|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 8, 2022 19:58:00 GMT -7
Posted by: Ron Walker Jun 22 2009, 06:22 PM QUOTE(Owen Phairis @ Aug 27 2008, 03:54 PM) * Here are pictures of the complete projectors showing Rons and the Novins. There seems to me to be a noticeable difference on the size of star ball plate and how the star ball attaches to the planet cage. I find it interesting.....
Rons
Novins
I ment to make comments on this before, but as I get older...... Oh well, better late then never.
I will preface this by saying that the more and more of these machines I see, the more and more I believe that there are not two built exactly the same! I'm sure that is a bit of an exaggeration but I wonder how big.
One of the problems with our various pictures is the distortions the various focal lengths induce into the pictures. While many things look different, I wonder how many of them are just optical illusions.
There is a large plate just under each star globe which is basically just for mounting auxiliary projectors. It looks much like the plate (and serves the same function) as the plate on the Mark VI Zeiss. I'm not at all sure when it was introduced or if it was a standard or optional element when ordering the projector. Because of its size and placement, it gives the illusion the the star balls on mine are larger or the planet cages are smaller on mine then yours. Perhaps because my projector was designed for a 30 foot dome and yours for a 40 foot, a larger diameter star ball was used to angle the star projectors.
Your Milky Way projectors appear longer and thinner then mine and again that could be because of the photographs or dome size considerations.
The lenses on the planet projectors also appear different for the same reasons.
One thing for sure, power to the star globes was run through straight conduit on the outside of the planet cages, while my later made projector had the wires just tied to the planet cage struts. They probably called it a design improvement, I call it being cheap by eliminating the wire guides.
You also have a lot of extra projectors mounted on the central core and on the base of the projector. Again I don't know if these were optional extras available to order or if they were additions by the planetarium staff. I would love to know exactly what they all projected. My plan is to add several more constilation outline projectors to the central core and the ruff below the star balls as long as the electrical slip rings hold out.
We either need to measure to get true differences or another trip is in order for me as you have a lot of great stuff for me to drool over. wink.gif
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 8, 2022 20:00:54 GMT -7
Posted by: Owen Phairis Jun 22 2009, 08:41 PM
Hi Ron,
There are more pictures of the Novins Minolta on the Museum website and on the scrapbook page. Perhaps these additional pictures might help in solving the differences between the two?
You are always welcome to come and visit and take pictures and measurements, or if there are any measurments you would like me to make I would be more than glad to do so.
The additional projectors you mention were made by "Walker Instruments" and were for constellation outlines (if my memory serves me right), another thing for us to play with when you come....
Owen -
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 8, 2022 20:01:57 GMT -7
Posted by: albert Jun 23 2009, 01:17 AM Now that is some fascinating information, Ron- on the star plates of the Minolta. I think the Zeiss machines might have used a similar scheme for the nebulae. At least the later ones - the 1015 machines in Augsburg and Munich definitely had a problem with the magellanic clouds. It looked like a piece of film was cemented to the star plate which had then cracked and dried- the image on the dome was pretty awful. Or it was like your glass cover. Are there alignment marks on the plate that have been painted over? I mean punched marks that have later been covered with some kind of opaque paint. That seems to have been the process with the old Zeiss machines for visual alignment of the star fields in the dome. BTW: Someone told me he had been to a planetarium in South America where they used an old Zeiss Machine. Someone had taken the star projectors out for cleaning- and put them back in the wrong places! " I have never seen such odd constellations" my friend observed.....bit like mixing up the reels of a movie in a cinema....I had that happen to me on DeMilles TEN COMMANDMENTS once....Never seen the parting of the Red Sea in the First half of the movie! I know that the ZKP 1 used "roughened" areas on the star plates to project nebulae. I guess this was done by hand, as was the rest of the star plates. The Minolta plate looks hand-punched. As you have mentioned, the holes seem to pucker inward. I don't think a photolithographic or laser process would leave the star plate warped. Ye goode olde punch- the infinite patience and capability for taking pains of the Japanese- I can only admire that. Now they probably thread fiber optics into the plates.... All these images show how dangerous it would be to simply replace a star ball lamp with a brighter one. All these additions to the plates might melt and fall off... Ron, here's a drawing of the fixed star projectors in the ZKP 1. The original image was inverted - white lines on black- and its a third generation photostat so the quality is bad... Notice the bolts 4 and 8. The no. 8 holds a ring that will serve to center and align the projector. The short bolt 4 holds the projector itself. This way, it can be taken out for cleaning without losing the alignment. The documentation warns against loosening the wrong bolts as this will throw everything out of alignment. Guess the Minolta uses a similar system? Hope you made the right choices when taking out the projector....or did you open'em up from behind while leaving the lens in place? This cannot be done on the small ZKP machine. The whole thing has to come out.
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 8, 2022 20:07:38 GMT -7
Posted by: albert Jun 23 2009, 01:33 AM Here is the ZKP projector from the outside. Note the rounded bolts and the ones with a flat top. The rounded ones hold a ring that will in turn hold the projector in place. A second ring is held by the other bolts and this one stays on the star ball. The eyelid mechanism sits in a threaded ring much like a filter. It can be unscrewed and then the whole thing comes off. I will have to do that soon..... This is TINY! Just for scale, the eyelid is not much bigger than a real one. Perhaps they should have put in eyelashes for a sexier look...
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 8, 2022 20:08:16 GMT -7
Posted by: Ron Walker Feb 14 2011, 06:06 PM QUOTE(albert @ Jun 23 2009, 01:17 AM) * Now that is some fascinating information, Ron- on the star plates of the Minolta. I think the Zeiss machines might have used a similar scheme for the nebulae. At least the later ones - the 1015 machines in Augsburg and Munich definitely had a problem with the magellanic clouds. It looked like a piece of film was cemented to the star plate which had then cracked and dried- the image on the dome was pretty awful. Or it was like your glass cover.
Are there alignment marks on the plate that have been painted over? I mean punched marks that have later been covered with some kind of opaque paint. That seems to have been the process with the old Zeiss machines for visual alignment of the star fields in the dome.
BTW: Someone told me he had been to a planetarium in South America where they used an old Zeiss Machine. Someone had taken the star projectors out for cleaning- and put them back in the wrong places! " I have never seen such odd constellations" my friend observed.....bit like mixing up the reels of a movie in a cinema....I had that happen to me on DeMilles TEN COMMANDMENTS once....Never seen the parting of the Red Sea in the First half of the movie!
I know that the ZKP 1 used "roughened" areas on the star plates to project nebulae. I guess this was done by hand, as was the rest of the star plates. The Minolta plate looks hand-punched. As you have mentioned, the holes seem to pucker inward. I don't think a photolithographic or laser process would leave the star plate warped. Ye goode olde punch- the infinite patience and capability for taking pains of the Japanese- I can only admire that. Now they probably thread fiber optics into the plates....
All these images show how dangerous it would be to simply replace a star ball lamp with a brighter one. All these additions to the plates might melt and fall off... Ron, here's a drawing of the fixed star projectors in the ZKP 1. The original image was inverted - white lines on black- and its a third generation photostat so the quality is bad...
Notice the bolts 4 and 8. The no. 8 holds a ring that will serve to center and align the projector. The short bolt 4 holds the projector itself. This way, it can be taken out for cleaning without losing the alignment. The documentation warns against loosening the wrong bolts as this will throw everything out of alignment. Guess the Minolta uses a similar system?Hope you made the right choices when taking out the projector....or did you open'em up from behind while leaving the lens in place? This cannot be done on the small ZKP machine. The whole thing has to come out.
There are alignment "nicks" on the edge of the star plates which fit a small protrusion on the mount. This mount is screwed into the projector housing. There is also a white dot on the mount that is intended to match another dot on the housing. I have found two of the mounts to also have red dots on the mounts which are offset from the white ones. I have found through projection that these must be "correction points" as when they are lined up with the projector white dot, correct projection occurs. I never liked the alignment of Pegasus and Andromeda and always associated it with my square room. It turns out that it was a white dot rather then a red dot alignment problem.
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 8, 2022 20:08:50 GMT -7
Posted by: Ron Walker Feb 14 2011, 06:17 PM As I have been working on the new Saint control panel, I have been thinking about what I am going to with my machine. As with everything before, the original control systems will be replaced with new ones, but I kind of like some of the old original look.
The old A3P control board is great in that it has back lit words to indicate the controls functions. I would just use the panel itself and replace all of the hardware. Then there is the idea of something completely new. That was the direction I was going in.
Finally there is the original Viewlex/Minolta control board. Since most of the controls would be replaced it would seem problematic to reuse it. However I do like the internally back lit switches. Perhaps it is time to rethink the entire system to see if I can reuse more of it.
Nothing is ever simple.
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 8, 2022 20:09:13 GMT -7
Posted by: mrgare5050 Feb 15 2011, 04:32 AM I have been thinking about what I am going to with my machine
for almost two years, I thought I was slow!
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 8, 2022 20:09:41 GMT -7
Posted by: Ron Walker Feb 15 2011, 11:55 AM QUOTE(mrgare5050 @ Feb 15 2011, 04:32 AM) * I have been thinking about what I am going to with my machine
for almost two years, I thought I was slow! smile.gif
When one is young, enthusiasm takes over and one usually makes several mistakes while completing a project. (How well I know.) Making these mistakes takes substantial time, but since one is constantly working all seem well. As one ages, what some might label as being slow is really just very careful thought as how to progress. huh.gif The time frame comes out the same.
Actually I must admit that I have been somewhat preoccupied with my building problems and have not looked to other projects. As all the rest of you go forth and actually accomplish things, I just contemplate. While I will continue to explore my building directions, I'm thinking it would be fun to actually get something up and running even if not to my unrealistic expectations. Maybe my dream is too big and I should bring my ideas down to earth to at least get something running. Perhaps enthusiasm should once again take over and I should just forge forth. I must admit that I am in the third redesign of a control unit that can actually run all three projectors that I have. I'm thinking this is now wrong and that the portable should be just a portable with a more permanent control for my more permanent projectors. Perhaps I should use the original control panel I made back in high school. Mix the old with the new.
I must admit that I have been in a bit of a funk (feeling sorry for myself) thinking that there is no use to continue with the projectors if I have no place to project, but Gare tends to give one hope as he continues to pull one rabbit after another out of his hat. His ideas seem to always work while I just sit and stare. (I guess we can call that a "Gare Stare" rolleyes.gif )
OK then, a new outlook it is. I need to move forward again in as many directions as I can. The plan.... to out Gare, Gare. Talk about dreaming BIG!!!
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 8, 2022 20:10:05 GMT -7
Posted by: mrgare5050 Feb 15 2011, 02:27 PM
Well I look to you RW to nominate me in 2 years for Eccentrics Anonymous, so Im on your case .. .Ive got your folder ... dr gare
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 8, 2022 20:11:41 GMT -7
Posted by: Ron Walker May 31 2011, 04:33 PM Goodgreef....another four months...I just keep jumping from project to project. I actually tried working but the client went belly-up before he paid me. This entire economy sucks and I don't think it's getting any better. Anyway enough complaining. As I said above, I need to do some work on a new control desk for my Minolta projector. First I need some kind of frame to build it on. I went and looked at my favorite building material "angle aluminum". Wow, I thought the government said there was no inflation. $23 for an eight foot length. I'll probably need at least two. I must become more creative, more like Gare, yes...what would Gare do? I found an old used computer stand that had spent some time out side in the rain. $15 bucks and it's mine. The press board tabletops didn't survive well, but they will all be replaced anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 8, 2022 20:12:45 GMT -7
Posted by: Ron Walker May 31 2011, 04:35 PM Just a few minutes with a screwdriver and I have a roll around base to start working with. If things take me in a different direction then my present thinking, I will still use this for something. I keep changing my mind and getting nothing done.
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 9, 2022 12:52:29 GMT -7
Posted by: mrgare5050 Jun 1 2011, 03:11 AM QUOTE(Ron Walker @ May 31 2011, 11:35 PM) * Just a few minutes with a screwdriver and I have a roll around base to start working with.
If things take me in a different direction then my present thinking, I will still use this for something. I keep changing my mind and getting nothing done.
This is good progress with good junk (it rains in Arizona, I found that out when we picked up the cylinder in Douglas it was 'monsoon', the last thing we expected).. country music has been extolling the virtuals of rain for years .. if its rusted it can be trusted! I especially like how it gives regular wood a patina, you bring a piece of wood inside thats been weathered, its like a work of art, all the details standing clear!
What sort of control panel will it be RW?
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 9, 2022 12:53:59 GMT -7
Posted by: Ron Walker Jun 1 2011, 11:43 AM
I have spent a lot of time thinking about that. At first I was thinking totally new, as the original electronics are "not so hot". Then I got the idea of keeping the original control board and trying to make it work (it really looks cool). Finally I think there will be a combination of the two. The original board in the front with a lot of new electronics behind the board and then a wing on each side with new controls for a lot of the projector. The original Viewlex electronics started dieing soon after the projector was installed and was eventually discarded. Parts were cannibalized and literally nailed to a closet wall, however no schematics were ever made. The original Minolta was a "brute force" design with basically a bunch of Variacs. I plan to go back to the "brute force" idea for much of the machine and am replacing a lot of the tungsten bulbs with LED's. These require new power supplies and control circuits and I found a replacement slide pot that will fit the original control panel exactly. Thus I will use the original control panel for a lot of the indicator push buttons which look good.
I am also trying to make the new control system generic enough that it will be able to run more then one machine. I always liked the idea of being able to run more then one projector so that comparisons can be made. I have two and have no idea of what fate will offer in the future. My third has its own baby control unit described elsewhere.
I love, "If it's rusted it can be trusted".
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 9, 2022 12:54:26 GMT -7
Posted by: Ken Miller Jun 2 2011, 08:05 AM QUOTE(Ron Walker @ Jun 1 2011, 11:43 AM) * I love, "If it's rusted it can be trusted". Me too. I've spent too many hours of my life getting rid of rust and repainting to make things look like new. I don't know if I can give up that obsession.
|
|
|
Post by Ron Walker on Sept 9, 2022 13:12:00 GMT -7
Posted by: Ron Walker Sep 11 2012, 05:50 PM So when everything else is delayed for whatever reason one can always turn to rebuilding and updating. As the rain falls one must revert to indoor activities and the most important one is now getting the Minolta projector up and functioning. One of my self imposed challenges is the review and replacement of many of the bulbs on the projector. In general I had planed to replace many of the bulbs with LED's to lighten the power load, create less heat, and perhaps brighten Venus and the Moon and perhaps Sirius. To my basic cheaper instinct, I found that virtually all of the bulbs on the projector are only available through Minolta and are rather expensive to boot. Also much of the machine runs on 100v which appears to be the norm for many thing Japanese. While there is a massive step down transformer for this, it seems a bit wasteful to transform power for some of the more simple circuits like lighting. Since our basic native line voltage is 120v, virtually all available lamps are designed for this voltage. Going outside the norm gets expensive. The projector contains two basic lamps at either end of the east/west axis which provides illumination for basic daylight as well as Moon glow. One of the two identical units is pictured here with some of my lamp experiments. The four lamp/sockets around the bottom outside of the fixture are for normal daylight and the lamp in the center of the aluminum tube is for the Moon glow. The blue filter is removed in this picture to show the lamp placement. The lamp on the outside at the nine o'clock position is one of the original 100v 50w units. Out of the 10 installed in the two fixtures only one still lit. Replacement lamps were quoted in the high teens and too rich for my blood. The sockets (as shown empty at the three o'clock position) are single point bayonet. There are not very many lamps with this type base available save for a few car and indicator type bulbs. Car lamps are virtually all 12v and while certainly useable use a substantial amount of current and run quite hot. Also they are not all that bright when used as a general illumination type of lamp. While they would work, a substantial transformer would be required so I moved on. Indicator lamps came next (see seven o'clock position) and they were available in 120v units. I experimented with these but they were only 6w each and while useful, I found them too dim for someone walking in from a sunny day. My experimentation then led to LED lamps. The units at the five o'clock position seemed appropriate and were somewhat brighter then the indicator bulbs. They contained some 24 LED's firing both upward and outward. I was actually very happy with the light output but there was one major problem. They dimmed well at the brighter end but as the reached the very dim end one could see several actual steps in brightness just before total blackout. Perhaps some could live with this but I could not as night does not come in steps but is a smooth drop to dark. Now I could find electronic dimmers that would smooth out the dimming but their cost is substantial and really out of my budget. These LED lamps will be put to good use in some of my other projector ideas which are not as critical at the dark dimming end. I did note that there a lot of bulbs for chandeliers that are cheap (under $1 each) but they require a candelabra screw socket. OK, bite the bullet and replace the sockets.
|
|