... Bought a Televue

> > > dioptrx not because I was confident I'd be able to use it on my

> > > Pentaxes, but because I'd fiddle with it and see if I could find a

> > > way. Sail forth, bold Floyd, into the ocean blue!

> > >

> > > The amount of money I blew on the Zeiss is less than the

Ovision, but

> > > not that much less. OTOH I expect the funds to be 50 - 75%

> > > recoverable if I don't want it. It is after all a zeiss eyepiece.

> > >

> > > regards

> > > Greg N

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hey, I am not saying the worm block doesn't work or is too

> tight. I am

> > > > just saying that being tight and rough to turn just doesn't seem

> > > > right. I just don't understand how the roughness would not be

> > > > transmitted into the system. But, I am willing to ge convinced and

> > > > perhaps to bu one.

> > > > Floyd

> > > >

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#38854 Aug 13, 2008

At the level of work you do Rainer, Roland would be very forthcoming.

He does not consider the AP worm a closely guarded secret and would

probably be interested in seeing some pics of your own designs.



regards

Greg N

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Rainer" rsbfoto@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Mark,

>

> Got it, but what makes me wonder is the usage of the words ...

>

> ... believe ... and ... seem ...

>

> So you are not sure, right ? but I am sure because i went thru all of

> it allready ... :-)

>

> Anyhow, there are many different designs, but honestly I have never

> seen deep into an AP worm or a Takahashi worm or a Paramount worm or

> whatever other good ecuatorial mount assembly so I can not assure how

> they are built ...

>

> If you ahd a chance to have a look into it that is good and so you

> know more about it then me :-)

>

> That is all I can say and I will not comment on this anymore :-) It is

> just a waste of time for me as I am very busy building my new

> observatory :-)

>

> rainerehlert.com/ObsReal14/cons/Pano-Obser-02.jpg

>

> Have a nice time and good luck ...

>

> regards Rainer

>

>

> >

> > Rainer

> >

> > As I have stated before, I personally do not believe that axial

> bearings are

> > required nor necessarily desirable in this application as the deep

> groove

> > ball races require a degree of pre-load to keep them running true. The

> > results from the OVision block and my preliminary results with

> Martins block

> > would seem to bear this out. There are also some other fine (more

> expensive)

> > mounts out there that only use deep groove radial ball race

bearings on

> > their worms too.

> >

> > Regards

> > Mark

> >

> > 2008/8/13 Rainer rsbfoto@>

> >

> > > Hi Greg,

> > >

> > > > Rainer

> > > > has his own design and is not on board for any of the

alternatives,

> > >

> > > I have been reading this and it has been proven (astrokattner did

> > > exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with radial ball

> > > bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you press

> > > them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball bearings but

still

> > > some problems.

> > >

> > > I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks do not

> > > integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS enough

> > > space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.

> > >

> > > Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design and I

> > > told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

> > > integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)

> > >

> > > Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end of the

> > > wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible balls

> > > makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball axial

> > > bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really do not

> > > need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis

running

> > > smoothly.

> > >

> > > I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago and the

> > > price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm

included but

> > > with 2 axial bearings.

> > >

> > > The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass worm. I

> > > immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.

> > >

> > > regards Rainer

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>







----------------------------

#38856 Aug 13, 2008

No one can answer that for you Floyd. I think the main thing is

whether you are suffering from the 76 arc second problem. If it has

bugged you, you might want to do something about it.



There's also the question of whether you ever envision imaging at

longer fls and if so, whether you'd want to do it on a Losmandy.



I'm very bullish on the G11 and G8s right now. The innovations on the

market and in the pipeline are terrific, it's a mount with a large

user base, a supportive group, it can be run on dscs or analog setting

circles or go-to paddle or laptop pc, I can't think of another mount

that can do ALL of those things. The Berlebach tripod series is a

wicked fine alternative tripod system for those who want to go with

wood instead of the already excellent default tripod--which has been

one of the best in the industry on a consistent basis.



Sometimes when the mood strikes I drop money on marginal gains. I

just did that when I ordered the Zeiss 16.7. I already have a Nagler

17 T4. How much better could the Zeiss be? It will be a case of an

incremental gain or maybe just tradeoffs. Maybe the Zeiss 16.7 won't

be any better at all!



You know the story. It's part of being an equipment hound. As far as

all that goes, I'm sort of in-between. All you have to do is look at

those Astromart guys with 200+ transactions. I'm still down in the

60s. But I do try things for the heck of it.



regards

Greg N

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Yup! Plus I am reviewing the data from the last tests I did on my

> mount and comparing it to the data that is now available. My worm and

> all right now looks pretty good. But, maybe the Ovision would have

> some improvement?

> Floyd

> ---



----------------------------

#38857 Aug 13, 2008

Sounds like you have to use the Ovision as it comes, no mods. That is

OK, as long as it works well.

Here is my log from the last test. It shows 2 worm cycles, guiding

off, logging on and just polar aligned.



tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/view/72cf?b=9&m=f&o=0



You can see that it is not so far from that of the Ovision and the

reason for my hesitant behavior. :^_

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@...> wrote:

>

> Floyd I think you should write to Franck and ask him. He's very

> forthcoming. Share the answer with us. Greg N

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Rainer,

> > You have brought up the same concern as I did, why is the Ovision set

> > up so tight as to be rough and stiff? Just can not figure out why this

> > would be a good thing.

> > I would have to agree that the axial ball bearing sound like a better

> > idea. So, you think that a person could insert a set of bearings in

> > the Ovision without modification?

> > Floyd

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Rainer" rsbfoto@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi Greg,

> > >

> > >

> > > > Rainer

> > > > has his own design and is not on board for any of the

alternatives,

> > >

> > > I have been reading this and it has been proven (astrokattner did

> > > exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with radial ball

> > > bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you press

> > > them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball bearings but

still

> > > some problems.

> > >

> > > I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks do not

> > > integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS enough

> > > space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.

> > >

> > > Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design and I

> > > told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

> > > integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)

> > >

> > > Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end of the

> > > wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible balls

> > > makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball axial

> > > bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really do not

> > > need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis

running

> > > smoothly.

> > >

> > > I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago and the

> > > price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm

included but

> > > with 2 axial bearings.

> > >

> > > The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass worm. I

> > > immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.

> > >

> > > regards Rainer

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#38858 Aug 13, 2008

I have other logs that are perhaps better, but I thought this was a

better average log.

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Sounds like you have to use the Ovision as it comes, no mods. That is

> OK, as long as it works well.

> Here is my log from the last test. It shows 2 worm cycles, guiding

> off, logging on and just polar aligned.

>

>

tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/view/72cf?b=9&m=f&o=0

>

> You can see that it is not so far from that of the Ovision and the

> reason for my hesitant behavior. :^_

> Floyd

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@> wrote:

> >

> > Floyd I think you should write to Franck and ask him. He's very

> > forthcoming. Share the answer with us. Greg N

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi Rainer,

> > > You have brought up the same concern as I did, why is the

Ovision set

> > > up so tight as to be rough and stiff? Just can not figure out

why this

> > > would be a good thing.

> > > I would have to agree that the axial ball bearing sound like a

better

> > > idea. So, you think that a person could insert a set of bearings in

> > > the Ovision without modification?

> > > Floyd

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Rainer" rsbfoto@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hi Greg,

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > > Rainer

> > > > > has his own design and is not on board for any of the

> alternatives,

> > > >

> > > > I have been reading this and it has been proven (astrokattner did

> > > > exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with radial ball

> > > > bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you

press

> > > > them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball bearings but

> still

> > > > some problems.

> > > >

> > > > I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks do not

> > > > integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS

enough

> > > > space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.

> > > >

> > > > Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design and I

> > > > told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

> > > > integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)

> > > >

> > > > Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end

of the

> > > > wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible

balls

> > > > makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball axial

> > > > bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really

do not

> > > > need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis

> running

> > > > smoothly.

> > > >

> > > > I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago and the

> > > > price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm

> included but

> > > > with 2 axial bearings.

> > > >

> > > > The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass worm. I

> > > > immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.

> > > >

> > > > regards Rainer

> > > >

> > >

> >

>







----------------------------

#38859 Aug 13, 2008

Hi Greg,



As far I know there has never been a Precise Parts worm. I assume that

was sort of misunderstanding of one of my very early postings.



Ashley made a total of 5 pieces of the RS-Wormblock and that was my

desgin. Ashley Stevens gave me some technical assistance in regard tot

he tolerances he as able to machine as well as we discussed about ball

bearings radial and axial and some minor changes so he could machine

my design.



regards Rainer



>

> What was the Precise Parts design? anyone know? How many were sold?

>

> I heard it was a "floating worm" but I'm now not so sure what that

> means. I used to think it meant spring loaded in such a way that

> spring pressure was needed to make contact with the mount.

>

> regards

> Greg N

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Rainer" rsbfoto@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Greg,

> >

> > I just checked an image send by the builder of the first RS-Wormblock.

> > It is dated May 3rd 2005 :-)

> >

> > rainerehlert.com/astro/worm/PPWB02.jpg

> >

> > Already more then 3 Years ago :-))

> >

> > regards Rainer

> >

> >

> > >

> > > Hi Greg,

> > >

> > >

> > > > Rainer

> > > > has his own design and is not on board for any of the

alternatives, > > >

> > > I have been reading this and it has been proven (astrokattner did

> > > exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with radial ball

> > > bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you press

> > > them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball bearings but

still > > > some problems.

> > >

> > > I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks do not

> > > integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS enough

> > > space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.

> > >

> > > Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design and I

> > > told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

> > > integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)

> > >

> > > Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end of the

> > > wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible balls

> > > makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball axial

> > > bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really do not

> > > need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis

running > > > smoothly.

> > >

> > > I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago and the

> > > price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm

included but > > > with 2 axial bearings.

> > >

> > > The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass worm. I

> > > immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.

> > >

> > > regards Rainer

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#38861 Aug 13, 2008

Hi Greg,

> > I heard it was a "floating worm" but I'm now not so sure what that

> > means. I used to think it meant spring loaded in such a way that

> > spring pressure was needed to make contact with the mount.



The floating worm is the RS-Wormblock and that means that a spring is

pushing the whole assembly on the right side onto the gear and the

whole block is held down by 2 springs. That is all.



Here you can see a few images



The right side and the left dide (motor) is held down by a spring at

each position



rainerehlert.com/astro/worm/WBSL01.jpg



Here a close up from the right side (far side from the motor) as well

as you can see the screw which adjusts the tension of the axial

bearings against the inner ring of the radial ball berings. The outer

ing of the radial ball bearings posirion themselves into a centered

position so the ball are running in the center of their correct race.



The next image shows you the spring which pushes the whole assembly

against the gear.



rainerehlert.com/astro/worm/WBSL03.jpg



OK, now all secrets of the RS-Wormblocks are disclosed. I would have

been happy if Ashley Stevens could have made me a one piece block but

he told me that time that he was not able to make such a long

perfectly centered bore on his lathe or watever machine he uses. That

is why I had to make a traverse in order to fix the position of both

blocks.



regards Rainer



----------------------------

#38862 Aug 13, 2008

Here is the close up of the right side



rainerehlert.com/astro/worm/WBSL02.jpg

>

> Hi Greg,

>

> > > I heard it was a "floating worm" but I'm now not so sure what that

> > > means. I used to think it meant spring loaded in such a way that

> > > spring pressure was needed to make contact with the mount.

>

> The floating worm is the RS-Wormblock and that means that a spring is

> pushing the whole assembly on the right side onto the gear and the

> whole block is held down by 2 springs. That is all.

>

> Here you can see a few images

>

> The right side and the left dide (motor) is held down by a spring at

> each position

>

> rainerehlert.com/astro/worm/WBSL01.jpg

>

> Here a close up from the right side (far side from the motor) as well

> as you can see the screw which adjusts the tension of the axial

> bearings against the inner ring of the radial ball berings. The outer

> ing of the radial ball bearings posirion themselves into a centered

> position so the ball are running in the center of their correct race.

>

> The next image shows you the spring which pushes the whole assembly

> against the gear.

>

> rainerehlert.com/astro/worm/WBSL03.jpg

>

> OK, now all secrets of the RS-Wormblocks are disclosed. I would have

> been happy if Ashley Stevens could have made me a one piece block but

> he told me that time that he was not able to make such a long

> perfectly centered bore on his lathe or watever machine he uses. That

> is why I had to make a traverse in order to fix the position of both

> blocks.

>

> regards Rainer

>







----------------------------

#38865 Aug 13, 2008

Well at least I was clear that it was not currently available! Thanks

for posting the pics. Very interesting work. I'm afraid I haven't

your talents....



regards

Greg N

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Rainer" rsbfoto@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Greg,

>

> As far I know there has never been a Precise Parts worm. I assume that

> was sort of misunderstanding of one of my very early postings.

>

>



----------------------------

#38870 Aug 13, 2008

I think that this message just went up before I could type it in.

This is the intended message.



Well people here can comment on what they see in those graphs. I'm

not comfortable rendering judgment. I do see some spikey things that

look like they might not be smooth enough to guide out but I can't

answer if they matter.



So my response is (a) imagers here can answer better than me--they

know what is guide-able and what is not and (b) I bet you Franck will

give you an intelligent response if he sees your results. Send him a

note with the PE to ovision-at-aol.com.



Again it comes down to what your goals are. If you're imaging in a 5"

f/6 you may not need as much as in a 9.25" f/10.



I have a feeling he's not going to oversell you. I don't think this

is a huge moneymaker for him even though others think it's overpriced.

I think he does best on volume sales of stuff that doesn't need

individual certification.



If perchance you did get an Ovision and decided not to keep it I

suspect you could get a healthy chunk of money back on the mart. I'd

guess $300 to $400. So you don't have the whole chunk of change at

risk. You'll get an excel file with a printout and you can put up a

jpeg of that. I think it would sell. But your results look "better

than the average bear."



regards

Greg N



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> I have other logs that are perhaps better, but I thought this was a

> better average log.

> Floyd

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > Sounds like you have to use the Ovision as it comes, no mods. That is

> > OK, as long as it works well.

> > Here is my log from the last test. It shows 2 worm cycles, guiding

> > off, logging on and just polar aligned.

> >

> >

>

tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/view/72cf?b=9&m=f&o=0

> >

> > You can see that it is not so far from that of the Ovision and the

> > reason for my hesitant behavior. :^_

> > Floyd

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Floyd I think you should write to Franck and ask him. He's very

> > > forthcoming. Share the answer with us. Greg N

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hi Rainer,

> > > > You have brought up the same concern as I did, why is the

> Ovision set

> > > > up so tight as to be rough and stiff? Just can not figure out

> why this

> > > > would be a good thing.

> > > > I would have to agree that the axial ball bearing sound like a

> better

> > > > idea. So, you think that a person could insert a set of

bearings in

> > > > the Ovision without modification?

> > > > Floyd

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Rainer" rsbfoto@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Hi Greg,

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > > Rainer

> > > > > > has his own design and is not on board for any of the

> > alternatives,

> > > > >

> > > > > I have been reading this and it has been proven

(astrokattner did

> > > > > exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with

radial ball

> > > > > bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you

> press

> > > > > them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball bearings but

> > still

> > > > > some problems.

> > > > >

> > > > > I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks do not

> > > > > integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS

> enough

> > > > > space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.

> > > > >

> > > > > Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design

and I

> > > > > told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

> > > > > integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)

> > > > >

> > > > > Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end

> of the

> > > > > wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible

> balls

> > > > > makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball

axial

> > > > > bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really

> do not

> > > > > need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis

> > running

> > > > > smoothly.

> > > > >

> > > > > I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago

and the

> > > > > price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm

> > included but

> > > > > with 2 axial bearings.

> > > > >

> > > > > The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass

worm. I

> > > > > immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.

> > > > >

> > > > > regards Rainer

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>







----------------------------

#38871 Aug 13, 2008

Floyd,

The log you show has the 76er. The steep dip does not occur at 240sec

intervals, I bet it is the 76er convoluted with the fundamental and

perhaps other harmonics. The PEAS FFT result doesn't look right since

the max frequency occurs at ~170sec and the next biggest at 85sec.

There is usually no strong components (wrt the fundamental) at those

locations. Your tracking would definitely improve with the Ovision

kit, however if your imager focal length is such that the autoguider

can handle 6" swing, no worries... For long focal length imaging the

sudden 2" jumps would be your worst problem. I'm not sure where they

are coming from, I've seen that kind of thing in DEC, but very rarely

in RA.



EB



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@...> wrote:

>

> I think that this message just went up before I could type it in.

> This is the intended message.

>

> Well people here can comment on what they see in those graphs. I'm

> not comfortable rendering judgment. I do see some spikey things that

> look like they might not be smooth enough to guide out but I can't

> answer if they matter.

>

> So my response is (a) imagers here can answer better than me--they

> know what is guide-able and what is not and (b) I bet you Franck will

> give you an intelligent response if he sees your results. Send him a

> note with the PE to ovision-at-aol.com.

>

> Again it comes down to what your goals are. If you're imaging in a 5"

> f/6 you may not need as much as in a 9.25" f/10.

>

> I have a feeling he's not going to oversell you. I don't think this

> is a huge moneymaker for him even though others think it's overpriced.

> I think he does best on volume sales of stuff that doesn't need

> individual certification.

>

> If perchance you did get an Ovision and decided not to keep it I

> suspect you could get a healthy chunk of money back on the mart. I'd

> guess $300 to $400. So you don't have the whole chunk of change at

> risk. You'll get an excel file with a printout and you can put up a

> jpeg of that. I think it would sell. But your results look "better

> than the average bear."

>

> regards

> Greg N

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > I have other logs that are perhaps better, but I thought this was a

> > better average log.

> > Floyd

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Sounds like you have to use the Ovision as it comes, no mods.

That is

> > > OK, as long as it works well.

> > > Here is my log from the last test. It shows 2 worm cycles, guiding

> > > off, logging on and just polar aligned.

> > >

> > >

> >

>

tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/view/72cf?b=9&m=f&o=0

> > >

> > > You can see that it is not so far from that of the Ovision and the

> > > reason for my hesitant behavior. :^_

> > > Floyd



----------------------------

#38872 Aug 13, 2008

Can I take my credit card statement down now? I don't want to leave

it up indefinitely, even if I did cover up the numbers.



Greg N

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Eric Benson" ebenson@...> wrote:

>

> Floyd,

> The log you show has the 76er. The steep dip does not occur at



----------------------------

#38877 Aug 13, 2008

Hi Greg,

Yes, there are some spikes that I would rather not see. But, as I

said, I have others that are quite flat comparatively, but I did not

post them because they almost look too good.

The one thing that I have noticed when trying to get a log like this

is that focus and conditions play a part in how the graph looks,

because the software reports what the camera posts which includes seeing.

I think you are right about the resale though, it would probably sell

for $350-450 on Amart, it is not something that you would see

everyday, kind of like a Zambuto mirror for sale. If you are in the

market and it is discounted, then you would probably buy it.

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@...> wrote:

>

> I think that this message just went up before I could type it in.

> This is the intended message.

>

> Well people here can comment on what they see in those graphs. I'm

> not comfortable rendering judgment. I do see some spikey things that

> look like they might not be smooth enough to guide out but I can't

> answer if they matter.

>

> So my response is (a) imagers here can answer better than me--they

> know what is guide-able and what is not and (b) I bet you Franck will

> give you an intelligent response if he sees your results. Send him a

> note with the PE to ovision-at-aol.com.

>

> Again it comes down to what your goals are. If you're imaging in a 5"

> f/6 you may not need as much as in a 9.25" f/10.

>

> I have a feeling he's not going to oversell you. I don't think this

> is a huge moneymaker for him even though others think it's overpriced.

> I think he does best on volume sales of stuff that doesn't need

> individual certification.

>

> If perchance you did get an Ovision and decided not to keep it I

> suspect you could get a healthy chunk of money back on the mart. I'd

> guess $300 to $400. So you don't have the whole chunk of change at

> risk. You'll get an excel file with a printout and you can put up a

> jpeg of that. I think it would sell. But your results look "better

> than the average bear."

>

> regards

> Greg N

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > I have other logs that are perhaps better, but I thought this was a

> > better average log.

> > Floyd

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Sounds like you have to use the Ovision as it comes, no mods.

That is

> > > OK, as long as it works well.

> > > Here is my log from the last test. It shows 2 worm cycles, guiding

> > > off, logging on and just polar aligned.

> > >

> > >

> >

>

tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/view/72cf?b=9&m=f&o=0

> > >

> > > You can see that it is not so far from that of the Ovision and the

> > > reason for my hesitant behavior. :^_

> > > Floyd

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@>

wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Floyd I think you should write to Franck and ask him. He's very

> > > > forthcoming. Share the answer with us. Greg N

> > > >

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@>

wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Hi Rainer,

> > > > > You have brought up the same concern as I did, why is the

> > Ovision set

> > > > > up so tight as to be rough and stiff? Just can not figure out

> > why this

> > > > > would be a good thing.

> > > > > I would have to agree that the axial ball bearing sound like a

> > better

> > > > > idea. So, you think that a person could insert a set of

> bearings in

> > > > > the Ovision without modification?

> > > > > Floyd

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Rainer" rsbfoto@>

wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Hi Greg,

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > Rainer

> > > > > > > has his own design and is not on board for any of the

> > > alternatives,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I have been reading this and it has been proven

> (astrokattner did

> > > > > > exhaustive test in this regard) that working only with

> radial ball

> > > > > > bearings alone is a risk (76second error)and specially if you

> > press

> > > > > > them together to tight. OK, there are angular ball

bearings but

> > > still

> > > > > > some problems.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I really wonder why the builders of the one piece blocks

do not

> > > > > > integrate some axial ball bearings into the design. THERE IS

> > enough

> > > > > > space to put 2 axial ball bearings into it.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Both asked me a while ago what do I think about their design

> and I

> > > > > > told to both that is is very good but they should consider to

> > > > > > integrate an axial bearing ... They did not :-)

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Both already do have the adjustng possibility on the rear end

> > of the

> > > > > > wormblock. Using a good axial bearing with as much as possible

> > balls

> > > > > > makes it better. I just changed from an 8 ball to a 10 ball

> axial

> > > > > > bearing and it improved the running smothness and you really

> > do not

> > > > > > need to apply high presuure just enough so you feel the wormis

> > > running

> > > > > > smoothly.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I presented the RS-Wormblock I guess more then 2 years ago

> and the

> > > > > > price was the same as they are selling it now, OK no worm

> > > included but

> > > > > > with 2 axial bearings.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The first good step from Scott Losmandy is to use a brass

> worm. I

> > > > > > immediately saw a change after using one in one of my mounts.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > regards Rainer

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>







----------------------------

#38879 Aug 13, 2008

Absolutely Greg!

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "gnowellsct" tim71pos@...> wrote:

>

> Can I take my credit card statement down now? I don't want to leave

> it up indefinitely, even if I did cover up the numbers.

>

> Greg N

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Eric Benson" ebenson@> wrote:

> >

> > Floyd,

> > The log you show has the 76er. The steep dip does not occur at

>



----------------------------

#39009 Aug 16, 2008

Well, I have been following all the great threads on this group about

the 2 worm units avalable and decided to take the plunge. I ordered the

Ovison worm today. I am also hoping I got onto the list for the Martin

worm assembly as well so I can do a comparison and use the best on the

RA and the other on the Dec. I figure there were a couple of others who

ordered this weekend so I will be in line. I wait with baited breath as

the others get theirs making mine closer to reality.



Wayne



----------------------------

#39010 Aug 16, 2008

Hi Wayne,

Congrats!

I look forward to hearing about the MWB as well as the Ovision and how

they compare.

I will take a much better look at the DEC and see if I need to swap

worms or not. I have paid much more attention to the RA in the past.

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Wayne" wayne.gay@...> wrote:

>

> Well, I have been following all the great threads on this group about

> the 2 worm units avalable and decided to take the plunge. I ordered the

> Ovison worm today. I am also hoping I got onto the list for the Martin

> worm assembly as well so I can do a comparison and use the best on the

> RA and the other on the Dec. I figure there were a couple of others who

> ordered this weekend so I will be in line. I wait with baited breath as

> the others get theirs making mine closer to reality.

>

> Wayne

>



----------------------------

#39012 Aug 16, 2008

Well this latest crop of orders will effectively double the users that

I am aware of, so we'll have a user base big enough to "get the idea"

about what this new part means. I hope all of you stay in contact with

this group.



Congratulations Wayne and I hope you have all the gizmos you need to

measure the results between MWB and Ovision and your default.



Down the line I'm hoping that Scott Losmandy will see his way clear to

changing his design or perhaps subcontracting to Ovision. He could

sell a G11 "certified PE" for extra money and keeping the dual blocks

if he finds them so attractive.



There may be a defense for using two blocks but if there is I haven't

read it here. I'm not even sure it saves much money because it makes

for a difficult backlash adjustment.



regards

Greg N



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Wayne,

> Congrats!

> I look forward to hearing about the MWB as well as the Ovision and how

> they compare.

> I will take a much better look at the DEC and see if I need to swap

> worms or not. I have paid much more attention to the RA in the past.

> Floyd

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Wayne" wayne.gay@> wrote:

> >

> > Well, I have been following all the great threads on this group about

> > the 2 worm units avalable and decided to take the plunge. I

ordered the

> > Ovison worm today. I am also hoping I got onto the list for the

Martin

> > worm assembly as well so I can do a comparison and use the best on

the

> > RA and the other on the Dec. I figure there were a couple of

others who

> > ordered this weekend so I will be in line. I wait with baited

breath as

> > the others get theirs making mine closer to reality.

> >

> > Wayne

> >

>



----------------------------

#39101 Aug 20, 2008

I have been following the current euphoria over the Ovision worm with

some interest. Readers may not remember that last year I reported

(Message #34458) no improvement with this worm. Since then Franck sent

me a new assembly which when tested was even worse. I refrained from

posting any info on this to give him a chance to sort things out, and

he has now sent me a third assembly. This shows a PE of about 6

arcseconds peak to peak which is very encouraging.



For a full report please see:

homepage.ntlworld.com/john.moore88/reports/g11_worms.htm



My conclusion is now that I would recommend this upgrade if you want to

do high quality imaging with a long focal length.



John Moore



----------------------------

#39105 Aug 20, 2008

Awesome data John, very clean. I have posted a periodogram (frequency

spectrum) of your data in the files area.



tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/%20Losmandy%20vs\

.%20Ovision/JohnMoore_G11_Ovision_Spectrum.png

tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/%20Losmandy%20v\

s.%20Ovision/JohnMoore_G11_Ovision_Spectrum.png%20>



It shows the complete annihilation of the 76er, very little or none of

the annoying 57 sec complex, and very clear demonstration the the

transfer gear noise at 32 sec (not 34 as Mark C. pointed out to me the

other day), and motor noise at 9.6 sec. Other stuff is kicking around in

there, most of it likely real due to the very good SNR of the data even

at high frequencies, the main two being 12.6 sec and 16 sec (the latter

being a harmonic of the transfer gear I suppose).



I note that the slope of the 32sec component is 8 times steeper than the

fundamental at 240sec. Hence the 0.32" amplitude is akin to a 2.5"

fundamental for the guider (double these number for p-p). The 0.2" motor

noise has an even steeper slope (5" equivalent) but hopefully is small

enough not to affect John's images.



Cheers,

EB

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "jcmoore_uk" j_moore@...> wrote:

>

> I have been following the current euphoria over the Ovision worm with

> some interest. Readers may not remember that last year I reported

> (Message #34458) no improvement with this worm. Since then Franck sent

> me a new assembly which when tested was even worse. I refrained from

> posting any info on this to give him a chance to sort things out, and

> he has now sent me a third assembly. This shows a PE of about 6

> arcseconds peak to peak which is very encouraging.

>

> For a full report please see:

> homepage.ntlworld.com/john.moore88/reports/g11_worms.htm

>

> My conclusion is now that I would recommend this upgrade if you want

to

> do high quality imaging with a long focal length.

>

> John Moore

>







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#39112 Aug 20, 2008

Eric someone just posted a higher precision aftermarket gearbox. Is

there any way we could get someone to investigate that in conjunction

with an Ovision?



regards

Greg N



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Eric Benson" ebenson@...> wrote:

>

> Awesome data John, very clean. I have posted a periodogram (frequency

> spectrum) of your data in the files area.

>

>

tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/%20Losmandy%20vs\

> .%20Ovision/JohnMoore_G11_Ovision_Spectrum.png

>

tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/%20Losmandy%20v\

> s.%20Ovision/JohnMoore_G11_Ovision_Spectrum.png%20>

>

> It shows the complete annihilation of the 76er, very little or none of

> the annoying 57 sec complex, and very clear demonstration the the

> transfer gear noise at 32 sec (not 34 as Mark C. pointed out to me the

> other day), and motor noise at 9.6 sec. Other stuff is kicking around in

> there, most of it likely real due to the very good SNR of the data even

> at high frequencies, the main two being 12.6 sec and 16 sec (the latter

> being a harmonic of the transfer gear I suppose).

>

> I note that the slope of the 32sec component is 8 times steeper than the

> fundamental at 240sec. Hence the 0.32" amplitude is akin to a 2.5"

> fundamental for the guider (double these number for p-p). The 0.2" motor

> noise has an even steeper slope (5" equivalent) but hopefully is small

> enough not to affect John's images.

>

> Cheers,

> EB

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "jcmoore_uk" j_moore@> wrote:

> >

> > I have been following the current euphoria over the Ovision worm with

> > some interest. Readers may not remember that last year I reported

> > (Message #34458) no improvement with this worm. Since then Franck sent

> > me a new assembly which when tested was even worse. I refrained from

> > posting any info on this to give him a chance to sort things out, and

> > he has now sent me a third assembly. This shows a PE of about 6

> > arcseconds peak to peak which is very encouraging.

> >

> > For a full report please see:

> > homepage.ntlworld.com/john.moore88/reports/g11_worms.htm

> >

> > My conclusion is now that I would recommend this upgrade if you want

> to

> > do high quality imaging with a long focal length.

> >

> > John Moore

> >

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>



----------------------------

#39116 Aug 20, 2008

Thanks for the additional information John. Looks like the latest

worms are the best, which is to be expected.

Hopefully we will see a bit more data soon.

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "jcmoore_uk" j_moore@...> wrote:

>

> I have been following the current euphoria over the Ovision worm with

> some interest. Readers may not remember that last year I reported

> (Message #34458) no improvement with this worm. Since then Franck sent

> me a new assembly which when tested was even worse. I refrained from

> posting any info on this to give him a chance to sort things out, and

> he has now sent me a third assembly. This shows a PE of about 6

> arcseconds peak to peak which is very encouraging.

>

> For a full report please see:

> homepage.ntlworld.com/john.moore88/reports/g11_worms.htm

>

> My conclusion is now that I would recommend this upgrade if you want to

> do high quality imaging with a long focal length.

>

> John Moore

>



----------------------------

#39152 Aug 21, 2008

--- > Awesome data John, very clean. I have posted a periodogram

(frequency > spectrum) of your data in the files area.

>

Eric,



Many thanks for that! Having somewhat derided the value of a frequency

plot I have to admit that this shows a lot of useful information. It's

interesting that the 32 second component is now becoming significant.

In fact I had already wondered about the wiggles in the time plot, and

I can now see that they are indeed harmonics of the 32 seconds. I agree

from looking at both plots that these now become the most important for

autoguiding performance. In fact so much so that it might be worth

trying to attack this problem next!



Regards

John Moore



----------------------------

#39453 Sep 3, 2008

Hi All



I thought I would post the PemPro txt files, after my new Ovision worm was

installed. There are two files, one is with PEC off, while gathering data,

and the other file is taken with PEC on after uploading to the mount.

They are both equal at 10 worm cycles each, so there is a good bit of data

there. Rather than make claims of how good (or not) the Worm is, I thought

the best approach is to post the raw txt files.

Ray Gralak did give them a "once over" and they looked good to him with a

peak periodic error of about 2.2 arc-seconds (PEC on of course !).



They can be seen here:



tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%20G11%20W

ith%20Ovision%20Worm/



I took a few pictures of the mount and worm



tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/461d



You can also see the string / pulley to apply a constant bias on the RA, all

credits for this Idea go to Rainer Ehlert.



I hope the links work



Thanks



Adrien Richardson









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#39457 Sep 3, 2008

Thanks for posting! I don't have Pempro to look at it graphically, but

I am sure it looks very good.

Floyd

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

biplane@...> wrote: >

> Hi All

>

> I thought I would post the PemPro txt files, after my new Ovision

worm was > installed. There are two files, one is with PEC off, while gathering

data, > and the other file is taken with PEC on after uploading to the mount.

> They are both equal at 10 worm cycles each, so there is a good bit

of data > there. Rather than make claims of how good (or not) the Worm is, I

thought > the best approach is to post the raw txt files.

> Ray Gralak did give them a "once over" and they looked good to him

with a > peak periodic error of about 2.2 arc-seconds (PEC on of course !).

>

> They can be seen here:

>

>

tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%20G11%20W > ith%20Ovision%20Worm/

>

> I took a few pictures of the mount and worm

>

> tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/461d

>

> You can also see the string / pulley to apply a constant bias on the

RA, all > credits for this Idea go to Rainer Ehlert.

>

> I hope the links work

>

> Thanks

>

> Adrien Richardson

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>



----------------------------

#39467 Sep 4, 2008

Hi Adrien,



I don't have PemPro on my work computer, so I loaded the files into

Excel and processed them there. Maybe someone can load these into

PemPro and post the resulting analysis. From looking at the raw data

in Excel, the data collected without PEC has a periodic error of

about 10 arcsecs peak-to-peak:



pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg



The file after PEC training is a lot better, but has some pretty

fast 1-2 arcseconds transitions that may cause problems at longer

focal lengths:



pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg



Was the first file taken with the Ovision worm or before you

installed it?



Regards,



-Paul





--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

biplane@...> wrote: >

> Hi All

>

> I thought I would post the PemPro txt files, after my new Ovision

worm was > installed. There are two files, one is with PEC off, while

gathering data, > and the other file is taken with PEC on after uploading to the

mount. > They are both equal at 10 worm cycles each, so there is a good bit

of data > there. Rather than make claims of how good (or not) the Worm is, I

thought > the best approach is to post the raw txt files.

> Ray Gralak did give them a "once over" and they looked good to him

with a > peak periodic error of about 2.2 arc-seconds (PEC on of course !).

>

> They can be seen here:

>

> tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%

20G11%20W > ith%20Ovision%20Worm/

>

> I took a few pictures of the mount and worm

>

>

tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46

1d >

> You can also see the string / pulley to apply a constant bias on

the RA, all > credits for this Idea go to Rainer Ehlert.

>

> I hope the links work

>

> Thanks

>

> Adrien Richardson

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>



----------------------------

#39469 Sep 4, 2008

Hi all,

I tried doing what you requested in Pempro...Pics at:

tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/dbf

6

(Bazza's Pics in the Photos section of this group)

I too, am very interested in the Ovision and MWB.

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Barry Morton

Worcester - UK.

















--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Paul K" pkane2001@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Adrien,

>

> I don't have PemPro on my work computer, so I loaded the files into

> Excel and processed them there. Maybe someone can load these into

> PemPro and post the resulting analysis. From looking at the raw

data

> in Excel, the data collected without PEC has a periodic error of

> about 10 arcsecs peak-to-peak:

>

> pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg

>

> The file after PEC training is a lot better, but has some pretty

> fast 1-2 arcseconds transitions that may cause problems at longer

> focal lengths:

>

> pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg

>

> Was the first file taken with the Ovision worm or before you

> installed it?

>

> Regards,

>

> -Paul

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

> biplane@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi All

> >

> > I thought I would post the PemPro txt files, after my new Ovision

> worm was

> > installed. There are two files, one is with PEC off, while

> gathering data,

> > and the other file is taken with PEC on after uploading to the

> mount.

> > They are both equal at 10 worm cycles each, so there is a good

bit

> of data

> > there. Rather than make claims of how good (or not) the Worm is,

I

> thought

> > the best approach is to post the raw txt files.

> > Ray Gralak did give them a "once over" and they looked good to

him

> with a

> > peak periodic error of about 2.2 arc-seconds (PEC on of course !).

> >

> > They can be seen here:

> >

> > tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%

27s%

> 20G11%20W

> > ith%20Ovision%20Worm/

> >

> > I took a few pictures of the mount and worm

> >

> >

>

tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46

> 1d

> >

> > You can also see the string / pulley to apply a constant bias on

> the RA, all

> > credits for this Idea go to Rainer Ehlert.

> >

> > I hope the links work

> >

> > Thanks

> >

> > Adrien Richardson

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>







----------------------------

#39470 Sep 4, 2008

By the way, just to make it clear, these are Adrien's results, not

mine!

Barry.



> I tried doing what you requested in Pempro...Pics at:

>

tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/dbf > 6

> (Bazza's Pics in the Photos section of this group)

> I too, am very interested in the Ovision and MWB.

> Hope this helps.

> Regards,

> Barry Morton

> Worcester - UK.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Paul K" pkane2001@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Adrien,

> >

> > I don't have PemPro on my work computer, so I loaded the files

into > > Excel and processed them there. Maybe someone can load these into

> > PemPro and post the resulting analysis. From looking at the raw

> data

> > in Excel, the data collected without PEC has a periodic error of

> > about 10 arcsecs peak-to-peak:

> >

> > pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg

> >

> > The file after PEC training is a lot better, but has some pretty

> > fast 1-2 arcseconds transitions that may cause problems at longer

> > focal lengths:

> >

> > pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg

> >

> > Was the first file taken with the Ovision worm or before you

> > installed it?

> >

> > Regards,

> >

> > -Paul

> >

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

> > biplane@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi All

> > >

> > > I thought I would post the PemPro txt files, after my new

Ovision > > worm was

> > > installed. There are two files, one is with PEC off, while

> > gathering data,

> > > and the other file is taken with PEC on after uploading to the

> > mount.

> > > They are both equal at 10 worm cycles each, so there is a good

> bit

> > of data

> > > there. Rather than make claims of how good (or not) the Worm

is, > I

> > thought

> > > the best approach is to post the raw txt files.

> > > Ray Gralak did give them a "once over" and they looked good to

> him

> > with a

> > > peak periodic error of about 2.2 arc-seconds (PEC on of

course !). > > >

> > > They can be seen here:

> > >

> > > tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%

> 27s%

> > 20G11%20W

> > > ith%20Ovision%20Worm/

> > >

> > > I took a few pictures of the mount and worm

> > >

> > >

> >

>

tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46 > > 1d

> > >

> > > You can also see the string / pulley to apply a constant bias

on > > the RA, all

> > > credits for this Idea go to Rainer Ehlert.

> > >

> > > I hope the links work

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > >

> > > Adrien Richardson

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#39471 Sep 4, 2008

Paul,



Increasing the scale in the second file makes the transitions look far

greater than they are. If you overlay the two files at the same image scale

the transitions don't look that bad. And I think tweaking the phase of the

PEC curve could tame most of those dynamics you see.



BTW, I recently released v2.5 of PEMPro and reset the 60-day for all

downloaders (so you can try it again for another 60 days - you can download

it from ccdware.com). In 2.5 there is a new frequency analysis tab which you

can use to explore the cyclic dynamics of a mount.



-Ray

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul K

> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 6:46 AM

> To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: G11 with new Ovision worm

> PemPro Results.

>

> Hi Adrian,

>

> I don't have PemPro on my work computer, so I loaded the files into

> Excel and processed them there. Something looks really strange in

> both files, maybe someone can load these into PemPro and post the

> resulting analysis. From looking at the raw data in Excel, the data

> collected without PEC has a periodic error of about 10 peak-to-peak:

>

> pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg

> pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg>

>

> And the second file appears to be taken on a GM-8 with PEC off, at

> different image scale? :

>

> pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg

> pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg>

>

> Are you sure these are the correct files?

>

> Regards,

>

> -Paul

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> , "Adrien Richardson"

> biplane@...> wrote:

> >

> > Hi All

> >

> > I thought I would post the PemPro txt files, after my new Ovision

> worm was

> > installed. There are two files, one is with PEC off, while

> gathering data,

> > and the other file is taken with PEC on after uploading to the

> mount.

> > They are both equal at 10 worm cycles each, so there is a good bit

> of data

> > there. Rather than make claims of how good (or not) the Worm is, I

> thought

> > the best approach is to post the raw txt files.

> > Ray Gralak did give them a "once over" and they looked good to him

> with a

> > peak periodic error of about 2.2 arc-seconds (PEC on of course !).

> >

> > They can be seen here:

> >

> >

> tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien

> %27s%

> tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%>

> 20G11%20W

> > ith%20Ovision%20Worm/

> >

>

>

>

>

>







----------------------------

#39472 Sep 4, 2008

Hi Ray,



I assure you, the larger scale for the second chart wasn't

intentional :) The overall amplitude of the error is certainly much

improved compared to the first file, without PEC.



The transition of 1-2 arcseconds can be due to seeing, but seems

unlikely, as the other axis didn't have the same size jumps.



I know PemPro can do well on G11's stock, or with the Ovision

retrofit worm. The real question is the characteristics of the new

worm, and how well it behaves with and without PEC.



Regards,



-Paul

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Ray Gralak" rgr@...> wrote:

>

> Paul,

>

> Increasing the scale in the second file makes the transitions look

far

> greater than they are. If you overlay the two files at the same

image scale

> the transitions don't look that bad. And I think tweaking the

phase of the

> PEC curve could tame most of those dynamics you see.

>

> BTW, I recently released v2.5 of PEMPro and reset the 60-day for

all

> downloaders (so you can try it again for another 60 days - you can

download

> it from ccdware.com). In 2.5 there is a new frequency analysis tab

which you

> can use to explore the cyclic dynamics of a mount.

>

> -Ray

>

>



----------------------------

#39473 Sep 4, 2008

Hmmm, I notice the 1st and 2nd fundamentals still show some

significant amplitude on the "PEC on" graph. As Ray has suggested, an

appropriate phase shift of the PE curve should tweak some of this

away. The residual error may be even less!



Frank

celestialwonders.com



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "brrymorton" barry.morton@...>

wrote: >

> Hi all,

> I tried doing what you requested in Pempro...Pics at:

> tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/dbf

> 6

> (Bazza's Pics in the Photos section of this group)

> I too, am very interested in the Ovision and MWB.

> Hope this helps.

> Regards,

> Barry Morton

> Worcester - UK.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Paul K" pkane2001@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Adrien,

> >

> > I don't have PemPro on my work computer, so I loaded the files into

> > Excel and processed them there. Maybe someone can load these into

> > PemPro and post the resulting analysis. From looking at the raw

> data

> > in Excel, the data collected without PEC has a periodic error of

> > about 10 arcsecs peak-to-peak:

> >

> > pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg

> >

> > The file after PEC training is a lot better, but has some pretty

> > fast 1-2 arcseconds transitions that may cause problems at longer

> > focal lengths:

> >

> > pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg

> >

> > Was the first file taken with the Ovision worm or before you

> > installed it?

> >

> > Regards,

> >

> > -Paul

> >

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

> > biplane@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi All

> > >

> > > I thought I would post the PemPro txt files, after my new Ovision

> > worm was

> > > installed. There are two files, one is with PEC off, while

> > gathering data,

> > > and the other file is taken with PEC on after uploading to the

> > mount.

> > > They are both equal at 10 worm cycles each, so there is a good

> bit

> > of data

> > > there. Rather than make claims of how good (or not) the Worm is,

> I

> > thought

> > > the best approach is to post the raw txt files.

> > > Ray Gralak did give them a "once over" and they looked good to

> him

> > with a

> > > peak periodic error of about 2.2 arc-seconds (PEC on of course !).

> > >

> > > They can be seen here:

> > >

> > > tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%

> 27s%

> > 20G11%20W

> > > ith%20Ovision%20Worm/

> > >

> > > I took a few pictures of the mount and worm

> > >

> > >

> >

> tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46

> > 1d

> > >

> > > You can also see the string / pulley to apply a constant bias on

> > the RA, all

> > > credits for this Idea go to Rainer Ehlert.

> > >

> > > I hope the links work

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > >

> > > Adrien Richardson

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#39475 Sep 4, 2008

Thanks, Barry. I'll have to look at these after I get home from

work, as I can't access yahoo photos from here :-(



Regards,



-Paul



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "brrymorton"

barry.morton@...> wrote: >

> By the way, just to make it clear, these are Adrien's results, not

> mine!

> Barry.

>

>

> > I tried doing what you requested in Pempro...Pics at:

> >

>

tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/db

f > > 6

> > (Bazza's Pics in the Photos section of this group)

> > I too, am very interested in the Ovision and MWB.

> > Hope this helps.

> > Regards,

> > Barry Morton

> > Worcester - UK.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Paul K" pkane2001@>

wrote: > > >

> > > Hi Adrien,

> > >

> > > I don't have PemPro on my work computer, so I loaded the files

> into

> > > Excel and processed them there. Maybe someone can load these

into > > > PemPro and post the resulting analysis. From looking at the

raw > > data

> > > in Excel, the data collected without PEC has a periodic error

of > > > about 10 arcsecs peak-to-peak:

> > >

> > > pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg

> > >

> > > The file after PEC training is a lot better, but has some

pretty > > > fast 1-2 arcseconds transitions that may cause problems at

longer > > > focal lengths:

> > >

> > > pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg

> > >

> > > Was the first file taken with the Ovision worm or before you

> > > installed it?

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > >

> > > -Paul

> > >

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

> > > biplane@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hi All

> > > >

> > > > I thought I would post the PemPro txt files, after my new

> Ovision

> > > worm was

> > > > installed. There are two files, one is with PEC off, while

> > > gathering data,

> > > > and the other file is taken with PEC on after uploading to

the > > > mount.

> > > > They are both equal at 10 worm cycles each, so there is a

good > > bit

> > > of data

> > > > there. Rather than make claims of how good (or not) the Worm

> is,

> > I

> > > thought

> > > > the best approach is to post the raw txt files.

> > > > Ray Gralak did give them a "once over" and they looked good

to > > him

> > > with a

> > > > peak periodic error of about 2.2 arc-seconds (PEC on of

> course !).

> > > >

> > > > They can be seen here:

> > > >

> > > >

tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien% > > 27s%

> > > 20G11%20W

> > > > ith%20Ovision%20Worm/

> > > >

> > > > I took a few pictures of the mount and worm

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46 > > > 1d

> > > >

> > > > You can also see the string / pulley to apply a constant

bias > on

> > > the RA, all

> > > > credits for this Idea go to Rainer Ehlert.

> > > >

> > > > I hope the links work

> > > >

> > > > Thanks

> > > >

> > > > Adrien Richardson

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> > > >

> > >

> >

>







----------------------------

#39476 Sep 4, 2008

Hi Paul,

Hmm, if your graph is correct, then the Ovision has greater than 10"

of PE which seems wrong. Not saying that your graph is wrong, but

rather it seems that something is not right. :^)

I would wonder if the worm is adjusted correctly. If it is, then this

is outside the 10" guarantee!

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Paul K" pkane2001@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Adrien,

>

> I don't have PemPro on my work computer, so I loaded the files into

> Excel and processed them there. Maybe someone can load these into

> PemPro and post the resulting analysis. From looking at the raw data

> in Excel, the data collected without PEC has a periodic error of

> about 10 arcsecs peak-to-peak:

>

> pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg

>

> The file after PEC training is a lot better, but has some pretty

> fast 1-2 arcseconds transitions that may cause problems at longer

> focal lengths:

>

> pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg

>

> Was the first file taken with the Ovision worm or before you

> installed it?

>

> Regards,

>

> -Paul

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

> biplane@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi All

> >

> > I thought I would post the PemPro txt files, after my new Ovision

> worm was

> > installed. There are two files, one is with PEC off, while

> gathering data,

> > and the other file is taken with PEC on after uploading to the

> mount.

> > They are both equal at 10 worm cycles each, so there is a good bit

> of data

> > there. Rather than make claims of how good (or not) the Worm is, I

> thought

> > the best approach is to post the raw txt files.

> > Ray Gralak did give them a "once over" and they looked good to him

> with a

> > peak periodic error of about 2.2 arc-seconds (PEC on of course !).

> >

> > They can be seen here:

> >

> > tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%

> 20G11%20W

> > ith%20Ovision%20Worm/

> >

> > I took a few pictures of the mount and worm

> >

> >

> tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46

> 1d

> >

> > You can also see the string / pulley to apply a constant bias on

> the RA, all

> > credits for this Idea go to Rainer Ehlert.

> >

> > I hope the links work

> >

> > Thanks

> >

> > Adrien Richardson

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>



----------------------------

#39477 Sep 4, 2008

Agreed, the PEMpro log shows the raw PE as 10.4" peak to peak. A bit

surprising, but the curve is very smooth. There is a lot of drift with PEC

on, Adrien you also need to look at the drift correction feature in PEMPro.



Mark

2008/9/4 Floyd Blue fblue@...

> Hi Paul,

> Hmm, if your graph is correct, then the Ovision has greater than 10"

> of PE which seems wrong. Not saying that your graph is wrong, but

> rather it seems that something is not right. :^)

> I would wonder if the worm is adjusted correctly. If it is, then this

> is outside the 10" guarantee!

> Floyd

> .

>

>

>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#39478 Sep 4, 2008

Hi Paul / Floyd



Thanks for your comments. Yes Both curves were taken with the new Worm

installed.

I agree the PE of +6.4 to -4.1 (Total 10.5) is high, but then with PEC on,

it drops down to 2.2 and no more 76 second error.

I returned my first Ovision worm I as it was obviously too tight. When the

shaft was rotated by hand, it was not smooth at all, almost "jerky" as, I

could feel the shaft against the ball bearings.

Frank sent the replacement right away.

It would be interesting to compare my results with others with the same

configuration and with PemPro.

I could try adjusting the worm, if anything I could have it a little

tight...



Adrien Richardson







_____



From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

On Behalf Of Floyd Blue

Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 8:14 PM

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: G11 with new Ovision worm PemPro Results.







Hi Paul,

Hmm, if your graph is correct, then the Ovision has greater than 10"

of PE which seems wrong. Not saying that your graph is wrong, but

rather it seems that something is not right. :^)

I would wonder if the worm is adjusted correctly. If it is, then this

is outside the 10" guarantee!

Floyd

--- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com, "Paul K" pkane2001@...> wrote: >

> Hi Adrien,

>

> I don't have PemPro on my work computer, so I loaded the files into

> Excel and processed them there. Maybe someone can load these into

> PemPro and post the resulting analysis. From looking at the raw data

> in Excel, the data collected without PEC has a periodic error of

> about 10 arcsecs peak-to-peak:

>

> pk.darkhoriz pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg>

ons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg >

> The file after PEC training is a lot better, but has some pretty

> fast 1-2 arcseconds transitions that may cause problems at longer

> focal lengths:

>

> pk.darkhoriz pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg>

ons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg >

> Was the first file taken with the Ovision worm or before you

> installed it?

>

> Regards,

>

> -Paul

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson" > biplane@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi All

> >

> > I thought I would post the PemPro txt files, after my new Ovision

> worm was

> > installed. There are two files, one is with PEC off, while

> gathering data,

> > and the other file is taken with PEC on after uploading to the

> mount.

> > They are both equal at 10 worm cycles each, so there is a good bit

> of data

> > there. Rather than make claims of how good (or not) the Worm is, I

> thought

> > the best approach is to post the raw txt files.

> > Ray Gralak did give them a "once over" and they looked good to him

> with a

> > peak periodic error of about 2.2 arc-seconds (PEC on of course !).

> >

> > They can be seen here:

> >

> > tech.

tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%>

groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s% > 20G11%20W

> > ith%20Ovision%20Worm/

> >

> > I took a few pictures of the mount and worm

> >

> >

> tech.

tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46>

ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46 > 1d

> >

> > You can also see the string / pulley to apply a constant bias on

> the RA, all

> > credits for this Idea go to Rainer Ehlert.

> >

> > I hope the links work

> >

> > Thanks

> >

> > Adrien Richardson

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>













[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#39479 Sep 4, 2008

Hi Adrien,

Was the new replacement worm smoother and less tight?

How much play did you leave when setting up the worm? I notice they

advise 1-2mm of play at the end of the weight shaft.

I tried setting my original worm at 1.5mm and I thought it was too

loose, not sure the tracking was not worse. So I tightened it back to

maybe 1mm perhaps slightly less and it seemed to track better.

Floyd

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

biplane@...> wrote: >

> Hi Paul / Floyd

>

> Thanks for your comments. Yes Both curves were taken with the new Worm

> installed.

> I agree the PE of +6.4 to -4.1 (Total 10.5) is high, but then with

PEC on, > it drops down to 2.2 and no more 76 second error.

> I returned my first Ovision worm I as it was obviously too tight.

When the > shaft was rotated by hand, it was not smooth at all, almost "jerky"

as, I > could feel the shaft against the ball bearings.

> Frank sent the replacement right away.

> It would be interesting to compare my results with others with the same

> configuration and with PemPro.

> I could try adjusting the worm, if anything I could have it a little

> tight...

>

> Adrien Richardson

>

>

>

> _____

>

> From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

[mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com] > On Behalf Of Floyd Blue

> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 8:14 PM

> To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: G11 with new Ovision worm PemPro Results.

>

>

>

> Hi Paul,

> Hmm, if your graph is correct, then the Ovision has greater than 10"

> of PE which seems wrong. Not saying that your graph is wrong, but

> rather it seems that something is not right. :^)

> I would wonder if the worm is adjusted correctly. If it is, then this

> is outside the 10" guarantee!

> Floyd

> --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Paul K" pkane2001@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Adrien,

> >

> > I don't have PemPro on my work computer, so I loaded the files into

> > Excel and processed them there. Maybe someone can load these into

> > PemPro and post the resulting analysis. From looking at the raw data

> > in Excel, the data collected without PEC has a periodic error of

> > about 10 arcsecs peak-to-peak:

> >

> > pk.darkhoriz pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg>

> ons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg

> >

> > The file after PEC training is a lot better, but has some pretty

> > fast 1-2 arcseconds transitions that may cause problems at longer

> > focal lengths:

> >

> > pk.darkhoriz pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg>

> ons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg

> >

> > Was the first file taken with the Ovision worm or before you

> > installed it?

> >

> > Regards,

> >

> > -Paul

> >

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

> > biplane@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi All

> > >

> > > I thought I would post the PemPro txt files, after my new Ovision

> > worm was

> > > installed. There are two files, one is with PEC off, while

> > gathering data,

> > > and the other file is taken with PEC on after uploading to the

> > mount.

> > > They are both equal at 10 worm cycles each, so there is a good bit

> > of data

> > > there. Rather than make claims of how good (or not) the Worm is, I

> > thought

> > > the best approach is to post the raw txt files.

> > > Ray Gralak did give them a "once over" and they looked good to him

> > with a

> > > peak periodic error of about 2.2 arc-seconds (PEC on of course !).

> > >

> > > They can be seen here:

> > >

> > > tech.

> tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%>

> groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%

> > 20G11%20W

> > > ith%20Ovision%20Worm/

> > >

> > > I took a few pictures of the mount and worm

> > >

> > >

> > tech.

> tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46>

> ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46

> > 1d

> > >

> > > You can also see the string / pulley to apply a constant bias on

> > the RA, all

> > > credits for this Idea go to Rainer Ehlert.

> > >

> > > I hope the links work

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > >

> > > Adrien Richardson

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> > >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>



----------------------------

#39489 Sep 5, 2008

That's actually the way Franck wants us to use them (tight and feeling

the shaft against the ball bearings.) I agree it is not what I would

want in principle, but I took him on faith and installed it as it was.



It is possible that your extra PE is related to running "loose."



regards

Greg N



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

biplane@...> wrote:

I > could feel the shaft against the ball bearings.

> Frank sent the replacement right away.

> It would be interesting to compare my results with others with the same

> configuration and with PemPro.

> I could try adjusting the worm, if anything I could have it a little

> tight...

>

> Adrien Richardson

>







----------------------------

#39570 Sep 8, 2008

Hi Jack,

Thanks for the heads up! Mind shipped on the 1st as well, but I am in

California USA so it will likely take a few more days. Maybe middle of

the week.

Nice to hear that the worm was smooth! That is very good!

Floyd

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "jack6132000" jacklsmith@...>

wrote: >

> Hi,

>

> This may be of interest to anyone who has or are intending to order

> an Ovision Worm Block Assembly.

>

> My Ovision was sent on 1st Sept and arrived today, so yours should

> arrive shortly, I get the impression they test them in batches.

>

> I have found all at Optique et Vision to be very helpful when contacted.

>

> I have seen a couple of posts saying the worm seemed tight and/or

> notchy, I am pleased to say that mine turns easily and feels as smooth

> as silk.

>

> I plan to install it this week-end, but testing is in the lap of the

> gods as the weather here in the UK has been reliably British.

>

> Regards

> Jack.

>



----------------------------

#39571 Sep 8, 2008

Hi Floyd

Sorry for the delay in reply, but as you know, Northern Europe has awful

weather for the moment. I sent my results of the worm to Frank, and he made

a few valuable suggestions.

Firstly that I should check to see if the bottom of the worm block and the

base of the G11 are clean, and with no imperfections.

According to Frank, all it needs is as little as 0.005mm to cause a

harmonic. SO I immediately took the motor, gearbox and worm off and cleaned

it well.

Second point Frank made was to make sure the worm block position results in

a maximum of 1-2mm of counter weight movement, that is well documented, but

he mentioned to go a little tighter if I can.

One thing I found was that when I have the worm block in my hand, and I

rotated the shaft, it felt very smooth, perhaps a little too loose. When I

remounted the worm on it own, that is with no gear box or motor, and rocked

(very gently) the counter weight shaft side to side,I found the gear shaft

move slightly laterally in the worm block.

So I tightened a little bit the brass screw at the end of the worm block,

and it fixed the problem. I then took the worm block off again to see how it

felt when the worm shaft was rotated by hand with this new setting,and it

felt just right, a little stiff, but not binding. I marked the before and

after positions of the rotation of the brass screw with a marker, so I know

how far I rotated the screw.

I have been waiting a week to see it these efforts have resulted in any

benefit before sending you a reply, but the weather still looks bad to the

whole of this week.



Good luck with your worm!



Adrien











_____



From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

On Behalf Of Floyd Blue

Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 11:55 PM

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: G11 with new Ovision worm PemPro Results.







Hi Adrien,

Was the new replacement worm smoother and less tight?

How much play did you leave when setting up the worm? I notice they

advise 1-2mm of play at the end of the weight shaft.

I tried setting my original worm at 1.5mm and I thought it was too

loose, not sure the tracking was not worse. So I tightened it back to

maybe 1mm perhaps slightly less and it seemed to track better.

Floyd

--- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

biplane@...> wrote: >

> Hi Paul / Floyd

>

> Thanks for your comments. Yes Both curves were taken with the new Worm

> installed.

> I agree the PE of +6.4 to -4.1 (Total 10.5) is high, but then with

PEC on, > it drops down to 2.2 and no more 76 second error.

> I returned my first Ovision worm I as it was obviously too tight.

When the > shaft was rotated by hand, it was not smooth at all, almost "jerky"

as, I > could feel the shaft against the ball bearings.

> Frank sent the replacement right away.

> It would be interesting to compare my results with others with the same

> configuration and with PemPro.

> I could try adjusting the worm, if anything I could have it a little

> tight...

>

> Adrien Richardson

>

>

>

> _____

>

> From: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com

[mailto:Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com] > On Behalf Of Floyd Blue

> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 8:14 PM

> To: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: G11 with new Ovision worm PemPro Results.

>

>

>

> Hi Paul,

> Hmm, if your graph is correct, then the Ovision has greater than 10"

> of PE which seems wrong. Not saying that your graph is wrong, but

> rather it seems that something is not right. :^)

> I would wonder if the worm is adjusted correctly. If it is, then this

> is outside the 10" guarantee!

> Floyd

> --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Paul K" pkane2001@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Adrien,

> >

> > I don't have PemPro on my work computer, so I loaded the files into

> > Excel and processed them there. Maybe someone can load these into

> > PemPro and post the resulting analysis. From looking at the raw data

> > in Excel, the data collected without PEC has a periodic error of

> > about 10 arcsecs peak-to-peak:

> >

> > pk.darkhoriz pk.darkhoriz

pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg> ons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg> > ons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg

> >

> > The file after PEC training is a lot better, but has some pretty

> > fast 1-2 arcseconds transitions that may cause problems at longer

> > focal lengths:

> >

> > pk.darkhoriz pk.darkhoriz

pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg> ons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg> > ons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg

> >

> > Was the first file taken with the Ovision worm or before you

> > installed it?

> >

> > Regards,

> >

> > -Paul

> >

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

> > biplane@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi All

> > >

> > > I thought I would post the PemPro txt files, after my new Ovision

> > worm was

> > > installed. There are two files, one is with PEC off, while

> > gathering data,

> > > and the other file is taken with PEC on after uploading to the

> > mount.

> > > They are both equal at 10 worm cycles each, so there is a good bit

> > of data

> > > there. Rather than make claims of how good (or not) the Worm is, I

> > thought

> > > the best approach is to post the raw txt files.

> > > Ray Gralak did give them a "once over" and they looked good to him

> > with a

> > > peak periodic error of about 2.2 arc-seconds (PEC on of course !).

> > >

> > > They can be seen here:

> > >

> > > tech.

> tech.

tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%>

groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%> > groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%

> > 20G11%20W

> > > ith%20Ovision%20Worm/

> > >

> > > I took a few pictures of the mount and worm

> > >

> > >

> > tech.

> tech.

tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46>

ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46> > ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46

> > 1d

> > >

> > > You can also see the string / pulley to apply a constant bias on

> > the RA, all

> > > credits for this Idea go to Rainer Ehlert.

> > >

> > > I hope the links work

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > >

> > > Adrien Richardson

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> > >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>













[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#39573 Sep 8, 2008

Hi Adrian,

Sounds like you are on the right track for sure. The lateral play in

the worm was not good, causes a lot of issues as the shaft moves in

the block.

Hope to see mine in the next few days.

I have a Intes Alter MN66 coming in on Thursday and I want the worm

installed before next New Moon so I can give this scope a try for

photography.

Floyd

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

biplane@...> wrote: >

> Hi Floyd

> Sorry for the delay in reply, but as you know, Northern Europe has awful

> weather for the moment. I sent my results of the worm to Frank, and

he made > a few valuable suggestions.

> Firstly that I should check to see if the bottom of the worm block

and the > base of the G11 are clean, and with no imperfections.

> According to Frank, all it needs is as little as 0.005mm to cause a

> harmonic. SO I immediately took the motor, gearbox and worm off and

cleaned > it well.

> Second point Frank made was to make sure the worm block position

results in > a maximum of 1-2mm of counter weight movement, that is well

documented, but > he mentioned to go a little tighter if I can.

> One thing I found was that when I have the worm block in my hand, and I

> rotated the shaft, it felt very smooth, perhaps a little too loose.

When I > remounted the worm on it own, that is with no gear box or motor, and

rocked > (very gently) the counter weight shaft side to side,I found the gear

shaft > move slightly laterally in the worm block.

> So I tightened a little bit the brass screw at the end of the worm

block, > and it fixed the problem. I then took the worm block off again to

see how it > felt when the worm shaft was rotated by hand with this new

setting,and it > felt just right, a little stiff, but not binding. I marked the

before and > after positions of the rotation of the brass screw with a marker, so

I know > how far I rotated the screw.

> I have been waiting a week to see it these efforts have resulted in any

> benefit before sending you a reply, but the weather still looks bad

to the > whole of this week.

>

> Good luck with your worm!

>

> Adrien

>

>

>

>

>

> _____

>

> From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

[mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com] > On Behalf Of Floyd Blue

> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 11:55 PM

> To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: G11 with new Ovision worm PemPro Results.

>

>

>

> Hi Adrien,

> Was the new replacement worm smoother and less tight?

> How much play did you leave when setting up the worm? I notice they

> advise 1-2mm of play at the end of the weight shaft.

> I tried setting my original worm at 1.5mm and I thought it was too

> loose, not sure the tracking was not worse. So I tightened it back to

> maybe 1mm perhaps slightly less and it seemed to track better.

> Floyd

> --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

> biplane@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Paul / Floyd

> >

> > Thanks for your comments. Yes Both curves were taken with the new Worm

> > installed.

> > I agree the PE of +6.4 to -4.1 (Total 10.5) is high, but then with

> PEC on,

> > it drops down to 2.2 and no more 76 second error.

> > I returned my first Ovision worm I as it was obviously too tight.

> When the

> > shaft was rotated by hand, it was not smooth at all, almost "jerky"

> as, I

> > could feel the shaft against the ball bearings.

> > Frank sent the replacement right away.

> > It would be interesting to compare my results with others with the

same > > configuration and with PemPro.

> > I could try adjusting the worm, if anything I could have it a little

> > tight...

> >

> > Adrien Richardson

> >

> >

> >

> > _____

> >

> > From: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com

> [mailto:Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com]

> > On Behalf Of Floyd Blue

> > Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 8:14 PM

> > To: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com

> > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: G11 with new Ovision worm PemPro

Results. > >

> >

> >

> > Hi Paul,

> > Hmm, if your graph is correct, then the Ovision has greater than 10"

> > of PE which seems wrong. Not saying that your graph is wrong, but

> > rather it seems that something is not right. :^)

> > I would wonder if the worm is adjusted correctly. If it is, then this

> > is outside the 10" guarantee!

> > Floyd

> > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "Paul K" pkane2001@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi Adrien,

> > >

> > > I don't have PemPro on my work computer, so I loaded the files into

> > > Excel and processed them there. Maybe someone can load these into

> > > PemPro and post the resulting analysis. From looking at the raw

data > > > in Excel, the data collected without PEC has a periodic error of

> > > about 10 arcsecs peak-to-peak:

> > >

> > > pk.darkhoriz pk.darkhoriz

> pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg>

ons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg> > > ons.org/tmp/adrian-raw.jpg

> > >

> > > The file after PEC training is a lot better, but has some pretty

> > > fast 1-2 arcseconds transitions that may cause problems at longer

> > > focal lengths:

> > >

> > > pk.darkhoriz pk.darkhoriz

> pk.darkhorizons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg>

ons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg> > > ons.org/tmp/adrian-pec.jpg

> > >

> > > Was the first file taken with the Ovision worm or before you

> > > installed it?

> > >

> > > Regards,

> > >

> > > -Paul

> > >

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

> > > biplane@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hi All

> > > >

> > > > I thought I would post the PemPro txt files, after my new Ovision

> > > worm was

> > > > installed. There are two files, one is with PEC off, while

> > > gathering data,

> > > > and the other file is taken with PEC on after uploading to the

> > > mount.

> > > > They are both equal at 10 worm cycles each, so there is a good

bit > > > of data

> > > > there. Rather than make claims of how good (or not) the Worm

is, I > > > thought

> > > > the best approach is to post the raw txt files.

> > > > Ray Gralak did give them a "once over" and they looked good to

him > > > with a

> > > > peak periodic error of about 2.2 arc-seconds (PEC on of course !).

> > > >

> > > > They can be seen here:

> > > >

> > > > tech.

> > tech.

> tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%>

> groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%>

> > groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/files/Adrien%27s%

> > > 20G11%20W

> > > > ith%20Ovision%20Worm/

> > > >

> > > > I took a few pictures of the mount and worm

> > > >

> > > >

> > > tech.

> > tech.

> tech.ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46>

> ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46>

> > ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/browse/46

> > > 1d

> > > >

> > > > You can also see the string / pulley to apply a constant bias on

> > > the RA, all

> > > > credits for this Idea go to Rainer Ehlert.

> > > >

> > > > I hope the links work

> > > >

> > > > Thanks

> > > >

> > > > Adrien Richardson

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>







----------------------------

#39585 Sep 9, 2008

Hello,



I also had mine shipped on the first and i am waiting anxiously for

mine.



Did it arrive via USPS or ?? They sent me a tracking number, but I

cannot figure out where to get the tracking from. France postal

doesn't recognize it...



Anyhow.. I am waiting....



Thanks for the encouraging update.



Wayne

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Jack,

> Thanks for the heads up! Mind shipped on the 1st as well, but I am

in

> California USA so it will likely take a few more days. Maybe middle

of

> the week.

> Nice to hear that the worm was smooth! That is very good!

> Floyd

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "jack6132000" jacklsmith@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Hi,

> >

> > This may be of interest to anyone who has or are intending to

order

> > an Ovision Worm Block Assembly.

> >

> > My Ovision was sent on 1st Sept and arrived today, so yours

should

> > arrive shortly, I get the impression they test them in batches.

> >

> > I have found all at Optique et Vision to be very helpful when

contacted.

> >

> > I have seen a couple of posts saying the worm seemed tight and/or

> > notchy, I am pleased to say that mine turns easily and feels as

smooth

> > as silk.

> >

> > I plan to install it this week-end, but testing is in the lap of

the

> > gods as the weather here in the UK has been reliably British.

> >

> > Regards

> > Jack.

> >

>



----------------------------

#39586 Sep 9, 2008

Hi Wayne,

I assume it was DHL, that was what the label had on it. It arrived

right at the same time the mail did, but they did not ring the bell or

anything, so not sure who brought it.

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Wayne" wayne.gay@...> wrote:

>

> Hello,

>

> I also had mine shipped on the first and i am waiting anxiously for

> mine.

>

> Did it arrive via USPS or ?? They sent me a tracking number, but I

> cannot figure out where to get the tracking from. France postal

> doesn't recognize it...

>

> Anyhow.. I am waiting....

>

> Thanks for the encouraging update.

>

> Wayne

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Jack,

> > Thanks for the heads up! Mind shipped on the 1st as well, but I am

> in

> > California USA so it will likely take a few more days. Maybe middle

> of

> > the week.

> > Nice to hear that the worm was smooth! That is very good!

> > Floyd

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "jack6132000" jacklsmith@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi,

> > >

> > > This may be of interest to anyone who has or are intending to

> order

> > > an Ovision Worm Block Assembly.

> > >

> > > My Ovision was sent on 1st Sept and arrived today, so yours

> should

> > > arrive shortly, I get the impression they test them in batches.

> > >

> > > I have found all at Optique et Vision to be very helpful when

> contacted.

> > >

> > > I have seen a couple of posts saying the worm seemed tight and/or

> > > notchy, I am pleased to say that mine turns easily and feels as

> smooth

> > > as silk.

> > >

> > > I plan to install it this week-end, but testing is in the lap of

> the

> > > gods as the weather here in the UK has been reliably British.

> > >

> > > Regards

> > > Jack.

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#40077 Oct 1, 2008

All:



Last night was very calm and clear, one of the last such nights for at

least another week. It was only the 2nd time out using my new worm,

and conditions were perfect to compare how well it did compared to my

stock worm under similar conditions.



Mind you, I have not done any PEMPro graphs and the like (have been

thinking about doing that) so my observations are based upon the

results of the imaging run and not in any way scientific. The first

night I had the Ovision worm on there was a slight breeze; but, even

given that breeze, I had inklings of substantial improvement.



Equipment is as follows:

Mount: GM8 with new Ovision worm installed (received two weeks ago)

with Gemini Level 4 v1.04

Scope: WO/TMB 80/480 Triplet

Camera: SXVF-H9C

PEC: Off (I tried PEC training withe hand controller and just got RA

drift:)).

Guiding: None

Polar Alignment: Very good drift alignment



Results



With the stock worm, the best I could ever do in calm conditions such

as last night was about a 35% yield (i.e. acceptable images) at 30

seconds each, maximum. If I went up to 45 seconds my yield would drop

dramatically, and yield at 1 minute was less that 10%.



With the new Ovision worm: I tried 45 second images (I used 45 as I

wanted to add to some subframes of M15 I had taken with that exposure

duration) over a 75 minute imaging run. Yield was 76% good images...it

would have been higher but some images were washed out by some

passing, thin, high clouds. I have tried 75 second images in a slight

breeze (the night before last) and still had over 46% of the images in

good condition!



Even though I have a short focal length, it is the same scope I have

used with this mount for the past six months, and the improvement from

the Ovision worm is wonderful. It is now putting my imaging at a

higher level. Since I live close to downtown Portland, Oregon, very

long exposures are problematic with the light pollution. But, with the

new worm, I should be able to get high yields up to 1.5 minutes per

frame. So, with stacking, I will now be able to get better results

than I have ever had and did not have to resort to autoguiding.



In fact, I am not going to mess around with PEC/PEMPro at the moment

and just enjoy. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!!!



Best,

Don Singer

Portland, OR







----------------------------

#40078 Oct 1, 2008

Don,



Excellent! Great to hear your new worm has improved your enjoyment of

the hobby. I agree with your sentiments, if it is working for you,

that is all that really matters. This is supposed to be a hobby and

sometimes I think we take things too seriously. I am looking forward

to seeing some of your images.



Frank

celestialwonders.com

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Don Singer" don@...> wrote:

>

> All:

>

> Last night was very calm and clear, one of the last such nights for at

> least another week. It was only the 2nd time out using my new worm,

> and conditions were perfect to compare how well it did compared to my

> stock worm under similar conditions.

>

> Mind you, I have not done any PEMPro graphs and the like (have been

> thinking about doing that) so my observations are based upon the

> results of the imaging run and not in any way scientific. The first

> night I had the Ovision worm on there was a slight breeze; but, even

> given that breeze, I had inklings of substantial improvement.

>

> Equipment is as follows:

> Mount: GM8 with new Ovision worm installed (received two weeks ago)

> with Gemini Level 4 v1.04

> Scope: WO/TMB 80/480 Triplet

> Camera: SXVF-H9C

> PEC: Off (I tried PEC training withe hand controller and just got RA

> drift:)).

> Guiding: None

> Polar Alignment: Very good drift alignment

>

> Results

>

> With the stock worm, the best I could ever do in calm conditions such

> as last night was about a 35% yield (i.e. acceptable images) at 30

> seconds each, maximum. If I went up to 45 seconds my yield would drop

> dramatically, and yield at 1 minute was less that 10%.

>

> With the new Ovision worm: I tried 45 second images (I used 45 as I

> wanted to add to some subframes of M15 I had taken with that exposure

> duration) over a 75 minute imaging run. Yield was 76% good images...it

> would have been higher but some images were washed out by some

> passing, thin, high clouds. I have tried 75 second images in a slight

> breeze (the night before last) and still had over 46% of the images in

> good condition!

>

> Even though I have a short focal length, it is the same scope I have

> used with this mount for the past six months, and the improvement from

> the Ovision worm is wonderful. It is now putting my imaging at a

> higher level. Since I live close to downtown Portland, Oregon, very

> long exposures are problematic with the light pollution. But, with the

> new worm, I should be able to get high yields up to 1.5 minutes per

> frame. So, with stacking, I will now be able to get better results

> than I have ever had and did not have to resort to autoguiding.

>

> In fact, I am not going to mess around with PEC/PEMPro at the moment

> and just enjoy. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!!!

>

> Best,

> Don Singer

> Portland, OR

>



----------------------------

#40079 Oct 1, 2008

Great news Don! Another satisfied Ovision customer! :^)

I am on my way out to set up the new ST2000xm camera on the new MN66

scope with the new Ovision worm! First time out for everything, this

could be a disaster in the making! :^) But I hope to get everything to

work, but do not expect to take any real images, just a lot of tests.

Still, I may be able to learn a little about the worm to just by how

it guides. However, it is a new scope that is heavier and longer, so

it may not be a good comparison. Next time out I will use the old

scope and new camera, then it should be close to the same as before.



Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Don Singer" don@...> wrote:

>

> All:

>

> Last night was very calm and clear, one of the last such nights for at

> least another week. It was only the 2nd time out using my new worm,

> and conditions were perfect to compare how well it did compared to my

> stock worm under similar conditions.

>

> Mind you, I have not done any PEMPro graphs and the like (have been

> thinking about doing that) so my observations are based upon the

> results of the imaging run and not in any way scientific. The first

> night I had the Ovision worm on there was a slight breeze; but, even

> given that breeze, I had inklings of substantial improvement.

>

> Equipment is as follows:

> Mount: GM8 with new Ovision worm installed (received two weeks ago)

> with Gemini Level 4 v1.04

> Scope: WO/TMB 80/480 Triplet

> Camera: SXVF-H9C

> PEC: Off (I tried PEC training withe hand controller and just got RA

> drift:)).

> Guiding: None

> Polar Alignment: Very good drift alignment

>

> Results

>

> With the stock worm, the best I could ever do in calm conditions such

> as last night was about a 35% yield (i.e. acceptable images) at 30

> seconds each, maximum. If I went up to 45 seconds my yield would drop

> dramatically, and yield at 1 minute was less that 10%.

>

> With the new Ovision worm: I tried 45 second images (I used 45 as I

> wanted to add to some subframes of M15 I had taken with that exposure

> duration) over a 75 minute imaging run. Yield was 76% good images...it

> would have been higher but some images were washed out by some

> passing, thin, high clouds. I have tried 75 second images in a slight

> breeze (the night before last) and still had over 46% of the images in

> good condition!

>

> Even though I have a short focal length, it is the same scope I have

> used with this mount for the past six months, and the improvement from

> the Ovision worm is wonderful. It is now putting my imaging at a

> higher level. Since I live close to downtown Portland, Oregon, very

> long exposures are problematic with the light pollution. But, with the

> new worm, I should be able to get high yields up to 1.5 minutes per

> frame. So, with stacking, I will now be able to get better results

> than I have ever had and did not have to resort to autoguiding.

>

> In fact, I am not going to mess around with PEC/PEMPro at the moment

> and just enjoy. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!!!

>

> Best,

> Don Singer

> Portland, OR

>







----------------------------

#40081 Oct 1, 2008

Floyd:



Good luck on the new gear!



....will post M15 when I get some to process.



Best to all,

Don

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Great news Don! Another satisfied Ovision customer! :^)

> I am on my way out to set up the new ST2000xm camera on the new MN66

> scope with the new Ovision worm! First time out for everything, this

> could be a disaster in the making! :^) But I hope to get everything to

> work, but do not expect to take any real images, just a lot of tests.

> Still, I may be able to learn a little about the worm to just by how

> it guides. However, it is a new scope that is heavier and longer, so

> it may not be a good comparison. Next time out I will use the old

> scope and new camera, then it should be close to the same as before.

>

> Floyd

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Don Singer" don@> wrote:

> >

> > All:

> >

> > Last night was very calm and clear, one of the last such nights for at

> > least another week. It was only the 2nd time out using my new worm,

> > and conditions were perfect to compare how well it did compared to my

> > stock worm under similar conditions.

> >

> > Mind you, I have not done any PEMPro graphs and the like (have been

> > thinking about doing that) so my observations are based upon the

> > results of the imaging run and not in any way scientific. The first

> > night I had the Ovision worm on there was a slight breeze; but, even

> > given that breeze, I had inklings of substantial improvement.

> >

> > Equipment is as follows:

> > Mount: GM8 with new Ovision worm installed (received two weeks ago)

> > with Gemini Level 4 v1.04

> > Scope: WO/TMB 80/480 Triplet

> > Camera: SXVF-H9C

> > PEC: Off (I tried PEC training withe hand controller and just got RA

> > drift:)).

> > Guiding: None

> > Polar Alignment: Very good drift alignment

> >

> > Results

> >

> > With the stock worm, the best I could ever do in calm conditions such

> > as last night was about a 35% yield (i.e. acceptable images) at 30

> > seconds each, maximum. If I went up to 45 seconds my yield would drop

> > dramatically, and yield at 1 minute was less that 10%.

> >

> > With the new Ovision worm: I tried 45 second images (I used 45 as I

> > wanted to add to some subframes of M15 I had taken with that exposure

> > duration) over a 75 minute imaging run. Yield was 76% good images...it

> > would have been higher but some images were washed out by some

> > passing, thin, high clouds. I have tried 75 second images in a slight

> > breeze (the night before last) and still had over 46% of the images in

> > good condition!

> >

> > Even though I have a short focal length, it is the same scope I have

> > used with this mount for the past six months, and the improvement from

> > the Ovision worm is wonderful. It is now putting my imaging at a

> > higher level. Since I live close to downtown Portland, Oregon, very

> > long exposures are problematic with the light pollution. But, with the

> > new worm, I should be able to get high yields up to 1.5 minutes per

> > frame. So, with stacking, I will now be able to get better results

> > than I have ever had and did not have to resort to autoguiding.

> >

> > In fact, I am not going to mess around with PEC/PEMPro at the moment

> > and just enjoy. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!!!

> >

> > Best,

> > Don Singer

> > Portland, OR

> >

>



----------------------------

#41041 Jan 3, 2009

Here in the UK, we're going through an unusual cold spell, down to -6 at

nights, hovering at 0 Deg during the day. (I know this is pure luxury

compared to some of our USA and Canadian colleagues!)



I have a permenent set up in an Observatory. Do you think it would be OK

to install my new Ovision worm during such cold conditions, or do you

think I should wait until the outside temperatures return to a more

normal reading?



Just wondered if it would make any difference to setting it up in the

cold, the tightening of bolts etc.



A Happy New Year to all Losmandy Users!



Regards,



Barry Morton



Worcester - UK



----------------------------

#41136 Jan 17, 2009

I installed my Ovision worm in my G11 back when outside temperature was

quite warm. Now that it is very cold, I noticed that when gently moving the

weight bar form side to side, it far exceeded the 2mm or so that Ovision

recommends. I adjusted the block by "feel" and to a setting that once again

corresponded to the 2mm arm movement.



When I run Pempro for 10 cycles with PEC OFF, it produces PE of +2.7 / -2.6

RMS 0,656. After programming the mount, with PEC ON, the results are +0.8 /

-0.7 RMS 0,568.



So it does seem it needs a "tweak" between seasons, but it only takes 10mins

and with those results I am not complaining!



But I am curious if by adjusting correctly in the summer, then placing a

heater strap beside the worm in the winter would avoid this process??



Sounds silly but hey.whatever works!!







Adrien Richardson











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#41137 Jan 17, 2009

That's something I experience with my GM-8 with the Losmandy bearing

blocks. There is no reason the Ovision bearing block would behave

differently (just a question of thermal expansion). But since the

Ovision design is a sinle block one, the adjustment will not suffer

from the well known misalignment problem of the original bearings.



Regards



Claudio

--------------



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

biplane@...> wrote: >

> I installed my Ovision worm in my G11 back when outside temperature was

> quite warm. Now that it is very cold, I noticed that when gently

moving the > weight bar form side to side, it far exceeded the 2mm or so that Ovision

> recommends. I adjusted the block by "feel" and to a setting that

once again > corresponded to the 2mm arm movement.

>

> When I run Pempro for 10 cycles with PEC OFF, it produces PE of +2.7

/ -2.6 > RMS 0,656. After programming the mount, with PEC ON, the results are

+0.8 / > -0.7 RMS 0,568.

>

> So it does seem it needs a "tweak" between seasons, but it only

takes 10mins > and with those results I am not complaining!

>

> But I am curious if by adjusting correctly in the summer, then placing a

> heater strap beside the worm in the winter would avoid this process??

>

> Sounds silly but hey.whatever works!!

>

>

>

> Adrien Richardson

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>



----------------------------

#41140 Jan 17, 2009

Adrien - thanks for the post on the Ovision worm results. I will be

ordering an Ovision worm for my GM8 and will post the before and after

results.



Clear skies,

Dave





-----Original Message-----

From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

[mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Adrien Richardson

Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2009 2:49 AM

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [Losmandy_users] New Ovision worm results





I installed my Ovision worm in my G11 back when outside temperature was

quite warm. Now that it is very cold, I noticed that when gently moving

the

weight bar form side to side, it far exceeded the 2mm or so that Ovision

recommends. I adjusted the block by "feel" and to a setting that once

again

corresponded to the 2mm arm movement.



When I run Pempro for 10 cycles with PEC OFF, it produces PE of +2.7

/ -2.6

RMS 0,656. After programming the mount, with PEC ON, the results are +0.8

/

-0.7 RMS 0,568.



So it does seem it needs a "tweak" between seasons, but it only takes

10mins

and with those results I am not complaining!



But I am curious if by adjusting correctly in the summer, then placing a

heater strap beside the worm in the winter would avoid this process??



Sounds silly but hey.whatever works!!



Adrien Richardson



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]













[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#41151 Jan 17, 2009

I have heard on Yahoo! extremeastronomy of people heating their worms

but I don't know how they do it.



One year I was using the standard G11 tripod in teh snow and snow got

up the hollow legs. bringing it back into the garage I decided to run

hot water over the legs to melt the snow. I ran some water over the

leg for about two minutes and looked down. The water had frozen all

around the leg!



Aluminum is very heat conductive and you've got considerable mass in

these mounts. So I'm not sure that the standard Kendrick strip

putting out ten or twenty watts is going to do the trick. If you have

something more powerful in mind, heating the worm might work.

Otherwise I think you just might end up shoving some molecules around.



regards

greg n







--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Adrien Richardson"

biplane@...> wrote: >

> I installed my Ovision worm in my G11 back when outside temperature was

> quite warm. Now that it is very cold, I noticed that when gently

moving the > weight bar form side to side, it far exceeded the 2mm or so that Ovision

> recommends. I adjusted the block by "feel" and to a setting that

once again > corresponded to the 2mm arm movement.

>

> When I run Pempro for 10 cycles with PEC OFF, it produces PE of +2.7

/ -2.6 > RMS 0,656. After programming the mount, with PEC ON, the results are

+0.8 / > -0.7 RMS 0,568.

>

> So it does seem it needs a "tweak" between seasons, but it only

takes 10mins > and with those results I am not complaining!

>

> But I am curious if by adjusting correctly in the summer, then placing a

> heater strap beside the worm in the winter would avoid this process??

>

> Sounds silly but hey.whatever works!!

>

>

>

> Adrien Richardson

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>







----------------------------

#41488 Feb 3 11:32 AM

well the good news is that

eyeballing a correction for drift

the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than +/-3 arc

seconds!

(before PEC)



the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

so my long focal length images are much worse now and very difficult

to guide

:(



whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls



i took great care installing the worm

following the directions provided.



i have two observations:

1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

there was almost none in the system with the original worm

perhaps explaining the high PE range

2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly (arrived

like that).



my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm assembly

that could be easily corrected



any suggestions would be appreciated

ovision has not responded to my email



thanks



-bill w



----------------------------

#41489 Feb 3 12:03 PM

wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

updated spread sheet

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...> wrote:

>

> well the good news is that

> eyeballing a correction for drift

> the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than +/-3 arc

> seconds!

> (before PEC)

>

> the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> so my long focal length images are much worse now and very difficult

> to guide

> :(

>

> whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

>

> i took great care installing the worm

> following the directions provided.

>

> i have two observations:

> 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> perhaps explaining the high PE range

> 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly (arrived

> like that).

>

> my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm assembly

> that could be easily corrected

>

> any suggestions would be appreciated

> ovision has not responded to my email

>

> thanks

>

> -bill w

>



----------------------------

#41493 Feb 3 9:32 PM

Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so that

you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides having

an equal spacing from the mount flange.

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...> wrote:

>

> wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> updated spread sheet

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> >

> > well the good news is that

> > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than +/-3 arc

> > seconds!

> > (before PEC)

> >

> > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very difficult

> > to guide

> > :(

> >

> > whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> >

> > i took great care installing the worm

> > following the directions provided.

> >

> > i have two observations:

> > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly (arrived

> > like that).

> >

> > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm assembly

> > that could be easily corrected

> >

> > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > ovision has not responded to my email

> >

> > thanks

> >

> > -bill w

> >

>



----------------------------

#41494 Feb 4 12:10 AM

thanks for your reply floyd

the oldham coupler looked well aligned

and the block square on installation

but will check again and cut down on the play a bit



what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that



-bill

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so that

> you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides having

> an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> Floyd

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> >

> > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > updated spread sheet

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > >

> > > well the good news is that

> > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than +/-3 arc

> > > seconds!

> > > (before PEC)

> > >

> > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very difficult

> > > to guide

> > > :(

> > >

> > > whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > >

> > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > following the directions provided.

> > >

> > > i have two observations:

> > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly (arrived

> > > like that).

> > >

> > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

assembly

> > > that could be easily corrected

> > >

> > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > >

> > > thanks

> > >

> > > -bill w

> > >

> >

>







----------------------------

#41498 Feb 4 6:46 AM

Hi, Bill -



Another very real possibility is the adjustment of the brass screw on

the west side of the worm block. You should adjust this using the

dowel rod technique to ensure it can turn smoothly and easily using

your fingers. (Another way to easily test how well the complete

system turns is to insert an allen wrench into one of the allen

screws on the Oldham coupler and use that as a lever, with the Gemini

turned off, of course.) First, tighten your RA clutch and loosen the

brass screw. Wiggle the counterweight shaft and look for lateral

movement of the worm itself within the block (too loose). Then

tighten until there is no more play, and possibly another eighth or

sixteenth turn. Then perform the dowel/allen wrench test.



The amount of play or tightness of the worm inside the wormblock is

completely independent of the worm block's spacing on the mount. So,

you will want to get the worm adjustment right first. Then work on

the spacing of the worm block against the mount flange. In other

words, the 1-2mm play at the end of the shaft can be the result of

either too loose meshing between the worm gear and worm, or, too much

lateral play of the Ovision worm within it's housing, or both, and

you need to work these two variables independently.



Regards,



Bill in Gold Canyon, AZ



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...> wrote:

>

> thanks for your reply floyd

> the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> and the block square on installation

> but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

>

> what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

>

> -bill

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so

that

> > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

having

> > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > Floyd

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

wrote:

> > >

> > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > updated spread sheet

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

wrote:

> > > >

> > > > well the good news is that

> > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

+/-3 arc

> > > > seconds!

> > > > (before PEC)

> > > >

> > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

difficult

> > > > to guide

> > > > :(

> > > >

> > > > whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > >

> > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > following the directions provided.

> > > >

> > > > i have two observations:

> > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

(arrived

> > > > like that).

> > > >

> > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

> assembly

> > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > >

> > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > >

> > > > thanks

> > > >

> > > > -bill w

> > > >

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#41502 Feb 4 11:00 AM

Hi Bill,

I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on the

end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see if

it turns smoothly.

Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem, but

it could be something else.

My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...> wrote:

>

> thanks for your reply floyd

> the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> and the block square on installation

> but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

>

> what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

>

> -bill

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so that

> > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides having

> > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > Floyd

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > >

> > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > updated spread sheet

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > well the good news is that

> > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

+/-3 arc

> > > > seconds!

> > > > (before PEC)

> > > >

> > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

difficult

> > > > to guide

> > > > :(

> > > >

> > > > whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > >

> > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > following the directions provided.

> > > >

> > > > i have two observations:

> > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly (arrived

> > > > like that).

> > > >

> > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

> assembly

> > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > >

> > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > >

> > > > thanks

> > > >

> > > > -bill w

> > > >

> > >

> >

>







----------------------------

#41527 Feb 5 11:55 AM

thanks for the replies

i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

(my emails didn't get thru)

they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well



will let you know how it goes

of course it's raining now



-bill w

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Bill,

> I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on the

> end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see if

> it turns smoothly.

> Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem, but

> it could be something else.

> My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> Floyd

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> >

> > thanks for your reply floyd

> > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > and the block square on installation

> > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> >

> > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> >

> > -bill

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so that

> > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

having

> > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > Floyd

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > updated spread sheet

> > > >

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> +/-3 arc

> > > > > seconds!

> > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > >

> > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> difficult

> > > > > to guide

> > > > > :(

> > > > >

> > > > > whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > > >

> > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > >

> > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

(arrived

> > > > > like that).

> > > > >

> > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

> > assembly

> > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > >

> > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > >

> > > > > thanks

> > > > >

> > > > > -bill w

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#42113 Mar 13, 2009

I heard from Franck today................



My worm has shipped and I got the test run in the mail. He sent me a

translation in English showing it is less than +- 4 arc seconds!!!!!!



OK................Now I'm not so patiently waiting for it to arrive

:-) ...........



$524.00 shipped to Raleigh, North Carolina. That's an upgrade you just

can't beat!!!!!!!



Steve Izzo

Raleigh Astronomy Club

Raleigh, North Carolina



----------------------------

#42114 Mar 13, 2009

Great Steve, you should be seeing it soon! Hope to hear all about it.

+-4" I can easily believe, the worms are very nice.

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, Steve Izzo sdizzo@...> wrote:

>

> I heard from Franck today................

>

> My worm has shipped and I got the test run in the mail. He sent me a

> translation in English showing it is less than +- 4 arc seconds!!!!!!

>

> OK................Now I'm not so patiently waiting for it to arrive

> :-) ...........

>

> $524.00 shipped to Raleigh, North Carolina. That's an upgrade you just

> can't beat!!!!!!!

>

> Steve Izzo

> Raleigh Astronomy Club

> Raleigh, North Carolina

>



----------------------------

#42116 Mar 13, 2009

Congrats Steve,



I can't wait to see some new images with the new worm.



Chuck Jaynes

Raleigh Astronomy Club

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, Steve Izzo sdizzo@...> wrote:

>

> I heard from Franck today................

>

> My worm has shipped and I got the test run in the mail. He sent me a

> translation in English showing it is less than +- 4 arc seconds!!!!!!

>

> OK................Now I'm not so patiently waiting for it to arrive

> :-) ...........

>

> $524.00 shipped to Raleigh, North Carolina. That's an upgrade you just

> can't beat!!!!!!!

>

> Steve Izzo

> Raleigh Astronomy Club

> Raleigh, North Carolina

>







----------------------------

#42164 Mar 20, 2009

Hi,



Has anyone written up tips on adjusting/tuning a mount with the Ovision worm? I've had mine about 6 months and it was working great, but now I'm getting sudden jumps of several arc-seconds, which might be related to the warmer weather now. I plan to work on it this weekend, so I'm looking for any pointers beyond the instructions that come from Ovision. It's been a year since I last dismantled and cleaned my G-11, so maybe it's time to do this again?



Thanks,

-Joe



----------------------------

#42166 Mar 20, 2009

Hi Joe,

Well, I can tell you that as it warms up, the worm gets tighter and that could cause the jumps you describe.



In my write-up on the MC Mod, I did not get into the adjustment of the worm, mainly because that had be discussed here as I recall.

I can tell you that you want to adjust it warm because that will be the tight lash. I use about 1mm movement at the end of the weight shaft warm or 2mm when cold for a lash measurement, which is what OVision recommends.



There is only a little adjustment available on the Oldham coupler side, so I do try to get the gap between the two ends of the block and the mount to be as close to equal as possible and still get the play at the end of the shaft that I want. I measure this with feeler gauges.



Another thing to look at is possible contamination of the grease on the worm and wheel. If just a bit of grit gets in there, there will be a jump when you hit the grit. You might want to clean off the old grease and apply new grease just to be sure. Then go ahead and adjust the worm again when it is warm, room temperature. Be aware that if you adjusted it at say 70f and the mount gets to 100f it will be tight. But for most of us the temperature at night when we are actually using the mount will be at or below the 70f, except during the summer here in the desert that is! :^) But if you have 1mm of lash then it should still be OK at a higher temp as I only see about 1mm change between quite cold and warm temperatures.



Every place is different, so these measurements are just a suggestion and your area may require a slightly different setup.

Floyd

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Ulowetz" joe.ulowetz@...> wrote:

>

> Hi,

>

> Has anyone written up tips on adjusting/tuning a mount with the Ovision worm? I've had mine about 6 months and it was working great, but now I'm getting sudden jumps of several arc-seconds, which might be related to the warmer weather now. I plan to work on it this weekend, so I'm looking for any pointers beyond the instructions that come from Ovision. It's been a year since I last dismantled and cleaned my G-11, so maybe it's time to do this again?

>

> Thanks,

> -Joe

>



----------------------------

#42167 Mar 20, 2009

Floyd,

Thanks for the suggestions!

-Joe

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Joe,

> Well, I can tell you that as it warms up, the worm gets tighter and that could cause the jumps you describe.

>

> In my write-up on the MC Mod, I did not get into the adjustment of the worm, mainly because that had be discussed here as I recall.

> I can tell you that you want to adjust it warm because that will be the tight lash. I use about 1mm movement at the end of the weight shaft warm or 2mm when cold for a lash measurement, which is what OVision recommends.

>

> There is only a little adjustment available on the Oldham coupler side, so I do try to get the gap between the two ends of the block and the mount to be as close to equal as possible and still get the play at the end of the shaft that I want. I measure this with feeler gauges.

>

> Another thing to look at is possible contamination of the grease on the worm and wheel. If just a bit of grit gets in there, there will be a jump when you hit the grit. You might want to clean off the old grease and apply new grease just to be sure. Then go ahead and adjust the worm again when it is warm, room temperature. Be aware that if you adjusted it at say 70f and the mount gets to 100f it will be tight. But for most of us the temperature at night when we are actually using the mount will be at or below the 70f, except during the summer here in the desert that is! :^) But if you have 1mm of lash then it should still be OK at a higher temp as I only see about 1mm change between quite cold and warm temperatures.

>

> Every place is different, so these measurements are just a suggestion and your area may require a slightly different setup.

> Floyd

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Ulowetz" joe.ulowetz@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi,

> >

> > Has anyone written up tips on adjusting/tuning a mount with the Ovision worm? I've had mine about 6 months and it was working great, but now I'm getting sudden jumps of several arc-seconds, which might be related to the warmer weather now. I plan to work on it this weekend, so I'm looking for any pointers beyond the instructions that come from Ovision. It's been a year since I last dismantled and cleaned my G-11, so maybe it's time to do this again?

> >

> > Thanks,

> > -Joe

> >

>



----------------------------

#42172 Mar 20, 2009

Floyd,



Where are you using a feeler gauge? I don't have my worm yet so I don't have an idea of what you're measuring or how you're doing it.



Can you elaborate?



Thanks.





--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Joe,

> Well, I can tell you that as it warms up, the worm gets tighter and that could cause the jumps you describe.

>

> In my write-up on the MC Mod, I did not get into the adjustment of the worm, mainly because that had be discussed here as I recall.

> I can tell you that you want to adjust it warm because that will be the tight lash. I use about 1mm movement at the end of the weight shaft warm or 2mm when cold for a lash measurement, which is what OVision recommends.

>

> There is only a little adjustment available on the Oldham coupler side, so I do try to get the gap between the two ends of the block and the mount to be as close to equal as possible and still get the play at the end of the shaft that I want. I measure this with feeler gauges.

>

> Another thing to look at is possible contamination of the grease on the worm and wheel. If just a bit of grit gets in there, there will be a jump when you hit the grit. You might want to clean off the old grease and apply new grease just to be sure. Then go ahead and adjust the worm again when it is warm, room temperature. Be aware that if you adjusted it at say 70f and the mount gets to 100f it will be tight. But for most of us the temperature at night when we are actually using the mount will be at or below the 70f, except during the summer here in the desert that is! :^) But if you have 1mm of lash then it should still be OK at a higher temp as I only see about 1mm change between quite cold and warm temperatures.

>

> Every place is different, so these measurements are just a suggestion and your area may require a slightly different setup.

> Floyd

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Ulowetz" joe.ulowetz@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi,

> >

> > Has anyone written up tips on adjusting/tuning a mount with the Ovision worm? I've had mine about 6 months and it was working great, but now I'm getting sudden jumps of several arc-seconds, which might be related to the warmer weather now. I plan to work on it this weekend, so I'm looking for any pointers beyond the instructions that come from Ovision. It's been a year since I last dismantled and cleaned my G-11, so maybe it's time to do this again?

> >

> > Thanks,

> > -Joe

> >

>







----------------------------

#42175 Mar 20, 2009

Hi,

The feeler gauge goes between the worm block and the mount body. Not talking about the flat where the bolts go through, but behind the block there is a space. You place the gauge there before you tighten the bolt on each side. I use two feeler gauge sets, one on each side. Then try to find an equal distance, like .03x" of so that will fit on both sides and give me the play I want at the end of the weight shaft.

Floyd

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Picciani" tpicciani@...> wrote:

>

> Floyd,

>

> Where are you using a feeler gauge? I don't have my worm yet so I don't have an idea of what you're measuring or how you're doing it.

>

> Can you elaborate?

>

> Thanks.

>

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Joe,

> > Well, I can tell you that as it warms up, the worm gets tighter and that could cause the jumps you describe.

> >

> > In my write-up on the MC Mod, I did not get into the adjustment of the worm, mainly because that had be discussed here as I recall.

> > I can tell you that you want to adjust it warm because that will be the tight lash. I use about 1mm movement at the end of the weight shaft warm or 2mm when cold for a lash measurement, which is what OVision recommends.

> >

> > There is only a little adjustment available on the Oldham coupler side, so I do try to get the gap between the two ends of the block and the mount to be as close to equal as possible and still get the play at the end of the shaft that I want. I measure this with feeler gauges.

> >

> > Another thing to look at is possible contamination of the grease on the worm and wheel. If just a bit of grit gets in there, there will be a jump when you hit the grit. You might want to clean off the old grease and apply new grease just to be sure. Then go ahead and adjust the worm again when it is warm, room temperature. Be aware that if you adjusted it at say 70f and the mount gets to 100f it will be tight. But for most of us the temperature at night when we are actually using the mount will be at or below the 70f, except during the summer here in the desert that is! :^) But if you have 1mm of lash then it should still be OK at a higher temp as I only see about 1mm change between quite cold and warm temperatures.

> >

> > Every place is different, so these measurements are just a suggestion and your area may require a slightly different setup.

> > Floyd

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Ulowetz" joe.ulowetz@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi,

> > >

> > > Has anyone written up tips on adjusting/tuning a mount with the Ovision worm? I've had mine about 6 months and it was working great, but now I'm getting sudden jumps of several arc-seconds, which might be related to the warmer weather now. I plan to work on it this weekend, so I'm looking for any pointers beyond the instructions that come from Ovision. It's been a year since I last dismantled and cleaned my G-11, so maybe it's time to do this again?

> > >

> > > Thanks,

> > > -Joe

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#42176 Mar 20, 2009

Hi,



Another place to look is the gearbox./ Oldham coupler connection - are the grub screws tight?. I had a Dec tracking problem the other night and just found that the grub screws had worked loose, so there was a lot of slop connection of gearbox to coupler.



Cheers

Rod









---------------

From: Floyd Blue fblue@...>

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, 21 March, 2009 6:42:09 AM

Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: Ovision worm adjustments





Hi Joe,

Well, I can tell you that as it warms up, the worm gets tighter and that could cause the jumps you describe.



In my write-up on the MC Mod, I did not get into the adjustment of the worm, mainly because that had be discussed here as I recall.

I can tell you that you want to adjust it warm because that will be the tight lash. I use about 1mm movement at the end of the weight shaft warm or 2mm when cold for a lash measurement, which is what OVision recommends.



There is only a little adjustment available on the Oldham coupler side, so I do try to get the gap between the two ends of the block and the mount to be as close to equal as possible and still get the play at the end of the shaft that I want. I measure this with feeler gauges.



Another thing to look at is possible contamination of the grease on the worm and wheel. If just a bit of grit gets in there, there will be a jump when you hit the grit. You might want to clean off the old grease and apply new grease just to be sure. Then go ahead and adjust the worm again when it is warm, room temperature. Be aware that if you adjusted it at say 70f and the mount gets to 100f it will be tight. But for most of us the temperature at night when we are actually using the mount will be at or below the 70f, except during the summer here in the desert that is! :^) But if you have 1mm of lash then it should still be OK at a higher temp as I only see about 1mm change between quite cold and warm temperatures.



Every place is different, so these measurements are just a suggestion and your area may require a slightly different setup.

Floyd

--- In Losmandy_users@ yahoogroups. com, "Joe Ulowetz" joe.ulowetz@ ...> wrote:

>

> Hi,

>

> Has anyone written up tips on adjusting/tuning a mount with the Ovision worm? I've had mine about 6 months and it was working great, but now I'm getting sudden jumps of several arc-seconds, which might be related to the warmer weather now. I plan to work on it this weekend, so I'm looking for any pointers beyond the instructions that come from Ovision. It's been a year since I last dismantled and cleaned my G-11, so maybe it's time to do this again?

>

> Thanks,

> -Joe

>











Stay connected to the people that matter most with a smarter inbox. Take a look au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/smarterinbox



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#42177 Mar 20, 2009

I think I see what you're talking about; The space between the worm gear cover, which is flat on either side of the worm, and the worm blocks themselves. Correct?







--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Hi,

> The feeler gauge goes between the worm block and the mount body. Not talking about the flat where the bolts go through, but behind the block there is a space. You place the gauge there before you tighten the bolt on each side. I use two feeler gauge sets, one on each side. Then try to find an equal distance, like .03x" of so that will fit on both sides and give me the play I want at the end of the weight shaft.

> Floyd

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Picciani" tpicciani@> wrote:

> >

> > Floyd,

> >

> > Where are you using a feeler gauge? I don't have my worm yet so I don't have an idea of what you're measuring or how you're doing it.

> >

> > Can you elaborate?

> >

> > Thanks.

> >

> >

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi Joe,

> > > Well, I can tell you that as it warms up, the worm gets tighter and that could cause the jumps you describe.

> > >

> > > In my write-up on the MC Mod, I did not get into the adjustment of the worm, mainly because that had be discussed here as I recall.

> > > I can tell you that you want to adjust it warm because that will be the tight lash. I use about 1mm movement at the end of the weight shaft warm or 2mm when cold for a lash measurement, which is what OVision recommends.

> > >

> > > There is only a little adjustment available on the Oldham coupler side, so I do try to get the gap between the two ends of the block and the mount to be as close to equal as possible and still get the play at the end of the shaft that I want. I measure this with feeler gauges.

> > >

> > > Another thing to look at is possible contamination of the grease on the worm and wheel. If just a bit of grit gets in there, there will be a jump when you hit the grit. You might want to clean off the old grease and apply new grease just to be sure. Then go ahead and adjust the worm again when it is warm, room temperature. Be aware that if you adjusted it at say 70f and the mount gets to 100f it will be tight. But for most of us the temperature at night when we are actually using the mount will be at or below the 70f, except during the summer here in the desert that is! :^) But if you have 1mm of lash then it should still be OK at a higher temp as I only see about 1mm change between quite cold and warm temperatures.

> > >

> > > Every place is different, so these measurements are just a suggestion and your area may require a slightly different setup.

> > > Floyd

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Ulowetz" joe.ulowetz@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hi,

> > > >

> > > > Has anyone written up tips on adjusting/tuning a mount with the Ovision worm? I've had mine about 6 months and it was working great, but now I'm getting sudden jumps of several arc-seconds, which might be related to the warmer weather now. I plan to work on it this weekend, so I'm looking for any pointers beyond the instructions that come from Ovision. It's been a year since I last dismantled and cleaned my G-11, so maybe it's time to do this again?

> > > >

> > > > Thanks,

> > > > -Joe

> > > >

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#42279 Mar 27, 2009

I have not installed the worm yet. Is it normal when turning the shaft by hand prior to mounting, to feel a slight vibration? I would have thought it would be smooth as butter but it's not. Is that normal?



Thanks.



----------------------------

#42280 Mar 27, 2009

Tom,



I just got mine and it is smooth as silk--or butter--whichever is smoother. I suggest you contact Franck about it.



Mark J



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Picciani" tpicciani@...> wrote:

>

> I have not installed the worm yet. Is it normal when turning the shaft by hand prior to mounting, to feel a slight vibration? I would have thought it would be smooth as butter but it's not. Is that normal?

>

> Thanks.

>



----------------------------

#42281 Mar 28, 2009

Thanks. I'll do that.



Tom P.

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Jones" yahoogroups01@...> wrote:

>

> Tom,

>

> I just got mine and it is smooth as silk--or butter--whichever is smoother. I suggest you contact Franck about it.

>

> Mark J

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Picciani" tpicciani@> wrote:

> >

> > I have not installed the worm yet. Is it normal when turning the shaft by hand prior to mounting, to feel a slight vibration? I would have thought it would be smooth as butter but it's not. Is that normal?

> >

> > Thanks.

> >

>



----------------------------

#42282 Mar 28, 2009

Franch replied very quickly:



Hello Thomas



sometimes if the Ns is warm a bit you can feel this due to the spring inside

there is no influence on PE



a defective ball bearing is very hard and stiff

very "rug" .



you can assembly it like this

if you want you can also unscreww a very little bit the screw at one end .



let me knowabout your results

best regards



Franck





So I think I'll install it today if I get the chance. I think I'll hold off installing the Mclennan gearboxes though until I'm sure the worm is OK. I don't want to introduce another element of change to it until I'm sure one phase is working.



Weather looks lousy for the next week. If that's any indication this must be a perfect worm.



Tom P.



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Picciani" tpicciani@...> wrote:

>

> Thanks. I'll do that.

>

> Tom P.

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Jones" yahoogroups01@> wrote:

> >

> > Tom,

> >

> > I just got mine and it is smooth as silk--or butter--whichever is smoother. I suggest you contact Franck about it.

> >

> > Mark J

> >

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Picciani" tpicciani@> wrote:

> > >

> > > I have not installed the worm yet. Is it normal when turning the shaft by hand prior to mounting, to feel a slight vibration? I would have thought it would be smooth as butter but it's not. Is that normal?

> > >

> > > Thanks.

> > >

> >

>







----------------------------

#42325 Mar 31, 2009

Tom,



The installation went fairly easy for mine. I haven't had a chance to check the PE, but just look at the guide star while tracking shows that it is staying right on--much less movement than before. The proof has been in the pudding--or the pics.



Mark J

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Picciani" tpicciani@...> wrote:

>

>

> Franch replied very quickly:

>

> Hello Thomas

>

> sometimes if the Ns is warm a bit you can feel this due to the spring inside

> there is no influence on PE

>

> a defective ball bearing is very hard and stiff

> very "rug" .

>

> you can assembly it like this

> if you want you can also unscreww a very little bit the screw at one end .

>

> let me knowabout your results

> best regards

>

> Franck

>

>

> So I think I'll install it today if I get the chance. I think I'll hold off installing the Mclennan gearboxes though until I'm sure the worm is OK. I don't want to introduce another element of change to it until I'm sure one phase is working.

>

> Weather looks lousy for the next week. If that's any indication this must be a perfect worm.

>

> Tom P.

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Picciani" tpicciani@> wrote:

> >

> > Thanks. I'll do that.

> >

> > Tom P.

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Jones" yahoogroups01@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Tom,

> > >

> > > I just got mine and it is smooth as silk--or butter--whichever is smoother. I suggest you contact Franck about it.

> > >

> > > Mark J

> > >

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Picciani" tpicciani@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > I have not installed the worm yet. Is it normal when turning the shaft by hand prior to mounting, to feel a slight vibration? I would have thought it would be smooth as butter but it's not. Is that normal?

> > > >

> > > > Thanks.

> > > >

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#42342 Apr 1, 2009

Hello Group,



After 3 months wait and credit card issues (doesn't seem as though my CC company thinks I should be buying from directly overseas - shut the card down), I finally received my Ovision worm last week. My job has been consuming me and all my spare time lately, but I took the time Saturday to install it on my G-11. Only took about 20 minutes.



That night I set up to take some test shots, and I have to say I was impressed with the results. I have not had a chance to graph the performance or anything like that, but in taking 6 minute exposures of M-51 using PHD guiding, I could immediately tell a difference just by watching the on screen tracking box. Whereas before it would jump around often and the computer was constantly sending out corrections to compensate, now it was hard to see it move at all, and it would sometimes go 5 - 10 seconds without issuing a command. Now, for me, thats am improvement!



If it wasn't for the wind that night, I think I would have had the best star images yet, but the cold front that passed brought enough wind that at some point in 6 minutes it would kick up and induce a little trailing. But so far I think this has been a worthwhile upgrade.



A lot of subjectiveness I know; perhaps soon I will find the time to run some numbers for a graph. But work is calling me back now...



Clear skies,



Claude



----------------------------

#42346 Apr 2, 2009

Great news! Mine goes in on Saturday with luck. The night is predicted still to be clear so I'll use Pempro and see how it looks. Because my worm feels a little bit of resistance every 1/4 turn, I want to do this mod separately before adding the new gearboxes.



I did turn the worm while pressing inward on the worm and it appears to be smooth then. So maybe it is the spring tension.



I can't wait to try it out.



Tom P.

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "cetialpha4" cetialpha4@...> wrote:

>

> Hello Group,

>

> After 3 months wait and credit card issues (doesn't seem as though my CC company thinks I should be buying from directly overseas - shut the card down), I finally received my Ovision worm last week. My job has been consuming me and all my spare time lately, but I took the time Saturday to install it on my G-11. Only took about 20 minutes.

>

> That night I set up to take some test shots, and I have to say I was impressed with the results. I have not had a chance to graph the performance or anything like that, but in taking 6 minute exposures of M-51 using PHD guiding, I could immediately tell a difference just by watching the on screen tracking box. Whereas before it would jump around often and the computer was constantly sending out corrections to compensate, now it was hard to see it move at all, and it would sometimes go 5 - 10 seconds without issuing a command. Now, for me, thats am improvement!

>

> If it wasn't for the wind that night, I think I would have had the best star images yet, but the cold front that passed brought enough wind that at some point in 6 minutes it would kick up and induce a little trailing. But so far I think this has been a worthwhile upgrade.

>

> A lot of subjectiveness I know; perhaps soon I will find the time to run some numbers for a graph. But work is calling me back now...

>

> Clear skies,

>

> Claude

>







----------------------------

#42548 Apr 21, 2009

just thought i'd give some follow up on my ovision worm

the first worm seemed to have a problem with the bearings

there was a very rough feeling when i rotated the worm by hand

(when not installed)

attempts to change the brass adjuster did not improve it



i was sent a new worm with a new design from ovision

it turns smoothly

i installed it this weekend

and my PE is much improved by virtue of elimination of the 76 second error

which was very large.



i analyzed my PE runs with PEC pro

and found some interesting results:

stock worm

Peak PE+:..18.32 arcsecs

Peak PE-:..-18.36 arcsecs

RMS PE: ..7.48 arcsecs

Av. PE+:..6.35 arcsecs

Av. PE-:..-6.15 arcsecs

Max Delta+:.1.51 arcsecs

Max Delta-:.-1.40 arcsecs

Av. Noise:.0.13 arcsecs



ovision worm

Peak PE+:..8.49 arcsecs

Peak PE-:..-8.20 arcsecs

RMS PE: ..3.79 arcsecs

Av. PE+:..3.31 arcsecs

Av. PE-:..-3.06 arcsecs

Max Delta+:.0.27 arcsecs

Max Delta-:.-0.30 arcsecs

Av. Noise:.0.04 arcsecs



looking at the frequency spectra

for the old worm

the 76 second predicted (calculated) PE was 17.1

the primary worm PE was 8.8

there was also a 117 second error of 8.8

not sure what this last is

it's close to worm bearing ball spin which has a period of 109?



for the new worm

the 76 second error is non existent

the 117 second error is non existent

however, the primary worm PE is 9.2



so the good news is that my PE has been cut in half

and it has the same period as the worm

so it should be amenable to PEC, perhaps halving the PE



but shouldn't the primary PE of the worm

be lower with a high precision worm?



-bill w

astro.whwiii.net

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...> wrote:

>

> thanks for the replies

> i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

> (my emails didn't get thru)

> they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well

>

> will let you know how it goes

> of course it's raining now

>

> -bill w

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Bill,

> > I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on the

> > end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see if

> > it turns smoothly.

> > Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> > without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem, but

> > it could be something else.

> > My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> > Floyd

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > >

> > > thanks for your reply floyd

> > > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > > and the block square on installation

> > > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> > >

> > > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> > >

> > > -bill

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so that

> > > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> > > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

> having

> > > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > > Floyd

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > > updated spread sheet

> > > > >

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> > +/-3 arc

> > > > > > seconds!

> > > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > > >

> > > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> > difficult

> > > > > > to guide

> > > > > > :(

> > > > > >

> > > > > > whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > > > >

> > > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

> (arrived

> > > > > > like that).

> > > > > >

> > > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

> > > assembly

> > > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > > >

> > > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > > >

> > > > > > thanks

> > > > > >

> > > > > > -bill w

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>







----------------------------

#42558 Apr 21, 2009

Bill,







Your original worm will have been run in from your use of the mount, these

aren't bad worms just a good worm in a bad block.



Your new worm will only get better as it is run in.



My mount with original block and worm gives these results







Peak PE+: 2.8 arcsecs

Peak PE-: -3.8 arcsecs

RMS PE: .877 arcsecs



Worm Period PE: 1.45

76 second PE was .55







Roy







-----Original Message-----

From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:57 AM

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

















just thought i'd give some follow up on my ovision worm

the first worm seemed to have a problem with the bearings

there was a very rough feeling when i rotated the worm by hand

(when not installed)

attempts to change the brass adjuster did not improve it



i was sent a new worm with a new design from ovision

it turns smoothly

i installed it this weekend

and my PE is much improved by virtue of elimination of the 76 second error

which was very large.



i analyzed my PE runs with PEC pro

and found some interesting results:

stock worm

Peak PE+: 18.32 arcsecs

Peak PE-: -18.36 arcsecs

RMS PE: 7.48 arcsecs

Av. PE+: 6.35 arcsecs

Av. PE-: -6.15 arcsecs

Max Delta+: 1.51 arcsecs

Max Delta-: -1.40 arcsecs

Av. Noise: 0.13 arcsecs



ovision worm

Peak PE+: 8.49 arcsecs

Peak PE-: -8.20 arcsecs

RMS PE: 3.79 arcsecs

Av. PE+: 3.31 arcsecs

Av. PE-: -3.06 arcsecs

Max Delta+: 0.27 arcsecs

Max Delta-: -0.30 arcsecs

Av. Noise: 0.04 arcsecs



looking at the frequency spectra

for the old worm

the 76 second predicted (calculated) PE was 17.1

the primary worm PE was 8.8

there was also a 117 second error of 8.8

not sure what this last is

it's close to worm bearing ball spin which has a period of 109?



for the new worm

the 76 second error is non existent

the 117 second error is non existent

however, the primary worm PE is 9.2



so the good news is that my PE has been cut in half

and it has the same period as the worm

so it should be amenable to PEC, perhaps halving the PE



but shouldn't the primary PE of the worm

be lower with a high precision worm?



-bill w

astro.whwiii.net



--- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...> wrote: >

> thanks for the replies

> i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

> (my emails didn't get thru)

> they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well

>

> will let you know how it goes

> of course it's raining now

>

> -bill w

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote: > >

> > Hi Bill,

> > I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on the

> > end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see if

> > it turns smoothly.

> > Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> > without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem, but

> > it could be something else.

> > My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> > Floyd

> > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote: > > >

> > > thanks for your reply floyd

> > > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > > and the block square on installation

> > > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> > >

> > > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> > >

> > > -bill

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote: > > > >

> > > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so that

> > > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> > > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

> having

> > > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > > Floyd

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote: > > > > >

> > > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > > updated spread sheet

> > > > >

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> > +/-3 arc

> > > > > > seconds!

> > > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > > >

> > > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> > difficult

> > > > > > to guide

> > > > > > :(

> > > > > >

> > > > > > whwastro.

whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls > > > > > >

> > > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

> (arrived

> > > > > > like that).

> > > > > >

> > > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

> > > assembly

> > > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > > >

> > > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > > >

> > > > > > thanks

> > > > > >

> > > > > > -bill w

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#42560 Apr 21, 2009

how on earth did you get values that low?!

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@...> wrote:

>

> Bill,

>

>

>

> Your original worm will have been run in from your use of the mount, these

> aren't bad worms just a good worm in a bad block.

>

> Your new worm will only get better as it is run in.

>

> My mount with original block and worm gives these results

>

>

>

> Peak PE+: 2.8 arcsecs

> Peak PE-: -3.8 arcsecs

> RMS PE: .877 arcsecs

>

> Worm Period PE: 1.45

> 76 second PE was .55

>

>

>

> Roy

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

> On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:57 AM

> To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> just thought i'd give some follow up on my ovision worm

> the first worm seemed to have a problem with the bearings

> there was a very rough feeling when i rotated the worm by hand

> (when not installed)

> attempts to change the brass adjuster did not improve it

>

> i was sent a new worm with a new design from ovision

> it turns smoothly

> i installed it this weekend

> and my PE is much improved by virtue of elimination of the 76 second error

> which was very large.

>

> i analyzed my PE runs with PEC pro

> and found some interesting results:

> stock worm

> Peak PE+: 18.32 arcsecs

> Peak PE-: -18.36 arcsecs

> RMS PE: 7.48 arcsecs

> Av. PE+: 6.35 arcsecs

> Av. PE-: -6.15 arcsecs

> Max Delta+: 1.51 arcsecs

> Max Delta-: -1.40 arcsecs

> Av. Noise: 0.13 arcsecs

>

> ovision worm

> Peak PE+: 8.49 arcsecs

> Peak PE-: -8.20 arcsecs

> RMS PE: 3.79 arcsecs

> Av. PE+: 3.31 arcsecs

> Av. PE-: -3.06 arcsecs

> Max Delta+: 0.27 arcsecs

> Max Delta-: -0.30 arcsecs

> Av. Noise: 0.04 arcsecs

>

> looking at the frequency spectra

> for the old worm

> the 76 second predicted (calculated) PE was 17.1

> the primary worm PE was 8.8

> there was also a 117 second error of 8.8

> not sure what this last is

> it's close to worm bearing ball spin which has a period of 109?

>

> for the new worm

> the 76 second error is non existent

> the 117 second error is non existent

> however, the primary worm PE is 9.2

>

> so the good news is that my PE has been cut in half

> and it has the same period as the worm

> so it should be amenable to PEC, perhaps halving the PE

>

> but shouldn't the primary PE of the worm

> be lower with a high precision worm?

>

> -bill w

> astro.whwiii.net

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> >

> > thanks for the replies

> > i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

> > (my emails didn't get thru)

> > they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well

> >

> > will let you know how it goes

> > of course it's raining now

> >

> > -bill w

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi Bill,

> > > I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on the

> > > end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see if

> > > it turns smoothly.

> > > Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> > > without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem, but

> > > it could be something else.

> > > My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> > > Floyd

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > thanks for your reply floyd

> > > > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > > > and the block square on installation

> > > > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> > > >

> > > > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > > > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> > > >

> > > > -bill

> > > >

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so that

> > > > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> > > > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

> > having

> > > > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > > > Floyd

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > > > updated spread sheet

> > > > > >

> > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

> > wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> > > +/-3 arc

> > > > > > > seconds!

> > > > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> > > difficult

> > > > > > > to guide

> > > > > > > :(

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > whwastro.

> whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

> > (arrived

> > > > > > > like that).

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

> > > > assembly

> > > > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > thanks

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > -bill w

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>







----------------------------

#42561 Apr 21, 2009

Try this-stainless worm, gears lapped. The backlash in the gears is only about 2arc minutes. Havn't done the Pem pro thing but the PE measured from the film (the old way...) on this 60 min trail shows +-1.25 arc sec! (No PEC). this shot is prime focus with a C8 (2000mmfl).

-------------- Original message from "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...>: --------------









how on earth did you get values that low?!

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@...> wrote:

>

> Bill,

>

>

>

> Your original worm will have been run in from your use of the mount, these

> aren't bad worms just a good worm in a bad block.

>

> Your new worm will only get better as it is run in.

>

> My mount with original block and worm gives these results

>

>

>

> Peak PE+: 2.8 arcsecs

> Peak PE-: -3.8 arcsecs

> RMS PE: .877 arcsecs

>

> Worm Period PE: 1.45

> 76 second PE was .55

>

>

>

> Roy

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

> On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:57 AM

> To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> just thought i'd give some follow up on my ovision worm

> the first worm seemed to have a problem with the bearings

> there was a very rough feeling when i rotated the worm by hand

> (when not installed)

> attempts to change the brass adjuster did not improve it

>

> i was sent a new worm with a new design from ovision

> it turns smoothly

> i installed it this weekend

> and my PE is much improved by virtue of elimination of the 76 second error

> which was very large.

>

> i analyzed my PE runs with PEC pro

> and found some interesting results:

> stock worm

> Peak PE+: 18.32 arcsecs

> Peak PE-: -18.36 arcsecs

> RMS PE: 7.48 arcsecs

> Av. PE+: 6.35 arcsecs

> Av. PE-: -6.15 arcsecs

> Max Delta+: 1.51 arcsecs

> Max Delta-: -1.40 arcsecs

> Av. Noise: 0.13 arcsecs

>

> ovision worm

> Peak PE+: 8.49 arcsecs

> Peak PE-: -8.20 arcsecs

> RMS PE: 3.79 arcsecs

> Av. PE+: 3.31 arcsecs

> Av. PE-: -3.06 arcsecs

> Max Delta+: 0.27 arcsecs

> Max Delta-: -0.30 arcsecs

> Av. Noise: 0.04 arcsecs

>

> looking at the frequency spectra

> for the old worm

> the 76 second predicted (calculated) PE was 17.1

> the primary worm PE was 8.8

> there was also a 117 second error of 8.8

> not sure what this last is

> it's close to worm bearing ball spin which has a period of 109?

>

> for the new worm

> the 76 second error is non existent

> the 117 second error is non existent

> however, the primary worm PE is 9.2

>

> so the good news is that my PE has been cut in half

> and it has the same period as the worm

> so it should be amenable to PEC, perhaps halving the PE

>

> but shouldn't the primary PE of the worm

> be lower with a high precision worm?

>

> -bill w

> astro.whwiii.net

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> >

> > thanks for the replies

> > i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

> > (my emails didn't get thru)

> > they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well

> >

> > will let you know how it goes

> > of course it's raining now

> >

> > -bill w

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi Bill,

> > > I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on the

> > > end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see if

> > > it turns smoothly.

> > > Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> > > without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem, but

> > > it could be something else.

> > > My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> > > Floyd

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > thanks for your reply floyd

> > > > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > > > and the block square on installation

> > > > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> > > >

> > > > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > > > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> > > >

> > > > -bill

> > > >

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so that

> > > > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> > > > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

> > having

> > > > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > > > Floyd

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > > > updated spread sheet

> > > > > >

> > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

> > wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> > > +/-3 arc

> > > > > > > seconds!

> > > > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> > > difficult

> > > > > > > to guide

> > > > > > > :(

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > whwastro.

> whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

> > (arrived

> > > > > > > like that).

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

> > > > assembly

> > > > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > thanks

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > -bill w

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#42565 Apr 22, 2009

FYI, I routinely get good values like this with my Ovision worm as well. I actively guide so the guiding RMS is more important to me than PE, so I haven't measured the PE lately, but my guiding RMS is typically less than 1 arcsec, and sometimes it settles down to around 0.3 arcsec. That's important to me because I image at 2350 mm (C9.25 prime focus) and 0.8 arcsec/pixel.



My guider is a 400mm AT-66 so I'm dealing w/ fractions of a pixel in the guider. I usually get 0.2-0.3 pixels RMS guiding, and at 3.5 arcsec/pixel this is around 1 arcsec. When the guiding error drops down to 0.1 pixel (0.3 arcsec) or slightly lower, I'm having a good night.



And yes, this is all on a Losmandy G-11 sitting on a tripod. Fortunately I don't see much differential flexure, at least not in the 5 minute exposures I typically do.

-Joe



MaxIm DL

ST-402 main imager on C9.25

Atik-16ic as guider on AT-66

www.skyinsight.net/gallery/v/Ulowetz/

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...> wrote:

>

> how on earth did you get values that low?!

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@> wrote:

> >

> > Bill,

> >

> >

> >

> > Your original worm will have been run in from your use of the mount, these

> > aren't bad worms just a good worm in a bad block.

> >

> > Your new worm will only get better as it is run in.

> >

> > My mount with original block and worm gives these results

> >

> >

> >

> > Peak PE+: 2.8 arcsecs

> > Peak PE-: -3.8 arcsecs

> > RMS PE: .877 arcsecs

> >

> > Worm Period PE: 1.45

> > 76 second PE was .55

> >

> >

> >

> > Roy



----------------------------

#42572 Apr 22, 2009

Hi Bill,







Measured fixed worm block end distance to stop and adjusted right hand

(adjustable) block end to exact same. Used feeler gauges jammed in gap both

sides.



These measurements were only at 1.98 arc/pixel plate scale 770mm FL. In

looking over the run I see the star used was saturated, this may be why the

results are so low. Last year (maybe longer) with a C8 F6.3 .98 arc/pixel

plate scale and the mount was very (before worm block adjustment) new the

results were +5.8 /-7.8. I can send you the PEMPro data file if you like.

The mount guides without problems at my current FL with 20min exposures as

the norm. I just came up on the AP list for a MACH1 have to make a decision

in the next few days if I still want to go that route.







Roy







-----Original Message-----

From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:02 PM

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

















how on earth did you get values that low?!



--- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@...> wrote: >

> Bill,

>

>

>

> Your original worm will have been run in from your use of the mount, these

> aren't bad worms just a good worm in a bad block.

>

> Your new worm will only get better as it is run in.

>

> My mount with original block and worm gives these results

>

>

>

> Peak PE+: 2.8 arcsecs

> Peak PE-: -3.8 arcsecs

> RMS PE: .877 arcsecs

>

> Worm Period PE: 1.45

> 76 second PE was .55

>

>

>

> Roy

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@

mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com] > On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:57 AM

> To: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> just thought i'd give some follow up on my ovision worm

> the first worm seemed to have a problem with the bearings

> there was a very rough feeling when i rotated the worm by hand

> (when not installed)

> attempts to change the brass adjuster did not improve it

>

> i was sent a new worm with a new design from ovision

> it turns smoothly

> i installed it this weekend

> and my PE is much improved by virtue of elimination of the 76 second error

> which was very large.

>

> i analyzed my PE runs with PEC pro

> and found some interesting results:

> stock worm

> Peak PE+: 18.32 arcsecs

> Peak PE-: -18.36 arcsecs

> RMS PE: 7.48 arcsecs

> Av. PE+: 6.35 arcsecs

> Av. PE-: -6.15 arcsecs

> Max Delta+: 1.51 arcsecs

> Max Delta-: -1.40 arcsecs

> Av. Noise: 0.13 arcsecs

>

> ovision worm

> Peak PE+: 8.49 arcsecs

> Peak PE-: -8.20 arcsecs

> RMS PE: 3.79 arcsecs

> Av. PE+: 3.31 arcsecs

> Av. PE-: -3.06 arcsecs

> Max Delta+: 0.27 arcsecs

> Max Delta-: -0.30 arcsecs

> Av. Noise: 0.04 arcsecs

>

> looking at the frequency spectra

> for the old worm

> the 76 second predicted (calculated) PE was 17.1

> the primary worm PE was 8.8

> there was also a 117 second error of 8.8

> not sure what this last is

> it's close to worm bearing ball spin which has a period of 109?

>

> for the new worm

> the 76 second error is non existent

> the 117 second error is non existent

> however, the primary worm PE is 9.2

>

> so the good news is that my PE has been cut in half

> and it has the same period as the worm

> so it should be amenable to PEC, perhaps halving the PE

>

> but shouldn't the primary PE of the worm

> be lower with a high precision worm?

>

> -bill w

> astro.whwiii.net

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> >

> > thanks for the replies

> > i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

> > (my emails didn't get thru)

> > they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well

> >

> > will let you know how it goes

> > of course it's raining now

> >

> > -bill w

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi Bill,

> > > I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on the

> > > end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see if

> > > it turns smoothly.

> > > Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> > > without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem, but

> > > it could be something else.

> > > My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> > > Floyd

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > thanks for your reply floyd

> > > > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > > > and the block square on installation

> > > > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> > > >

> > > > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > > > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> > > >

> > > > -bill

> > > >

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so

that > > > > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> > > > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

> > having

> > > > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > > > Floyd

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > > > updated spread sheet

> > > > > >

> > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

> > wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> > > +/-3 arc

> > > > > > > seconds!

> > > > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> > > difficult

> > > > > > > to guide

> > > > > > > :(

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > whwastro.

> whwastro.

whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls> > homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

> > (arrived

> > > > > > > like that).

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

> > > > assembly

> > > > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > thanks

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > -bill w

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#42575 Apr 22, 2009

interesting,

i'll admit it, having no machining experience,

i've never heard of lapping

is this something that everyone knows about and does without difficulty

or do i risk messing up my new precision gear etc?



what was your PE before the lapping?



-bill w

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, drgenovese@... wrote:

>

> Try this-stainless worm, gears lapped. The backlash in the gears is only about 2arc minutes. Havn't done the Pem pro thing but the PE measured from the film (the old way...) on this 60 min trail shows +-1.25 arc sec! (No PEC). this shot is prime focus with a C8 (2000mmfl).

> -------------- Original message from "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...>: --------------

>

>

>

>

> how on earth did you get values that low?!

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@> wrote:

> >

> > Bill,

> >

> >

> >

> > Your original worm will have been run in from your use of the mount, these

> > aren't bad worms just a good worm in a bad block.

> >

> > Your new worm will only get better as it is run in.

> >

> > My mount with original block and worm gives these results

> >

> >

> >

> > Peak PE+: 2.8 arcsecs

> > Peak PE-: -3.8 arcsecs

> > RMS PE: .877 arcsecs

> >

> > Worm Period PE: 1.45

> > 76 second PE was .55

> >

> >

> >

> > Roy

> >

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

> > On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> > Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:57 AM

> > To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > just thought i'd give some follow up on my ovision worm

> > the first worm seemed to have a problem with the bearings

> > there was a very rough feeling when i rotated the worm by hand

> > (when not installed)

> > attempts to change the brass adjuster did not improve it

> >

> > i was sent a new worm with a new design from ovision

> > it turns smoothly

> > i installed it this weekend

> > and my PE is much improved by virtue of elimination of the 76 second error

> > which was very large.

> >

> > i analyzed my PE runs with PEC pro

> > and found some interesting results:

> > stock worm

> > Peak PE+: 18.32 arcsecs

> > Peak PE-: -18.36 arcsecs

> > RMS PE: 7.48 arcsecs

> > Av. PE+: 6.35 arcsecs

> > Av. PE-: -6.15 arcsecs

> > Max Delta+: 1.51 arcsecs

> > Max Delta-: -1.40 arcsecs

> > Av. Noise: 0.13 arcsecs

> >

> > ovision worm

> > Peak PE+: 8.49 arcsecs

> > Peak PE-: -8.20 arcsecs

> > RMS PE: 3.79 arcsecs

> > Av. PE+: 3.31 arcsecs

> > Av. PE-: -3.06 arcsecs

> > Max Delta+: 0.27 arcsecs

> > Max Delta-: -0.30 arcsecs

> > Av. Noise: 0.04 arcsecs

> >

> > looking at the frequency spectra

> > for the old worm

> > the 76 second predicted (calculated) PE was 17.1

> > the primary worm PE was 8.8

> > there was also a 117 second error of 8.8

> > not sure what this last is

> > it's close to worm bearing ball spin which has a period of 109?

> >

> > for the new worm

> > the 76 second error is non existent

> > the 117 second error is non existent

> > however, the primary worm PE is 9.2

> >

> > so the good news is that my PE has been cut in half

> > and it has the same period as the worm

> > so it should be amenable to PEC, perhaps halving the PE

> >

> > but shouldn't the primary PE of the worm

> > be lower with a high precision worm?

> >

> > -bill w

> > astro.whwiii.net

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > >

> > > thanks for the replies

> > > i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

> > > (my emails didn't get thru)

> > > they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well

> > >

> > > will let you know how it goes

> > > of course it's raining now

> > >

> > > -bill w

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hi Bill,

> > > > I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on the

> > > > end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see if

> > > > it turns smoothly.

> > > > Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> > > > without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem, but

> > > > it could be something else.

> > > > My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> > > > Floyd

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > thanks for your reply floyd

> > > > > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > > > > and the block square on installation

> > > > > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> > > > >

> > > > > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > > > > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> > > > >

> > > > > -bill

> > > > >

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so that

> > > > > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> > > > > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

> > > having

> > > > > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > > > > Floyd

> > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > > > > updated spread sheet

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

> > > wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> > > > +/-3 arc

> > > > > > > > seconds!

> > > > > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> > > > difficult

> > > > > > > > to guide

> > > > > > > > :(

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > whwastro.

> > whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> > homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

> > > (arrived

> > > > > > > > like that).

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

> > > > > assembly

> > > > > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > thanks

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > -bill w

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>







----------------------------

#42580 Apr 22, 2009

Bill- first the bearing blocks have to be set square to avoid any side torque on the bearings which cause the dreaded "76 sec error". In my case the bearing blocks were square when placed flat against the mounting plate. If they arn't, simply slightly enlarge the bearing recess with a dremel so the bearing can move slightly and drill a tiny hole from the side. When squared off, a drop of red locktight wil keep it from wiggling further. To adjust the worm/worm wheel contact forget the spacers. Push the worm against the worm gear and lightly hand tighten the bolts to the bearing blocks keeping the worm tangent to the worm wheel (I scribed a reference line on the plate). To open the space up a little, just rotate the worm back and forth with you fingers until there is about 5 degrees of back and forth free rotation of the worm. Gently tighten the bolts and recheck this free rotation. If it opens up or tightens down readjust it- there is some feel to how tight the bolts should be to allow the bearing blocks to back off slightly but not slip when they are further tightened. Now - this will take a while- using your fingers turn the worm until the worm gear goes all the way around and mark the most play area of the worm gear to "map" it . Now readjust the worm/bearing blocks the same as above at the most play area of the worm gear (again with about 5 degrees of rotational play in rotating the worm.) (Of course it will be too tight everywhere else- it is instructive to hand turn the worm all the way around the worm gear again to see how rough the contact is in spots) ). Now apply 160 grit valve grinding coumpound ( from any car parts store) to the worm and worm gear and use a flexible shaft drill extension and chuck to attach a regular hand drill to the worm shaft. Now turn the worm at medium speed for 20 minutes or so- this will wear down the high spots on both gears(this is "lapping" ). To finish spend a while wiping all the oil and grit from all the teeth in both gears- you can't disassemble it because when you reassemble it the contact areas will shift slightly. Now try turning the worm by hand all the way around the worm gear again- the change is impressive! Regrease it ( I'm using white lithium grease but I don't think it matters). The result is the pictures on my DrG photo section. No I never got around to checking it before ( like I should have) But I am sure it is a hell of a lot lower now- +-1.25 arc sec. ( and that may be due to the Oldham coupler). One day I'll get around to doing a computer map with PhD guide....don't hold your breath though. This same technique should be used with the Ovision worms!-the roughness is in the worm gear! (By the way I have a Stainless worm)

-------------- Original message from "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...>: --------------









interesting,

i'll admit it, having no machining experience,

i've never heard of lapping

is this something that everyone knows about and does without difficulty

or do i risk messing up my new precision gear etc?



what was your PE before the lapping?



-bill w

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, drgenovese@... wrote:

>

> Try this-stainless worm, gears lapped. The backlash in the gears is only about 2arc minutes. Havn't done the Pem pro thing but the PE measured from the film (the old way...) on this 60 min trail shows +-1.25 arc sec! (No PEC). this shot is prime focus with a C8 (2000mmfl).

> -------------- Original message from "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...>: --------------

>

>

>

>

> how on earth did you get values that low?!

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@> wrote:

> >

> > Bill,

> >

> >

> >

> > Your original worm will have been run in from your use of the mount, these

> > aren't bad worms just a good worm in a bad block.

> >

> > Your new worm will only get better as it is run in.

> >

> > My mount with original block and worm gives these results

> >

> >

> >

> > Peak PE+: 2.8 arcsecs

> > Peak PE-: -3.8 arcsecs

> > RMS PE: .877 arcsecs

> >

> > Worm Period PE: 1.45

> > 76 second PE was .55

> >

> >

> >

> > Roy

> >

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

> > On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> > Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:57 AM

> > To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > just thought i'd give some follow up on my ovision worm

> > the first worm seemed to have a problem with the bearings

> > there was a very rough feeling when i rotated the worm by hand

> > (when not installed)

> > attempts to change the brass adjuster did not improve it

> >

> > i was sent a new worm with a new design from ovision

> > it turns smoothly

> > i installed it this weekend

> > and my PE is much improved by virtue of elimination of the 76 second error

> > which was very large.

> >

> > i analyzed my PE runs with PEC pro

> > and found some interesting results:

> > stock worm

> > Peak PE+: 18.32 arcsecs

> > Peak PE-: -18.36 arcsecs

> > RMS PE: 7.48 arcsecs

> > Av. PE+: 6.35 arcsecs

> > Av. PE-: -6.15 arcsecs

> > Max Delta+: 1.51 arcsecs

> > Max Delta-: -1.40 arcsecs

> > Av. Noise: 0.13 arcsecs

> >

> > ovision worm

> > Peak PE+: 8.49 arcsecs

> > Peak PE-: -8.20 arcsecs

> > RMS PE: 3.79 arcsecs

> > Av. PE+: 3.31 arcsecs

> > Av. PE-: -3.06 arcsecs

> > Max Delta+: 0.27 arcsecs

> > Max Delta-: -0.30 arcsecs

> > Av. Noise: 0.04 arcsecs

> >

> > looking at the frequency spectra

> > for the old worm

> > the 76 second predicted (calculated) PE was 17.1

> > the primary worm PE was 8.8

> > there was also a 117 second error of 8.8

> > not sure what this last is

> > it's close to worm bearing ball spin which has a period of 109?

> >

> > for the new worm

> > the 76 second error is non existent

> > the 117 second error is non existent

> > however, the primary worm PE is 9.2

> >

> > so the good news is that my PE has been cut in half

> > and it has the same period as the worm

> > so it should be amenable to PEC, perhaps halving the PE

> >

> > but shouldn't the primary PE of the worm

> > be lower with a high precision worm?

> >

> > -bill w

> > astro.whwiii.net

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > >

> > > thanks for the replies

> > > i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

> > > (my emails didn't get thru)

> > > they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well

> > >

> > > will let you know how it goes

> > > of course it's raining now

> > >

> > > -bill w

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hi Bill,

> > > > I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on the

> > > > end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see if

> > > > it turns smoothly.

> > > > Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> > > > without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem, but

> > > > it could be something else.

> > > > My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> > > > Floyd

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > thanks for your reply floyd

> > > > > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > > > > and the block square on installation

> > > > > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> > > > >

> > > > > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > > > > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> > > > >

> > > > > -bill

> > > > >

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so that

> > > > > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> > > > > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

> > > having

> > > > > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > > > > Floyd

> > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > > > > updated spread sheet

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

> > > wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> > > > +/-3 arc

> > > > > > > > seconds!

> > > > > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> > > > difficult

> > > > > > > > to guide

> > > > > > > > :(

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > whwastro.

> > whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> > homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

> > > (arrived

> > > > > > > > like that).

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

> > > > > assembly

> > > > > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > thanks

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > -bill w

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#42587 Apr 22, 2009

sheesh your PE out of the box was almost 1/3 of mine

i'm curious to see what the PEMPro data looks like

if you don't mind sending it



thanks

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Bill,

>

>

>

> Measured fixed worm block end distance to stop and adjusted right hand

> (adjustable) block end to exact same. Used feeler gauges jammed in gap both

> sides.

>

> These measurements were only at 1.98 arc/pixel plate scale 770mm FL. In

> looking over the run I see the star used was saturated, this may be why the

> results are so low. Last year (maybe longer) with a C8 F6.3 .98 arc/pixel

> plate scale and the mount was very (before worm block adjustment) new the

> results were +5.8 /-7.8. I can send you the PEMPro data file if you like.

> The mount guides without problems at my current FL with 20min exposures as

> the norm. I just came up on the AP list for a MACH1 have to make a decision

> in the next few days if I still want to go that route.

>

>

>

> Roy

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

> On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:02 PM

> To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> how on earth did you get values that low?!

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@> wrote:

> >

> > Bill,

> >

> >

> >

> > Your original worm will have been run in from your use of the mount, these

> > aren't bad worms just a good worm in a bad block.

> >

> > Your new worm will only get better as it is run in.

> >

> > My mount with original block and worm gives these results

> >

> >

> >

> > Peak PE+: 2.8 arcsecs

> > Peak PE-: -3.8 arcsecs

> > RMS PE: .877 arcsecs

> >

> > Worm Period PE: 1.45

> > 76 second PE was .55

> >

> >

> >

> > Roy

> >

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com]

> > On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> > Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:57 AM

> > To: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com

> > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > just thought i'd give some follow up on my ovision worm

> > the first worm seemed to have a problem with the bearings

> > there was a very rough feeling when i rotated the worm by hand

> > (when not installed)

> > attempts to change the brass adjuster did not improve it

> >

> > i was sent a new worm with a new design from ovision

> > it turns smoothly

> > i installed it this weekend

> > and my PE is much improved by virtue of elimination of the 76 second error

> > which was very large.

> >

> > i analyzed my PE runs with PEC pro

> > and found some interesting results:

> > stock worm

> > Peak PE+: 18.32 arcsecs

> > Peak PE-: -18.36 arcsecs

> > RMS PE: 7.48 arcsecs

> > Av. PE+: 6.35 arcsecs

> > Av. PE-: -6.15 arcsecs

> > Max Delta+: 1.51 arcsecs

> > Max Delta-: -1.40 arcsecs

> > Av. Noise: 0.13 arcsecs

> >

> > ovision worm

> > Peak PE+: 8.49 arcsecs

> > Peak PE-: -8.20 arcsecs

> > RMS PE: 3.79 arcsecs

> > Av. PE+: 3.31 arcsecs

> > Av. PE-: -3.06 arcsecs

> > Max Delta+: 0.27 arcsecs

> > Max Delta-: -0.30 arcsecs

> > Av. Noise: 0.04 arcsecs

> >

> > looking at the frequency spectra

> > for the old worm

> > the 76 second predicted (calculated) PE was 17.1

> > the primary worm PE was 8.8

> > there was also a 117 second error of 8.8

> > not sure what this last is

> > it's close to worm bearing ball spin which has a period of 109?

> >

> > for the new worm

> > the 76 second error is non existent

> > the 117 second error is non existent

> > however, the primary worm PE is 9.2

> >

> > so the good news is that my PE has been cut in half

> > and it has the same period as the worm

> > so it should be amenable to PEC, perhaps halving the PE

> >

> > but shouldn't the primary PE of the worm

> > be lower with a high precision worm?

> >

> > -bill w

> > astro.whwiii.net

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > >

> > > thanks for the replies

> > > i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

> > > (my emails didn't get thru)

> > > they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well

> > >

> > > will let you know how it goes

> > > of course it's raining now

> > >

> > > -bill w

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hi Bill,

> > > > I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on the

> > > > end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see if

> > > > it turns smoothly.

> > > > Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> > > > without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem, but

> > > > it could be something else.

> > > > My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> > > > Floyd

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > thanks for your reply floyd

> > > > > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > > > > and the block square on installation

> > > > > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> > > > >

> > > > > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > > > > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> > > > >

> > > > > -bill

> > > > >

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so

> that

> > > > > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> > > > > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

> > > having

> > > > > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > > > > Floyd

> > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > > > > updated spread sheet

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

> > > wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> > > > +/-3 arc

> > > > > > > > seconds!

> > > > > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> > > > difficult

> > > > > > > > to guide

> > > > > > > > :(

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > whwastro.

> > whwastro.

> whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> > homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

> > > (arrived

> > > > > > > > like that).

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

> > > > > assembly

> > > > > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > thanks

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > -bill w

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>







----------------------------

#42588 Apr 22, 2009

Place the PEMPro txt file in this groups file section in a folder called

Cummings.







Roy











-----Original Message-----

From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 12:34 AM

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

















sheesh your PE out of the box was almost 1/3 of mine

i'm curious to see what the PEMPro data looks like

if you don't mind sending it



thanks



--- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@...> wrote: >

> Hi Bill,

>

>

>

> Measured fixed worm block end distance to stop and adjusted right hand

> (adjustable) block end to exact same. Used feeler gauges jammed in gap

both > sides.

>

> These measurements were only at 1.98 arc/pixel plate scale 770mm FL. In

> looking over the run I see the star used was saturated, this may be why

the > results are so low. Last year (maybe longer) with a C8 F6.3 .98 arc/pixel

> plate scale and the mount was very (before worm block adjustment) new the

> results were +5.8 /-7.8. I can send you the PEMPro data file if you like.

> The mount guides without problems at my current FL with 20min exposures as

> the norm. I just came up on the AP list for a MACH1 have to make a

decision > in the next few days if I still want to go that route.

>

>

>

> Roy

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@

mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com] > On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:02 PM

> To: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

yahoogroups.com > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> how on earth did you get values that low?!

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@> wrote:

> >

> > Bill,

> >

> >

> >

> > Your original worm will have been run in from your use of the mount,

these > > aren't bad worms just a good worm in a bad block.

> >

> > Your new worm will only get better as it is run in.

> >

> > My mount with original block and worm gives these results

> >

> >

> >

> > Peak PE+: 2.8 arcsecs

> > Peak PE-: -3.8 arcsecs

> > RMS PE: .877 arcsecs

> >

> > Worm Period PE: 1.45

> > 76 second PE was .55

> >

> >

> >

> > Roy

> >

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com]

> > On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> > Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:57 AM

> > To: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com

> > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > just thought i'd give some follow up on my ovision worm

> > the first worm seemed to have a problem with the bearings

> > there was a very rough feeling when i rotated the worm by hand

> > (when not installed)

> > attempts to change the brass adjuster did not improve it

> >

> > i was sent a new worm with a new design from ovision

> > it turns smoothly

> > i installed it this weekend

> > and my PE is much improved by virtue of elimination of the 76 second

error > > which was very large.

> >

> > i analyzed my PE runs with PEC pro

> > and found some interesting results:

> > stock worm

> > Peak PE+: 18.32 arcsecs

> > Peak PE-: -18.36 arcsecs

> > RMS PE: 7.48 arcsecs

> > Av. PE+: 6.35 arcsecs

> > Av. PE-: -6.15 arcsecs

> > Max Delta+: 1.51 arcsecs

> > Max Delta-: -1.40 arcsecs

> > Av. Noise: 0.13 arcsecs

> >

> > ovision worm

> > Peak PE+: 8.49 arcsecs

> > Peak PE-: -8.20 arcsecs

> > RMS PE: 3.79 arcsecs

> > Av. PE+: 3.31 arcsecs

> > Av. PE-: -3.06 arcsecs

> > Max Delta+: 0.27 arcsecs

> > Max Delta-: -0.30 arcsecs

> > Av. Noise: 0.04 arcsecs

> >

> > looking at the frequency spectra

> > for the old worm

> > the 76 second predicted (calculated) PE was 17.1

> > the primary worm PE was 8.8

> > there was also a 117 second error of 8.8

> > not sure what this last is

> > it's close to worm bearing ball spin which has a period of 109?

> >

> > for the new worm

> > the 76 second error is non existent

> > the 117 second error is non existent

> > however, the primary worm PE is 9.2

> >

> > so the good news is that my PE has been cut in half

> > and it has the same period as the worm

> > so it should be amenable to PEC, perhaps halving the PE

> >

> > but shouldn't the primary PE of the worm

> > be lower with a high precision worm?

> >

> > -bill w

> > astro.whwiii.net

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > >

> > > thanks for the replies

> > > i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

> > > (my emails didn't get thru)

> > > they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well

> > >

> > > will let you know how it goes

> > > of course it's raining now

> > >

> > > -bill w

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hi Bill,

> > > > I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on

the > > > > end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see

if > > > > it turns smoothly.

> > > > Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> > > > without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem,

but > > > > it could be something else.

> > > > My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> > > > Floyd

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > thanks for your reply floyd

> > > > > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > > > > and the block square on installation

> > > > > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> > > > >

> > > > > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > > > > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> > > > >

> > > > > -bill

> > > > >

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so

> that

> > > > > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with

the > > > > > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

> > > having

> > > > > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > > > > Floyd

> > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > > > > updated spread sheet

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@

mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

> > > wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> > > > +/-3 arc

> > > > > > > > seconds!

> > > > > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> > > > difficult

> > > > > > > > to guide

> > > > > > > > :(

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > whwastro.

> > whwastro.

> whwastro.

whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls> > homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> > homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

> > > (arrived

> > > > > > > > like that).

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the

worm > > > > > assembly

> > > > > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > thanks

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > -bill w

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#42596 Apr 23, 2009

thanks for the write up!



-bill w

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, drgenovese@... wrote:

>

> Bill- first the bearing blocks have to be set square to avoid any side torque on the bearings which cause the dreaded "76 sec error". In my case the bearing blocks were square when placed flat against the mounting plate. If they arn't, simply slightly enlarge the bearing recess with a dremel so the bearing can move slightly and drill a tiny hole from the side. When squared off, a drop of red locktight wil keep it from wiggling further. To adjust the worm/worm wheel contact forget the spacers. Push the worm against the worm gear and lightly hand tighten the bolts to the bearing blocks keeping the worm tangent to the worm wheel (I scribed a reference line on the plate). To open the space up a little, just rotate the worm back and forth with you fingers until there is about 5 degrees of back and forth free rotation of the worm. Gently tighten the bolts and recheck this free rotation. If it opens up or tightens down readjust it- there is some feel to how tight the bolts should be to allow the bearing blocks to back off slightly but not slip when they are further tightened. Now - this will take a while- using your fingers turn the worm until the worm gear goes all the way around and mark the most play area of the worm gear to "map" it . Now readjust the worm/bearing blocks the same as above at the most play area of the worm gear (again with about 5 degrees of rotational play in rotating the worm.) (Of course it will be too tight everywhere else- it is instructive to hand turn the worm all the way around the worm gear again to see how rough the contact is in spots) ). Now apply 160 grit valve grinding coumpound ( from any car parts store) to the worm and worm gear and use a flexible shaft drill extension and chuck to attach a regular hand drill to the worm shaft. Now turn the worm at medium speed for 20 minutes or so- this will wear down the high spots on both gears(this is "lapping" ). To finish spend a while wiping all the oil and grit from all the teeth in both gears- you can't disassemble it because when you reassemble it the contact areas will shift slightly. Now try turning the worm by hand all the way around the worm gear again- the change is impressive! Regrease it ( I'm using white lithium grease but I don't think it matters). The result is the pictures on my DrG photo section. No I never got around to checking it before ( like I should have) But I am sure it is a hell of a lot lower now- +-1.25 arc sec. ( and that may be due to the Oldham coupler). One day I'll get around to doing a computer map with PhD guide....don't hold your breath though. This same technique should be used with the Ovision worms!-the roughness is in the worm gear! (By the way I have a Stainless worm)

> -------------- Original message from "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...>: --------------

>



----------------------------

#42600 Apr 24, 2009

Lapping is a way of getting your gears to "run-in" faster.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapping



In any machine, the surfaces, on a micron scale are rough. The highest peaks get worn off, but the process of running in can take many hours (in many cars you find the engine friction is of the order of 10-15% higher when the engine is new compared to what it is after 10,000 miles).



Once the surfaces are fully "run-in" the machine should be smoother than when it is new.

"Running-in" is however a natural process, and I personally would be somewhat reluctant to put an abrasive into the gears on my G11. You would also need to worry about the compatibility with the worm gear (this is usually bronze).



In other words, I don't believe it is necessary, provided you use your mount regularly, it should run-in naturally.



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...> wrote:

>

> interesting,

> i'll admit it, having no machining experience,

> i've never heard of lapping

> is this something that everyone knows about and does without difficulty

> or do i risk messing up my new precision gear etc?

>

> what was your PE before the lapping?

>

> -bill w

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, drgenovese@ wrote:

> >

> > Try this-stainless worm, gears lapped. The backlash in the gears is only about 2arc minutes. Havn't done the Pem pro thing but the PE measured from the film (the old way...) on this 60 min trail shows +-1.25 arc sec! (No PEC). this shot is prime focus with a C8 (2000mmfl).

> > -------------- Original message from "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>: --------------

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > how on earth did you get values that low?!

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Bill,

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Your original worm will have been run in from your use of the mount, these

> > > aren't bad worms just a good worm in a bad block.

> > >

> > > Your new worm will only get better as it is run in.

> > >

> > > My mount with original block and worm gives these results

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Peak PE+: 2.8 arcsecs

> > > Peak PE-: -3.8 arcsecs

> > > RMS PE: .877 arcsecs

> > >

> > > Worm Period PE: 1.45

> > > 76 second PE was .55

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Roy

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > -----Original Message-----

> > > From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

> > > On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:57 AM

> > > To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > just thought i'd give some follow up on my ovision worm

> > > the first worm seemed to have a problem with the bearings

> > > there was a very rough feeling when i rotated the worm by hand

> > > (when not installed)

> > > attempts to change the brass adjuster did not improve it

> > >

> > > i was sent a new worm with a new design from ovision

> > > it turns smoothly

> > > i installed it this weekend

> > > and my PE is much improved by virtue of elimination of the 76 second error

> > > which was very large.

> > >

> > > i analyzed my PE runs with PEC pro

> > > and found some interesting results:

> > > stock worm

> > > Peak PE+: 18.32 arcsecs

> > > Peak PE-: -18.36 arcsecs

> > > RMS PE: 7.48 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE+: 6.35 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE-: -6.15 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta+: 1.51 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta-: -1.40 arcsecs

> > > Av. Noise: 0.13 arcsecs

> > >

> > > ovision worm

> > > Peak PE+: 8.49 arcsecs

> > > Peak PE-: -8.20 arcsecs

> > > RMS PE: 3.79 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE+: 3.31 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE-: -3.06 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta+: 0.27 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta-: -0.30 arcsecs

> > > Av. Noise: 0.04 arcsecs

> > >

> > > looking at the frequency spectra

> > > for the old worm

> > > the 76 second predicted (calculated) PE was 17.1

> > > the primary worm PE was 8.8

> > > there was also a 117 second error of 8.8

> > > not sure what this last is

> > > it's close to worm bearing ball spin which has a period of 109?

> > >

> > > for the new worm

> > > the 76 second error is non existent

> > > the 117 second error is non existent

> > > however, the primary worm PE is 9.2

> > >

> > > so the good news is that my PE has been cut in half

> > > and it has the same period as the worm

> > > so it should be amenable to PEC, perhaps halving the PE

> > >

> > > but shouldn't the primary PE of the worm

> > > be lower with a high precision worm?

> > >

> > > -bill w

> > > astro.whwiii.net

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > thanks for the replies

> > > > i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

> > > > (my emails didn't get thru)

> > > > they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well

> > > >

> > > > will let you know how it goes

> > > > of course it's raining now

> > > >

> > > > -bill w

> > > >

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Hi Bill,

> > > > > I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on the

> > > > > end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see if

> > > > > it turns smoothly.

> > > > > Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> > > > > without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem, but

> > > > > it could be something else.

> > > > > My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> > > > > Floyd

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > thanks for your reply floyd

> > > > > > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > > > > > and the block square on installation

> > > > > > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> > > > > >

> > > > > > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > > > > > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> > > > > >

> > > > > > -bill

> > > > > >

> > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so that

> > > > > > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> > > > > > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

> > > > having

> > > > > > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > > > > > Floyd

> > > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > > > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > > > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > > > > > updated spread sheet

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> > > > > +/-3 arc

> > > > > > > > > seconds!

> > > > > > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> > > > > difficult

> > > > > > > > > to guide

> > > > > > > > > :(

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > whwastro.

> > > whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> > > homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

> > > > (arrived

> > > > > > > > > like that).

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

> > > > > > assembly

> > > > > > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > thanks

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > -bill w

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>







----------------------------

#42604 Apr 24, 2009

I disagree-auto motors are broken in after several thousand miles at several thousand RPM. At the speed of our motors it will take YEARS. Additionally it requires some pressure, and the motors do not have enough torque to turn through tight ares and they will stall and possibly burn out. My backlash is only about 11/2 arc minutes and if you try adjusting the gears this close without a run in you will burn out the motors.

-------------- Original message from "Ian Taylor" iantaylor2uk@...>: --------------









Lapping is a way of getting your gears to "run-in" faster.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapping



In any machine, the surfaces, on a micron scale are rough. The highest peaks get worn off, but the process of running in can take many hours (in many cars you find the engine friction is of the order of 10-15% higher when the engine is new compared to what it is after 10,000 miles).



Once the surfaces are fully "run-in" the machine should be smoother than when it is new.

"Running-in" is however a natural process, and I personally would be somewhat reluctant to put an abrasive into the gears on my G11. You would also need to worry about the compatibility with the worm gear (this is usually bronze).



In other words, I don't believe it is necessary, provided you use your mount regularly, it should run-in naturally.

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...> wrote:

>

> interesting,

> i'll admit it, having no machining experience,

> i've never heard of lapping

> is this something that everyone knows about and does without difficulty

> or do i risk messing up my new precision gear etc?

>

> what was your PE before the lapping?

>

> -bill w

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, drgenovese@ wrote:

> >

> > Try this-stainless worm, gears lapped. The backlash in the gears is only about 2arc minutes. Havn't done the Pem pro thing but the PE measured from the film (the old way...) on this 60 min trail shows +-1.25 arc sec! (No PEC). this shot is prime focus with a C8 (2000mmfl).

> > -------------- Original message from "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>: --------------

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > how on earth did you get values that low?!

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Bill,

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Your original worm will have been run in from your use of the mount, these

> > > aren't bad worms just a good worm in a bad block.

> > >

> > > Your new worm will only get better as it is run in.

> > >

> > > My mount with original block and worm gives these results

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Peak PE+: 2.8 arcsecs

> > > Peak PE-: -3.8 arcsecs

> > > RMS PE: .877 arcsecs

> > >

> > > Worm Period PE: 1.45

> > > 76 second PE was .55

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Roy

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > -----Original Message-----

> > > From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

> > > On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:57 AM

> > > To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > just thought i'd give some follow up on my ovision worm

> > > the first worm seemed to have a problem with the bearings

> > > there was a very rough feeling when i rotated the worm by hand

> > > (when not installed)

> > > attempts to change the brass adjuster did not improve it

> > >

> > > i was sent a new worm with a new design from ovision

> > > it turns smoothly

> > > i installed it this weekend

> > > and my PE is much improved by virtue of elimination of the 76 second error

> > > which was very large.

> > >

> > > i analyzed my PE runs with PEC pro

> > > and found some interesting results:

> > > stock worm

> > > Peak PE+: 18.32 arcsecs

> > > Peak PE-: -18.36 arcsecs

> > > RMS PE: 7.48 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE+: 6.35 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE-: -6.15 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta+: 1.51 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta-: -1.40 arcsecs

> > > Av. Noise: 0.13 arcsecs

> > >

> > > ovision worm

> > > Peak PE+: 8.49 arcsecs

> > > Peak PE-: -8.20 arcsecs

> > > RMS PE: 3.79 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE+: 3.31 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE-: -3.06 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta+: 0.27 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta-: -0.30 arcsecs

> > > Av. Noise: 0.04 arcsecs

> > >

> > > looking at the frequency spectra

> > > for the old worm

> > > the 76 second predicted (calculated) PE was 17.1

> > > the primary worm PE was 8.8

> > > there was also a 117 second error of 8.8

> > > not sure what this last is

> > > it's close to worm bearing ball spin which has a period of 109?

> > >

> > > for the new worm

> > > the 76 second error is non existent

> > > the 117 second error is non existent

> > > however, the primary worm PE is 9.2

> > >

> > > so the good news is that my PE has been cut in half

> > > and it has the same period as the worm

> > > so it should be amenable to PEC, perhaps halving the PE

> > >

> > > but shouldn't the primary PE of the worm

> > > be lower with a high precision worm?

> > >

> > > -bill w

> > > astro.whwiii.net

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > thanks for the replies

> > > > i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

> > > > (my emails didn't get thru)

> > > > they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well

> > > >

> > > > will let you know how it goes

> > > > of course it's raining now

> > > >

> > > > -bill w

> > > >

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Hi Bill,

> > > > > I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on the

> > > > > end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see if

> > > > > it turns smoothly.

> > > > > Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> > > > > without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem, but

> > > > > it could be something else.

> > > > > My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> > > > > Floyd

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > thanks for your reply floyd

> > > > > > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > > > > > and the block square on installation

> > > > > > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> > > > > >

> > > > > > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > > > > > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> > > > > >

> > > > > > -bill

> > > > > >

> > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so that

> > > > > > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with the

> > > > > > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

> > > > having

> > > > > > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > > > > > Floyd

> > > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > > > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > > > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > > > > > updated spread sheet

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> > > > > +/-3 arc

> > > > > > > > > seconds!

> > > > > > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> > > > > difficult

> > > > > > > > > to guide

> > > > > > > > > :(

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > whwastro.

> > > whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> > > homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

> > > > (arrived

> > > > > > > > > like that).

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the worm

> > > > > > assembly

> > > > > > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > thanks

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > -bill w

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#42605 Apr 24, 2009

Ian Taylor wrote: > In other words, I don't believe it is necessary, provided you use your mount regularly, it should run-in naturally.

>

It makes a difference that over a year an automobile engine would make

several million revolutions while over a year the polar axis of a

telescope would make a couple of hundred revolutions.



Bud



----------------------------

#42608 Apr 25, 2009

The fact that it is such a low speed will help running in. The lubricant film thickness between the gears will be very small at the low speeds encountered in the Losmandy gears. Most wear that occurs in a car occurs at starting and stopping - so although the car may experience millions of revs/year, it is only the first few revs at starting and stopping that will be important - most people only probably start their car around 4000 times per year.



Running in of the gears will also be helped if you load up the mount. If you don't have much weight on, then I agree it could take quite a while to run in.

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, William Hamblen wrhamblen@...> wrote:

>

> Ian Taylor wrote:

> > In other words, I don't believe it is necessary, provided you use your mount regularly, it should run-in naturally.

> >

> It makes a difference that over a year an automobile engine would make

> several million revolutions while over a year the polar axis of a

> telescope would make a couple of hundred revolutions.

>

> Bud

>



----------------------------

#42651 Apr 28, 2009

thanks for posting it roy

astounding that you got that PE out of the box, while i was +/- 18



well with the ovision worm and a heavier counter weight

i was able to tweak it down to a PE of +/- 6 with an RMS of 3



i guess it's time for PEC training

do you use that at all?



-bill



ps good luck with the mach1!

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@...> wrote:

>

> Place the PEMPro txt file in this groups file section in a folder called

> Cummings.

>

>

>

> Roy

>

>

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

> On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 12:34 AM

> To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> sheesh your PE out of the box was almost 1/3 of mine

> i'm curious to see what the PEMPro data looks like

> if you don't mind sending it

>

> thanks

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Bill,

> >

> >

> >

> > Measured fixed worm block end distance to stop and adjusted right hand

> > (adjustable) block end to exact same. Used feeler gauges jammed in gap

> both

> > sides.

> >

> > These measurements were only at 1.98 arc/pixel plate scale 770mm FL. In

> > looking over the run I see the star used was saturated, this may be why

> the

> > results are so low. Last year (maybe longer) with a C8 F6.3 .98 arc/pixel

> > plate scale and the mount was very (before worm block adjustment) new the

> > results were +5.8 /-7.8. I can send you the PEMPro data file if you like.

> > The mount guides without problems at my current FL with 20min exposures as

> > the norm. I just came up on the AP list for a MACH1 have to make a

> decision

> > in the next few days if I still want to go that route.

> >

> >

> >

> > Roy

> >

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com]

> > On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> > Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:02 PM

> > To: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> yahoogroups.com

> > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > how on earth did you get values that low?!

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Bill,

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Your original worm will have been run in from your use of the mount,

> these

> > > aren't bad worms just a good worm in a bad block.

> > >

> > > Your new worm will only get better as it is run in.

> > >

> > > My mount with original block and worm gives these results

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Peak PE+: 2.8 arcsecs

> > > Peak PE-: -3.8 arcsecs

> > > RMS PE: .877 arcsecs

> > >

> > > Worm Period PE: 1.45

> > > 76 second PE was .55

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Roy

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > -----Original Message-----

> > > From: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@

> > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com]

> > > On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:57 AM

> > > To: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com

> > > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > just thought i'd give some follow up on my ovision worm

> > > the first worm seemed to have a problem with the bearings

> > > there was a very rough feeling when i rotated the worm by hand

> > > (when not installed)

> > > attempts to change the brass adjuster did not improve it

> > >

> > > i was sent a new worm with a new design from ovision

> > > it turns smoothly

> > > i installed it this weekend

> > > and my PE is much improved by virtue of elimination of the 76 second

> error

> > > which was very large.

> > >

> > > i analyzed my PE runs with PEC pro

> > > and found some interesting results:

> > > stock worm

> > > Peak PE+: 18.32 arcsecs

> > > Peak PE-: -18.36 arcsecs

> > > RMS PE: 7.48 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE+: 6.35 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE-: -6.15 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta+: 1.51 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta-: -1.40 arcsecs

> > > Av. Noise: 0.13 arcsecs

> > >

> > > ovision worm

> > > Peak PE+: 8.49 arcsecs

> > > Peak PE-: -8.20 arcsecs

> > > RMS PE: 3.79 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE+: 3.31 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE-: -3.06 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta+: 0.27 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta-: -0.30 arcsecs

> > > Av. Noise: 0.04 arcsecs

> > >

> > > looking at the frequency spectra

> > > for the old worm

> > > the 76 second predicted (calculated) PE was 17.1

> > > the primary worm PE was 8.8

> > > there was also a 117 second error of 8.8

> > > not sure what this last is

> > > it's close to worm bearing ball spin which has a period of 109?

> > >

> > > for the new worm

> > > the 76 second error is non existent

> > > the 117 second error is non existent

> > > however, the primary worm PE is 9.2

> > >

> > > so the good news is that my PE has been cut in half

> > > and it has the same period as the worm

> > > so it should be amenable to PEC, perhaps halving the PE

> > >

> > > but shouldn't the primary PE of the worm

> > > be lower with a high precision worm?

> > >

> > > -bill w

> > > astro.whwiii.net

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > thanks for the replies

> > > > i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

> > > > (my emails didn't get thru)

> > > > they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well

> > > >

> > > > will let you know how it goes

> > > > of course it's raining now

> > > >

> > > > -bill w

> > > >

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Hi Bill,

> > > > > I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on

> the

> > > > > end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see

> if

> > > > > it turns smoothly.

> > > > > Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> > > > > without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem,

> but

> > > > > it could be something else.

> > > > > My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> > > > > Floyd

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > thanks for your reply floyd

> > > > > > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > > > > > and the block square on installation

> > > > > > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> > > > > >

> > > > > > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > > > > > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> > > > > >

> > > > > > -bill

> > > > > >

> > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so

> > that

> > > > > > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with

> the

> > > > > > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

> > > > having

> > > > > > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > > > > > Floyd

> > > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > > > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > > > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > > > > > updated spread sheet

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> > > > > +/-3 arc

> > > > > > > > > seconds!

> > > > > > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> > > > > difficult

> > > > > > > > > to guide

> > > > > > > > > :(

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > whwastro.

> > > whwastro.

> > whwastro.

> whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> > homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> > > homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

> > > > (arrived

> > > > > > > > > like that).

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the

> worm

> > > > > > assembly

> > > > > > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > thanks

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > -bill w

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>







----------------------------

#42652 Apr 29, 2009

Bill,



I didn't mean to miss-lead you. My out of the box PE was something like +5.8 -7.8 PP=13.6 and that trained down to a PP of less than 5.

At that time I was imaging @ F6.3 with a C8 1280mm FL ST2000XM with 7.4um pixels .95arcsec/pixel. Since that time I adjusted the alignment of the worm to worm-wheel trying to get the pair as perpendicular as I could with feeler gauges. The imaging package has changed and is heaver now. Imaging equipment now is FLT110wTMBFF-VanSlyke 3in focuser ST4000XCM/AO8 side-by-side with TV76wRF2008-Moonlight 2" focuser ST2000XM/CFW8a. I always keep the package loaded east about 2-5lbs. This is not your seldom-used mount either; it is in my observatory and is running 6 to 8 hours almost every clear night. This G11 is nicely adjusted and well run-in.

Had to pass on the MACH1 hard to justify that in these times, given the performance of my G11.



Roy



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@...> wrote:

>

> thanks for posting it roy

> astounding that you got that PE out of the box, while i was +/- 18

>

> well with the ovision worm and a heavier counter weight

> i was able to tweak it down to a PE of +/- 6 with an RMS of 3

>

> i guess it's time for PEC training

> do you use that at all?

>

> -bill

>

> ps good luck with the mach1!

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@> wrote:

> >

> > Place the PEMPro txt file in this groups file section in a folder called

> > Cummings.

> >

> >

> >

> > Roy

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

> > On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> > Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 12:34 AM

> > To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > sheesh your PE out of the box was almost 1/3 of mine

> > i'm curious to see what the PEMPro data looks like

> > if you don't mind sending it

> >

> > thanks

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi Bill,

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Measured fixed worm block end distance to stop and adjusted right hand

> > > (adjustable) block end to exact same. Used feeler gauges jammed in gap

> > both

> > > sides.

> > >

> > > These measurements were only at 1.98 arc/pixel plate scale 770mm FL. In

> > > looking over the run I see the star used was saturated, this may be why

> > the

> > > results are so low. Last year (maybe longer) with a C8 F6.3 .98 arc/pixel

> > > plate scale and the mount was very (before worm block adjustment) new the

> > > results were +5.8 /-7.8. I can send you the PEMPro data file if you like.

> > > The mount guides without problems at my current FL with 20min exposures as

> > > the norm. I just came up on the AP list for a MACH1 have to make a

> > decision

> > > in the next few days if I still want to go that route.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Roy

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > -----Original Message-----

> > > From: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@

> > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com]

> > > On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:02 PM

> > > To: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > yahoogroups.com

> > > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > how on earth did you get values that low?!

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com, "Roy Cummings" tr_cummings@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Bill,

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Your original worm will have been run in from your use of the mount,

> > these

> > > > aren't bad worms just a good worm in a bad block.

> > > >

> > > > Your new worm will only get better as it is run in.

> > > >

> > > > My mount with original block and worm gives these results

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Peak PE+: 2.8 arcsecs

> > > > Peak PE-: -3.8 arcsecs

> > > > RMS PE: .877 arcsecs

> > > >

> > > > Worm Period PE: 1.45

> > > > 76 second PE was .55

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Roy

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > -----Original Message-----

> > > > From: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@

> > > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com]

> > > > On Behalf Of fndnmonyhoo

> > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:57 AM

> > > > To: Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > yahoogroups.com

> > > > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: ovision worm help-follow up

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > just thought i'd give some follow up on my ovision worm

> > > > the first worm seemed to have a problem with the bearings

> > > > there was a very rough feeling when i rotated the worm by hand

> > > > (when not installed)

> > > > attempts to change the brass adjuster did not improve it

> > > >

> > > > i was sent a new worm with a new design from ovision

> > > > it turns smoothly

> > > > i installed it this weekend

> > > > and my PE is much improved by virtue of elimination of the 76 second

> > error

> > > > which was very large.

> > > >

> > > > i analyzed my PE runs with PEC pro

> > > > and found some interesting results:

> > > > stock worm

> > > > Peak PE+: 18.32 arcsecs

> > > > Peak PE-: -18.36 arcsecs

> > > > RMS PE: 7.48 arcsecs

> > > > Av. PE+: 6.35 arcsecs

> > > > Av. PE-: -6.15 arcsecs

> > > > Max Delta+: 1.51 arcsecs

> > > > Max Delta-: -1.40 arcsecs

> > > > Av. Noise: 0.13 arcsecs

> > > >

> > > > ovision worm

> > > > Peak PE+: 8.49 arcsecs

> > > > Peak PE-: -8.20 arcsecs

> > > > RMS PE: 3.79 arcsecs

> > > > Av. PE+: 3.31 arcsecs

> > > > Av. PE-: -3.06 arcsecs

> > > > Max Delta+: 0.27 arcsecs

> > > > Max Delta-: -0.30 arcsecs

> > > > Av. Noise: 0.04 arcsecs

> > > >

> > > > looking at the frequency spectra

> > > > for the old worm

> > > > the 76 second predicted (calculated) PE was 17.1

> > > > the primary worm PE was 8.8

> > > > there was also a 117 second error of 8.8

> > > > not sure what this last is

> > > > it's close to worm bearing ball spin which has a period of 109?

> > > >

> > > > for the new worm

> > > > the 76 second error is non existent

> > > > the 117 second error is non existent

> > > > however, the primary worm PE is 9.2

> > > >

> > > > so the good news is that my PE has been cut in half

> > > > and it has the same period as the worm

> > > > so it should be amenable to PEC, perhaps halving the PE

> > > >

> > > > but shouldn't the primary PE of the worm

> > > > be lower with a high precision worm?

> > > >

> > > > -bill w

> > > > astro.whwiii.net

> > > >

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > thanks for the replies

> > > > > i was able to reach ovision by telephone this AM

> > > > > (my emails didn't get thru)

> > > > > they suggested loosening the brass screw at one end slightly as well

> > > > >

> > > > > will let you know how it goes

> > > > > of course it's raining now

> > > > >

> > > > > -bill w

> > > > >

> > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Hi Bill,

> > > > > > I would think the preload is too tight. Mark the brass adjuster on

> > the

> > > > > > end then loosen it slightly and check for no lateral play. Then see

> > if

> > > > > > it turns smoothly.

> > > > > > Another person had this problem but sent it back for replacement

> > > > > > without trying to adjust it. I would bet that this is the problem,

> > but

> > > > > > it could be something else.

> > > > > > My worm turned freely and smoothly when I tested it.

> > > > > > Floyd

> > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > thanks for your reply floyd

> > > > > > > the oldham coupler looked well aligned

> > > > > > > and the block square on installation

> > > > > > > but will check again and cut down on the play a bit

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > what are your thoughts on the worm not spinning smoothly?

> > > > > > > it's hard to imaging smooth tracking with that

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > -bill

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > > yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Check the Oldham coupler for its alignment. Adjust the worm so

> > > that

> > > > > > > > you have 1mm play at the end of the counter weight shaft with

> > the

> > > > > > > > mount a room temp. Make sure the worm is square with both sides

> > > > > having

> > > > > > > > an equal spacing from the mount flange.

> > > > > > > > Floyd

> > > > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@ mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > wups used main pixel scale instead of guider

> > > > > > > > > the PE range is closer to +/- 5 arcsec (still not bad)

> > > > > > > > > with jumps of 5-7 arc-sec in a second ;(

> > > > > > > > > updated spread sheet

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > --- In Losmandy_users@

> > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com>

> > > > yahoogroups.com, "fndnmonyhoo" mosg@>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > well the good news is that

> > > > > > > > > > eyeballing a correction for drift

> > > > > > > > > > the range of my PE has been reduced from +/-30 to less than

> > > > > > +/-3 arc

> > > > > > > > > > seconds!

> > > > > > > > > > (before PEC)

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > the bad news is that the PE is very jagged

> > > > > > > > > > jumping 3 arcsec and back over the course of a second or 2

> > > > > > > > > > so my long focal length images are much worse now and very

> > > > > > difficult

> > > > > > > > > > to guide

> > > > > > > > > > :(

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > whwastro.

> > > > whwastro.

> > > whwastro.

> > whwastro.homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> > homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> > > homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls>

> > > > homestead.com/files/temp/ovision_PE_run.xls

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > i took great care installing the worm

> > > > > > > > > > following the directions provided.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > i have two observations:

> > > > > > > > > > 1. there's definitely more backlash now ~2mm

> > > > > > > > > > there was almost none in the system with the original worm

> > > > > > > > > > perhaps explaining the high PE range

> > > > > > > > > > 2. the ovision worm assembly itself did not turn smoothly

> > > > > (arrived

> > > > > > > > > > like that).

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > my guess/hope is that there's a bearing problem with the

> > worm

> > > > > > > assembly

> > > > > > > > > > that could be easily corrected

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > any suggestions would be appreciated

> > > > > > > > > > ovision has not responded to my email

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > thanks

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > -bill w

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

>







----------------------------

#42953 May 24, 2009

Hi, all-

I made my first attempt at creating a PE curve in order to test the Ovision on my new G11 mount.

The PE seemed large to me, and perhaps rough, so I sent it to Franck at Ovision. Franck said he thought my data looked strange. I assume I did something wrong. Could someone review it for me?

I created the logfile with K3CCDTools. The data were created with an 80mm f7 scope, with and without a 2x barlow. The camera was a StellaCam3.

Perhaps I set up the camera in K3CCDTools incorrectly?



Here are the chip specs for the camera as per OPT:

CCD Pixel Size = 8.4um (H) x 9.8um (V)

Number of pixels = 811 (H) x 508 (V)

Here is how I input the data to K3CCDTools camera setup dialogue box: Pixel Width: 8.4 microns-

Pixel Height: 9.8 microns

CCD Width: 768 pixels

CCD Height: 494 pixels



One thing I wonder is: the camera specs are listed as H and V, which I assume is Horizontal and Vertical.

The Dialogue box asks for Width and Height. Did I put the numbers in correctly, or should I transpose them?

Note: the Sony specs page stated that the Effective number of pixels is 768 (H) 494 (V). I probably should have used the Actual number of pixels rather than the Effective number, right?

Also, once again, did I translate H and V to Width and Height correctly, or should I transpose?

I put the two Excel files in the Files section under "Ovision Test-Bob Hertel"

Could run the numbers and tell me if the data looks strange, as it did to Franck?

Thanks for any assistance.

Bob Hertel



----------------------------

#42954 May 25, 2009

Hi, Bob -



The data are indeed too erratic. Setting aside the image scale calculation issues for the time being, the RA values jump too abruptly. You didn't indicate what your exposure time was and that is one possible explanation. If the exposure is too long, the average value may have moved significantly. I would suggest keeping at or under 2 seconds. (When I want to record my PE, I use one second and make sure I find a sufficiently bright star for that length - but certainly not one that is saturated.



As far as your settings, yes, you appear to have the pixel dimensions correct, but that would not lead to a significant difference. Also, the array dimensions for the camera are different from what you show for the CCD Width and Height - but those don't enter into the image scale calculation (arc-seconds/pixel) anyway. And again, the raw data, whether in terms of pixels or arc-seconds, are curious because the simply numbers jump around too much.



I suggest performing another run, first checking that the RA assembly, and in fact the entire train, is "tight" (very little play/backlash). If you have one of the earlier versions of the Ovion assemblies, with two spanner holes in the brass part opposite the motor side, make sure you don't have axial play. I.e., does the worm move back and forth within the worm block.



And, surely overweight slightly to the east. Before you can measure your PE, you will need a smoother curve than what you have shown. If you still get similar data, switch back to your previous worm and see if you get the same results. But, I doubt very much it is the Ovision worm.



Please let us know how you fair.



Regards,



Bill









--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "rjhertel2001" robert.hertel@...> wrote:

>

> Hi, all-

> I made my first attempt at creating a PE curve in order to test the Ovision on my new G11 mount.

> The PE seemed large to me, and perhaps rough, so I sent it to Franck at Ovision. Franck said he thought my data looked strange. I assume I did something wrong. Could someone review it for me?

> I created the logfile with K3CCDTools. The data were created with an 80mm f7 scope, with and without a 2x barlow. The camera was a StellaCam3.

> Perhaps I set up the camera in K3CCDTools incorrectly?

>

> Here are the chip specs for the camera as per OPT:

> CCD Pixel Size = 8.4um (H) x 9.8um (V)

> Number of pixels = 811 (H) x 508 (V)

> Here is how I input the data to K3CCDTools camera setup dialogue box: Pixel Width: 8.4 microns-

> Pixel Height: 9.8 microns

> CCD Width: 768 pixels

> CCD Height: 494 pixels

>

> One thing I wonder is: the camera specs are listed as H and V, which I assume is Horizontal and Vertical.

> The Dialogue box asks for Width and Height. Did I put the numbers in correctly, or should I transpose them?

> Note: the Sony specs page stated that the Effective number of pixels is 768 (H) 494 (V). I probably should have used the Actual number of pixels rather than the Effective number, right?

> Also, once again, did I translate H and V to Width and Height correctly, or should I transpose?

> I put the two Excel files in the Files section under "Ovision Test-Bob Hertel"

> Could run the numbers and tell me if the data looks strange, as it did to Franck?

> Thanks for any assistance.

> Bob Hertel

>



----------------------------

#43218 Jun 24, 2009

OK, last night I decided to give PEC a try with the run in gearbox and the Ovision worm.

I have tried PEC before but did not see any real results from using it. But last night, after only one run, the mount produced and almost flat line on the "Real Time" guiding graph in PHD. I mean the line was flat for much of the time with hardly a bump! It was definitely a big improvement. When I ran the data through PECPrep and applied the auto-filter to remove noise there was a beautiful wave pattern, which I never saw before.

So, I guess that indeed the MC gearbox errors are corrected by PEC, while the original gearboxes were not. The 1st and 2nd gear errors were completely eliminated! In fact, there were no errors over .4" in the frequency chart. The quiding was the smoothest that I have every experienced with the G-11.

I did image afterward, a narrow band image of a part of NGC7000. The data was really nice, with no signs of guiding errors.

Floyd







----------------------------

#43219 Jun 25, 2009

Hi Floyd



Glad it is all coming together for you.



I took a look at a disassembled stock gearbox last night and was not

un-impressed with the general quality (the plastic casing aside) the gears

do run on bearings (even the first gear runs a brass/bronze sleeve on steel

pin) with the output gear on a traditional bronze sleeve bearing. With only

2 gears it should in theory induce less error than the 3 gear McLennan box,

though there was much more backlash than I expected when I had cleaned off

all the grease.



The only time I have ever had the PHD graph be flat was when I selected a

hot pixel to guide on ;o)



My trouble at the moment is not the mount but my imaging train, I will be

leaving things as they are for a while though I must invest in an OAG as

currently when I use the DSLR I have to use my ETX60 big finder with my old

DSI as the guider which at 400mm F/L is not a good match to 3048mm F/L of

the 12" SCT.



Here's to the coming winter and dark skies again



Regards Badger





----- Original Message -----

From: "Floyd Blue" fblue@...>

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 4:24 AM

Subject: [Losmandy_users] Finally ran PEC with the new Ovision worm and MC

gearboxes.





> OK, last night I decided to give PEC a try with the run in gearbox and the

> Ovision worm.

> I have tried PEC before but did not see any real results from using it.

> But last night, after only one run, the mount produced and almost flat

> line on the "Real Time" guiding graph in PHD. I mean the line was flat for

> much of the time with hardly a bump! It was definitely a big improvement.

> When I ran the data through PECPrep and applied the auto-filter to remove

> noise there was a beautiful wave pattern, which I never saw before.

> So, I guess that indeed the MC gearbox errors are corrected by PEC, while

> the original gearboxes were not. The 1st and 2nd gear errors were

> completely eliminated! In fact, there were no errors over .4" in the

> frequency chart. The quiding was the smoothest that I have every

> experienced with the G-11.

> I did image afterward, a narrow band image of a part of NGC7000. The data

> was really nice, with no signs of guiding errors.

> Floyd

>

>

>

---------------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>





---------------







No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

Version: 8.5.374 / Virus Database: 270.12.91/2201 - Release Date: 06/25/09

06:22:00



----------------------------

#43220 Jun 25, 2009

Hi Floyd



I'm assuming you're using LOsmandy PEC as opposed to a third party application?

Just asking as this will motivate me to give it a shot.

I've been 50/50 when it comes to the results of using PEC while guiding.



Troy --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "David Mercer" david.mercer@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Floyd

>

> Glad it is all coming together for you.

>

> I took a look at a disassembled stock gearbox last night and was not

> un-impressed with the general quality (the plastic casing aside) the gears

> do run on bearings (even the first gear runs a brass/bronze sleeve on steel

> pin) with the output gear on a traditional bronze sleeve bearing. With only

> 2 gears it should in theory induce less error than the 3 gear McLennan box,

> though there was much more backlash than I expected when I had cleaned off

> all the grease.

>

> The only time I have ever had the PHD graph be flat was when I selected a

> hot pixel to guide on ;o)

>

> My trouble at the moment is not the mount but my imaging train, I will be

> leaving things as they are for a while though I must invest in an OAG as

> currently when I use the DSLR I have to use my ETX60 big finder with my old

> DSI as the guider which at 400mm F/L is not a good match to 3048mm F/L of

> the 12" SCT.

>

> Here's to the coming winter and dark skies again

>

> Regards Badger

>

>

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: "Floyd Blue" fblue@...>

> To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com>

> Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 4:24 AM

> Subject: [Losmandy_users] Finally ran PEC with the new Ovision worm and MC

> gearboxes.

>

>

> > OK, last night I decided to give PEC a try with the run in gearbox and the

> > Ovision worm.

> > I have tried PEC before but did not see any real results from using it.

> > But last night, after only one run, the mount produced and almost flat

> > line on the "Real Time" guiding graph in PHD. I mean the line was flat for

> > much of the time with hardly a bump! It was definitely a big improvement.

> > When I ran the data through PECPrep and applied the auto-filter to remove

> > noise there was a beautiful wave pattern, which I never saw before.

> > So, I guess that indeed the MC gearbox errors are corrected by PEC, while

> > the original gearboxes were not. The 1st and 2nd gear errors were

> > completely eliminated! In fact, there were no errors over .4" in the

> > frequency chart. The quiding was the smoothest that I have every

> > experienced with the G-11.

> > I did image afterward, a narrow band image of a part of NGC7000. The data

> > was really nice, with no signs of guiding errors.

> > Floyd

> >

> >

> >

---------------

> >

> > Yahoo! Groups Links

> >

> >

> >

>

>

---------------

>

>

>

> No virus found in this incoming message.

> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

> Version: 8.5.374 / Virus Database: 270.12.91/2201 - Release Date: 06/25/09

> 06:22:00

>







----------------------------

#43221 Jun 25, 2009

Hi Badger,

Yeah, the original box is OK, but the plastic gears are just not really anything more than a formed plastic and precision is just a real possibility. This plus the lash that you saw were the main reasons for my decision to try the MC gearboxes.



I have the AT8RC now as well as the NP101 and I too need to have a different setup for guiding for both. The Guide scope setup now is 4.4" image scale, very large, but works fine with the NP101 with 3" image scale. But the AT8RC is .94" image scale, so I need to use a smaller image scale for guiding too. I am going to try using a Barlow on the guide scope and see it I can get 2.2" image scale to work. I think it will achieve focus, but not certain. This should help a bit, but the FOV will be quite small too, which is a bit if a headache when trying to find a guide star.

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "David Mercer" david.mercer@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Floyd

>

> Glad it is all coming together for you.

>

> I took a look at a disassembled stock gearbox last night and was not

> un-impressed with the general quality (the plastic casing aside) the gears

> do run on bearings (even the first gear runs a brass/bronze sleeve on steel

> pin) with the output gear on a traditional bronze sleeve bearing. With only

> 2 gears it should in theory induce less error than the 3 gear McLennan box,

> though there was much more backlash than I expected when I had cleaned off

> all the grease.

>

> The only time I have ever had the PHD graph be flat was when I selected a

> hot pixel to guide on ;o)

>

> My trouble at the moment is not the mount but my imaging train, I will be

> leaving things as they are for a while though I must invest in an OAG as

> currently when I use the DSLR I have to use my ETX60 big finder with my old

> DSI as the guider which at 400mm F/L is not a good match to 3048mm F/L of

> the 12" SCT.

>

> Here's to the coming winter and dark skies again

>

> Regards Badger

>

>

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: "Floyd Blue" fblue@...>

> To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com>

> Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 4:24 AM

> Subject: [Losmandy_users] Finally ran PEC with the new Ovision worm and MC

> gearboxes.

>

>

> > OK, last night I decided to give PEC a try with the run in gearbox and the

> > Ovision worm.

> > I have tried PEC before but did not see any real results from using it.

> > But last night, after only one run, the mount produced and almost flat

> > line on the "Real Time" guiding graph in PHD. I mean the line was flat for

> > much of the time with hardly a bump! It was definitely a big improvement.

> > When I ran the data through PECPrep and applied the auto-filter to remove

> > noise there was a beautiful wave pattern, which I never saw before.

> > So, I guess that indeed the MC gearbox errors are corrected by PEC, while

> > the original gearboxes were not. The 1st and 2nd gear errors were

> > completely eliminated! In fact, there were no errors over .4" in the

> > frequency chart. The quiding was the smoothest that I have every

> > experienced with the G-11.

> > I did image afterward, a narrow band image of a part of NGC7000. The data

> > was really nice, with no signs of guiding errors.

> > Floyd

> >

> >

> >

---------------

> >

> > Yahoo! Groups Links

> >

> >

> >

>

>

---------------

>

>

>

> No virus found in this incoming message.

> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

> Version: 8.5.374 / Virus Database: 270.12.91/2201 - Release Date: 06/25/09

> 06:22:00

>



----------------------------

#43222 Jun 25, 2009

Hi Troy,

Yes, the Ge3mini PEC is what I am using.

I just set up the guiding to 2.5 sec intervals and let it settle down. Then I turned on the PEC training and let it go for the 240 secs. Afterward, the PEC turned on and I continued guiding that way all night.



The following guide stats are with guiding engauged and PHD running normally. The biggest error was 39.8 sec @ .4" then one at 15.9 sec & 59.8 sec @ .3" with others .2" or 1". These errors seem to respond to PEC, but were reduced not eliminated.



This is a pretty good improvement with the 80 sec error (2nd gear)completely eliminated. The 16 sec error (15.9 sec) 1st gear was reduced from .7" to .3", which I feel is a good result.



Overall, I am very pleased with the results and now feel that the mount is perform about as good as it ever will. :^)



These are the stats for a 100 min guiding session with no noise filters applied.



Worm Period:.479 Secs

Steps/Period:.50133

Sample Count:.5750

Sample Int.:.1.00 Secs



Trend: Y = 0.0000X + 0.0



Peak PE+:..1.04 arcsecs

Peak PE-:..-1.35 arcsecs

RMS PE: ..0.31 arcsecs

Av. PE: ..0.00 arcsecs

Av. PE+:..0.26 arcsecs

Av. PE-:..-0.24 arcsecs

Max Delta+:.0.73 arcsecs

Max Delta-:.-0.29 arcsecs

Av. Noise:.0.02 arcsecs



Then this is with the noise filters applied



Worm Period:.479 Secs

Steps/Period:.50133

Sample Count:.5750

Sample Int.:.1.00 Secs



Trend: Y = 0.0000X + 0.0



Peak PE+:..0.32 arcsecs

Peak PE-:..-0.33 arcsecs

RMS PE: ..0.14 arcsecs

Av. PE: ..0.00 arcsecs

Av. PE+:..0.11 arcsecs

Av. PE-:..-0.11 arcsecs

Max Delta+:.0.73 arcsecs

Max Delta-:.-0.29 arcsecs

Av. Noise:.0.45 arcsecs

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Troy" sere_team@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Floyd

>

> I'm assuming you're using LOsmandy PEC as opposed to a third party application?

> Just asking as this will motivate me to give it a shot.

> I've been 50/50 when it comes to the results of using PEC while guiding.

>

> Troy

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "David Mercer" david.mercer@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Floyd

> >

> > Glad it is all coming together for you.

> >

> > I took a look at a disassembled stock gearbox last night and was not

> > un-impressed with the general quality (the plastic casing aside) the gears

> > do run on bearings (even the first gear runs a brass/bronze sleeve on steel

> > pin) with the output gear on a traditional bronze sleeve bearing. With only

> > 2 gears it should in theory induce less error than the 3 gear McLennan box,

> > though there was much more backlash than I expected when I had cleaned off

> > all the grease.

> >

> > The only time I have ever had the PHD graph be flat was when I selected a

> > hot pixel to guide on ;o)

> >

> > My trouble at the moment is not the mount but my imaging train, I will be

> > leaving things as they are for a while though I must invest in an OAG as

> > currently when I use the DSLR I have to use my ETX60 big finder with my old

> > DSI as the guider which at 400mm F/L is not a good match to 3048mm F/L of

> > the 12" SCT.

> >

> > Here's to the coming winter and dark skies again

> >

> > Regards Badger

> >

> >

> >

> > ----- Original Message -----

> > From: "Floyd Blue" fblue@>

> > To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com>

> > Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 4:24 AM

> > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Finally ran PEC with the new Ovision worm and MC

> > gearboxes.

> >

> >

> > > OK, last night I decided to give PEC a try with the run in gearbox and the

> > > Ovision worm.

> > > I have tried PEC before but did not see any real results from using it.

> > > But last night, after only one run, the mount produced and almost flat

> > > line on the "Real Time" guiding graph in PHD. I mean the line was flat for

> > > much of the time with hardly a bump! It was definitely a big improvement.

> > > When I ran the data through PECPrep and applied the auto-filter to remove

> > > noise there was a beautiful wave pattern, which I never saw before.

> > > So, I guess that indeed the MC gearbox errors are corrected by PEC, while

> > > the original gearboxes were not. The 1st and 2nd gear errors were

> > > completely eliminated! In fact, there were no errors over .4" in the

> > > frequency chart. The quiding was the smoothest that I have every

> > > experienced with the G-11.

> > > I did image afterward, a narrow band image of a part of NGC7000. The data

> > > was really nice, with no signs of guiding errors.

> > > Floyd

> > >

> > >

> > >

---------------

> > >

> > > Yahoo! Groups Links

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

---------------

> >

> >

> >

> > No virus found in this incoming message.

> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

> > Version: 8.5.374 / Virus Database: 270.12.91/2201 - Release Date: 06/25/09

> > 06:22:00

> >

>







----------------------------

#43224 Jun 25, 2009

Floyd,



I've recently upgraded to the MC gearboxe and in a few minutes will post two PEMPro screen shots in the files section. Search for the folder created by ehouby. One screen shot is a run without PEC and the other with PEC. The PEC was programed by PEMPro and reduced the 15.9s peak from .34 to .14 arc sec.



If the weather ever clears up I'll see how the mount performs with a M703 at 1880mm and report back to the group. This mount also has an Ovision worm.



-Eric



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Troy,

> Yes, the Ge3mini PEC is what I am using.

> I just set up the guiding to 2.5 sec intervals and let it settle down. Then I turned on the PEC training and let it go for the 240 secs. Afterward, the PEC turned on and I continued guiding that way all night.

>

> The following guide stats are with guiding engauged and PHD running normally. The biggest error was 39.8 sec @ .4" then one at 15.9 sec & 59.8 sec @ .3" with others .2" or 1". These errors seem to respond to PEC, but were reduced not eliminated.

>

> This is a pretty good improvement with the 80 sec error (2nd gear)completely eliminated. The 16 sec error (15.9 sec) 1st gear was reduced from .7" to .3", which I feel is a good result.

>

> Overall, I am very pleased with the results and now feel that the mount is perform about as good as it ever will. :^)

>

> These are the stats for a 100 min guiding session with no noise filters applied.

>

> Worm Period:.479 Secs

> Steps/Period:.50133

> Sample Count:.5750

> Sample Int.:.1.00 Secs

>

> Trend: Y = 0.0000X + 0.0

>

> Peak PE+:..1.04 arcsecs

> Peak PE-:..-1.35 arcsecs

> RMS PE: ..0.31 arcsecs

> Av. PE: ..0.00 arcsecs

> Av. PE+:..0.26 arcsecs

> Av. PE-:..-0.24 arcsecs

> Max Delta+:.0.73 arcsecs

> Max Delta-:.-0.29 arcsecs

> Av. Noise:.0.02 arcsecs

>

> Then this is with the noise filters applied

>

> Worm Period:.479 Secs

> Steps/Period:.50133

> Sample Count:.5750

> Sample Int.:.1.00 Secs

>

> Trend: Y = 0.0000X + 0.0

>

> Peak PE+:..0.32 arcsecs

> Peak PE-:..-0.33 arcsecs

> RMS PE: ..0.14 arcsecs

> Av. PE: ..0.00 arcsecs

> Av. PE+:..0.11 arcsecs

> Av. PE-:..-0.11 arcsecs

> Max Delta+:.0.73 arcsecs

> Max Delta-:.-0.29 arcsecs

> Av. Noise:.0.45 arcsecs

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Troy" sere_team@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Floyd

> >

> > I'm assuming you're using LOsmandy PEC as opposed to a third party application?

> > Just asking as this will motivate me to give it a shot.

> > I've been 50/50 when it comes to the results of using PEC while guiding.

> >

> > Troy

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "David Mercer" david.mercer@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi Floyd

> > >

> > > Glad it is all coming together for you.

> > >

> > > I took a look at a disassembled stock gearbox last night and was not

> > > un-impressed with the general quality (the plastic casing aside) the gears

> > > do run on bearings (even the first gear runs a brass/bronze sleeve on steel

> > > pin) with the output gear on a traditional bronze sleeve bearing. With only

> > > 2 gears it should in theory induce less error than the 3 gear McLennan box,

> > > though there was much more backlash than I expected when I had cleaned off

> > > all the grease.

> > >

> > > The only time I have ever had the PHD graph be flat was when I selected a

> > > hot pixel to guide on ;o)

> > >

> > > My trouble at the moment is not the mount but my imaging train, I will be

> > > leaving things as they are for a while though I must invest in an OAG as

> > > currently when I use the DSLR I have to use my ETX60 big finder with my old

> > > DSI as the guider which at 400mm F/L is not a good match to 3048mm F/L of

> > > the 12" SCT.

> > >

> > > Here's to the coming winter and dark skies again

> > >

> > > Regards Badger

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > ----- Original Message -----

> > > From: "Floyd Blue" fblue@>

> > > To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com>

> > > Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 4:24 AM

> > > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Finally ran PEC with the new Ovision worm and MC

> > > gearboxes.

> > >

> > >

> > > > OK, last night I decided to give PEC a try with the run in gearbox and the

> > > > Ovision worm.

> > > > I have tried PEC before but did not see any real results from using it.

> > > > But last night, after only one run, the mount produced and almost flat

> > > > line on the "Real Time" guiding graph in PHD. I mean the line was flat for

> > > > much of the time with hardly a bump! It was definitely a big improvement.

> > > > When I ran the data through PECPrep and applied the auto-filter to remove

> > > > noise there was a beautiful wave pattern, which I never saw before.

> > > > So, I guess that indeed the MC gearbox errors are corrected by PEC, while

> > > > the original gearboxes were not. The 1st and 2nd gear errors were

> > > > completely eliminated! In fact, there were no errors over .4" in the

> > > > frequency chart. The quiding was the smoothest that I have every

> > > > experienced with the G-11.

> > > > I did image afterward, a narrow band image of a part of NGC7000. The data

> > > > was really nice, with no signs of guiding errors.

> > > > Floyd

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

---------------

> > > >

> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > >

---------------

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > No virus found in this incoming message.

> > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

> > > Version: 8.5.374 / Virus Database: 270.12.91/2201 - Release Date: 06/25/09

> > > 06:22:00

> > >

> >

>







----------------------------

#43231 Jun 26, 2009

Floyd,



It would be really helpful if you could post your log files. Of interest

would be these logs:



1. Before PEC without autoguiding (to show raw PEC)

2. Before PEC with autoguiding (to show how well autoguiding performs

without PEC)

3. PEC enabled without autoguiding (to asses PEC correction)

4. And finally autoguiding with PEC enabled (to see how well autoguiding

performs with PEC)



I have a new (free!) log analyzer that I've been working on so log files

instead of graphs would be nice to test with.



-Ray



> Hi Eric,

> It does seem that Pempro and PECPrep do give different

> readings, so I do not know that I can compare my data. But

> the improvement percentage wise seems to be about the same as

> mine. Shows that the errors in the gearbox do respond to PEC training.

>

> Pempro uses quite a few runs doesn't it? I only did one 4

> minute run, but I will take several more soon and have Gemini

> average them and see how that works out.

> Floyd

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> , "ehouby"

> ehouby@...> wrote:

> >

> >

> > Floyd,

> >

> > I've recently upgraded to the MC gearboxe and in a few

> minutes will post two PEMPro screen shots in the files

> section. Search for the folder created by ehouby. One screen

> shot is a run without PEC and the other with PEC. The PEC was

> programed by PEMPro and reduced the 15.9s peak from .34 to

> .14 arc sec.

> >

> > If the weather ever clears up I'll see how the mount

> performs with a M703 at 1880mm and report back to the group.

> This mount also has an Ovision worm.

> >

> > -Eric

> >

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> , "Floyd Blue"

> fblue@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi Troy,

> > > Yes, the Ge3mini PEC is what I am using.

> > > I just set up the guiding to 2.5 sec intervals and let it

> settle down. Then I turned on the PEC training and let it go

> for the 240 secs. Afterward, the PEC turned on and I

> continued guiding that way all night.

> > >

> > > The following guide stats are with guiding engauged and

> PHD running normally. The biggest error was 39.8 sec @ .4"

> then one at 15.9 sec & 59.8 sec @ .3" with others .2" or 1".

> These errors seem to respond to PEC, but were reduced not eliminated.

> > >

> > > This is a pretty good improvement with the 80 sec error

> (2nd gear)completely eliminated. The 16 sec error (15.9 sec)

> 1st gear was reduced from .7" to .3", which I feel is a good result.

> > >

> > > Overall, I am very pleased with the results and now feel that the

> > > mount is perform about as good as it ever will. :^)

> > >

> > > These are the stats for a 100 min guiding session with no

> noise filters applied.

> > >

> > > Worm Period: 479 Secs

> > > Steps/Period: 50133

> > > Sample Count: 5750

> > > Sample Int.: 1.00 Secs

> > >

> > > Trend: Y = 0.0000X + 0.0

> > >

> > > Peak PE+: 1.04 arcsecs

> > > Peak PE-: -1.35 arcsecs

> > > RMS PE: 0.31 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE: 0.00 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE+: 0.26 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE-: -0.24 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta+: 0.73 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta-: -0.29 arcsecs

> > > Av. Noise: 0.02 arcsecs

> > >

> > > Then this is with the noise filters applied

> > >

> > > Worm Period: 479 Secs

> > > Steps/Period: 50133

> > > Sample Count: 5750

> > > Sample Int.: 1.00 Secs

> > >

> > > Trend: Y = 0.0000X + 0.0

> > >

> > > Peak PE+: 0.32 arcsecs

> > > Peak PE-: -0.33 arcsecs

> > > RMS PE: 0.14 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE: 0.00 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE+: 0.11 arcsecs

> > > Av. PE-: -0.11 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta+: 0.73 arcsecs

> > > Max Delta-: -0.29 arcsecs

> > > Av. Noise: 0.45 arcsecs

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> , "Troy" sere_team@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Hi Floyd

> > > >

> > > > I'm assuming you're using LOsmandy PEC as opposed to a

> third party application?

> > > > Just asking as this will motivate me to give it a shot.

> > > > I've been 50/50 when it comes to the results of using

> PEC while guiding.

> > > >

> > > > Troy

> > > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> , "David Mercer"

> david.mercer@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Hi Floyd

> > > > >

> > > > > Glad it is all coming together for you.

> > > > >

> > > > > I took a look at a disassembled stock gearbox last

> night and was

> > > > > not un-impressed with the general quality (the plastic casing

> > > > > aside) the gears do run on bearings (even the first

> gear runs a

> > > > > brass/bronze sleeve on steel

> > > > > pin) with the output gear on a traditional bronze sleeve

> > > > > bearing. With only

> > > > > 2 gears it should in theory induce less error than the 3 gear

> > > > > McLennan box, though there was much more backlash than I

> > > > > expected when I had cleaned off all the grease.

> > > > >

> > > > > The only time I have ever had the PHD graph be flat

> was when I

> > > > > selected a hot pixel to guide on ;o)

> > > > >

> > > > > My trouble at the moment is not the mount but my

> imaging train,

> > > > > I will be leaving things as they are for a while

> though I must

> > > > > invest in an OAG as currently when I use the DSLR I

> have to use

> > > > > my ETX60 big finder with my old DSI as the guider

> which at 400mm

> > > > > F/L is not a good match to 3048mm F/L of the 12" SCT.

> > > > >

> > > > > Here's to the coming winter and dark skies again

> > > > >

> > > > > Regards Badger

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > ----- Original Message -----

> > > > > From: "Floyd Blue" fblue@>

> > > > > To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> > > > > mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> >

> > > > > Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 4:24 AM

> > > > > Subject: [Losmandy_users] Finally ran PEC with the

> new Ovision

> > > > > worm and MC gearboxes.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > > OK, last night I decided to give PEC a try with the run in

> > > > > > gearbox and the Ovision worm.

> > > > > > I have tried PEC before but did not see any real

> results from using it.

> > > > > > But last night, after only one run, the mount produced and

> > > > > > almost flat line on the "Real Time" guiding graph in PHD. I

> > > > > > mean the line was flat for much of the time with

> hardly a bump! It was definitely a big improvement.

> > > > > > When I ran the data through PECPrep and applied the

> > > > > > auto-filter to remove noise there was a beautiful

> wave pattern, which I never saw before.

> > > > > > So, I guess that indeed the MC gearbox errors are

> corrected by

> > > > > > PEC, while the original gearboxes were not. The 1st and 2nd

> > > > > > gear errors were completely eliminated! In fact,

> there were no

> > > > > > errors over .4" in the frequency chart. The quiding was the

> > > > > > smoothest that I have every experienced with the G-11.

> > > > > > I did image afterward, a narrow band image of a part of

> > > > > > NGC7000. The data was really nice, with no signs of

> guiding errors.

> > > > > > Floyd

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

---------------

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

---------------

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > No virus found in this incoming message.

> > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

> > > > > Version: 8.5.374 / Virus Database: 270.12.91/2201 - Release

> > > > > Date: 06/25/09 06:22:00

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

>

>

>

>







----------------------------

#43233 Jun 26, 2009

Hi Floyd,



OK, no problem. You said you did some analysis with PECPrep so I assumed you

had some logs with unguided data. If you don't then the PECPrep analytics

are probably not useful anyway.



You wrote: > > > It does seem that Pempro and PECPrep do give different readings, so

> > > I do not know that I can compare my data. But the improvement

> > > percentage wise seems to be about the same as mine.



In general if you want to report an equivalent percentage improvement of PE

you should post some numbers to quantify the PE with guiding off before and

after correction. If you don't have that data then I'm not sure how you can

really back up the statement about the percentage improvement you saw. Just

a very steady night can make all the difference in the world in terms of the

number and magnitude of autoguider movements, so you can't necessarily count

on that.



BTW, the North American Nebula, the object you posted a picture of, is at

about +44 degrees declination. Any residual periodic error is reduced by a

factor of the cosine of the declination (about 0.7x in this case), and

correspondingly, autoguider movements by 0.7x as well.



-Ray



----------------------------

#43234 Jun 26, 2009

Hi Ray,

It is fairly simple. I started guiding and watched the graph, then I started PEC and after it ran I again watched the graph. The graph was immediately almost flat compared to the normal peaks and valleys I saw before I ran PEC. Then I looked at the guide log before the PEC and after and there I could see the improvement in the frequency chart in PECPrep.



As for proving anything, really I do not feel I have to do so, as I was just trying to comment that the PEC in the Gemini seems to take care of the errors from the MC Gearbox, which I stated earlier that I would look into because of concerns with the 18 sec and 80 sec errors introduced by the MC Gearbox. So, it is of no real concern whether or not the data is imperically correct to me. I was just trying to get a handle on PEC and its effects on the guiding and the GB errors, but the effect on my guiding was very obvious when you watched the graph as PHD ran.



My real problem is that I do not wish to pay $150 for the Pempro at this time. I have tried several times to get to run the demo, but always ran out of time before I could get it done and the 90 days wa over. But to me $150 for the program is money that I need for other things at this time. :^) So if PEC on the Gemini take care of my issues, that is a good thing.



Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Ray Gralak \(Yahoo Groups\)" yahoo@...> wrote:

>

>

> Hi Floyd,

>

> OK, no problem. You said you did some analysis with PECPrep so I assumed you

> had some logs with unguided data. If you don't then the PECPrep analytics

> are probably not useful anyway.

>

> You wrote:

> > > > It does seem that Pempro and PECPrep do give different readings, so

> > > > I do not know that I can compare my data. But the improvement

> > > > percentage wise seems to be about the same as mine.

>

> In general if you want to report an equivalent percentage improvement of PE

> you should post some numbers to quantify the PE with guiding off before and

> after correction. If you don't have that data then I'm not sure how you can

> really back up the statement about the percentage improvement you saw. Just

> a very steady night can make all the difference in the world in terms of the

> number and magnitude of autoguider movements, so you can't necessarily count

> on that.

>

> BTW, the North American Nebula, the object you posted a picture of, is at

> about +44 degrees declination. Any residual periodic error is reduced by a

> factor of the cosine of the declination (about 0.7x in this case), and

> correspondingly, autoguider movements by 0.7x as well.

>

> -Ray

>



----------------------------

#43235 Jun 26, 2009

Hi Floyd,

> My real problem is that I do not wish to pay $150 for the

> Pempro at this time. I have tried several times to get to run

> the demo, but always ran out of time before I could get it

> done and the 90 days wa over. But to me $150 for the program

> is money that I need for other things at this time. :^) So if

> PEC on the Gemini take care of my issues, that is a good thing.



Huh?? I didn't even suggest that you should buy PEMPro. I'm not trying to

sell you or anyone else PEMPRo. I was trying to get data to test a FREE log

analysis program I have been working on for a while now (I thought I said

that?).



-Ray



----------------------------

#43236 Jun 26, 2009

Sorry Ray,

I did not mean it that way, I was just trying to explain why I did not have the Pempro data to post due to my inability to get out before the free 90 trial period was over. :^) I appreciate the fact that you offer this trial, but my timing is always wrong to give it a chance.



With the other expenses I have had getting things going with the new scope, auto focus system and software to try to automate things a little, I have just not got the funds to buy Pempro and am trying to make do with the Gemini PEC, which does seem to be working pretty well.



As for the data from the guiding runs, I will gladly supply those when I get a chance to make those kind of runs. Now, I can only supply the guiding logs with guiding on. I can upload a log of that that is 100 minutes long.



I just have not had any spare time to do any more real testing. So few days for imaging so far this year due to weather that I am really just wanting to get some exposures. I have a new AT8RC that I have to figure out guiding settings and camera settigs. Only had it out once so far and then things did not go so well. So, I am trying desparately to get some kind of data for the year. :^)



So, please accept my apology if I seem to come off wrong, I was just busy and trying to answer the post and did not proof read it before posting.

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Ray Gralak \(Yahoo Groups\)" yahoo@...> wrote:

>

> Hi Floyd,

>

> > My real problem is that I do not wish to pay $150 for the

> > Pempro at this time. I have tried several times to get to run

> > the demo, but always ran out of time before I could get it

> > done and the 90 days wa over. But to me $150 for the program

> > is money that I need for other things at this time. :^) So if

> > PEC on the Gemini take care of my issues, that is a good thing.

>

> Huh?? I didn't even suggest that you should buy PEMPro. I'm not trying to

> sell you or anyone else PEMPRo. I was trying to get data to test a FREE log

> analysis program I have been working on for a while now (I thought I said

> that?).

>

> -Ray

>







----------------------------

#43238 Jun 26, 2009

Ray,



While you're here, I've changed my email address from the one that was used to register the upgrade

to V2. How do I now use my new email with the registration? That was 2 years ago.



Don

----- Original Message -----

From: "Ray Gralak (Yahoo Groups)" yahoo@...>

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 7:53 PM

Subject: RE: [Losmandy_users] Re: Finally ran PEC with the new Ovision worm and MC gearboxes.





> Hi Floyd,

>

>> So, please accept my apology if I seem to come off wrong, I

>> was just busy and trying to answer the post and did not proof

>> read it before posting.

>

> Oh, no problem!! And I understand completely. In fact I do that a lot myself

> and it gets me into "trouble" all too often! :-) I'm often multitasking

> between several things so I just want to quickly post a response without

> taking the time to check my wording. We're all human though so no big deal.

> :-)

>

> -Ray

>

>> -----Original Message-----

>> From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

>> [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Floyd Blue

>> Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 4:37 PM

>> To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

>> Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: Finally ran PEC with the new

>> Ovision worm and MC gearboxes.

>>

>>

>>

>> Sorry Ray,

>> I did not mean it that way, I was just trying to explain why

>> I did not have the Pempro data to post due to my inability to

>> get out before the free 90 trial period was over. :^) I

>> appreciate the fact that you offer this trial, but my timing

>> is always wrong to give it a chance.

>>

>> With the other expenses I have had getting things going with

>> the new scope, auto focus system and software to try to

>> automate things a little, I have just not got the funds to

>> buy Pempro and am trying to make do with the Gemini PEC,

>> which does seem to be working pretty well.

>>

>> As for the data from the guiding runs, I will gladly supply

>> those when I get a chance to make those kind of runs. Now, I

>> can only supply the guiding logs with guiding on. I can

>> upload a log of that that is 100 minutes long.

>>

>> I just have not had any spare time to do any more real

>> testing. So few days for imaging so far this year due to

>> weather that I am really just wanting to get some exposures.

>> I have a new AT8RC that I have to figure out guiding settings

>> and camera settigs. Only had it out once so far and then

>> things did not go so well. So, I am trying desparately to get

>> some kind of data for the year. :^)

>>

>> So, please accept my apology if I seem to come off wrong, I

>> was just busy and trying to answer the post and did not proof

>> read it before posting.

>> Floyd

>> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

>> mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> , "Ray Gralak

>> \(Yahoo Groups\)" yahoo@...> wrote:

>> >

>> > Hi Floyd,

>> >

>> > > My real problem is that I do not wish to pay $150 for the

>> Pempro at

>> > > this time. I have tried several times to get to run the demo, but

>> > > always ran out of time before I could get it done and the

>> 90 days wa

>> > > over. But to me $150 for the program is money that I need

>> for other

>> > > things at this time. :^) So if PEC on the Gemini take care of my

>> > > issues, that is a good thing.

>> >

>> > Huh?? I didn't even suggest that you should buy PEMPro. I'm

>> not trying

>> > to sell you or anyone else PEMPRo. I was trying to get data

>> to test a

>> > FREE log analysis program I have been working on for a while now (I

>> > thought I said that?).

>> >

>> > -Ray

>> >

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>

>

>

---------------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

>



----------------------------

#43242 Jun 26, 2009

Don



I'll email you privately, Don.



-Ray



----------------------------

#43492 Jul 28, 2009

Is there a definitive verdict on the effectivess of the Ovision worm? Does it provide $500 worth of improvement over the Losmandy HP worm?



----------------------------

#43494 Jul 28, 2009

Not sure there is a definitive conclusion reached on this as yet. I just bought PemPro and will be running it to try to get a real PE from the run. I have tried other things like guiding with the corrections disabled in PHD and then checking the resulting log with PECPrep and it seems to show less than 2" at this time, but I have another that shows about 3.5-4" PE.

I can say that it does seem to have smoothed things a lot.

Floyd --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Curtis Croulet" calypte@...> wrote:

>

> Is there a definitive verdict on the effectivess of the Ovision worm? Does it provide $500 worth of improvement over the Losmandy HP worm?

>



----------------------------

#43496 Jul 28, 2009

I can only speak of my experience........................



Prior to Ovision installation it was impossible to image with my G11 and

my LX200R 10" (focal length with f6.3 reducer/flattener ~ 1800mm).

Periodic Error was simply to sharp to guide out

at this focal length.



I am now imaging consistently with this set-up and getting round stars.

I do have to use my dual chip SBIG or my OAG/DSLR combo due to mirror shift.



I recently imaged at 320mm with my Stellarview SV80S. I rough polar

aligned and went at it. The stars were perfect (I admit to working hard

to remove most DEC back-lash).\



I ran PemPro after installing the Ovision worm and got a total of 2.29

arc seconds P to P. I'm not sure I believe that result but it must be

pretty good.





I can say I am completely satisfied I got my $500.00 worth................







There is no doubt it does improve the G11............... How much it

improves it is an on-going debate. I feel it was the single best thing I

spent my money on that gave me a noticeable "edge"

with my Astrophotography.











Curtis Croulet wrote: > Is there a definitive verdict on the effectivess of the Ovision worm? Does it provide $500 worth of improvement over the Losmandy HP worm?

>

>

>

---------------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

>

>







----------------------------

#43497 Jul 28, 2009

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, Steve Izzo sdizzo@...> wrote: >

> I can only speak of my experience........................

>

> Prior to Ovision installation it was impossible to image with my G11 and

> my LX200R 10" (focal length with f6.3 reducer/flattener ~ 1800mm).

> Periodic Error was simply to sharp to guide out

> at this focal length.



My question is occasioned by a shooting session last night (July 27-28, '09) where I was shooting in the southern sky with my TV-85 and reducer, which gives an FL of 480 mm. It's not a demanding set-up, and some people may be satisfied with the star images I got, as indeed I was two years ago. Bright stars are fine, but faint stars are noticeable ovals when I enlarge the images, and, watching the tracking display in CCDSoft, I could see that the PE was rather extreme at times and much greater than dec errors. I had polar alignment pretty much nailed. At such times, one starts thinking of alternatives, and an Ovision worm is cheaper than an A-P mount g>.



----------------------------

#43501 Jul 28, 2009

We've seen results posted here that are all "within spec" from Ovision. Bearing in mind that Ovision doesn't make the whole mount, we would expect some variation: first, because even Ovision doesn't make completely identical units, and second, because there are factors that Ovision doesn't control, such as the accuracy of the teeth on the worm wheel of the mount itself.



All considered, the results seem to be anywhere from 2 to 8 arc seconds peak to peak: but what has most people pleased is that the PE is very smooth and regular, so it is easy to guide out errors. There are people in the 5-7 arc second category who are happy because their autoguiders can now "handle" what the mount gives them.



regards

Greg N







--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, Steve Izzo sdizzo@...> wrote:

>

> I can only speak of my experience........................

>

> Prior to Ovision installation it was impossible to image with my G11 and

> my LX200R 10" (focal length with f6.3 reducer/flattener ~ 1800mm).

> Periodic Error was simply to sharp to guide out

> at this focal length.

>

> I am now imaging consistently with this set-up and getting round stars.

> I do have to use my dual chip SBIG or my OAG/DSLR combo due to mirror shift.

>

> I recently imaged at 320mm with my Stellarview SV80S. I rough polar

> aligned and went at it. The stars were perfect (I admit to working hard

> to remove most DEC back-lash).\

>

> I ran PemPro after installing the Ovision worm and got a total of 2.29

> arc seconds P to P. I'm not sure I believe that result but it must be

> pretty good.

>

>

> I can say I am completely satisfied I got my $500.00 worth................

>

>

>

> There is no doubt it does improve the G11............... How much it

> improves it is an on-going debate. I feel it was the single best thing I

> spent my money on that gave me a noticeable "edge"

> with my Astrophotography.

>

>

>

>

>

> Curtis Croulet wrote:

> > Is there a definitive verdict on the effectivess of the Ovision worm? Does it provide $500 worth of improvement over the Losmandy HP worm?

> >

> >

> >

---------------

> >

> > Yahoo! Groups Links

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>



----------------------------

#43506 Jul 29, 2009

I bought my Ovision worm last October for my G-11, and I can now consistently guide better than 1 arcsec, and sometimes as low as 0.3 arcsec RMS. I image at 2350mm.



I'm very glad I upgraded to it.



-Joe



----------------------------

#43511 Jul 29, 2009

Hi,

Just so happens that I did take a one hour exposure with no guiding and the Polar Alignment intensionally set wrong, so that I would get good trails.



I uploaded these to this folder.

groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/album/1307745612/pic/list



They are the last two pictures. One shows the one hour exposure, image scale is 1.17" and the other shows a crop of 1 worm period, 240 secs, with a 1 pixel line drawn through the center of the wave form. This allows you to see how many pixels the star moved up and down. You can see that the bight pixels, the centroid of the star moved about one pixel up and 3 down (approximately) peak to peak or about 5". The trails and the stars were difficult read with certainty, it seems like the centroid moved as I described, but hard to be sure.

The quality of the crop is not so great because I had to blow it up so you could see it well as it was only about a 1 inch section of one star trail representing 240 secs of time.



I also did a non guided log that night that showed these measurements that was 2 worm periods. This seems to show about 2.67" peak to peak. Not sure which is correct.

This of course shows the PE as seen by PHD with guiding corrections disabled.



Peak PE+:.1.67 arcsecs

Peak PE-:.-1.00 arcsecs

RMS PE: ..0.54 arcsecs

Av. PE: ..-0.19 arcsecs

Av. PE+:..0.41 arcsecs

Av. PE-:..-0.43 arcsecs

Max Delta+:.0.37 arcsecs

Max Delta-:.-0.32 arcsecs

Av. Noise:.0.02 arcsecs



Hope this information is what you wanted.

Floyd

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "photons" photons0@...> wrote:

>

> hia! Floyd... sure would be nice to have a visual of that ovision worms PE..

>

> software graph/analysis is great, dont get me wrong! but a visual star trail of the PE is priceless.. :) youll know for certain you have PEC trained just right if you do the test.

>

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > Not sure there is a definitive conclusion reached on this as yet. I just bought PemPro and will be running it to try to get a real PE from the run. I have tried other things like guiding with the corrections disabled in PHD and then checking the resulting log with PECPrep and it seems to show less than 2" at this time, but I have another that shows about 3.5-4" PE.

> > I can say that it does seem to have smoothed things a lot.

> > Floyd

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Curtis Croulet" calypte@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Is there a definitive verdict on the effectivess of the Ovision worm? Does it provide $500 worth of improvement over the Losmandy HP worm?

> > >

> >

>







----------------------------

#43514 Jul 29, 2009

very nice Floyd... thanks for going through the trouble.. it shows you have a smooth worm in that area of the gear... i plan on checking mine from horizon to horizon just for the hell of it.. and where there's bumps if any im gonna mark that area and inspect the gear wheel closely if i cant fix it i can avoid it at least.



robert

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> Hi,

> Just so happens that I did take a one hour exposure with no guiding and the Polar Alignment intensionally set wrong, so that I would get good trails.

>

> I uploaded these to this folder.

> groups.yahoo.com/group/Losmandy_users/photos/album/1307745612/pic/list

>

> They are the last two pictures. One shows the one hour exposure, image scale is 1.17" and the other shows a crop of 1 worm period, 240 secs, with a 1 pixel line drawn through the center of the wave form. This allows you to see how many pixels the star moved up and down. You can see that the bight pixels, the centroid of the star moved about one pixel up and 3 down (approximately) peak to peak or about 5". The trails and the stars were difficult read with certainty, it seems like the centroid moved as I described, but hard to be sure.

> The quality of the crop is not so great because I had to blow it up so you could see it well as it was only about a 1 inch section of one star trail representing 240 secs of time.

>

> I also did a non guided log that night that showed these measurements that was 2 worm periods. This seems to show about 2.67" peak to peak. Not sure which is correct.

> This of course shows the PE as seen by PHD with guiding corrections disabled.

>

> Peak PE+:.1.67 arcsecs

> Peak PE-:.-1.00 arcsecs

> RMS PE: ..0.54 arcsecs

> Av. PE: ..-0.19 arcsecs

> Av. PE+:..0.41 arcsecs

> Av. PE-:..-0.43 arcsecs

> Max Delta+:.0.37 arcsecs

> Max Delta-:.-0.32 arcsecs

> Av. Noise:.0.02 arcsecs

>

> Hope this information is what you wanted.

> Floyd

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "photons" photons0@> wrote:

> >

> > hia! Floyd... sure would be nice to have a visual of that ovision worms PE..

> >

> > software graph/analysis is great, dont get me wrong! but a visual star trail of the PE is priceless.. :) youll know for certain you have PEC trained just right if you do the test.

> >

> >

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Floyd Blue" fblue@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Not sure there is a definitive conclusion reached on this as yet. I just bought PemPro and will be running it to try to get a real PE from the run. I have tried other things like guiding with the corrections disabled in PHD and then checking the resulting log with PECPrep and it seems to show less than 2" at this time, but I have another that shows about 3.5-4" PE.

> > > I can say that it does seem to have smoothed things a lot.

> > > Floyd

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Curtis Croulet" calypte@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Is there a definitive verdict on the effectivess of the Ovision worm? Does it provide $500 worth of improvement over the Losmandy HP worm?

> > > >

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#43517 Jul 29, 2009

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Ulowetz" joe.ulowetz@...> wrote: >

> I bought my Ovision worm last October for my G-11, and I can now consistently guide better than 1 arcsec, and sometimes as low as 0.3 arcsec RMS. I image at 2350mm.

>

> I'm very glad I upgraded to it.

>

> -Joe

>



That's a strong endorsement of the Ovision worm. Thanks.



----------------------------

#45369 Mar 30, 2010

Hi all,



I just uploaded in the files section (Ovision results) my recently obtained results of my new Ovision worm on my G11 compared to the old worm - Peak to peak - 3.9 arcsec - pretty good.



cheers,



Jeff



----------------------------

#46907 Sep 12, 2010

My new worm just arrived and I had it installed in 20 minutes...no

problem. This is the first time I have ever opened up the worms...what

fun. I have posted a graph under Files>Losmandy vs Ovision>HILBORN

Ovision PE graph.



Can someone comment on the graph and what it is telling me in layman's

terms ?...the guiding was really, really smooth and the average PE looks

to be +- 0.6 or so....as they say "close enough for government work"



Thanks for any input

Cheers

Lynn



----------------------------

#46943 Sep 17, 2010

Hello,



I to installed the ovision kit recently and did some testshots.

PE is manually calculated and some comment can help to confirm the values :-)

I'm very satisfied with the results, this is a 240sec unguided/unmodified (816mm focal lenght) testimage of the Double cluster in Perseus:

home.online.no/~gegausta/DoubleClusterTest.htm

and here is the startrail I used to calculate the PE:

home.online.no/~gegausta/G11Ovision.htm



Installation of the kit is quite easy, the only thing that can be a little bit tricky is to get the best possible meshing of the gears.



I found the section on the RA-gear with the "largest" radius and at this spot I made sure there where no play.

Then I rotated the small gear with my fingers one whole RA-round to be sure there where no thight spots.



Now it performes beautifully and Im very plaesed.



Clear skies

Fant



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "lynnhilborn" lynnhilborn@...> wrote:

>

> My new worm just arrived and I had it installed in 20 minutes...no

> problem. This is the first time I have ever opened up the worms...what

> fun. I have posted a graph under Files>Losmandy vs Ovision>HILBORN

> Ovision PE graph.

>

> Can someone comment on the graph and what it is telling me in layman's

> terms ?...the guiding was really, really smooth and the average PE looks

> to be +- 0.6 or so....as they say "close enough for government work"

>

> Thanks for any input

> Cheers

> Lynn

>







----------------------------

#48796 May 21, 2011

I want to adjust the backflash on my new ovision worm, that I have just installed, could anyone tell me if I need to loosen the RA clutch, as you do when you intall it?



----------------------------

#48800 May 21, 2011

You do not have to loosen the clutch, but you can if you like. I like to use the end of the counter weight shaft to judge the play, so I leave the clutch tightened. But you can also use your fingers on the Oldham coupler to feel the lash, with the clutch loosened.

Floyd

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Riccardo" riccardo.pecce@...> wrote:

>

>

>

> I want to adjust the backflash on my new ovision worm, that I have just installed, could anyone tell me if I need to loosen the RA clutch, as you do when you intall it?

>



----------------------------

#48801 May 22, 2011

So, slippage doesn't hurt anything?



Bart

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "bakersfieldbiker" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> You do not have to loosen the clutch, but you can if you like. I like to use the end of the counter weight shaft to judge the play, so I leave the clutch tightened. But you can also use your fingers on the Oldham coupler to feel the lash, with the clutch loosened.

> Floyd

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Riccardo" riccardo.pecce@> wrote:

> >

> >

> >

> > I want to adjust the backflash on my new ovision worm, that I have just installed, could anyone tell me if I need to loosen the RA clutch, as you do when you intall it?

> >

>



----------------------------

#48804 May 22, 2011

When adjusting the worm, you are just setting the lash between the worm and worm wheel. So slippage is not an issue really.

The big thing is that you need to check the lash all the way around the worm wheel, the large gear, to find any tight spots. This is where the minimum lash is set, not in a loose spot. Most every wheel has a tight area, it does not take much to make a tight spot.

So, I usually run the mount full motion in the axis and check it ever few degrees to find the tight spot, then I adjust the lash there.

Ovision recommends that you have about 1.5 to 2mm of play at the end of the counter weight shaft when adjusting this lash, this is what I used.

Floyd

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "bartjy" QTMServer@...> wrote:

>

>

> So, slippage doesn't hurt anything?

>

> Bart

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "bakersfieldbiker" fblue@> wrote:

> >

> > You do not have to loosen the clutch, but you can if you like. I like to use the end of the counter weight shaft to judge the play, so I leave the clutch tightened. But you can also use your fingers on the Oldham coupler to feel the lash, with the clutch loosened.

> > Floyd

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Riccardo" riccardo.pecce@> wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > I want to adjust the backflash on my new ovision worm, that I have just installed, could anyone tell me if I need to loosen the RA clutch, as you do when you intall it?

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#48806 May 23, 2011

Thank you very much for your help..

The reason I whant to set the backflash is because when I am tracking

(1800mm FL) for about a minute or so I get elongate stars or double stars any idea what is wrong..

polar alignment is ok..











--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "bakersfieldbiker" fblue@...> wrote:

>

> When adjusting the worm, you are just setting the lash between the worm and worm wheel. So slippage is not an issue really.

> The big thing is that you need to check the lash all the way around the worm wheel, the large gear, to find any tight spots. This is where the minimum lash is set, not in a loose spot. Most every wheel has a tight area, it does not take much to make a tight spot.

> So, I usually run the mount full motion in the axis and check it ever few degrees to find the tight spot, then I adjust the lash there.

> Ovision recommends that you have about 1.5 to 2mm of play at the end of the counter weight shaft when adjusting this lash, this is what I used.

> Floyd

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "bartjy" QTMServer@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > So, slippage doesn't hurt anything?

> >

> > Bart

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "bakersfieldbiker" fblue@> wrote:

> > >

> > > You do not have to loosen the clutch, but you can if you like. I like to use the end of the counter weight shaft to judge the play, so I leave the clutch tightened. But you can also use your fingers on the Oldham coupler to feel the lash, with the clutch loosened.

> > > Floyd

> > >

> > > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Riccardo" riccardo.pecce@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > I want to adjust the backflash on my new ovision worm, that I have just installed, could anyone tell me if I need to loosen the RA clutch, as you do when you intall it?

> > > >

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#48807 May 24, 2011

Hi Bart



Elongated stars suggest a polar error, double stars are a sudden movement.



I use 1750 or 3048 as my F/L and found that before I biased the OTA to

the east that I had the same problem.



There are a few post and pictures in either Rainers folder or mine (mine

are in the Gemini group photos section under 'badgers little shop of

horrors') detailing or showing how to add a weight to automatically ad

this offset regardless of E/W position.



Before you go down that route you can perform a simple test to see if

this is the problem and cure by slipping the weights up or down the

shaft to make the OTA heavy to the east, this makes the mount push the

OTA rather than allowing gravity to let the OTA drop to fill the gap (if

that makes sense), a well balanced OTA is prone to this as it allows the

OTA to float between the worm backlash.



There are other causes:



I once had this occur because I used to walk away from the mount on my

Patio (which though I considered this a solid base obviously was not)

jerked the mount with every step I made, a longer shutter release cable

cured this.



I have had a sticky worm bearing that also cause a jump every so often

very similar to the 76 second error mentioned on here, I think Mark

Crossley's site gives a very good description of that problem

www.wilmslowastro.com/tips/g11gemini.htm#bearing_block



You can also do a long 8 minute exposure to get in 2 complete worm

rotations and see if this error is repeatable, I.E every 20 seconds etc.

Pempro (they have a demo) will help in narrowing down a repeatable error.



I am sure others will also offer advice to track this down, good luck



Regards Badger









On 23/05/2011 17:59, Riccardo wrote:

> Thank you very much for your help..

> The reason I whant to set the backflash is because when I am tracking

> (1800mm FL) for about a minute or so I get elongate stars or double stars any idea what is wrong..

> polar alignment is ok..

>







----------------------------

#48808 May 24, 2011

Bart



I forgot to mention mirror flop, given your F/L I will guess that you

use a SCT or MAK



Badger





On 23/05/2011 17:59, Riccardo wrote:

> Thank you very much for your help..

> The reason I whant to set the backflash is because when I am tracking

> (1800mm FL) for about a minute or so I get elongate stars or double stars any idea what is wrong..

> polar alignment is ok..

>

>

>

>

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "bakersfieldbiker"fblue@...> wrote:

>> When adjusting the worm, you are just setting the lash between the worm and worm wheel. So slippage is not an issue really.

>> The big thing is that you need to check the lash all the way around the worm wheel, the large gear, to find any tight spots. This is where the minimum lash is set, not in a loose spot. Most every wheel has a tight area, it does not take much to make a tight spot.

>> So, I usually run the mount full motion in the axis and check it ever few degrees to find the tight spot, then I adjust the lash there.

>> Ovision recommends that you have about 1.5 to 2mm of play at the end of the counter weight shaft when adjusting this lash, this is what I used.

>> Floyd

>>

>> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "bartjy"QTMServer@> wrote:

>>>

>>> So, slippage doesn't hurt anything?

>>>

>>> Bart

>>>

>>> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "bakersfieldbiker"fblue@> wrote:

>>>> You do not have to loosen the clutch, but you can if you like. I like to use the end of the counter weight shaft to judge the play, so I leave the clutch tightened. But you can also use your fingers on the Oldham coupler to feel the lash, with the clutch loosened.

>>>> Floyd

>>>>

>>>> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Riccardo"riccardo.pecce@> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> I want to adjust the backflash on my new ovision worm, that I have just installed, could anyone tell me if I need to loosen the RA clutch, as you do when you intall it?

>>>>>

>

>

>

---------------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

>



----------------------------

#49725 Sep 22, 2011

Hi,



I just ordered an Ovision work yesterday. I submitted the order form by e-mail. Does anyone know how long it typically takes for one of these to arrive in the States?



Thanks



John



----------------------------

#49727 Sep 23, 2011

I ordered mine a couple of years ago, so I don't know about current times. Mine took about a month. I think it's more a function of how soon he has a worm ready to ship, rather than the shipping time from France.



-Joe

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "John Miele" jmiele@...> wrote:

>

> Hi,

>

> I just ordered an Ovision work yesterday. I submitted the order form by e-mail. Does anyone know how long it typically takes for one of these to arrive in the States?

>

> Thanks

>

> John

>



----------------------------

#49738 Sep 23, 2011

John,



I got mine in May. It shipped in about a week. However, the mail

processes took about 2 weeks. But it was worth the wait.



My PE prior to Ovision was +/- 14 arc seconds. With Ovision, it was

down to about +/-1 arc seconds. On top of that I use Sidereal Tech's

Tick Management to improve my unguided error to under 0.5 arc seconds.



Steve



----------------------------

#49742 Sep 23, 2011

Thanks guys. I'll hope it's 3 to 4 weeks for me too!



John

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Ruhl sfruhl@...> wrote:

>

> John,

>

> I got mine in May. It shipped in about a week. However, the mail

> processes took about 2 weeks. But it was worth the wait.

>

> My PE prior to Ovision was +/- 14 arc seconds. With Ovision, it was

> down to about +/-1 arc seconds. On top of that I use Sidereal Tech's

> Tick Management to improve my unguided error to under 0.5 arc seconds.

>

> Steve

>



----------------------------

#49743 Sep 23, 2011

If he has one in stock, it's just a matter of your credit card or check

clearing. I got mine about 5 days after he processed payment.



Dave



----------------------------

#51998 Nov 23, 2012

I just bought a used OVision worm. The instructions state that there should be 1-2mm play at the end of the counterweight shaft. I see at least one web site that suggests feeler gauges and a ruler to measure this. Seems like good advice.



www.earwighavenobservatory.com/content/adjusting-g11-worm-gear-backlash



Two questions.



1. Is this what everyone uses? Or do you simply work for a tiny bit of play at the counterweight shaft end?



2. I am assuming I should apply some lubricant. White lithium OK?



Thanks, Ed



----------------------------

#51999 Nov 23, 2012

Hi, Ed...There's been a lot of discussion about which grease to use. I recently lubed my worms and worm gears with red Mobil 1 synthetic grease and things have been working fine. I just have the original worms that came with the G11. I used a feeler gauge when tightening the worm blocks to make sure they were installed evenly on both blocks. When checking for play at the end of the counterweight shaft I had a dial indicator touching the shaft end. The dial indicator rig was clamped firmly to a 30" bar stool. HTH.



-Bob

www.willowriseobservatory.com

On Nov 23, 2012, at 11:26 AM, "Ed Wiley" edwiley@...> wrote:



> I just bought a used OVision worm. The instructions state that there should be 1-2mm play at the end of the counterweight shaft. I see at least one web site that suggests feeler gauges and a ruler to measure this. Seems like good advice.

>

> www.earwighavenobservatory.com/content/adjusting-g11-worm-gear-backlash

>

> Two questions.

>

> 1. Is this what everyone uses? Or do you simply work for a tiny bit of play at the counterweight shaft end?

>

> 2. I am assuming I should apply some lubricant. White lithium OK?

>

> Thanks, Ed

>

>

>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#52000 Nov 24, 2012

Hi Bob: A dial indicator? Why didn't I think of that, I have a couple. I'll look around the group for lubricant variations. Great post, many thanks.



Ed

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, Bob willowriseobservatory@...> wrote:

>

> Hi, Ed...There's been a lot of discussion about which grease to use. I recently lubed my worms and worm gears with red Mobil 1 synthetic grease and things have been working fine. I just have the original worms that came with the G11. I used a feeler gauge when tightening the worm blocks to make sure they were installed evenly on both blocks. When checking for play at the end of the counterweight shaft I had a dial indicator touching the shaft end. The dial indicator rig was clamped firmly to a 30" bar stool. HTH.

>

> -Bob

> www.willowriseobservatory.com

>

> On Nov 23, 2012, at 11:26 AM, "Ed Wiley" edwiley@...> wrote:

>

> > I just bought a used OVision worm. The instructions state that there should be 1-2mm play at the end of the counterweight shaft. I see at least one web site that suggests feeler gauges and a ruler to measure this. Seems like good advice.

> >

> > www.earwighavenobservatory.com/content/adjusting-g11-worm-gear-backlash

> >

> > Two questions.

> >

> > 1. Is this what everyone uses? Or do you simply work for a tiny bit of play at the counterweight shaft end?

> >

> > 2. I am assuming I should apply some lubricant. White lithium OK?

> >

> > Thanks, Ed

> >

> >

> >

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>



----------------------------

#52001 Nov 24, 2012

Personally, I don't find feeler guages to be much use for mount adjustment. Making adjustments with the axis slewing is the best way to get the worm adjusted as tight as possible without binding.



For lube, use SuperLube. You are mixing lubes, which is not a good thing, but SuperLube will generally not react with other lubes so that will be OK. Do not use white lithium for this under any circumstances. Someone else recommended Mobile 1, and while I use this on my milling machine, it is not good for this application because it will not stay in place. A oil has to be replenished frequently which will just make a mess of your mount.



Ed Thomas

Deep Space Products

www.deepspaceproducts.com





--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Ed Wiley" edwiley@...> wrote:

>

> I just bought a used OVision worm. The instructions state that there should be 1-2mm play at the end of the counterweight shaft. I see at least one web site that suggests feeler gauges and a ruler to measure this. Seems like good advice.

>

> www.earwighavenobservatory.com/content/adjusting-g11-worm-gear-backlash

>

> Two questions.

>

> 1. Is this what everyone uses? Or do you simply work for a tiny bit of play at the counterweight shaft end?

>

> 2. I am assuming I should apply some lubricant. White lithium OK?

>

> Thanks, Ed

>



----------------------------

#52007 Nov 25, 2012

Thanks, Ed: Super lube it is. Any links to the axis slewing adjustment protocol?



Ed

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Edward Thomas" dsproducts@...> wrote:

>

> Personally, I don't find feeler guages to be much use for mount adjustment. Making adjustments with the axis slewing is the best way to get the worm adjusted as tight as possible without binding.

>

> For lube, use SuperLube. You are mixing lubes, which is not a good thing, but SuperLube will generally not react with other lubes so that will be OK. Do not use white lithium for this under any circumstances. Someone else recommended Mobile 1, and while I use this on my milling machine, it is not good for this application because it will not stay in place. A oil has to be replenished frequently which will just make a mess of your mount.

>

> Ed Thomas

> Deep Space Products

> www.deepspaceproducts.com

>

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Ed Wiley" edwiley@> wrote:

> >

> > I just bought a used OVision worm. The instructions state that there should be 1-2mm play at the end of the counterweight shaft. I see at least one web site that suggests feeler gauges and a ruler to measure this. Seems like good advice.

> >

> > www.earwighavenobservatory.com/content/adjusting-g11-worm-gear-backlash

> >

> > Two questions.

> >

> > 1. Is this what everyone uses? Or do you simply work for a tiny bit of play at the counterweight shaft end?

> >

> > 2. I am assuming I should apply some lubricant. White lithium OK?

> >

> > Thanks, Ed

> >

>



----------------------------

#52008 Nov 25, 2012

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Edward Thomas" dsproducts@...> wrote:

>> For lube, use SuperLube. You are mixing lubes, which is not a good thing, but SuperLube will generally not react with other lubes so that will be OK. Do not use white lithium for this under any circumstances.



Why not white lithium? I spent most of yesterday giving my G11 and

thorough cleaning and lubricated with white lithium. Will I be

spending next weekend cleaning the white lithium out, or is it just

bad to mix?







----------------------------

#52010 Nov 26, 2012

You have to be careful when mixing lubricants. On lube may cause another to break down or separate. The problem with white lithium is that is separates on its own leaving a clay-like substance that makes a mess of things and does provide good lubrication. The next time you clean your mount, it will be much more difficult.



Ed Thomas

Deep Space Products

www.deepspaceproducts.com



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, Will Beers whbeers@...> wrote:

>

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Edward Thomas" dsproducts@> wrote:

> >> For lube, use SuperLube. You are mixing lubes, which is not a good thing, but SuperLube will generally not react with other lubes so that will be OK. Do not use white lithium for this under any circumstances.

>

> Why not white lithium? I spent most of yesterday giving my G11 and

> thorough cleaning and lubricated with white lithium. Will I be

> spending next weekend cleaning the white lithium out, or is it just

> bad to mix?

>



----------------------------

#52011 Nov 26, 2012

The easiest way to make the adjustment is simply to press the worm up against the wheel tightly and snug it down, leaving it just loose enough to slide with a little effort. This will be too tight. From there, try to slew the axis while pushing the worm block away from the wheel (with a screw driver as a pry if using the original worm blocks, or with the adjustment thumb screw if using the new OPWB). You are just looking for the point at which the motor will not stall and the worm will turn. If there was something I would change on these mounts, it would be to only have one-piece worm blocks and to add a decent adjustment mechanism.



Ed Thomas

Deep Space Products

www.deepspaceproducts.com



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Ed Wiley" edwiley@...> wrote:

>

> Thanks, Ed: Super lube it is. Any links to the axis slewing adjustment protocol?

>

> Ed



----------------------------

#52013 Nov 26, 2012

Ed: Do you prefer the standard SuperLube or the silicone SuperLube?



Thansk!



Bryan

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Edward Thomas" dsproducts@...> wrote:

>

> Personally, I don't find feeler guages to be much use for mount adjustment. Making adjustments with the axis slewing is the best way to get the worm adjusted as tight as possible without binding.

>

> For lube, use SuperLube. You are mixing lubes, which is not a good thing, but SuperLube will generally not react with other lubes so that will be OK. Do not use white lithium for this under any circumstances. Someone else recommended Mobile 1, and while I use this on my milling machine, it is not good for this application because it will not stay in place. A oil has to be replenished frequently which will just make a mess of your mount.

>

> Ed Thomas

> Deep Space Products

> www.deepspaceproducts.com



----------------------------

#52016 Nov 27, 2012

I use the standard multi-purpose grease.



Ed Thomas

Deep Space Products

www.deepspaceproducts.com



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Worsel" bryancashion@...> wrote:

>

> Ed: Do you prefer the standard SuperLube or the silicone SuperLube?

>

> Thansk!

>

> Bryan

>



----------------------------

#52017 Nov 27, 2012

Thanks!



Bryan

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Edward Thomas" dsproducts@...> wrote:

>

> I use the standard multi-purpose grease.

>

> Ed Thomas

> Deep Space Products

> www.deepspaceproducts.com

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Worsel" bryancashion@> wrote:

> >

> > Ed: Do you prefer the standard SuperLube or the silicone SuperLube?

> >



----------------------------

#52021 Nov 29, 2012

I used a brush and some isopropyl alcohol and cleaned all the grease off the worm and gear. Then I applied Mobil One synthetic grease to the entire assembly. Regreased after 4 years. No problems.



The advantage of Mobil One is the temperature range far exceeds anything we'll see during those cold nights.



Tom P.

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Edward Thomas" dsproducts@...> wrote:

>

> I use the standard multi-purpose grease.

>

> Ed Thomas

> Deep Space Products

> www.deepspaceproducts.com

>

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "Worsel" bryancashion@> wrote:

> >

> > Ed: Do you prefer the standard SuperLube or the silicone SuperLube?

> >

> > Thansk!

> >

> > Bryan

> >

>



----------------------------

#52496 Mar 18, 2013

Hi I am new to the group and was wondering for Astrophotography would the Ovision Worm Gear really help. I am using a Celestron C11 for visual, and will be using an ED 80 Orion refractor for imaging.



----------------------------

#52497 Mar 19, 2013

I think with only a 4-600mm F/L you certainly would not need the Ovision

upgrade, if you had a OTA over 1500mm I would have said possibly and if

you were using a 10" SCT yes but all the G11's I have used have as

standard been fine with such short focal length scopes as the Megrez 72,

ED80/100's.



Badger





On 19/03/2013 04:16, Don wrote:

> Hi I am new to the group and was wondering for Astrophotography would the Ovision Worm Gear really help. I am using a Celestron C11 for visual, and will be using an ED 80 Orion refractor for imaging.

>

>

>

---------------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

>







----------------------------

#52498 Mar 19, 2013

I agree with what Badger said. If you do move to a longer focal length, such as the C11 you mentioned, then yes. the Ovision worm will help tremendously. I've been using mine for 2 years. PE is down to 1.7 arc seconds peak to peak. It was 15 with the standard worm.



I am using a C 9.25 on a G11 Gemini 2. Haven't taken it out since the gemini upgrade but using the Gemini 1 previously I had great results.



Tom P.

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, David Mercer david.mercer@...> wrote:

>

> I think with only a 4-600mm F/L you certainly would not need the Ovision

> upgrade, if you had a OTA over 1500mm I would have said possibly and if

> you were using a 10" SCT yes but all the G11's I have used have as

> standard been fine with such short focal length scopes as the Megrez 72,

> ED80/100's.

>

> Badger

>

>

>

> On 19/03/2013 04:16, Don wrote:

> > Hi I am new to the group and was wondering for Astrophotography would the Ovision Worm Gear really help. I am using a Celestron C11 for visual, and will be using an ED 80 Orion refractor for imaging.

> >

> >

> >

---------------

> >

> > Yahoo! Groups Links

> >

> >

> >

> >

>



----------------------------

#52500 Mar 19, 2013

I have used the C11 in the past with a smaller mount the Cg-5, this gave me poor results. Always defocused planets and elongated stars, but then again I had issues with probably not the best polar alignment. Thus my interest is looking toward an ED 80.

I notice I do not see any subject material on what people are using for autoguiding. Does the G11 need autoguiding?



Sent from my iPad



On Mar 19, 2013, at 3:57 AM, "tpiccian" tpicciani@...> wrote:Ed

> I agree with what Badger said. If you do move to a longer focal length, such as the C11 you mentioned, then yes. the Ovision worm will help tremendously. I've been using mine for 2 years. PE is down to 1.7 arc seconds peak to peak. It was 15 with the standard worm.

>

> I am using a C 9.25 on a G11 Gemini 2. Haven't taken it out since the gemini upgrade but using the Gemini 1 previously I had great results.

>

> Tom P.

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, David Mercer david.mercer@...> wrote:

> >

> > I think with only a 4-600mm F/L you certainly would not need the Ovision

> > upgrade, if you had a OTA over 1500mm I would have said possibly and if

> > you were using a 10" SCT yes but all the G11's I have used have as

> > standard been fine with such short focal length scopes as the Megrez 72,

> > ED80/100's.

> >

> > Badger

> >

> >

> >

> > On 19/03/2013 04:16, Don wrote:

> > > Hi I am new to the group and was wondering for Astrophotography would the Ovision Worm Gear really help. I am using a Celestron C11 for visual, and will be using an ED 80 Orion refractor for imaging.

> > >

> > >

> > >

---------------

> > >

> > > Yahoo! Groups Links

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

>

>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#52501 Mar 19, 2013

In my opinion, every mount needs autoguiding unless you're taking moon or planet images. If you don't, even the slightest alignment issue will cause trailing.



I use an ST8 and I love it. They can be had at a reasonable price on Astromart.



Tom P.

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, Don don123donxyz@...> wrote:

>

> I have used the C11 in the past with a smaller mount the Cg-5, this gave me poor results. Always defocused planets and elongated stars, but then again I had issues with probably not the best polar alignment. Thus my interest is looking toward an ED 80.

> I notice I do not see any subject material on what people are using for autoguiding. Does the G11 need autoguiding?

>

> Sent from my iPad

>

> On Mar 19, 2013, at 3:57 AM, "tpiccian" tpicciani@...> wrote:Ed

>

> > I agree with what Badger said. If you do move to a longer focal length, such as the C11 you mentioned, then yes. the Ovision worm will help tremendously. I've been using mine for 2 years. PE is down to 1.7 arc seconds peak to peak. It was 15 with the standard worm.

> >

> > I am using a C 9.25 on a G11 Gemini 2. Haven't taken it out since the gemini upgrade but using the Gemini 1 previously I had great results.

> >

> > Tom P.

> >

> > --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, David Mercer david.mercer@> wrote:

> > >

> > > I think with only a 4-600mm F/L you certainly would not need the Ovision

> > > upgrade, if you had a OTA over 1500mm I would have said possibly and if

> > > you were using a 10" SCT yes but all the G11's I have used have as

> > > standard been fine with such short focal length scopes as the Megrez 72,

> > > ED80/100's.

> > >

> > > Badger

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > On 19/03/2013 04:16, Don wrote:

> > > > Hi I am new to the group and was wondering for Astrophotography would the Ovision Worm Gear really help. I am using a Celestron C11 for visual, and will be using an ED 80 Orion refractor for imaging.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

---------------

> > > >

> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> >

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>







----------------------------

#52504 Mar 19, 2013

What about cameras with built in guiding chips? Do they work? SBIG

makes them, but kind of expensive.



DonM

Bayview, TX





On 3/19/13 10:06 AM, tpiccian wrote:

>

>

> In my opinion, every mount needs autoguiding unless you're taking moon

> or planet images. If you don't, even the slightest alignment issue

> will cause trailing.

>

> I use an ST8 and I love it. They can be had at a reasonable price on

> Astromart.

>

> Tom P.

>



----------------------------

#52505 Mar 19, 2013

SBIG is the ONLY camera manufacturer at this time to have dual chip cameras. They have the lock on the patent as far as I'm aware. I have been using an ST8 for a couple years and an ST7 for a few years prior to that.



The advantage of the guiding chip is that if there is mirror flop or slippage, the guide and main camera are using the same optics and thus are always in sync. So there's no chance of a slipping guide scope.



The disadvantage is that you will be guiding through the color filters and that can dim the exposures. Some software such as Maxim can compensate by setting different guide times based on the color filter used.



But longer guide exposures lead to longer times between correction, so there's some tradeoff. If you're using the Ovision worm, usually that's not too much of a problem because you're probably not going to be exposing the guide camera more that 5 or 6 seconds. And that's not enough time to let the star drift very far.



Tom P.

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, DON MOSES RCFLYER@...> wrote:

>

> What about cameras with built in guiding chips? Do they work? SBIG

> makes them, but kind of expensive.

>

> DonM

> Bayview, TX

>

>

>

> On 3/19/13 10:06 AM, tpiccian wrote:

> >

> >

> > In my opinion, every mount needs autoguiding unless you're taking moon

> > or planet images. If you don't, even the slightest alignment issue

> > will cause trailing.

> >

> > I use an ST8 and I love it. They can be had at a reasonable price on

> > Astromart.

> >

> > Tom P.

> >

>



----------------------------

#52506 Mar 19, 2013

the newer SBIG cameras (STT) have the guide CCD in the filter wheel assembly and the pickoff prism is in front of the filters.



the camera still thinks the guide CCD is internal; there's an HDMI cable connecting the filter wheel to the camera body.



rob



--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, "tpiccian" tpicciani@...> wrote:

>

> SBIG is the ONLY camera manufacturer at this time to have dual chip cameras. They have the lock on the patent as far as I'm aware. I have been using an ST8 for a couple years and an ST7 for a few years prior to that.

>

> The advantage of the guiding chip is that if there is mirror flop or slippage, the guide and main camera are using the same optics and thus are always in sync. So there's no chance of a slipping guide scope.

>

> The disadvantage is that you will be guiding through the color filters and that can dim the exposures. Some software such as Maxim can compensate by setting different guide times based on the color filter used.

>

> But longer guide exposures lead to longer times between correction, so there's some tradeoff. If you're using the Ovision worm, usually that's not too much of a problem because you're probably not going to be exposing the guide camera more that 5 or 6 seconds. And that's not enough time to let the star drift very far.

>

> Tom P.

>

> --- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, DON MOSES RCFLYER@> wrote:

> >

> > What about cameras with built in guiding chips? Do they work? SBIG

> > makes them, but kind of expensive.

> >

> > DonM

> > Bayview, TX

> >

> >

> >

> > On 3/19/13 10:06 AM, tpiccian wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > In my opinion, every mount needs autoguiding unless you're taking moon

> > > or planet images. If you don't, even the slightest alignment issue

> > > will cause trailing.

> > >

> > > I use an ST8 and I love it. They can be had at a reasonable price on

> > > Astromart.

> > >

> > > Tom P.

> > >

> >

>



----------------------------

#52513 Mar 21, 2013

Don,



That will depend on what issues you are having and the current worm you have.



From posts on various sites this appears to be quite variable so whether you want it or not will depend on your requirements and results.



Regards



Paul Homer On 19/03/2013, at 3:16 PM, "Don" don123donxyz@...> wrote:



> Hi I am new to the group and was wondering for Astrophotography would the Ovision Worm Gear really help. I am using a Celestron C11 for visual, and will be using an ED 80 Orion refractor for imaging.

>

>







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#52514 Mar 21, 2013

I think another reason the PE of the mounts vary is mainly down to how

the worm is adjusted, we also have 2 piece worm block, 1 piece with

floating gearbox, Ovision 1 piece with fixed gearbox, steel or brass

worms to throw into the mix, all this makes it almost impossible to work

out what will work for your mount, on paper the Ovision worm with the

Losmandy one piece block should in theory be the best combination, but

real world tests have shown this is not always the case.



On 21/03/2013 08:14, Paul Homer wrote:

> Don,

>

> That will depend on what issues you are having and the current worm you have.

>

> > From posts on various sites this appears to be quite variable so whether you want it or not will depend on your requirements and results.

>

> Regards

>

> Paul Homer

> On 19/03/2013, at 3:16 PM, "Don"don123donxyz@...> wrote:

>

>> Hi I am new to the group and was wondering for Astrophotography would the Ovision Worm Gear really help. I am using a Celestron C11 for visual, and will be using an ED 80 Orion refractor for imaging.

>>

>>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>

>

>

---------------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

>







----------------------------

#52525 Mar 25, 2013

I think the real answer here is to measure your PE and see what you have. The easiest way to do this is with a camera and some software. Pempro is THE package everyone uses (you can get a 30 day eval license) but it also needs a camera control package (like MaximDL, also 30 day eval avail).



Measuring your PE will tell you much more than just your PE, it will also give you insight as to how easy/difficult guiding will be. Regardless of how large your peak to peak PE is, if the frequency analysis shows significant high frequency components then guiding will require extremely short exposures to have any chance of correcting fast enough. If your only PE errors are very low frequency (near the worm period), then guiding should be easy, even if the PE is somewhat large.



This will also tell you if investing in a precision worm, OPWB, or Ovision might be worthwhile. You can measure your PE as is, and if unhappy with the results, disassemble, adjust, tinker, etc until you get it the way you want or give up and buy the upgrade. The software will also allow you to generate a PE correction curve and program your mount to compensate for some of the errors (only those that are related to the worm period). You can of course then measure the results and see if it actually helped.



My G-11 has the Losmandy precision brass worm and the OPWB. My (uncorrected) PE is 4.8 arc-sec peak to peak with no high frequency components, and no 76 sec error. The curve is very smooth, so I did not bother with PEC (Periodic Error Correction). Because the curve is smooth and low frequency, my auto guider can easily correct any errors.



Cheers,

Mark

--- In Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com, David Mercer david.mercer@...> wrote:

>

> I think another reason the PE of the mounts vary is mainly down to how

> the worm is adjusted, we also have 2 piece worm block, 1 piece with

> floating gearbox, Ovision 1 piece with fixed gearbox, steel or brass

> worms to throw into the mix, all this makes it almost impossible to work

> out what will work for your mount, on paper the Ovision worm with the

> Losmandy one piece block should in theory be the best combination, but

> real world tests have shown this is not always the case.

>

>

> On 21/03/2013 08:14, Paul Homer wrote:

> > Don,

> >

> > That will depend on what issues you are having and the current worm you have.

> >

> > > From posts on various sites this appears to be quite variable so whether you want it or not will depend on your requirements and results.

> >

> > Regards

> >

> > Paul Homer

> > On 19/03/2013, at 3:16 PM, "Don"don123donxyz@...> wrote:

> >

> >> Hi I am new to the group and was wondering for Astrophotography would the Ovision Worm Gear really help. I am using a Celestron C11 for visual, and will be using an ED 80 Orion refractor for imaging.

> >>

> >>

> >

> >

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> >

> >

> >

---------------

> >

> > Yahoo! Groups Links

> >

> >

> >

> >

>



----------------------------

#52527 Mar 26, 2013

You could see quite an improvement by just adding the Losmandy brass worm and at $60 it's a bargain.

Good luck



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#52528 Mar 27, 2013

I'll second that: Replacing the old steel with the brass

high precision worm was all I needed to do to mine.



Mark C.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#52529 Mar 27, 2013

Mark...Did you change both worms or just RA?



-Bob

www.willowriseobservatory.com

On Mar 27, 2013, at 9:38 AM, "Mark Christensen" mjcw500@...> wrote:



> I'll second that: Replacing the old steel with the brass

> high precision worm was all I needed to do to mine.

>

> Mark C.

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>

>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#52533 Mar 28, 2013

Since the cost was so reasonable, I did both. I also

swapped out the worm bearings and the RA bearing

blocks since I bought mine used and one of the

(frustrated?) prior owners had seriously over-torqued

the blocks and I was worried that the thin metal had

been distorted. Sheer conservatism on my part but

since they were so cheap I did it anyway.



Mark C.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#52536 Mar 28, 2013

only RA worm changed



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#52537 Mar 28, 2013

I have a question about the Steel worm gears versus the brass hi precision gears.



My G-11 was built in 2008. Does anyone know what Losmandy was putting in the G-11 at that time??







Aubrey Brickhouse







From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bob

Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 1:22 PM

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

Subject: Re: [Losmandy_users] Re: Losmandy G11 Ovision Worm











Mark...Did you change both worms or just RA?



-Bob

www.willowriseobservatory.com

On Mar 27, 2013, at 9:38 AM, "Mark Christensen" mjcw500@... mailto:mjcw500%40att.net> > wrote:



> I'll second that: Replacing the old steel with the brass

> high precision worm was all I needed to do to mine.

>

> Mark C.

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>

>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#52540 Mar 28, 2013

Aubrey,



If you look at the worm and it's not brass, it will be the high precision steel worm. Don't know

when the brass worm was included as standard.



Don

----- Original Message -----

From: "Aubrey Brickhouse" abrickhouse1@...>

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 11:27 AM

Subject: RE: [Losmandy_users] Re: Losmandy G11 Ovision Worm





>I have a question about the Steel worm gears versus the brass hi precision gears.

>

> My G-11 was built in 2008. Does anyone know what Losmandy was putting in the G-11 at that time??

>

>

>

> Aubrey Brickhouse

>

>

>



----------------------------

#52543 Mar 28, 2013

I got an email back from Scott today and he said they incorporated them

starting in 2003 so I am good.







Aubrey







From: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com]

On Behalf Of Don D'Egidio

Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 10:43 AM

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

Subject: Re: [Losmandy_users] Re: Losmandy G11 Ovision Worm











Aubrey,



If you look at the worm and it's not brass, it will be the high precision

steel worm. Don't know

when the brass worm was included as standard.



Don

----- Original Message -----

From: "Aubrey Brickhouse" abrickhouse1@...

mailto:abrickhouse1%40sbcglobal.net> >

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

mailto:Losmandy_users%40yahoogroups.com> >

Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 11:27 AM

Subject: RE: [Losmandy_users] Re: Losmandy G11 Ovision Worm



>I have a question about the Steel worm gears versus the brass hi precision

gears.

>

> My G-11 was built in 2008. Does anyone know what Losmandy was putting in

the G-11 at that time??

>

>

>

> Aubrey Brickhouse

>

>

>











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#52554 Mar 29, 2013

I'd recommend you getting a new gearbox also. They're cheap and you would have a backup just in case.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#52991 Jun 22, 2013

I thought I'd add a comment about the positive buying experience I had with my ovision worm.... I've seen people concerned about sending off order forms, the website being a bit cough>... you know.... :)





I printed out the order form, filled it in and scanned it and emailed it off, in about 3hrs (about 9am Paris time) I had a reply stating the worm was in the post, with tracking number, and the detailed specs of my worm. 8 days later the worm was on my desk (Australia).

Excellent, speedy service, and the worm itself is a piece of art, a shame to hide it behind the cover....





Now its installed, and everything seems to have survived my mount reassembly/regrease, I just need some stars to see how good it is! :)



Lee



----------------------------

#53950 Mar 10, 2014

My question is should I replace both my DEC and RA steel worms with Ovision Worms. My tracking is poorly even at45 seconds now with proper polar alignment.



Sent from Windows Mail



----------------------------

#53951 Mar 11, 2014

I think of the Ovision worm as a super fine-tune type of thing.�� If you don't have things working fairly well, you won't see the benefit of the Ovision worm.



From: "don123donxyz@..." don123donxyz@...> To: "losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com"losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 10:34 PM Subject: [Losmandy_users] Ovision Worm

��My question is should I replace both my DEC and RA steel worms with Ovision Worms. My tracking is poorly even at45 seconds now with proper polar alignment.



Sent from Windows Mail



----------------------------

#53952 Mar 11, 2014

The costly Ovision worm would buy you absolutely nothing for the DEC axis which does not move most of the time during ��visual tracking or imaging on a properly polar aligned equatorial mount. Don't waste your money. I have a fairly low 6 arc-sec peak to peak error on my high precision Losmandy RA worm and have to keep my exposures to 30 seconds when I don't use guiding. I am contemplating getting an Ovision to replace my RA worm.

Tom



----------------------------

#53953 Mar 11, 2014

Losmandy makes pretty darned good stuff:also!



----------------------------

#53954 Mar 11, 2014

The Losmandy worm is not as precision made or documented as is the Ovision.



----------------------------

#53955 Mar 11, 2014

Replace only the RA. Ideally, Dec should not get involved if your polar aligned. My adventures with the Ovision gear are outlined in: www.bpastro.org/uploads/newsletter/BPAANewsletterFall2011colorprintfinal.pdfMy typical track error with my G11 (no use of PEC) is less than 0.5 arc-sec RMSSee the article for details. It is not a typical setup.



----------------------------

#53956 Mar 11, 2014

Anybody know how long it typically takes to get the Ovision worm?�� I ordered mine back in January and all I know is I'm in the queue...

John



----------------------------

#53957 Mar 11, 2014

Hi this is Don Curry. I emailed Ovision on March 4th and they stated they were out of stock and that the machining process of the new run is on its way end of March. So I was going to put my order in beginningof April.







----------------------------

#53958 Mar 12, 2014

They told me the same thing in Jan (and also in Feb)- better order now...



----------------------------

#53959 Mar 12, 2014

More to the point, I suspect that Optique et Vision collects a sufficient number of orders to��cover a minimum��buy (10, 25, 50?) from his gear and/or housing supplier, then makes a production run.�� The dates you're getting are his "estimate" of when that will be.����So��help us all��and order now.

- Rick "Waiting��Since January" McAlister��



----------------------------

#54412 Jul 4, 2014

I have a mount LOSMANDY G11GII. I purchased the mount with��ONE��PIECE��WORM BLOK ��. My question is whether OVISION WORM give me better results tracking?��I now have quite a few problems tracking, really frustrating and discouraging...

In addition to all the problems that, when the mount begins to reach Zenith - it's just horror!!!

And altogether I use a focal length of 800 mm.



Tahnk you,

Eran.



----------------------------

#54413 Jul 4, 2014

Are you using autoguiding? If not, you will probably get poor results

with either OPW or ovision worm. At 800 mm, unless you shoot 30 second

subs or less, you will discard many shots.



Tom



On 7/4/2014 4:29 PM, eranzg@... [Losmandy_users] wrote:

>

>

> I have a mount LOSMANDY G11GII. I purchased the mount with ONEPIECE WORM

> BLOK . My question is whether OVISION WORM give me better results tracking?

>

> I now have quite a few problems tracking, really frustrating and

> discouraging...

>

> In addition to all the problems that, when the mount begins to reach

> Zenith - it's just horror!!!

>

> And altogether I use a focal length of 800 mm.

>

>

> Tahnk you,

>

>

> Eran.

>

>

>

>

>



----------------------------

#54415 Jul 4, 2014

Eran,

A problem when crossing the zenith is likely to be improved by slightly unbalancing the setup as there should always be some give in the gears to prevent them locking together. Because of this you should aim to be slightly heavier in the east so that the the gears are always pushing against each other.

It might assist to give some details of the tracking problems you are having.

Regards

PaulOn 5 Jul 2014, at 6:29 am, eranzg@... [Losmandy_users] Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



I have a mount LOSMANDY G11GII. I purchased the mount with��ONE��PIECE��WORM BLOK ��. My question is whether OVISION WORM give me better results tracking?��I now have quite a few problems tracking, really frustrating and discouraging...

In addition to all the problems that, when the mount begins to reach Zenith - it's just horror!!!

And altogether I use a focal length of 800 mm.



Tahnk you,

Eran.



----------------------------

#54416 Jul 4, 2014

Eran,

Yes, the Ovision will give better tracking results. BUT I think you should first work with you existing worm to see if you can iron out the problem. I suspect two main culprits: First, the balance of your mount should be carefully done on both RA and DEC axis with the RA slightly weight biased towards the east to take up any backlash float that will definitely affecttracking adversely. Second, try reducing the aggressiveness setting of your autoguider. This is especially critical if your seeing is poor. In my case, I get best and perfect tracking results when I lower my aggressiveness from the default 100 to 30. Otherwise I get frustrating garbage. The solution could be that simple.



John



On Saturday, July 5, 2014 5:34 AM, "tom loeblt@... [Losmandy_users]" Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

��Are you using autoguiding? If not, you will probably get poor results

with either OPW or ovision worm. At 800 mm, unless you shoot 30 second

subs or less, you will discard many shots.



Tom

On 7/4/2014 4:29 PM, eranzg@... [Losmandy_users] wrote:

>

>

> I have a mount LOSMANDY G11GII. I purchased the mount with ONEPIECE WORM

> BLOK . My question is whether OVISION WORM give me better results tracking?

>

> I now have quite a few problems tracking, really frustrating and

> discouraging...

>

> In addition to all the problems that, when the mount begins to reach

> Zenith - it's just horror!!!

>

> And altogether I use a focal length of 800 mm.

>

>

> Tahnk you,

>

>

> Eran.

>

>

>

>

>



----------------------------

#54417 Jul 5, 2014

Hi.

We need a lot more info on your set up to diagnose the problem.The first thing.I'd check is polar alignment, the better your alignment is the less corrections your auto guider needs to perform. You want to be able to get.at least 60secs with little to no trailing, unguided. If you are.certain that you polar alignment is good and and you still can't get 60secs unguided then you need to measure your periodic error. If you don't have pempro I'd advise buying it as it will help with polar alignment and also measure your PE and correct it as well. As you are imaging at 800mm you don't need a super precise worm. You need to get you your PE down below about 12. This will allow you to do 10-15 min exposures guided, I know this because my PE after correction is 12 and my focal length is 714 and I can do 15 min subs no problem.

Hope this helps.

Cheers.Sandy

On Saturday, 5 July 2014, John Nassr jnassr2010@... [Losmandy_users] Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

.Eran,



Yes, the Ovision will give better tracking results. BUT I think you should first work with you existing worm to see if you can iron out the problem. I suspect two main culprits: First, the balance of your mount should be carefully done on both RA and DEC axis with the RA slightly weight biased towards the east to take up any backlash float that will definitely affecttracking adversely. Second, try reducing the aggressiveness setting of your autoguider. This is especially critical if your seeing is poor. In my case, I get best and perfect tracking results when I lower my aggressiveness from the default 100 to 30. Otherwise I get frustrating garbage. The solution could be that simple.





John



On Saturday, July 5, 2014 5:34 AM, "tom loeblt@... [Losmandy_users]" Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



.Are you using autoguiding? If not, you will probably get poor results

with either OPW or ovision worm. At 800 mm, unless you shoot 30 second

subs or less, you will discard many shots.



Tom



On 7/4/2014 4:29 PM, eranzg@... [Losmandy_users] wrote:

>

>

> I have a mount LOSMANDY G11GII. I purchased the mount with ONEPIECE WORM

> BLOK . My question is whether OVISION WORM give me better results tracking?

>

> I now have quite a few problems tracking, really frustrating and

> discouraging...

>

> In addition to all the problems that, when the mount begins to reach

> Zenith - it's just horror!!!

>

> And altogether I use a focal length of 800 mm.

>

>

> Tahnk you,

>

>

> Eran.

>

>

>

>

>







----------------------------

#54421 Jul 5, 2014

I have the Ovision and it works great. However, with good guiding I also had success with the stock gears. The OVision worm (and probably the Losmandy one) really cuts down the PE, but if your PE is smooth, you can guide it out.

��I use the "swinging weight method" to keep it slightly off balance to the east and this works whether the scope is in the Eat or West. Another point, near the zenith you may not be balanced. So here is what I do.

1. Clutches loosened and tightened as needed for each process as needed. Don''t let things get out of control.2. Balance the OTA in the saddle, absolutely level OTA. Its a PITA, shifting back and forth from vertical to horizontal, clutches on and off�� to move the OTA in the saddle unless you have a top rial with a finder or other weight to shift.3. Balance in RA and DEC and make sure they are balanced E and W at 45 degrees as well as the usual positions. Clutches loose to check this once roughly balanced.4. Point the OTA to the zenith. Does it fall off to one side? If so, balance it so that it does not fall off. This is the "finder at the side" problem. I mount my finder and my Moonlite vertically. You could rotate the tube if you have tube rings.5. If you are doing AP, mount the OTA so that the camera is under the OTA when pointed at the pole, NOT on top.

Once done, tighten the clutches (you will probably do this numerous time during the balancing process as you shift things around).

Now, the swinging weight. Basically its a cord tied to the Dec housing and then passed over the RA housing (above the setting circles near the junction) and connected to a 2 lb weight that hangs free on the E side. Since it is always on the E side, it provides "dynamic" but slightly bias weight that keeps the gears engaged.

Naturally, I am assuming your gears mesh correctly.

Ed

ps: I cannot find the link for the swinging weight solution, but thanks to the observer who pointed me to it!

Ed



----------------------------

#54423 Jul 5, 2014

First of all thanks to everyone.



I admit that I have received a lot of information - that requires me to check a few things mentioned here.��I want to add this - I work with MAXIMDL to make tracking corrections. I use another telescope for tracking and I use the ORION SSAG camera.��For electricity - written on my transformer: MODEL PAA060FINPUT 100-240V 50/60HZ 1.7AOUTPUT 12.0V ��5.0AAnd for balance I ��giving more weight to the east (slightly).



Eran.



----------------------------

#54425 Jul 6, 2014

If you can post your tracking logs that will help as well.

Sometimes the tracking is fine but due to differential flex��between the guider and��the imaging scope trailing is still present. So having a log and a sample picture through the imaging scope will help.

Specific information that will help people diagnose your problem:

Guiding camera pixels sizeImaging camera pixel sizeImaging telescope focal lengthGuiding telescope focal length

The ratio of pixel size to (corresponding) focal length tells you how sensitive the guider and imager are to movement.Guiding that is fine for a 500 mm imaging focal length can look awful at 2000 mm. The diameter is irrelevant, except to the extent that the rig is or is not too heavy.

Reported RMS guiding error from guiding software.Guiding logs,including any calibration data. I believe MaximDL will create one for you.A typical image showing what you're unhappy with.A picture of the rig.

Mark Christensen

PS: I assume you have shot short exposures that look fine. If not, do take some. That will help isolate any optical problems. More than one case of reported bad imaging was caused by miss-aligned optics or camera/focuser cocking.

PPS: Neither the Losmandy nor the Ovision one-piece worm block is a magic answer: They just make it a lot easier to adjust the worm. Having the high precision worms (which came with your one-piece worm assembly) is more important.



----------------------------

#54604 Sep 9, 2014

Hi, Ihave a new G-11 Gemini II mount and have upgraded to the Ovision worm gear. Ihave installed the gear and I am getting around 4mm of play at the counterweightshaft (they recommend 1-2mm). I cant seem to get it any closer. When I move thecounterweight shaft back and forth the Ovision worm gear is actually moving inthe housing back and forth. Is this right? I thought the worm gear would betight in the housing with very little back and forth play. This is my first timechanging one of these gears so maybe I am doing something wrong. Any help isappreciated. Thanks, Jim



----------------------------

#54605 Sep 9, 2014

Hi Jim,

I installed Ovision worm on my G11 couple of years back and could set it with ~ 1-2 mm play as mentioned..I do not think the worm from Ovision is supposed to move back and forth inside the housing, at least mine didn't..May be you could check with Ovision for this issue.

Regards,Nilesh Desai



----------------------------

#54606 Sep 10, 2014

If I remember correctly, it has been a while since I've had mine apart. There are a couple of set screws that push against the bearing in the worm block to take up end play of the worm. Just don't make them to tight or the bearing will not spin smooth.��Chuck

---------- Original Message ----------From: "'Jim' atwaterkent@... [Losmandy_users]" Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com>To: losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com>Subject: [Losmandy_users] Ovision worm upgrade problemDate: Tue, 9 Sep 2014 21:05:51 -0400

��Hi, I have a new G-11 Gemini II mount and have upgraded to the Ovision worm gear. I have installed the gear and I am getting around 4mm of play at the counterweight shaft (they recommend 1-2mm). I cant seem to get it any closer. When I move the counterweight shaft back and forth the Ovision worm gear is actually moving in the housing back and forth. Is this right? I thought the worm gear would be tight in the housing with very little back and forth play. This is my first time changing one of these gears so maybe I am doing something wrong. Any help is appreciated. Thanks, Jim







----------------------------

#54607 Sep 10, 2014

Sorry I meant to say threaded end piece that pushes against the bearing, not set screws.

Chuck



----------------------------

#54608 Sep 10, 2014

Thanks guys for your help. Is there anyone out there who has adjusted theend cap on the Ovision block to reduce side to side play? I am not sure I shouldtouch it. I appreciate any help. Thanks, Jim��From: mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.comSent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 6:45 AMTo: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.comSubject: [SPAM]Re: [Losmandy_users] Ovision worm upgradeproblem



----------------------------

#54609 Sep 10, 2014

When I first got mine a couple of years ago it needed to be tightened up, there was too much end play like you are seeing. I tightened it up until the bearings started to feel rough then backed the adjustment off slightly so there was no roughness or end to end movement.

Chuck



----------------------------

#54610 Sep 10, 2014

Thanks Chuck, that.s what I needed to hear. I will try it this weekend.Appreciate your help.�� Jim��From: mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.comSent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 7:43 PMTo: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.comSubject: [SPAM]Re: [SPAM]Re: [Losmandy_users] Ovision worm upgradeproblem



----------------------------

#54612 Sep 12, 2014

Hi Jim I have my Ovision worm as well from just a few days ago. Ed told me to get it as tight as possible without binding. The first night I had mine out I could not get it to track, and then I called Ed who always does hypertuned services and that's the info he gave me. So I retightened and was able to do 2 minute unguided subs with perfect round stars.�������� I may try to get it tighter if possibleDon Curry



----------------------------

#54613 Sep 12, 2014

Hi Don,

What please was the focal length of your scope when you did 2 minute unguided images that produced nice round stars?

John



On Saturday, September 13, 2014 12:40 AM, "don123donxyz@... [Losmandy_users]" Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

��Hi Jim I have my Ovision worm as well from just a few days ago. Ed told me to get it as tight as possible without binding. The first night I had mine out I could not get it to track, and then I called Ed who always does hypertuned services and that's the info he gave me. So I retightened and was able to do 2 minute unguided subs with perfect round stars.�������� I may try to get it tighter if possibleDon Curry



----------------------------

#54614 Sep 13, 2014

That.s great Don, thanks for letting me know. I will adjust it today. Whatwas the focal length of the scope you used to get 2 minute subs? Thanks again,Jim��From: mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.comSent: Friday, September 12, 2014 12:40 PMTo: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.comSubject: [SPAM][Losmandy_users] Re: Ovision worm upgradeproblem



----------------------------

#54615 Sep 14, 2014

I am using a hyperstar at 520mm�� F2, instead of my native F10 2850mm on my Celestron C11



----------------------------

#54630 Sep 21, 2014

������������������������ UPDATE���� I'm up to 3 minutes 30 seconds unguided now with perfect round stars with The Ovision worm, and could not be happier with the upgrade .



----------------------------

#54631 Sep 22, 2014

Hi, what's your f.l that you have there?

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 22, 2014, at 2:05 AM, "don123donxyz@... [Losmandy_users]" Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



�������������������������� UPDATE���� I'm up to 3 minutes 30 seconds unguided now with perfect round stars with The Ovision worm, and could not be happier with the upgrade .



----------------------------

#54632 Sep 22, 2014

Hi Joe, focal length is 1400mm.��From: mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.comSent: Monday, September 22, 2014 6:22 AMTo: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.comSubject: [SPAM]Re: [Losmandy_users] Re: Ovision worm upgradeproblem



----------------------------

#54633 Sep 22, 2014

That is impressive!

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 22, 2014, at 7:11 AM, "'Jim' atwaterkent@... [Losmandy_users]" Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



��Hi Joe, focal length is 1400mm.��From: mailto:Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.comSent: Monday, September 22, 2014 6:22 AMTo: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.comSubject: [SPAM]Re: [Losmandy_users] Re: Ovision worm upgradeproblem



----------------------------

#54640 Sep 22, 2014

��I'm at 510mm at F2 with a hyper star and use my laptop as my eyepiece attached to my full spectrum Canon T2i which ��all replaces my secondary mirror.Don Curry



----------------------------

#56987 Mar 4, 2016

�� Hello

I would like to ask for any opinion or suggestion of a problem I am having with my G11G2. slowly, I have been trying to improve the mount. So after getting nobs, and the ring spacer so I do not hit the motors with the dovetail, I decided to get the Ovision Worm.��the worm specs show about 2 arc sec peak to peak, which looks pretty good��to do AP with long focal length telescopes.��I installed��the worm and left about 1.5mm backslash. Finally, after 2 months the weather improved so I could test the mount. The problem I encounter was:

Regardless of bias balance or perfect balance, I could not get round stars even in a 60s exposure. Looking at��PHD graph and��disconnecting the guiding inputs the��RA went to 16 arc-sec in one direction and just keep going away (below the abase line). However, when��I start guiding, then��the��RA error was only 3 arc sec peak��to peak (about 20 min exposure).I��slewed to different parts of the sky (E and W) and the error did not change. I also changed the balance and��it did not make any difference. Does any body have any idea or suggestion of what could be?����Is that a sign I damaged the worm somehow when I installed?

Thank you so much

Rodrigo



----------------------------

#56988 Mar 4, 2016

Hi Rodrigo,I think the Ovision worm and assembly are pre-tested by them. ...so it would be likely something else..You did not mention doing a drift alignment, or what telescope, guiding system,. image camera, or autoguide camera system you care using...The drift alignment step is critical, because even with a perfect RA drive, the errors in polar axis still have to be guided out.. So too is having either a OAG, or really strongly coupled piggyback guider system..Please give us some more details, so we can help...Best regards,

MichaelOn Mar 4, 2016 12:44 PM, "Rodrigo Roesch rodrigoroesch@... [Losmandy_users]" Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

.. Hello

I would like to ask for any opinion or suggestion of a problem I am having with my G11G2. slowly, I have been trying to improve the mount. So after getting nobs, and the ring spacer so I do not hit the motors with the dovetail, I decided to get the Ovision Worm..the worm specs show about 2 arc sec peak to peak, which looks pretty good.to do AP with long focal length telescopes..I installed.the worm and left about 1.5mm backslash. Finally, after 2 months the weather improved so I could test the mount. The problem I encounter was:

Regardless of bias balance or perfect balance, I could not get round stars even in a 60s exposure. Looking at.PHD graph and.disconnecting the guiding inputs the.RA went to 16 arc-sec in one direction and just keep going away (below the abase line). However, when.I start guiding, then.the.RA error was only 3 arc sec peak.to peak (about 20 min exposure).I.slewed to different parts of the sky (E and W) and the error did not change. I also changed the balance and.it did not make any difference. Does any body have any idea or suggestion of what could be?..Is that a sign I damaged the worm somehow when I installed?

Thank you so much

Rodrigo







----------------------------

#56991 Mar 4, 2016

Hi Michael

Thank you for following up with my email. The setting I used is:Image scope: Orion EON 80mm+ reducer so 400mm focal length Guiding scope: Orion 50mmGuiding Camera: Orion SSAU Image Camera Monochrome Canon Xsi

I usually use the polar scope when I use short focal length, usually I get about 2 arc-sec error with the scope.Before upgrading top Ovision I could do 2-3 min unguided with that particular scope, now I cant even do 60s. Attached is a graph from PHD over 700s. I to get the information I disconnect the guiding input so the information does not have any correction. I did not include the DEC information since it was very low.







Thank you

Rodrigo







On Friday, March 4, 2016 4:00 PM, "Michael Herman mherman346@... [Losmandy_users]" Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:





. Hi Rodrigo,I think the Ovision worm and assembly are pre-tested by them. ...so it would be likely something else.. You did not mention doing a drift alignment, or what telescope, guiding system,. image camera, or autoguide camera system you care using... The drift alignment step is critical, because even with a perfect RA drive, the errors in polar axis still have to be guided out.. So too is having either a OAG, or really strongly coupled piggyback guider system.. Please give us some more details, so we can help...Best regards,

Michael On Mar 4, 2016 12:44 PM, "Rodrigo Roesch rodrigoroesch@... [Losmandy_users]" Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



. . Hello

I would like to ask for any opinion or suggestion of a problem I am having with my G11G2. slowly, I have been trying to improve the mount. So after getting nobs, and the ring spacer so I do not hit the motors with the dovetail, I decided to get the Ovision Worm..the worm specs show about 2 arc sec peak to peak, which looks pretty good.to do AP with long focal length telescopes..I installed.the worm and left about 1.5mm backslash. Finally, after 2 months the weather improved so I could test the mount. The problem I encounter was:

Regardless of bias balance or perfect balance, I could not get round stars even in a 60s exposure. Looking at.PHD graph and.disconnecting the guiding inputs the.RA went to 16 arc-sec in one direction and just keep going away (below the abase line). However, when.I start guiding, then.the.RA error was only 3 arc sec peak.to peak (about 20 min exposure).I.slewed to different parts of the sky (E and W) and the error did not change. I also changed the balance and.it did not make any difference. Does any body have any idea or suggestion of what could be?..Is that a sign I damaged the worm somehow when I installed?

Thank you so much

Rodrigo









#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902 -- #yiv9684064902ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-mkp #yiv9684064902hd {color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-mkp #yiv9684064902ads {margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-mkp .yiv9684064902ad {padding:0 0;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-mkp .yiv9684064902ad p {margin:0;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-mkp .yiv9684064902ad a {color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-sponsor #yiv9684064902ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-sponsor #yiv9684064902ygrp-lc #yiv9684064902hd {margin:10px 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-sponsor #yiv9684064902ygrp-lc .yiv9684064902ad {margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902actions {font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902activity {background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902activity span:first-child {text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902activity span a {color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902activity span span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902activity span .yiv9684064902underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv9684064902 .yiv9684064902attach {clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;width:400px;}#yiv9684064902 .yiv9684064902attach div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9684064902 .yiv9684064902attach img {border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv9684064902 .yiv9684064902attach label {display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv9684064902 .yiv9684064902attach label a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9684064902 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 4px;}#yiv9684064902 .yiv9684064902bold {font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv9684064902 .yiv9684064902bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9684064902 dd.yiv9684064902last p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv9684064902 dd.yiv9684064902last p span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv9684064902 dd.yiv9684064902last p span.yiv9684064902yshortcuts {margin-right:0;}#yiv9684064902 div.yiv9684064902attach-table div div a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9684064902 div.yiv9684064902attach-table {width:400px;}#yiv9684064902 div.yiv9684064902file-title a, #yiv9684064902 div.yiv9684064902file-title a:active, #yiv9684064902 div.yiv9684064902file-title a:hover, #yiv9684064902 div.yiv9684064902file-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9684064902 div.yiv9684064902photo-title a, #yiv9684064902 div.yiv9684064902photo-title a:active, #yiv9684064902 div.yiv9684064902photo-title a:hover, #yiv9684064902 div.yiv9684064902photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv9684064902 div#yiv9684064902ygrp-mlmsg #yiv9684064902ygrp-msg p a span.yiv9684064902yshortcuts {font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv9684064902 .yiv9684064902green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv9684064902 .yiv9684064902MsoNormal {margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv9684064902 o {font-size:0;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902photos div div {border:1px solid #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902photos div label {color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv9684064902 .yiv9684064902replbq {margin:4px;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv9684064902 input, #yiv9684064902 textarea {font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv9684064902 code {font:115% monospace;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-mlmsg #yiv9684064902logo {padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-msg p a {font-family:Verdana;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-msg p#yiv9684064902attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-reco #yiv9684064902reco-head {color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-reco {margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-sponsor #yiv9684064902ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-sponsor #yiv9684064902ov li {font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-sponsor #yiv9684064902ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-text {font-family:Georgia;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em 0;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv9684064902 #yiv9684064902ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none !important;}#yiv9684064902







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







----------------------------

#56992 Mar 4, 2016

Hi Rodrigo,

That is good info. . .I agree that an 80 mm scope should track easily, especially with a field reducer, so something is out of alignment. .So that is a real puzzle. ..

What are the most likely possibilities?

Either (1) the RA axis has a large PE, causing stars to wiggle in 240 sec period, or (2) your polar alignment is out of position. .



The Ovision worm system would seem to rule out PE, but PE can be measured using PHD2 log file, and a free program like PECprep (here:.eq-mod.sourceforge.net/pecprep/ . ) that program is built for the Orion / Synta EQ6 / EQG, but it also has built in settings for the G11. .

Taking data through your main scope with your guide camera will tell you if your polar drift alignment is good, and also get you data for the PE measurement.. Your Gemini can also take data and create its own PEC dataset, .That will eliminate any existing PE too. ..



A few more questions are related:.

Are you doing your drift alignment through the 50mm piggy back guide scope?. If so, that may be a cause of trouble. .You really need to polar drift align using the 80mm main camera.... and ... (I think) your guide scope must be aimed at the same center of the main scope field of view, and your guide scope mechanically must be firmly locked to the main scope. .

If the guide scope axis is slightly off from the main scope axis, then a slight error in mount polar alignment will cause the autoguide camera corrections of the piggy back scope image to push the main scope image off of star alignment.. This also becomes harder to manage when the guide scope star image is smaller (wider field) than the main scope image. . .Usually you need scope rings on the piggy back scope, so you can aim it to the same optical center as the main scope. ..Easiest if you just put your main scope centered on a bright star near the meridian and equator, and then center your guide scope to the same star.. Then put your guide camera on the main scope and drift align.. Then your guiding will be on the same center.

In the end,....my experience was....

...I gave up piggy back guiding, and adopted using an OAG.. Once I got the OAG system, I got nice round stars.. I was using a piggy back 80mm guide scope on a 254mm 10 inch SCT...I could never get the coupling between those scopes to be strong enough, or not change alignment. Besides, when the 80mm scope camera would drift 2 pixels, the main camera would have drifted ~ (254/80) ~ 3X as far.. The OAG ensures that the main image is being guided directly, and the corrected star drift of a few pixels means the main image is also going to be only off a few pixels. . .(PHD says it will correct with sub-pixel movement...)

If you consider an OAG approach.......I tried several OAG units.. The one from Orion, which had lots of tiny screw adjustments, did not work for me, as the adjustments would loosen up over time (and temperature), and its prism is small, making it hard to see the guide stars.. I was able to find a used Lumicon "easy guider" that had a 2" nose and 2" back, and that has a very large prism, and that is much easier for the guide camera to focus on.. It was a headache to find the right adaptor rings, but once done... that stays as part of the main camera assembly (I have a Baader MPC coma corrector, and a 2" Nautilus filter wheel on the front of all that too so everything is really bolted together). .

The guide camera will show stars through the OAG to be fainter than through a piggy back scope, so you must then use a longer guide camera exposure, like about 3 seconds.. Sometimes, you must rotate the main camera+OAG around the target, to find a bright enough guide star.. But once you get that done, the autoguiding ensures the main camera image is well tracked...

I hope you discover your imaging trouble soon.... and are on your way to beautiful images...And I hope you tell us what the final cause of the trouble was, once you figure this out.... .

All the best,

Michael



----------------------------

#56993 Mar 5, 2016

Hi Rodrigo,

there is a nice document about guiding errors here.openphdguiding.org/tutorial-analyzing-phd2-guiding-results/Maybe this might help to track your problem down.Good luckRobert.

PS: You may also ask for help (.groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!forum/open-phd-guiding) here.



----------------------------

#56994 Mar 5, 2016

Rodrigo, ��At least on my computer (Windows PC) your attachment does not show up. Perhaps you can upload it to the Files section of the Yahoogroup and let us know where it is? ��With that short a focal length you should have no problem whatsoever guiding for 10s of minutes with the original or the Ovision gear. Plus that guider/imager combo is lightweight. The only thing I would worry about is flex in the mini-guider as the mounting of those is none too rigid. ��Do you have any guiding graphs with the same rig (imaging scope and guider) before you switched to the Ovision? ��Mark Christensen



----------------------------

#56996 Mar 5, 2016

Hi Thank you for all the suggestions. I think, the problem is not really the guiding since I can't get an unguided picture for 60s with 400 focal length. So last nigth, I removed the motor and the gear box and tried to rotate the worm with my fingers, (clotches untigthed) what I found was it needed more effort to rotate a quarter of a turn then became soft and then hard again, like getting up and down in a roller coaster. So I went ahead and added a bit more space betwen the worm and the ring but to the expenses of increasing backslash. Now the worm rotates easly when I move it with my fingers. What I don't understand is I followed the Ovision instructions and I left 1.5 mm backslash and this time I had to increase to 2mm to have the worm rotating smooth. Do you think that this could cause bad tracking? Now I need to wait for clear night to test

Thank youRodrigo







----------------------------

#57072 Mar 11, 2016

Hello everybody

I would like to ask any recommendation to address my tracking problem. As I mentioned in my last e-mail. I installed the Ovision worm and the tracking became very poor. I have tried different things from replacing gear box to drift alignment and nothing seems to work. It seems that the RA jumps a lot. So far my best unguided time is only 20-30 seconds regardless of the position of the object and bias balance. If I disable the guiding output, I can see a 16 arc-sec move. I attached a screen shoot of the PHD graph,.the shoot is over 12min..I also attached a pic I took while capturing the information with PHD2 using my..80mm.refractor and a reducer for 400mm focal length. As you can see the DEC is working really nice but RA oscillates. What is interesting is the picture at 60s and 12 min looks the same,. in terms of star trails, it is just the intensity of the trail is changing. So something is making the RA to jump but I cant figure out what can be.

Thank you

Rodrigo



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



----------------------------

#57073 Mar 11, 2016

Do you have a club nearby? Maybe you're just not getting how to adjust the gears after your upgrade? Sometimes it helps to have someone physically do the work for you. In the US, you could send it to Scott or Ed THOMAS (hypertune).



I remember a guy on CN who is well respected and got very frustrated with his G11. Turned out he had just adjusted it incorrectly. Scott took it back and got it back to a usable state.



----------------------------

#57079 Mar 11, 2016

Thank you for the suggestion, the��problem is��the only member of��my club who has a G11��never has adjusted��his worm gear and he is not using��his mount for AP at his point. I asked Ed, but he does not test the tracking��after adjusting the mounts so it is difficult to know if whatever he will adjusts will take care of the problem. The mount looks ok at naked eye. Everything looks aligned and there are not weir noises��and also slews and points the object very well. It is just t he very poor tracking. I also tried to contact Astrotroniks but they never answered back so I am not sure if they are still in business.

Thank you

Rodrigo



On Friday, March 11, 2016 10:19 AM, "mads0100@... [Losmandy_users]" Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



��Do you have a club nearby? Maybe you're just not getting how to adjust the gears after your upgrade? Sometimes it helps to have someone physically do the work for you. In the US, you could send it to Scott or Ed THOMAS (hypertune).



I remember a guy on CN who is well respected and got very frustrated with his G11. Turned out he had just adjusted it incorrectly. Scott took it back and got it back to a usable state.



----------------------------

#57621 Jul 6, 2016

Rodrigo,

did you get your issues solved?

Hamza



----------------------------

#57622 Jul 6, 2016

Odd I had to decrease the worm position; making it tighter to get better unguided performance. I actually thought I was getting to much play at 1.5mm thus went to 1.0 mm or so and was doing unguided for 5 minute exposures at 560mm.



----------------------------

#58582 Jan 29, 2017

Hello

I would like to ask some opinions about how important is to have the Ovision block perfectly square. I just installed a new Ovision worm as replacement of my old Ovision wiorm since the performance was marginal. I adjusted the worm with a feeler gauge and both sides of the worm block looked to have the same distance (I left 1 mm backlash). However, when I slew the mount and look at the worm I can see that the holdham coupler has some misalignment in certain angle. Is that normal? I assumed that having one block piece should provide perfect alignment. I tried to moves the block more from the motor side but I could not improve that unless increase my backlash.

Thank you

Rodrigo



----------------------------

#58584 Jan 30, 2017

Rodrigo,

The Ovision worm blocks are just a one piece worm block and does not resolve the problems of misaligned wormgear axis and gearbox axis. This is why the Losmandy OPW design is superior and can give better PE performance when properly installed with preload on the bearings using Bellevue spring washers. It would seem that the Losmandy HP worms are generally not quite as good as a good Ovision worm but with the Losmady's nearly perfect alignment of the gearbox output shaft with the wormgear shaft the Losmandy will, all things being equal outperform the Ovision system. The coupling is important and makes a small difference but as with most things all of the errors add up in the system.��

Chip



----------------------------

#58585 Jan 30, 2017

Hi Chip

Thank you for the information. Is there a way you know I can better align the Ovision worm block with the motor gear shaft? So far I can see how the coupler slides a bit during worm rotation. What I wonder is if the odham coupler will eliminate any effect of misalignment, so I should not worry about it

Rodrigo

--------------- On Mon, 1/30/17, chiplouie@... [Losmandy_users] Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: Ovision worm alignment

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

Date: Monday, January 30, 2017, 3:10 PM



Rodrigo,



The Ovision worm blocks are

just a one piece worm block and does not resolve the

problems of misaligned wormgear axis and gearbox axis. This

is why the Losmandy OPW design is superior and can give

better PE performance when properly installed with preload

on the bearings using Bellevue spring washers. It would seem

that the Losmandy HP worms are generally not quite as good

as a good Ovision worm but with the Losmady's nearly

perfect alignment of the gearbox output shaft with the

wormgear shaft the Losmandy will, all things being equal

outperform the Ovision system. The coupling is important and

makes a small difference but as with most things all of the

errors add up in the system.





Chip







----------------------------

#58586 Jan 30, 2017

Hi Rodrigo (and Chip too!),

I have been working on these puzzles for awhile... here is what I think is going on:

1. The design of the Oldham coupler is really ingenious.. The design keeps both sides of the plastic coupler at 90 degrees from each other, so even if the (call it Z direction) axes are not in the same line, as long as they are totally parallel (in both X and Y points of view), the coupler should keep the rotation of the first axis (the gearbox output axis) identical to the rotation of the worm gear axis on the other side. .

2. But if the coupler sides are NOT parallel, then you have a problem: .the angle between the axes will make one axis have to speed up or slow down to match the rotation on the other side.. The changes in rotation (just by symmetry) would be like twice the worm period, and I think this is what often makes the large "1/2 period" or "2x frequency" contribution when you look at the FFT analysis (say by the program PECprep). .

3. In the most optimal situation, you have both axes parallel and with no offset (in other words the two axes {gearbox output and worm gear} would be on the same single line in 3 dimensions). .

4. If you can, therefore, try to look at the coupling in all viewpoints and try to keep the Oldham coupler lined up on both sides. .

5. You must also have the metal (sliding) parts of the Oldham coupler fully inserted into the plastic center part.. Do not leave a gap in there which creates backlash and may make autoguiding troublesome.. Likewise I like to get the worm very close to the ring gear (i.e. almost zero counterweight backlash at the end of the RA axis, and no wiggle on the DEC axis either for the same reason.)

6. Now, the Ovision system (which I do not have... going from looking at the assembly and reading about it) and the Losmandy OPW both have mechanical methods of keeping both worm blocks lined up.. Lining up the worm blocks is critical to keep a single bearing ball from getting the drive force, or one part of the bearing race from taking the stress (and that is why the worm ball period can show up in the FFT analysis).. That is good for keeping the bearings centers lined up also.. Only the Ovision system has a designed built-in Belleville spring washer to keep the rear bearing under compression, but the Losmandy OPW (or even the 2 piece original worm blocks) can have one of these Belleville spring washers installed. . ..

7. Another critical point to get your native PE low as possible is to have superior worm bearings for the RA axis.. There are ABEC-7 bearings available from several sources for about US $13 each or possibly less.. Your Ovision must have these already, but the stock worm bearings from Losmandy have unknown quality ratings. ..

I have a writeup with some diagrams on this in our Files section... discussing the PE analysis, and need to preload the worm bearings. .

Wishing you super results on your Ovision system...let us know what you find from your own testing..

- Michael ..



----------------------------

#58587 Jan 30, 2017

Hi Michael

Thank you. During a worm rotation, one part looks perfectly aligned but then in a another angle, it looks like the odham couples slides a bit, may be 1mm. So should I try to realign again?

Rodrigo

--------------- On Mon, 1/30/17, Michael Herman mherman346@... [Losmandy_users] Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



Subject: Re: [Losmandy_users] Re: Ovision worm alignment

To: "Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com" Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com>

Date: Monday, January 30, 2017, 4:46 PM



Hi Rodrigo (and Chip

too!),



I have been working

on these puzzles for awhile... here is what I think is

going on:



1.

The design of the Oldham coupler is really ingenious.. The

design keeps

both sides of the plastic

coupler at 90 degrees from each other, so even if

the (call it Z direction) axes are not in the

same line, as long as they

are totally

parallel (in both X and Y points of view), the coupler

should

keep the rotation of the first axis

(the gearbox output axis) identical to

the

rotation of the worm gear axis on the other side.



2. But if the coupler sides

are NOT parallel, then you have a problem:. the

angle between the axes will make one axis have

to speed up or slow down to

match the

rotation on the other side.. The changes in rotation (just

by

symmetry) would be like twice the worm

period, and I think this is what

often makes

the large "1/2 period" or "2x frequency"

contribution when you

look at the FFT

analysis (say by the program PECprep).



3. In the most optimal situation, you have both

axes parallel and with no

offset (in other

words the two axes {gearbox output and worm gear} would

be

on the same single line in 3

dimensions).



4. If you can,

therefore, try to look at the coupling in all viewpoints

and

try to keep the Oldham coupler lined up

on both sides.



5. You must

also have the metal (sliding) parts of the Oldham coupler

fully

inserted into the plastic center

part.. Do not leave a gap in there which

creates backlash and may make autoguiding

troublesome.. Likewise I like to

get the

worm very close to the ring gear (i.e. almost zero

counterweight

backlash at the end of the RA

axis, and no wiggle on the DEC axis either

for the same reason.)



6. Now, the Ovision system (which I do not

have... going from looking at

the assembly

and reading about it) and the Losmandy OPW both have

mechanical methods of keeping both worm blocks

lined up.. Lining up the

worm blocks is

critical to keep a single bearing ball from getting the

drive force, or one part of the bearing race

from taking the stress (and

that is why the

worm ball period can show up in the FFT analysis).. That

is

good for keeping the bearings centers

lined up also.. Only the Ovision

system has

a designed built-in Belleville spring washer to keep the

rear

bearing under compression, but the

Losmandy OPW (or even the 2 piece

original

worm blocks) can have one of these Belleville spring

washers

installed.



7. Another critical point to get your native PE

low as possible is to have

superior worm

bearings for the RA axis.. There are ABEC-7 bearings

available from several sources for about US $13

each or possibly less.

Your Ovision must

have these already, but the stock worm bearings from

Losmandy have unknown quality ratings.



I have a writeup with some

diagrams on this in our Files section...

discussing the PE analysis, and need to preload

the worm bearings.



Wishing

you super results on your Ovision system...let us know what

you

find from your own testing.



- Michael



On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Rodrigo

Roesch rodrigoroesch@...

[Losmandy_users] Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com>

wrote:



>

>

> Hi Chip

> Thank you for the information. Is there a

way you know I can better align

> the

Ovision worm block with the motor gear shaft? So far I can

see how the

> coupler slides a bit during

worm rotation. What I wonder is if the odham

> coupler will eliminate any effect of

misalignment, so I should not worry

>

about it

> Rodrigo

>

---------------

> On Mon, 1/30/17, chiplouie@...

[Losmandy_users]

> Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com>

wrote:

>

> Subject:

[Losmandy_users] Re: Ovision worm alignment

> To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

> Date: Monday, January 30, 2017, 3:10 PM

>

> Rodrigo,

>

> The Ovision worm

blocks are

> just a one piece worm block

and does not resolve the

> problems of

misaligned wormgear axis and gearbox axis. This

> is why the Losmandy OPW design is superior

and can give

> better PE performance when

properly installed with preload

> on the

bearings using Bellevue spring washers. It would seem

> that the Losmandy HP worms are generally

not quite as good

> as a good Ovision

worm but with the Losmady's nearly

>

perfect alignment of the gearbox output shaft with the

> wormgear shaft the Losmandy will, all

things being equal

> outperform the

Ovision system. The coupling is important and

> makes a small difference but as with most

things all of the

> errors add up in the

system.

>

>

> Chip

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>



>







--

Michael

Herman

mobile: 408 421-1239

email: mherman346@...







----------------------------

#58588 Jan 30, 2017

Hi Rodrigo,.

Yes...I would try to get the drive axis and the worm axis exactly in line...if you can..

.I don't know how the Ovision mounting is done, or what could be a problem, but you might try to ask Ovision for their suggestions if you are getting stuck.

When you are done adjusting, do a very accurate drift polar alignment. . Then take some PE data. .

I find that PHD2 works well for me...its handy drift alignment tool helps, and then I make a new PHD log file that I read into PECprep for analysis of the G11 frequencies.

The frequencies will diagnose both the overall PE, and what mechanical elements are causing PE.. You want the only factor to be the worm or elements at n x worm frequency..(n is any integer...n for the worm is 1 of course) so that the PEC (say built into Gemini units), will clean it all up. .

If you get elements at some other frequency, not an integer, .or below 1 worm frequency, then PEC will not clean those up.. The bearing balls tend to be one such trouble. .

Autoguiding will probably clean up stuff at fractions of a worm period...they are slow variations. .

Hope all this helps!. Nothing helps the problem of bad seeing... we are all stuck with that...

Stay well,Michael.



----------------------------

#58589 Jan 30, 2017

Great animations on how an Oldham coupling works.�� As long as the two shafts are parallel, the coupler does the rest.

Oldham Coupling Flash Animation

Oldham Coupling Flash Animation A site dedicated to animation of mechanisms, pneumatic, hydraulic and electronic components



----------------------------

#58591 Jan 30, 2017

Thanks for that! !!

On Jan 30, 2017 2:23 PM, "philipcamera@... [Losmandy_users]" Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

.Great animations on how an Oldham coupling works.. As long as the two shafts are parallel, the coupler does the rest.

Oldham Coupling Flash Animation

Oldham Coupling Flash Animation A site dedicated to animation of mechanisms, pneumatic, hydraulic and electronic components



----------------------------

#58592 Jan 30, 2017

Thank you for the video. Based on that, my shafts looks parallel just one slightly higher than the other. So if that is the case, should I expect any impact on the quality of my tracking?



--------------- On Mon, 1/30/17, Michael Herman mherman346@... [Losmandy_users] Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



Subject: Re: [Losmandy_users] Re: Ovision worm alignment

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

Date: Monday, January 30, 2017, 5:51 PM



Thanks for that! !!



On Jan 30, 2017 2:23 PM,

"philipcamera@...

[Losmandy_users]"

Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com>

wrote:



>

>

> Great animations on

how an Oldham coupling works.. As long as the two

> shafts are parallel, the coupler does the

rest.

>

> Oldham

Coupling Flash Animation www.mekanizmalar.com/oldham.html>

> [image: image] www.mekanizmalar.com/oldham.html>

> Oldham Coupling Flash Animation www.mekanizmalar.com/oldham.html>

> A site dedicated to animation of

mechanisms, pneumatic, hydraulic and

>

electronic components

> View on

www.mekanizmalar.com www.mekanizmalar.com/oldham.html>

> Preview by Yahoo

>

>

>

>

> Oldham coupling

animation www.youtube.com/watch?v=KP09wP7OIxg>

> [image: image] www.youtube.com/watch?v=KP09wP7OIxg>

> Oldham coupling animation www.youtube.com/watch?v=KP09wP7OIxg>

> This is a simple model to understand the

working of oldham couping

> View on

www.youtube.com www.youtube.com/watch?v=KP09wP7OIxg>

> Preview by Yahoo

>

>

>

>



----------------------------

#58593 Jan 30, 2017

Am I missing something here? I have an ovision and its in a one piece worm block. Folks have been writing��work blocks in this post and that seems incorrect. I just mount it set the backlash and thats it.��

Ross��



----------------------------

#58595 Jan 31, 2017

Hi Ross

Maybe it was something misspelled. The discussion here is the alignment of the worm shaft in respect to the motor gear shaft. It seems like the two shafts can be parallel to each other but still difficult to peferf alignment them in all directions (high/low) So you can see the variations during the rotation of the Oldham coupler.

Rodrigo

--------------- On Mon, 1/30/17, Ross Elkins rossmon1@... [Losmandy_users] Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



Subject: [Losmandy_users] Re: Ovision worm alignment

To: Losmandy_users@yahoogroups.com

Date: Monday, January 30, 2017, 10:22 PM



Am I missing something

here? I have an ovision and its in a one piece worm block.

Folks have been writing

work blocks in this

post and that seems incorrect. I just mount it set the

backlash and thats it.



Ross



----------------------------

#58604 Feb 1 9:31 PM

The problem with the original Losmandy 2-piece worm gear bearing support blocks AND the Ovision one-piece worm block is that in both cases the worm mesh is set by moving the worm gear in and out by changing the angle of the worm gear with a pivot point being the block closest to the gearbox. This pivoting action necessarily changes the angle of the worm gear shaft. Unfortunately the gearbox is attached to the plate under the worm gear at a fixed location which maintains a single, non-adjustable position. This is parallel misalignment of the axles is unavoidable with both of these designs.��

The Losmandy OPW design attaches the gearbox to a plate which moves in perfect alignment with the worm gear as it is moved in and out to set correct gear mesh. This completely eliminates the small, unpredictable changes in velocity introduced by the Oldham coupler because it cannot compensate for due to incorrect geometry when both sides of the coupler are not perfectly parallel to one another. As has been demonstrated by several people the Losmandy HP-worms are capable of very low levels of PE when used with Losmandy OPWs with Bellevue spring washers. ����Chip������







----------------------------

#60593 Dec 21, 2017

Hello

In October of this year I bought a used Losmandy G11 with an ovision worm gear.I am unable to get the performance out of the gear at the RA axis.

I'm getting phd rms numbers of .9 arcsec and 1.0 arsec

After trying many things including 1 to 2mm of end play in the worm by adjustingthe end cap this�� did not help. I adjusted both end points of the worm by usinga feeler guage to get even spacing from worm body to mount body. .020 in.

Gear Box to worm gear alignment is fine.



I swapped out motors and gearboxes from dec to ra and ra to decNo difference.

I then swapped worms. an older dec worm by Losmandy (stainless Steel) to the ra axis and ovison to decaxis. I now get Ra rns of .59 and Dec of .4 rms



At one time I cleaned all gears and bearings. I took off the end cap of the ovsion worm.

. Is�� there supposed to be a spring washer or spring at the end of the OPW at the endcap?Is there a schematic or drawing showing size if there is supposed to be one.



Thanks for any help and Happy Holidays

Greg



----------------------------

#60595 Dec 21, 2017

Hi Greg,

I think that your Ovision's worm gear endplay is not getting set correctly and there is no preload on the worm bearings. I don't have an Ovision worm because the original 2-piece worm blocks loaded with ABEC-7 bearings and Losmandy HP worms were getting sub arcsecond PE numbers after adding Bellevue washers and careful adjustment of the drivetrain and when guided well under 0.5 arcsecond PE from PHD2.��

Have you looked at Michael Herman's article on the G11 drivetrain? If not download it from Yahoo and read it and apply these ideas to your Ovision and you should be GTG. Be sure to clean and relube using SuperLube for long life with minimal separation, gummin up and low viscosity even below freezing. Use SPARINGLY, clean up your clutch discs and be sure to reassemble with the wavey spring washers under the clutch knobs NOT directly on the thrust bearing races. Also do not get hung up on minimal backlash, without a temperature compensated worm gear you will only be making trouble for yourself when the air temps get low enough to shrink the back lash to zero causing stalls.��

Cheers/Chip



----------------------------

#60602 Dec 24, 2017

Thanks Chip

��I took apart the Ovision worm and it does have a spring washer installed��cleaned and lubed the assembly.

I used an eye loop to look at the worm. There are a few pits in the brasson the top surface in a few places. I don't think that will cause any issues

Will re-swap Ra�� and Dec assemblies.I have read MIchaels white paper. Considering new bearings and spring washersOn both Ra and Dec although Ovison bearings seem fine upon inspection

While running PHD I noticed I have to keep Agressivenes to 60and min motion to .25 hysterysus to .35 otherwise Ra is to active.This is with Dec worm at Ra

I had also tore down both ra and dec and relubed and cleaned up cluth surfacesDec had some lube underneath pads. Didn't seem to help Ra performance afterclean and relube of Ra

Greg



----------------------------

#60603 Dec 24, 2017

Hi,

Nice to read of your observations and maintenance work.

I suggest that you try to separate what PHD2 is telling you, from how the mount is actually performing.. It would be easy to misinterpret the PHD2 messages.

So I suggest you do the following to diagnose the mount.. The diagnostic will also point to where the worm system problem is, if there is a problem at all.

The diagnostic is the PE measurement itself.. For that, you can use the free program PECprep.exe, which you can download from the EQMOD group.. When you run that program, you first select the mount type as G11.. It has all the right mount parameters built in.

You will also need to select as the input file a clean PHD2 log file.. To get that, find where where on your. PC that your PHD2 log files are normally stored.. Usually they have a simple date code, and they are text files...

You set up your mount and put your autoguider camera at prime focus of your imaging scope.. Do not use a guide scope...you must eliminate any mechanical coupling issues...

Point at the intersection of. celestial Meridian and Equator.. Do a very careful drift alignment...the PHD2 has a drift align tool that works well.. You want the guide star to stay in the autoguide camera field for 30 minutes...

Return to the meridian and equator position and choose a star to ttack.. Allow PHD2 to autoguide to assure it knows N,S,E,W.. Then stop autoguiding and erase or rename the current PHD2 logfile.. You then tell PHD2 to Turn Off guide signals, and start "autoguiding" again.. NowE clean logfile will just have records of the star fluctuations from RA worm motion...the raw PE.. Let that run for about 4 worm periods...which are 239 sec (4 minutes) each.. So maybe let the tracking go for 20 to 30 minutes.

Then rename that PHD2 file with something describing the scope, thd camera, and the date, like G11_SCT_SSAG_Dec_24_2017.txt

Use that in the PECPREP program to analyse the PE.. .It will tell you the periods that make up the worm PE...each gear and bearing and the worm fundamental, and harmonics, will be shown.. You should hope to get the overall "RMS PE" about 1 arcsec.. If you are near that,. it is about the design limit of the mount.. I show an example near the end of that PDF about improving the G11 PE...

Anyway...that's my suggestion.

Once you have the mount understood, you can start to set up PHD2 for proper autoguiding.. For that, I find the PHD2 Wizard very helpful...

All the best,Michael.



----------------------------

#60624 Dec 27, 2017

Hi Michael,

You know I always forget that people, even people I KNOW are new or new to their Losmandy mount, don't know all of the required bits many experienced people don't mentioning. Thanks for reminding us that you have to start at the beginning to get to the end we are hoping the help people to find.��

So how is it going in the mile high city?��

Chip





����







----------------------------

#60629 Dec 27, 2017

Hi Chip,

You are great in 1,000 ways... why its such a nice friendship..

It's nice and frosty here...snow everywhere.. The high can be 15F one day and the low... negative numbers.. The next day the high can be 40F (people in shorts and tee shirts too).. But snow is always just a day away.. I don't know how anyone does astronomy here... but some folks do. The housing prices are insanely low, but the heating bills must be high to balance out the economy.. Gas prices are about $2.40/gal.. Not in California any more Dorothy!. But there is no beach here so Susan will not consider moving here.

Having fun with Hunter who's at 2.5 a real mensch already.. . Beth took him to see Nutcracker ballet and he's memorized all the music already...

We went to see Greatest Showman at the movies and it was a fun movie.. Easy story and the music and presentation reminded me both of LaLa Land and of Hamilton...

Flying back home on Jan 2... to warmth... though still chilly.. SanJose had a 3.5 quake the other day... still nothing in the 5 or above range... we are way overdue for something to happen.

Have a great New Year!

Michael



Contact Us
This Site's Privacy Policy
Google's privacy policies

S
e
n
i
o
r
T
u
b
e
.
o
r
g