×

INDI Library v2.0.6 is Released (02 Feb 2024)

Bi-monthly release with minor bug fixes and improvements

Scheduler question: Do (or should) altitude limits apply to setting rather than only rising?

  • Posts: 211
  • Thank you received: 31
I want to set up a scheduler file that I can load and start over multiple nights. I would like to start each night with a particular target and image it until it drops below an altitude threshold, then move to the next highest priority target.

But as far as I can tell from playing with the scheduler, the Altitude limit applies only to starting on a target as the target rises. Is that correct, or am I missing a setting somewhere? In the screenshot, in the Simulator, the Deneb sequence will continue running until Deneb actually goes below the horizon.
 
2 years 1 month ago #80661
Attachments:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 225
  • Thank you received: 16
The altitude limit applies to both rising and setting.  My setup will park (or goto the next target) when the object drops below the limit.

Ron
The following user(s) said Thank You: Ron DeBry
2 years 1 month ago #80663

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 211
  • Thank you received: 31
Interesting - does your scheduler show the job end time correctly (the time at which the first job drops below the altitude limit), or is it like the screenshot above where it shows the job continuing to the horizon?
2 years 1 month ago #80664

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 1208
  • Thank you received: 559
I agree with you that the scheduler should simulate the future and put the expected finish time, given altitude constraints, on that line. However, I believe it doesn't do that.

My understanding is that 
- Yes, altitude limits, including the artificial horizon limits, do apply to rising and setting.
- No, that is not accurately reflected on the table on the scheduler tab.

Also, beware that, as things stand, the scheduler doesn't necessarily start the next job once the previous one has fallen below the horizon (if that job isn't "finished"). Multi-job scheduling could definitely be improved. My understanding is that if you want two jobs to run in a given night, you need to make sure that the first one "completes".  That is, if the first job falls below an altitude constraint, but still has images to capture, it will reschedule for tomorrow, if possible, but the next job will not start. 

We (the developers) have spoken on-and-off about improving this, and hopefully will improve it in the next scheduler software iteration.

Hy
The following user(s) said Thank You: Eric
2 years 1 month ago #80665

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 211
  • Thank you received: 31
Thanks, Hy.

Would a workaround be to set each job as a sequence that takes, say, 60 minutes, and set it to repeat until terminated? Or, if it hits the altitude limit during a repeat, will it still shut everything down for the night rather than move to the next job?
2 years 1 month ago #80666

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 225
  • Thank you received: 16
Hy,

On reflection, you are correct. When I schedule two objects, I schedule the first job's number of images to make sure it completes before dropping beyond the alt limit. Then it kicks off the second job which usually stops at the alt limit.

However, I have had many one image jobs that start and stop based on the alt limit.

Thanks for clarifying.

Ron
2 years 1 month ago #80667

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 1208
  • Thank you received: 559
@Ron DeBry: I believe the repeat-until-terminated means it isn't finishing so the 2nd job won't start. Not 100% sure, would have to pour through the code or try it. I think, as Ron Clanton says, you'd need to make sure the 1st job terminates by setting the number of exposures as such, or by setting a finish time.

This is certainly a well-requested improvement that I hope we get going.
Hy
 
2 years 1 month ago #80668

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.525 seconds