|
Collimation
isn’t too well
understood, but I don’t suppose
it needs to be, provided you know how to “do it”. Collimation really
means
ensuring the various pieces of the optical train are in line and square
with
each other.
When we
buy a telescope, we assume, that it’s perfect, and accept the
views we
get with it as normal for this type of instrument. But it’s worth a
check.
Collimation is really quite a big subject, but can be dealt with fairly
simply
for our purposes. First, how do you know your telescope isn’t
“perfect”? In
simple terms it doesn’t give you a clear image, the image is slightly
fuzzy, out of focus, but
many other problems can give the same result, from bad seeing, to
fingerprints
on the eyepiece.
But you
don’t
need to investigate what’s causing the problem yet, just check
for bad collimation to eliminate it as a cause. How? Wind the image of
a star
out of focus and if the rings or discs you see are concentric, you
don’t really
have collimation as a major fault. Though you can always improve it.
So, do all telescopes suffer, or does this affliction only occur in
certain
breeds?
All telescopes can get this problem, but some are more
likely
than
others, I suppose it’s in the genes.
Refractors are the least likely to suffer and accordingly few have the
means to
correct it, only some very high end refractors have the adjustment, 3
screws, built into the objective lens cell, to correct bad collimation,
though
you don’t expect to have a collimation problem with them anyway.
The only way
to correct a normal refractor with bad collimation is to send it
back to its Maker.
Reflectors? Yes, all types.The degree of affliction is dependant on the
design
and quality of its execution, but by and large, all reflectors suffer.
The test as
before, use a medium magnification eyepiece, focus on a mag 3 to 6
star, in reasonable seeing, when the star doesn’t jump about. Make sure
it’s in
the centre of the field of view too. Now unfocus it so that big
circles, discs
are produced. Important points are, make sure the star is in the middle
of the
field, as other problems will start to interfere if the star is off
axis.
And make sure
the primary has had time to stabilise its figure. This comes when
the temperature of the primary matches the ambient temperature. It can
take an
hour from getting the telescope out and set up. The “figure” is the
shape of
the primary’s curve; it changes with temperature. These are only very
small
amounts but they can be seen in the eyepiece. A closed tube reflector
will take
much longer than an open tube reflector. But you can do most of the
work
without waiting, though with less perfection.
SCTs, like
Meade and Celestron products, have a pierced primary so you only
have one means of collimating and that is by adjusting the secondary,
where 3 screws are provided.
Newtonians?
You must first mark a central spot on the primary, draw a small
circle there with a felt tip pen. Sacrilegious? Yes, but be
adventurous, after
all, the secondary hides this area, so it isn’t a working surface. Make
sure the circle is accurately in the middle though.
Then looking
through the focuser, preferably using a long extension tube so as
to get as far back as possible making the eye line through the focuser
to the
secondary as central to it’s axis as possible (a tube with a small
central hole
through it will help too, though much more difficult to use), adjust
the
secondary side to side etc. till your circle on the primary is right in
the
middle of the field of view seen through the focuser, and concentric
with the
rim of the secondary.
That was
stage one.
Stage two is
to remove the tube and extension and put a low magnification
eyepiece in, and get a star in the centre of the field, and put it out
of focus
so that the circles are seen. This applies to SCT’s too.
In Schmidt
Cassegrains, the adjustment is in the secondary. In Newtonians the
adjustment is in the primary.
Adjust the
screws, a little at a time, trying to remember which screw, which
way, till the circles are concentric. After each adjustment, which will
take
the image to one side, return the image to the centre of the field
before
making a judgement on that adjustment. That puts quite a lot of work
into a few
words, particularly if your collimation is far off and you have no
drives. Your
telescope may be quite long and your arms short, so you can’t see what
you’re
adjustments do till you’ve got your eye to the eyepiece again. It can
be time
consuming, but persevere in little steps, don’t be tempted to use a
hammer and
chisel. A remote eye, in the head of a friend helps, but a webcam is
better,
and easier on the temper.
When you’ve
got the rings concentric both sides of focus, yes, both sides of
focus, this means winding the focus through the focus point and beyond,
stop for
a cup of tea. Then change to a higher magnification eyepiece, and start
all
over again. Then on to a higher magnification eyepiece and repeat.
If you want
it to be as good as possible, add a Barlow and do it again. But
you’re approaching the point of diminishing returns. So judge when to
stop to suit your needs.
When you get
to using more than 2x barlows for this job you’d better start
thinking about all the other problems that affect the image you see in
the eyepiece.
There are
many refinements to consider, but none that makes giant improvements.
That’s all
there is to it, so get on with it. You’ll not regret the work.
Oh, another
point. It pays to check collimation every time you use the
telescope till you get to know how well it holds collimation. Some hold
it well
but still need it checked from time to time. Others don’t hold it well
at all
but that generally applies to older and cheaper reflectors.
My preferred
way is to use a webcam so I can stay at the working end of the
telescope and make adjustments with more care. The chip is so small
that the
image will always be on the centreline of the telescope or it flies off
screen,
which forces you to make small adjustments. The picture I see of the
rings is
much bigger on the screen of the laptop, and with two eyes it’s easier
to judge
concentricity.
|
 |