×

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

Bi-monthly release with minor bug fixes and improvements

Exciting new tool in Ekos for Mount Modelling

This tool is developed by Robert Lancaster, and ... well, see the screenshot to see what is it about:



7 years 2 weeks ago #15032
Attachments:

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

  • Posts: 454
  • Thank you received: 51
Hello,
This is a nice improvement of the astrometry tool.
Would it be possible to have an explanation about it by the creator ?
Clear skies
Patrick
7 years 2 weeks ago #15033

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

  • Posts: 2876
  • Thank you received: 809
I will make something to explain it soon. I am still trying to refine it a little. It does work very well now I think, but could use a little more "spit and polish". It is almost there.
7 years 2 weeks ago #15070

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

  • Posts: 454
  • Thank you received: 51
This morning I tested the astrometry function with simulators.
I tracked the HD198149 star and try to solve field. The process doesn't converge to a solution. Is it because of the simulators or the process itself ?
I have to mention that I had, sometimes, same behaviors in real situation in some regions of the sky.
7 years 1 week ago #15161

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

  • Posts: 2876
  • Thank you received: 809
The mount model tool did not change the behavior of the Ekos astrometric solver and astrometry.net, it just makes use of them. The simulators and astrometry often solve very well when everything is set up right. I usually use the offline solver and my images solve within a few seconds. The exception is near the poles, things do not solve well at all there. Anywhere else in the sky, it should solve pretty quickly. It just may take a little adjustment.

I have found that a number of factors can affect whether an image gets solved or not. First, are you using the online or offline solver? If you are using the offline one, then you need to have the right index files and need to have the right programs properly installed, if you are using the online solver, you must have a connection to the internet and their servers must be working properly. Second, did you get the right number of stars? You can increase or decrease the exposure time or bin your images more or less to change this. I will usually just play with these two settings when a field doesnt solve. Third, do you have all of the settings correct for the solver such as the telescope equipment, the fits2fits parameter, the coordinates, the search radius, etc. Sometimes, you can just remove or change a parameter that is causing problems and it solves right away.

Hopefully this helps. Thanks

Rob
7 years 1 week ago #15166

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

  • Posts: 472
  • Thank you received: 165
Haven't had clear weather to try this on real setup yet, but with simulators I noticed that sometimes when running the modeling it starts a new image capture immediately after starting slew to next star. I guess it sees the mount as idle even though it has just issued a slew command. Maybe it should first wait until the mount status changes to busy and then back to idle, though it might be a simulator only issue as well.
7 years 1 week ago #15167

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

  • Posts: 454
  • Thank you received: 51
Hello Robert,
I assume that it is not your tool that is to incriminate. Maybe I would have to open a new thread for this topic.
For the test I evoke I just used simulators. And all looks fine, I have the good focal and aperture.
But for this object HD198149 the solver never converge and doesn't move the simulator mount. The object is 61° DE which is far from the North Pole.
I tried to do the same for Alderamin in Cepheus and the result was identical.
I have set the telescope focal and aperture to respectively 777 and 111mm. The camera simulator is 1280x960 pixels of 3,75µm. And all the index files covering the computed field (41.3' x 30.9') are presents (index-4208.fits 2Mass and index-4108.fits Tycho2).


Hum, maybe I am silly or Alzheimer. I guess the CCD simulator cannot change the view of the targeted field. So, the process can enter in infinite loop never finding the good solution. If I am right, I am sorry, this topic is not a good one.
But now I understand the philosophy of your tool and YES the automatic mount model is a great improvement and a really good use of astrometry. I hope to test it very soon. Maybe tonight if the weather remain clement.
Last edit: 7 years 1 week ago by Patrick.
7 years 1 week ago #15169
Attachments:

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

  • Posts: 2876
  • Thank you received: 809
From your screenshot, it looks like it did solve the image, but you have told it to "slew to target" and you have the accuracy required to be 15. I think its a simulator issue. I have found that the simulator always has a certain amount of error and a sync does not correct it. I would recommend requiring 30 arcsec instead or setting the align module l to sync only and not "slew to target" so that it can actually complete if you want to test the modeling tool with the simulators. The error in the simulator is nice for testing purposes, but you cannot expect its accuracy to improve like a real mount with a pointing model would (unless the simulator is rewritten).
7 years 1 week ago #15176

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

  • Posts: 2876
  • Thank you received: 809

It shouldn't start the capture until it arrives at the star. do you know the circumstances under which this happens or is it random?
7 years 1 week ago #15177

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

  • Posts: 454
  • Thank you received: 51
Tested it an hour ago. It works fine on 3 stars in Leo. But as for the first iterations the error is huge the colored target becomes very very tiny. So we have to rescale and pan. It would be better to rescale the target while the points are drawn. Maybe it could exists better solutions.
Last edit: 7 years 1 week ago by Patrick.
7 years 1 week ago #15191

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

  • Posts: 472
  • Thank you received: 165
As far as I see it seems to be random, probably a race condition, but quite easy to reproduce.
7 years 1 week ago #15192

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

  • Posts: 2876
  • Thank you received: 809

The target size is determined by the requested accuracy in the solver at the moment, which you can change whenever you like.

7 years 1 week ago #15195
Attachments:

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

Time to create page: 0.750 seconds