Hi!

Tried both, seems a bit better this way... But i do not know...

Hey Jasem.

Tried changing the iterations down to 3 with no effect. Decided to use this absolutely clear night to capture pictures and not to test around.
Maybe i can use the frames, also with not so good guiding...

Tried differend algorithms, but this made it not better too...
Tried PHD2 again, but this gives me peakes of 8+ arcsecs...
I´m a bit confused, what could be the problem...

One more thing that happenend today was that from one minute to the other, kstars crashed, and all my profiles where gone. I could not make new profiles.
I had this issue some time ago if you remember and was able to solve this issue with renaming the .indi folder and the .kstars folder in my home dir.

cheers
Niki

Yesterday things got worse.
Most of the frames are lost due to guiding loosingnthe guidestar.

What changed was the gain of the asi 120 to 28, because on the guideframes it was hard to see the guidestar due to strong noise. Maybe this was the wrong decision...
Should i try to raise the gain?

As you can see in the screenshot, the system keeps using very faint stars for guiding. I do not get why it does not choose a bright one...
Can i adjust this somewhere?

As mentoned above, is it better to guide through asi, or through mount?

You can see the last guidegraph from last night in the second picture.

I will post last nights log later, as i am in my work now...

I have to say that the kstars version i am using atm works GREAT! The only problem is my guiding.

No more camera issues since the short usb cables.
Offline-Platesolving runs within seconds.

Very satisfying system.

Cheers, Niki







Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

Right guiding is the biggest problem for most people. Does PHD2 solve this issue?

Unfortunately not. PHD2 DID work, what was a big step for me since it did NOT, the last time i tried.
But i initially got a failure about "Backlash Problem" right at calibration...

I think i will today:

Update to the latest nightly (if i not allready am running it)
correct my polar-alignment since i did not check that for quite some time
maybe run a polaralignment in Kstars or PHD2

And then try again.


cheers
Niki

I believe - ASI120 VIA ASI120 means ST4 port on the camera. and ASI120 via [your mount] is internal pulse guiding. I use the later.
PHD always liked a weak star. If I pick a weak star in the internal guider - it drops my selection and picks a BIG BRIGHT ONE?

The internal guide program likes big bright ones. PHD wants a weak start that has a nice pointed PEAK at the top and not a over exposed flat top.
I have good results with PHD (on windows my old setup) I tried PHD on the PI - as a server to the desktop (Kstars/ekos) in the house. It worked, but
not nearly as good as being on the local machine. I suspect it has to do with the PI 100 yards away running PHD and then sending the results to me
on the desktop in the house. IT FELT... LAGGY and guiding from (local at about .35 dropped on the PI to about .79. The internal guide code also
guides about .79. so I think it has to do with the REMOTE server delays.

I had problems too - but they just went away. We seemed to think it was due to lowering from 10 iterations to 3. It also complained I have backlash
but I have a high end mount and really doubt that.

The GUIDING code is the weakest link in the Kstars/Ekos software pack. Hopefully it gets a refit. PHD is open source why not combine it?
PHD has been combined into Asiair and works extraordinarily well with my cheap AVX mount I get around .5 total rms error. (with sighting down the tube to PA).

I'll attach - I have a PHD guiding on windows directly and I think I might have a cap of guiding with the internal Eko's guider.

PHD - typical direct from NUC PC in dome to mount.



Internal Kstars/Ekos guiding. Best I've achieved so far.

Thanks Ron for the continued testing!

It is possible, but I haven't check, that the way RMS is calculated can be slightly off between the two programs. To compare apples to apples, you'd probably want to compare PHD2 running on StellarMate vs. the NUC, does that produce also around 0.6 RMS?

We considered using PHD2, but there is no PHD2 library to do that, you either use the full program or not. I'm not sure about ASIAir, they might be using PHD2 the same way we are (via connecting to the PHD2 server). Do you also use LX200 AP experimental on the ASIAir?

Testing yesterday again.

Installed latest nightly.
Changed gain of the asi120 from 28 upto 80.
Iterations in settings to three like it is default on new version.
Checked Paralignment through polarscope which was abit off, and fixed that.

First calibration running flawless.
Rms still at max 2,0 but 70% about 1,2 or so

Next i will test with phd. Maybe tonight, weather looks good.

To Rob.

I am not on remote atm. All tests are on a linux laptop with direct connection to the hardware. This to except delay problems between two computers, which i definitally have due to week wifi.

Cheers
Niki


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

So I checked PHD2 code and it is indeed different way of calculating RMS from our method. So it could be the same performance, but the RMS is different.

So what's the difference (not mathematically but what RMS is PhD computing and what Ekos) and which one is "better"?

Does that mean that its working one as good as the other, and only the „drawing“ is different?
That would explain the still good stars though RMS of 2,0


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

This post is just to mention it:

According to www.avalon-instruments.com/support/13-tr...suggested-parameters guider settings look different between tooth belt and worm gear driven mounts. This may apply to an EQ6-R as well.

CS
Klaus