×

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

Bi-monthly release with minor bug fixes and improvements

Re:Realign after guiding failure

  • Posts: 969
  • Thank you received: 94
Hi everyone
Do we have a setting that will realign after any guiding failure? I can only find realign on guide calibration failure.
Cheers,
Steve
Last edit: 4 years 1 month ago by alacant.
4 years 1 month ago #50002

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

  • Posts: 1119
  • Thank you received: 182
I second that suggestion!

It would be great to have an option that is triggered on guiding failure, preferentially after the mount has been moved from the original position by an X number of guide pulses.

That normally indicates that the mount is drifting and is lost in space, if not time....

Jo
The following user(s) said Thank You: alacant
4 years 1 month ago #50011

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

  • Posts: 1029
  • Thank you received: 301

Replied by Eric on topic Realign after guiding failure

This is indeed another recovery method we need to improve. Note that if implemented in the future, this will probably only be available for the Scheduler automation.
The issue is that recovery mechanisms are difficult to validate properly after implementation. We are busy preparing automated tests to keep all this under control.

However, sorry but I think the "X number of guide pulses" feature is too far on the guider implementation side.
Scheduler will only ever use "still OK" or "not good anymore" translated flags to engage a recovery.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Jose Corazon, alacant
4 years 1 month ago #50027

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

  • Posts: 1119
  • Thank you received: 182
Thanks, Eric!

Yes, upon rereading this, I agree that that idea was not well thought out.
But how about the following: “Simply “ implement a routine that checks after a user-definable x number of frames whether that frame is still congruent with the first frame of the sequence and whether that falls within a predefined tolerance window.
All that would require is the solver to be able to run in parallel with the capture module.
Would that be possible?
4 years 1 month ago #50029

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

  • Posts: 969
  • Thank you received: 94
Hi
We already recover after guiding failure; that works great.- the problem being that the new guide star may take the intended target away from, say, centre field. The issue then is that the edges of the frame are lost.
If you need anything tested along these lines, here I am:)
Cheers and clear skies,
Steve
The following user(s) said Thank You: Jose Corazon
4 years 1 month ago #50030

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

  • Posts: 1119
  • Thank you received: 182
Happy to test as well! I am using the scheduler every time I am imaging, so wouldn't be able to avoid it.

While we are discussing the scheduler, Eric. Is there an easy way to fix this problem:

indilib.org/forum/general/6489-priority-...incorrect.html#49671

I know this worked without a hitch in the past, so if you come across the reason why ASAP scheduling of multiple targets no longer works.... :-)

Jo
4 years 1 month ago #50034

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

  • Posts: 1029
  • Thank you received: 301
So what you both propose is an additional error detection gate where the incoming frame is solved, and its WCS data compared to the target coordinates to produce a guiding quality metric on which Scheduler may take a decision. That gate resolution could run in parallel with the next exposure, but requires a low resource allocation. That sounds really nice.

-Eric
The following user(s) said Thank You: Jose Corazon
4 years 1 month ago #50071

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

  • Posts: 969
  • Thank you received: 94
Hi
My idea was: if guiding fails, realign. End of story.
It would be a toggle in the scheduler options for those who want the current behavior.

Would that make it easier?
Cheers,
Steve
Last edit: 4 years 1 month ago by alacant.
4 years 1 month ago #50072

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

  • Posts: 1029
  • Thank you received: 301
Certainly. However there is a bug we need to tackle first: re-aligning while a sequence is in progress causes the Capture module to miss the next frame and wait for its timeout to elapse before aborting and restarting. This is the issue you spotted after a meridian flip.

-Eric
The following user(s) said Thank You: Jose Corazon
4 years 1 month ago #50082

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

  • Posts: 1119
  • Thank you received: 182

Under ideal circumstances, yes, that would be the way to go. However, some mounts, like the iOptron SmartEQPro+, have a large periodic error and that often leads to the guide star being lost after dithering. The same guide star is immediately reacquired, but effectively, that would thus trigger a realignment after each dither, even if there was no real image shift.

One could probably avoid that by setting the deviation at which guide error is detected so high that that does not happen, but that would then beat the entire purpose again.

An option for periodic realignment would avoid that scenario. Probably once implemented, one could then simply choose between these two options.

Jo
The following user(s) said Thank You: Eric
4 years 1 month ago #50091

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

  • Posts: 969
  • Thank you received: 94
Hi.
My suggestion is for an option. A toggle.
Cheers
The following user(s) said Thank You: Jose Corazon
Last edit: 4 years 1 month ago by alacant.
4 years 1 month ago #50096

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

Time to create page: 0.277 seconds