Strainwave Drive Mount Weight Limits and Focal Length Question

5 replies365 views
Sky Story avatar
I am contemplating getting a strain wave mount and wondering about the weight limits.  With strain wave mounts, should you limit your telescope weight to 1/2 to 2/3 the rated weight capacity like what would be done with an equatorial mount, or are strain wave mounts considered capable of guiding well even at the full range of their weight rating?

Also, ZWO and Sky-Watcher recommend their mounts to 1000 mm focal length?  What does this mean for telescopes with higher focal lengths.  I am an SCT fan and prefer to shoot at high focal length.
Engaging
Ashraf AbuSara avatar
The answer is it depends. There are many factors you have to consider, and some challenges you have to overcome like everything else. 

I have used harmonic drives with long focal length systems extensively, with some decent results. The longest focal length I used was my C11 on the AM5 at about 2065mm. It is not a trivial task but doable. Currently I routinely use my AG Optical FA12 with my HAE69ec. This is a special case as this harmonic mount is equipped with a high precision encoder on the RA axis which helps. I am not aware of any other harmonic mounts with high precision encoders currently other than the iOptron variants from the HAEec versions, but I could be wrong.

The first challenge as far as guiding is using an OAG. When using such a long focal length on a reflector, an OAG is preferred. The issue with harmonic drives is that they need frequent corrections to counteract the large periodic error, which means short exposures, 0.5-1.5 seconds. I often used 1s. The problem with such short exposures is at long focal lengths, it will be harder to find guide stars, especially during galaxy season. So it is important to use a large prism OAG with a large sensor guide camera. Large pixels preferable. I found the combination of the 174mm along with the ZWO OAG-L to work well for that purpose to maximize the chances of finding multiple stars suitable for guiding. Personally I never went past f/7, so at f/10 this can be even more challenging. 

Then comes the issue of size. The weight is not the only factor that comes into play here. How far the center of mass of the OTA is from the RA axis matters. If you get two systems, with the same weight (lets say 30lbs). One is a 6 inches in diameter while the other is 10, the mount will have a much harder time moving the 10inch system compared to the 6 inch system, despite having the same weight. Unfortunately not all mount manufacturers explain this in their specifications. 

With that being said, you don't need to limit yourself to half the posted payload limit. But if you are using a 10 inch or 11 inch SCT, probably keep your payload 10lbs away from the maximum limit to take into account the OTA center from the RA axis. 

Finally it also depends on your location and seeing conditions. With such frequent exposures, you will be heavily dependent on your seeing conditions. Multistar guiding definitely helps, but you may not always be able to get more than 2-3 stars, and sometimes 1 star that is suitable for guiding. Things may have worked well for me because I have good seeing conditions especially in the summer with my AM5. But if your seeing conditions are poor, your guiding will suffer, and so will your images. 

Hope this helps.
Helpful Insightful Engaging
Dunk avatar
Ashraf AbuSara:
I am not aware of any other harmonic mounts with high precision encoders currently other than the iOptron variants from the HAEec versions, but I could be wrong.


The Rainbow Astro RST135E has a Renishaw encoder on the RA axis.
Well Written
Ashraf AbuSara avatar
Dunk:
Ashraf AbuSara:
I am not aware of any other harmonic mounts with high precision encoders currently other than the iOptron variants from the HAEec versions, but I could be wrong.


The Rainbow Astro RST135E has a Renishaw encoder on the RA axis.

Thanks for pointing that out. I wasn't aware they made RSTs with RA encoder.
Well Written Respectful
Sky Story avatar
Ashraf AbuSara:
Finally it also depends on your location and seeing conditions. With such frequent exposures, you will be heavily dependent on your seeing conditions. Multistar guiding definitely helps, but you may not always be able to get more than 2-3 stars, and sometimes 1 star that is suitable for guiding. Things may have worked well for me because I have good seeing conditions especially in the summer with my AM5. But if your seeing conditions are poor, your guiding will suffer, and so will your images.


Thank you. I live in about a Bortle 1.5 region. Seeing when I shoot is okay to very good.  Still, I might just go with a GEM mount for the second observatory.  Where I live, the sky conditions are so good I have no reason to travel for astrophotography.
Ashraf AbuSara avatar
Sky Story:
Ashraf AbuSara:
Finally it also depends on your location and seeing conditions. With such frequent exposures, you will be heavily dependent on your seeing conditions. Multistar guiding definitely helps, but you may not always be able to get more than 2-3 stars, and sometimes 1 star that is suitable for guiding. Things may have worked well for me because I have good seeing conditions especially in the summer with my AM5. But if your seeing conditions are poor, your guiding will suffer, and so will your images.


Thank you. I live in about a Bortle 1.5 region. Seeing when I shoot is okay to very good.  Still, I might just go with a GEM mount for the second observatory.  Where I live, the sky conditions are so good I have no reason to travel for astrophotography.

Yes if it will live on a permenant pier, there is not reason to go with a strainwave mount.