I tested the new version yesterday. I think it needs a lot of tests to finally confirm it, but it went very well for me.

It takes a long time to get close to the 0 Error value, I've always been way too fast here in the past. I startet with your values, but for Axis1 i had to change it:

1.8 - 0.01 - 0.05
0.75 - 0.01 - 0.13

(the tuning took me about 10-15 minutes)

In the end I was able to achieve that the error value was around zero (+-2). So it was possible for me (for the first time) to take a 60 second single frame (unguided):



(Raspberry Pi HQ Cam - single 60 Sek with Omegon 76-342)

After that i turned on guiding and it went well for over 7 minutes (than i stopped):



Polling was here at 500ms in the options, but i didnt saw a big difference.

I think that were the best results i ever hat with IND AZ-GTI(x) combo. I think we need to do a lot more testing to make sure it works reproducibly. But I'm confident and excited about the progress.

MAT, that is awsome image! I see that you are using HQ Camera for imaging? Are you imaging with Ekos? Which INDI driver are you using for HQ Camera?
Will this awsome work help with guiding with AZ-Gti EQMod connection too?

Woot!! This is really exciting news. 60 seconds and your stars still look round. I agree with Simon, excellent image.

A storm from came through yesterday evening so no field testing until Thursday
for me it appears, but I'm very eager to get out and test.

I did determine from testing indoors that the polling time difference between the axes appeared to have been a one time fluke and the logs look normal again, so we can scratch that from the issues list.

**Update**: I am adding another excel sheet with some analysis to this post from indoor testing today using the same parameters used yesterday. Axis 1 appears to be good. Axis 2 may need the derivative term increased slightly to correct the initial overshoots for faster accurate tracking. For those testing, it may be a good idea to test indoors and use a similar procedure to get the gain values determined visually prior to going outdoors. It took around 5 minutes for the tracking to settle, but as I noted in the excel file, I believe this can be corrected by bumping the derivative term a bit.

>>>I see that you are using HQ Camera for imaging? Are you imaging with Ekos? Which INDI driver are you using for HQ Camera?

Unfortunately I have to disappoint you here - i made the picture with my own crappy Java-GUI which only starts/stops libcamera shell-commands in the background. No EKOS used here. But i follow the HQ thread with great interest!

After taking that 60 sec frame i swichted to M42 and took a 60 sec frame and there was a little drift -> but i think this was perhaps because of field rotation ( M42 was AZ 240 ALT 16). But as i went down to 20-30 sec it was very good again. For me lower values are ok, i use more 15-20 sec when imaging.

I think we have to make further tests to proof it was not only luck, but what i can say is, that it was yesterday more consistent than ever.

@MAT: Thank you for sharing that info.
Maybe you can give a try to RONALD SCHREIBER's great indi_pylibcamera driver and try to capture image with Ekos?

More info here:
- github.com/scriptorron/indi_pylibcamera
- indilib.org/forum/ccds-dslrs/12177-indi-libcamera-driver.html
- saimons-astronomy.webador.com/1216039_ra...ndi-libcamera-driver

All -

I'm attaching yesterday and today's data files for indoor testing. Essentially, Axis1, which is the azimuth axis is not carrying much load. I hypothesize that this is why it always produces zero error almost immediately. On all excel sheets I have provided the data for both axes. The data in the excel files is for the following settings:

File 1: both axes @ 0.75 Kp, 0.13 Ki, 0.01 Kd.
File 2: both axes again @ 0.75 Kp, 0.13 Ki, 0.01 Kd.
File 3: Axis 1 @ 0.75 Kp, 0.13 Ki, 0.01 Kd, Axis 2 @ 0.95 Kp, 0.55 Ki, and 0.02 Kd
File 4: Axis 1 @ 0.75 Kp, 0.13 Ki, 0.01 Kd., Axis 2 @ 0.95 Kp, 0.65 Ki, and 0.27 Kd
File 5: Axis 1 @ 0.75 Kp, 0.13 Ki, 0.01 Kd., Axis @ 1.1 Kp, 0.65 Ki, and 0.01 Kd.

Hopefully my notes on the graph document the thought process enough to lead others in the right direction.

Excellent reports Michael! @Mat, can you try the setting for File 5 with load? I will be able to test today as well and will report back.

Hey folks,

@simon: Thank you for the hint with the cam!

@all:

i tested indoor with mount loaded with 3.7 kg:

I set the values (Axis 1 @0.75 Kp, 0.01 Ki, 0.13 Kd, Axis @ 1.1 Kp, 0.65 Ki, and 0.01 Kd) ​​and started the tracking - then I waited 2 minutes for it to settle - here are some logs as attachement. I had some high errors in between. So i think this values would not work well?

Is that what you wanted me to test?

EDIT: i have to add, that it settled around zero but then errors appeared - it settled again an errors came back...

Regards

Thanks, Jasem. I figure continuing to document/share our testing will help propel us forward on this.

Mat - thanks for taking the data. I noticed your settings which you used to capture the awesome photo the other night were:

1.8 - 0.01 - 0.05
0.75 - 0.01 - 0.13

I believe your altitude/azimuth encoders may be flipped in comparison to mine. So could you do a 15 minute test with the following?

Axis1 @ 1.1 Kp, 0.65 Ki, and 0.01 Kd
Axis 2 @0.75 Kp, 0.13 Ki, 0.01 Kd

Note: I messed up and switched the Kd and Ki values above in the post. The data files I provided have the correct terms I used. I have corrected the previous post! I apologize. Kd should always be the smallest value.

If you have bandwidth, also re-perform the test you did in your most recent post ~1 hour ago switching the Ki and Kd terms. If you provide the logs for both of these tests, I'll plug the data into the spreadsheet, and we can trend. The objective of these tests are two-fold: 1. to see if we can produce a faster stabilization time 2. to see if we can provide initial guesses for non-technical users to speed up the PID tuning process.

To summarize the testing discussed above could you perform these two 10-15 minute tests and provide the logs?:
Test 1:
Axis1 @ 1.1 Kp, 0.65 Ki, and 0.01 Kd
Axis 2 @0.75 Kp, 0.13 Ki, 0.01 Kd

Test 2:
Axis1 @0.75 Kp, 0.13 Ki, 0.01 Kd
Axis2 @ 1.1 Kp, 0.65 Ki, and 0.01 Kd

Thank you!!!!

Hi Michael, Jasem,

sry, the next days im a little bit short in time (travelling).

Regards

I will test tonight. I think we need to adopt some default parameters as the next INDI release is due in a week.

Hey Folks,

How did ur tests go? (Im back home and back on track on friday)

Mat