Hi all,
I run my Avalon M-Uno with EQMOD 1.28s, using the latest SGP 2.6.0.24 Beta and Ansvr 0.19. I have it all configured as such:
I’ve noticed that most times when a target ends and SGP goes to the next target, it slews and then starts to centre via plate solving. It plate solves once and fails to be within the error margin of 50 pixels. Since I have it set to try 5 times, it calculates the offset, slews the mount very slightly and captures another exposure to plate solve a second time. This time it takes longer to plate solve and then just says the scale error is more than 25% and that it failed to plate solve.
This is one such error from one SGP log file:
[10/22/17 00:16:26.501][DEBUG] [Unknown] Astrometry.NET - Upload complete
[10/22/17 00:16:26.501][DEBUG] [Unknown] Astrometry.NET - Waiting for solve to complete
[10/22/17 00:16:27.003][DEBUG] [Unknown] Astrometry.NET request: /api/jobs/356
[10/22/17 00:16:27.003][DEBUG] [Unknown] Astrometry.NET returned: {“status”:“success”}
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] Astrometry.NET request: /api/jobs/356/calibration
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] Astrometry.NET returned: {“dec”:43.5044295012,“epoch”:“J2000”,“ra”:139.860023556,“orientation”:106.357267774503,“parity”:1,“radius”:0,“pixscale”:1.38201896185835}
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] ------------ Begin CalibrationResponse -------------
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] dec 43.5044295012
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] ra 139.860023556
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] radius 0
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] orientation 106.357267774503
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] pixscale 1.38201896185835
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] epoch J2000
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] time NULL
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] parity 1.38201896185835
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] ------------ End CalibrationResponse ---------------
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] Astrometry.NET - Job successfully solved
[10/22/17 00:16:27.004][DEBUG] [Unknown] Astrometry.NET solve done in 50 seconds.
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] Astrometry.NET - Solve Completed
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] *********** SUCCESSFUL SOLVE *************
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] SOLVER: True
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] SUCCESS: True
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] CONF: 100
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] BLIND: True
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] RA: 9.3240015704
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] DEC: 43.5044295012
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] SCALE: 1.20262708791154
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] FLIPPED: False
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] ANGLE (EON): 286.357267774503
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] MSG:
Solve took 50.616 seconds
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] ******************************************
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] Checking to see if solve might be bad…
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] Solved scale not within 25% of scale hint!
[10/22/17 00:16:27.374][DEBUG] [Telescope Thread] Solve might be bad (auto center)! Solved scale is not within 25% of scale hint.
If I just dismiss this error and click Try Now on Recovery, it actually works perfectly well as if nothing happened. I just don’t understand how random this is.
My imaging pixel scale is 2.08"/pixel (450mm focal length and 4.54um pixel size). I have 2.08 set in the equipment (and sequence) profile. I do however plate solve with 20s exposures with the Luminance filter at 2x2 binning.
I’ve noticed that when it fails, the scale on the SGP log file is like 1.2 or 6.6. It should be 4.16 since it’s at 2x2 binning. Indeed when the scale is near 4.16, plate solving works perfectly. The issue is now down to this:
Why is Ansvr/SGP detecting a scale like 1.2 or 6.6 when the plate solve images look fine and are definitely captured at 4.16?
Thank you!
Best Regards,
Kayron