Re: Coma /Collimation

Bob Madden (madden@netcom.com)
Mon, 8 May 1995 12:54:53 -0700 (PDT)

Good goin' Rich! I'll bet you sell out quickly. This video is superb even if there are hams for actors, especially Alan Gorski. Seriously folks, Rich and Alan have done a great job on the video. Every amateur group should have one in their library. Our Association has one.

Bob

):-{])) <---- madden@netcom.com madden@svpal.org Remember amateur astronomers: "keep looking for the next Universe"

On 8 May 1995, Richard Combs wrote:

> Reply to: RE>>Coma /Collimation
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------
> Date: 5/6/95 12:12 AM
> To: Richard Combs
> From: atm@best.com
>
>
> >The coma is present or slightly more pronounce at the edge of field in the
> >right side perpendicular to the optical axis. In my mind, I would tweak the
> >focuser setting screws on the opposite side bringing that opposite side up
> >in order to tilt the focuser aperture in the direction away from the coma. I
> >will try this tommorrow in fact and see if the coma becomes symmetrical. I
> >wonder if anyone checks this in their scope as a matter of habit. To tell
> >you the truth, I've always thought that stars tell the most accurate tale of
> >alignment and that these devices can be jiggled in the focuser enough to
> >make their readings ambiguous.}
>
> Don't forget that if you adjust the squaring on of the focuser, you will need
> to check the diagonal rotation adjustment, and the primary alignment. The
> focuser is pivoting at its base, and so the image plane will change its
> position. You need to tweek the diagonal rotation adjustment and primary
> mirror alignment to bring the center of the FOV back to the center of the
> focuser.
>
>
> >See my comment above regarding collimation devices. I once borrowed a
> >friends lazer collimater without instructions. What I noticed is that any
> >pressure on the side of the laser tube when in the focuser made the beam
> >wobble. Which was the true and accurate reading? Maybe a conventional
> >Cheshire set would be better.
>
> Irregardless of whether you are using a laser collimator or
> sight-tube/cheshire tools, you can only be as accurate as your sloppiest
> component, usually the facuser. The Crayford focusers seem to be the best
> design so far. An ultra-precise alignment tool won't help in a loose facuser.
> I find a good sight tube and a cheshire adequate for my needs. The laser
> collimators can be very accurate in principle, but they sometimes are not
> build as accurately as they could be. And I believe you should be confident in
> the use of the traditional tools before you would use a laser collimator,
> because you must understand what you are doing for them to produce acceptable
> results.
>
> As Chuck said, Al Gorski and I will be showing a video on collimation at RTMC.
> We will be bringing about 30 copies for sale at $20. And Lumicon has about a
> dozen copies on the shelf. I don't think they will be advertising them, they
> just wanted to make them available to people who buy scopes off the showroom
> floor. You could get one if you call. But at RTMC, I'l autograph your copy for
> free. Gee wiz!....RICH
>
>