Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Frankenscope? Let's see it!***be advised that NOTHING in this forum has been safety tested and you are reading and using these posts at your own peril. blah, blah, blah... dont mess around with your eyesight when it comes to solar astronomy. Use appropriate filtration at all times...
User avatar
rsfoto
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 794
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by rsfoto » Sun May 20, 2018 3:21 am

GeorgeIonas wrote:
Sun May 20, 2018 12:07 am
Hi Rainer,

I went with the UV/IRcutKG3 filter cut down to 34mm so it would be a easy "drop in" replacement into the BF30.

Sorry to hear that the 12nm Ha filter did not thread into the BF30. An alternative would be to screw the filter into a short extension tube in front to the BF30.

On another note it is good to hear that you can reduce your exposure times, this helps to beat poor seeing.

George
Hi George,

Good for your but honestly when talking to Oliver the cost increased every time I made a question and so I just tested the simple solution putting an Orphan 12nm Ha Filter instead of the rust.

Let me see what happens ...

Rainer
Last edited by rsfoto on Sun May 20, 2018 3:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

User avatar
rsfoto
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 794
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by rsfoto » Sun May 20, 2018 3:31 am

mdwmark wrote:
Sun May 20, 2018 2:55 am
You got me worried here. When you start replacing part without knowing the design.
If you look at the blocker filter. It will be between .6nm-1nm HW. I'm petty sure its a standard coating. Well put it at 656.3nm +/-.3nm. Just the bandpass will turn back on at about 700nm on the red side and 480m on the blue side. If they designed it to be blocked to 1000nm. Then the KG3 or KG5 will block the long side just fine.But if it's not block that far in the red, then the ITF is what is required. The KG glass is still transmitting at 700nm. For the short side the RG630
can handle that. So if they have a ITF in the stack there probably a reason. If you can replace it for less then $300 then that is still a good deal. If made right they should last 5-8 years.
There was a comment about using a hard coated blocker. You still have the problem of the IR pass the 1500nm . There is still a lot of IR light making it way through. Once you get out to 2400nm the amount of IR making it pass the atmosphere is very low. You shouldn't have to worry about anything that far out. Besides the ITF and the KG are still working at 3000nm.
PS: I have been using hard coated blockers for two years on the TEC models . Also I do not use KG glass because of the problems that were stated earlier.
Mark W.

Hi Mark,

OK you are worried. I understand but I am not visual ¿ so what ?

I compared before and after. My camera is still alive. The filter did not crack.

If there is no risk there is no fun. If there would be no people risking something there would be no development and we would be still climbing trees and throwing stones at each other ( well, maybe that would be better then having G36 or AR-15 rifle or whatever)

Some time people like to make things more complicated then necessary ...

OK, Different strokes for different folks.

When I have time I perhaps will measure on of the rusted filters.

Rainer
Last edited by rsfoto on Sun May 20, 2018 2:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

User avatar
rsfoto
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 794
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by rsfoto » Sun May 20, 2018 3:45 am

mdwmark wrote:
Sun May 20, 2018 2:55 am
You got me worried here. When you start replacing part without knowing the design.
If you look at the blocker filter. It will be between .6nm-1nm HW. I'm petty sure its a standard coating. Well put it at 656.3nm +/-.3nm. Just the bandpass will turn back on at about 700nm on the red side and 480m on the blue side. If they designed it to be blocked to 1000nm. Then the KG3 or KG5 will block the long side just fine.But if it's not block that far in the red, then the ITF is what is required. The KG glass is still transmitting at 700nm. For the short side the RG630
can handle that. So if they have a ITF in the stack there probably a reason. If you can replace it for less then $300 then that is still a good deal. If made right they should last 5-8 years.
There was a comment about using a hard coated blocker. You still have the problem of the IR pass the 1500nm . There is still a lot of IR light making it way through. Once you get out to 2400nm the amount of IR making it pass the atmosphere is very low. You shouldn't have to worry about anything that far out. Besides the ITF and the KG are still working at 3000nm.
PS: I have been using hard coated blockers for two years on the TEC models . Also I do not use KG glass because of the problems that were stated earlier.
Mark W.
Hi Mark,

Look at the images and that is what is inside the BF30 ... all of my 3 three BF30

It is not only one but 2 cells inside the 2" nosepiece
Coronado_1a.jpg
Coronado_1a.jpg (119.21 KiB) Viewed 878 times
Coronado_0a.jpg
Coronado_0a.jpg (113.17 KiB) Viewed 878 times
regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

User avatar
Merlin66
Librarian
Librarian
Posts: 3140
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 1:23 pm
Location: St Leonards, Australia
Contact:

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by Merlin66 » Sun May 20, 2018 4:46 am

Mark,
I'd appreciate hearing your comments/ concerns with the IR >1500nm.
This region is well beyond the sensitivity of commercial CCD/ CMOS cameras and hence should have no impact.
"Astronomical Spectroscopy - The Final Frontier" - to boldly go where few amateurs have gone before
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/ast ... scopy/info
"Astronomical Spectroscopy for Amateurs" and
"Imaging Sunlight - using a digital spectroheliograph" - Springer

User avatar
rsfoto
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 794
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by rsfoto » Sun May 20, 2018 7:17 pm

Hi,

Well I warmed up my Spectrograph and measured the Original first filter towards the Sun as well as the Astronomik Ha 12nm filter which I am using now and that looks like this.

Interesting are the parasite lines around 5000Å and 5200Å in the Original Coronado Filters as well as in the Astronomik but by far not so pronounced at 4860Å and 5150Å

CoronadoFilter.jpg
CoronadoFilter.jpg (193.36 KiB) Viewed 862 times
Astronomik12nmHa.jpg
Astronomik12nmHa.jpg (194.02 KiB) Viewed 862 times
comparison.jpg
comparison.jpg (185.04 KiB) Viewed 862 times
regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

christian viladrich
Im an EXPERT!
Im an EXPERT!
Posts: 424
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2015 4:46 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by christian viladrich » Sun May 20, 2018 7:42 pm

Hello Rainer,
Can you go beyond 780 nm with your spectrograph ? 1500 nm ?
Christian Viladrich
Co-author of "Astronomie Planétaire"
http://www.astroplanetes.com/
Co-author of "Astronomie Solaire"
http://www.astronomiesolaire.com/

christian viladrich
Im an EXPERT!
Im an EXPERT!
Posts: 424
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2015 4:46 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by christian viladrich » Sun May 20, 2018 7:44 pm

BTW, I have some friends who are using the Astronomik 12 nm or the Astrodon 6 nm Ha filters to replace their rusted ITF.
Christian Viladrich
Co-author of "Astronomie Planétaire"
http://www.astroplanetes.com/
Co-author of "Astronomie Solaire"
http://www.astronomiesolaire.com/

User avatar
rsfoto
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 794
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by rsfoto » Sun May 20, 2018 8:06 pm

christian viladrich wrote:
Sun May 20, 2018 7:42 pm
Hello Rainer,
Can you go beyond 780 nm with your spectrograph ? 1500 nm ?
Hi Christian,

No, my Spectrograph is a poor man's LISA from Shelyak :oops:

What would I need or how does that work ?

May I ask why is over 1500nm so important ?

Rainer
regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

christian viladrich
Im an EXPERT!
Im an EXPERT!
Posts: 424
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2015 4:46 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by christian viladrich » Mon May 21, 2018 8:02 am

Hi Rainer,
At sea level, 89% of incoming solar energy is at wavelengths < 1500 nm.
By comparison, 80% of solar energy is at wavelengths < 1100 nm, and 46% < 700 nm.
So, the knowledge of the transmission up to 1100 nm (or better 1500 nm) is good information.
Christian Viladrich
Co-author of "Astronomie Planétaire"
http://www.astroplanetes.com/
Co-author of "Astronomie Solaire"
http://www.astronomiesolaire.com/

User avatar
Merlin66
Librarian
Librarian
Posts: 3140
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 1:23 pm
Location: St Leonards, Australia
Contact:

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by Merlin66 » Mon May 21, 2018 8:42 am

Christian,
Agreed. But that’s the total energy....our visual systems function <700nm and the commercial CCD looses all sensitivity beyond 1100nm, beyond that we experience “heat”.
I have not seen any evidence that IR beyond 1200nm has any negative impact on solar observing.
"Astronomical Spectroscopy - The Final Frontier" - to boldly go where few amateurs have gone before
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/ast ... scopy/info
"Astronomical Spectroscopy for Amateurs" and
"Imaging Sunlight - using a digital spectroheliograph" - Springer

christian viladrich
Im an EXPERT!
Im an EXPERT!
Posts: 424
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2015 4:46 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by christian viladrich » Mon May 21, 2018 8:55 am

My point was to give a general information on the amount of energy beyond 1100 nm. Indeed, most of multicoated filters block IR up to 1100 nm while there is still some amount of energy beyond this limit.

I agree there is no problem for imaging on small size telescopes.
In larger size telescopes (> 150 mm), the amount of energy beyond 1100 nm is not negligeable. It is difficult to assess the impact of this on actual solar observing.
Christian Viladrich
Co-author of "Astronomie Planétaire"
http://www.astroplanetes.com/
Co-author of "Astronomie Solaire"
http://www.astronomiesolaire.com/

User avatar
Merlin66
Librarian
Librarian
Posts: 3140
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 1:23 pm
Location: St Leonards, Australia
Contact:

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by Merlin66 » Mon May 21, 2018 9:07 am

Christian,
We really need to find an objective method of assessing the issues of NIR radiation Re solar observing/ imaging.
IMO there are no safety or performance concerns.
"Astronomical Spectroscopy - The Final Frontier" - to boldly go where few amateurs have gone before
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/ast ... scopy/info
"Astronomical Spectroscopy for Amateurs" and
"Imaging Sunlight - using a digital spectroheliograph" - Springer

User avatar
rsfoto
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 794
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by rsfoto » Tue May 22, 2018 1:03 pm

Hi,

I just got an e-mail from Oliver Smie from Beloptik.

He wrote me that using for example the Astronomik Ha filter for photography is OK but not for visual as the filter blocks only up to 1150nm and for visual is it not recommendable to use it due to the Optical Density of this filter.

He also wrote that with Optical Density 3 it should block up to 1500nm and with Optical Density 4 it should block up to 1000nm.

Now I have to ask how is the Optical Density defined ? Glass thickness, refractive index, etc. ?

What amazes me most is how is Coronado (Meade) not able to make a good filter ? The BF30 has a price of US $ 1,600.00 ... and at the moment at one US Big shop with waiting list ...

Rainer
regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

User avatar
TheSkyBurner
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 607
Joined: Sat May 05, 2018 7:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by TheSkyBurner » Tue May 22, 2018 7:52 pm

There is reason for uncertainty because the lack of understanding that the filters act in a "train".

The erf sets the initial optical density to level 2 for both IR and UV., the coating On the first collimating lens sets the optical density for UV to level 3. The first coating on the first etalon plate sets the UV optical density to level 4 or 5.

Then the prism coating, sets the optical density to 5 or 6 for both IR and UV. Then the ITF extends the optical density even further up to LEVEL 8.


Now if you remove just one of these filters and do not replace it with a suitable equal, then your optical density will fall below the international standard for optical safety. It has nothing to do with performance, it is 100% decided upon international based on damage to your retina and cornea as an occupational hazard. Such as reference by exposure to welders burn.

IF you know what you are doing you can have the system made with only two filters, each with optical density level 6. However one of these filters is going to cost more than your entire PST, and Large aperture ERF. They are not cheap when the bandwidth is less than 1nm and this is why they are not used by any manufacturer. It is cheaper to make an optical train following the physical parameters of increasing density.

User avatar
TheSkyBurner
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 607
Joined: Sat May 05, 2018 7:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by TheSkyBurner » Tue May 22, 2018 7:53 pm

Most people neglect to realize that the PST has something similar to a herschel prism in it which substantially reduces the IR and UV light before the eyepiece.


User avatar
rsfoto
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 794
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by rsfoto » Tue May 22, 2018 9:10 pm

Hi TheSkyBurner,

We are talking about BF30 filters and not PST = Personal Solar Telescope ...

... but thanks anyway as now I am understanding all this a bit more then before.

So the optical train of a Solar telescope using a BF30 is in my case as following

1 one SM60 with ERF then another SM60 with no ERF, 4 optical lenses from a Petzval telescope (Takahashi FSQ 85ED), then first element of BF30 (be it the original or as in my case a 12nm H-alpha filter DSO purpose) then the second original filter from Coronado BF30 (Blocking Filter 30mm Ø)

Rainer
regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

User avatar
TheSkyBurner
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 607
Joined: Sat May 05, 2018 7:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by TheSkyBurner » Wed May 23, 2018 12:13 am

How long have you had your bf30, and are you the original owner?

Getting rust on a bf30 from such a small etalon/ objective with its ERF still in place is quite worry some!

If you had the thing less than 3 years I would say there is something seriously up with the danger zone coming out of the back of the SM60. Only way you can control by adding a secondary IR UV cut filter over the face of the etalon, or before the blocking filter....

etalon is transmitting a range of IR/UV intensity strong enough to cause environmental damage.. That is a slightly upsetting considering the cost of a bf30,. (obviously its first element was intended to be sacrificial)

GeorgeIonas
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 922
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 1:21 pm
Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by GeorgeIonas » Wed May 23, 2018 2:56 am

My BF30 has been used on double stacked SM90 Etalons (having the ERFs on both Etalons) and has lasted for only 6 years. The "rust" in the ITF filter now covers about half of the filters diameter.

So my option were; buy another BF30 at US$1600 which is expensive or send it back to Meade and wait months for it to be repaired which will deteriorate again or get a UV/IRcutKG3 as a ITF replacement filter from Beloptik within a couple weeks for 137.50 Eur shipped to me here in New Zealand.

George
DS External SM90 Etalons, Single External SM40 Etalon, BF30, WO FLT98 f/6.3, Tak FS-102 f/8, Tak FS-60C f/5.9, DMK51, DMK21

User avatar
Bob Yoesle
Im an EXPERT!
Im an EXPERT!
Posts: 449
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 7:24 pm

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by Bob Yoesle » Wed May 23, 2018 1:27 pm

Thank you very much Mark for your input and expertise ;-)
Diagonally parked in a parallel universe.

Curiosity is the father of knowledge; uncertainty is the mother of wisdom.

Dark-Sky Defenders

User avatar
rsfoto
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 794
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by rsfoto » Wed May 23, 2018 5:34 pm

TheSkyBurner wrote:
Wed May 23, 2018 12:13 am
How long have you had your bf30, and are you the original owner?

Getting rust on a bf30 from such a small etalon/ objective with its ERF still in place is quite worry some!

If you had the thing less than 3 years I would say there is something seriously up with the danger zone coming out of the back of the SM60. Only way you can control by adding a secondary IR UV cut filter over the face of the etalon, or before the blocking filter....

etalon is transmitting a range of IR/UV intensity strong enough to cause environmental damage.. That is a slightly upsetting considering the cost of a bf30,. (obviously its first element was intended to be sacrificial)
Hi,

Yes I am the original owner and since around 2007 I have exchanged the three BF30 I have already one and a half time. They even rust when not in use and I have them in a more or less dry climate ...
regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

christian viladrich
Im an EXPERT!
Im an EXPERT!
Posts: 424
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2015 4:46 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by christian viladrich » Wed May 23, 2018 7:01 pm

Unfortunately, it is not usual to have rusted BF30. This is really a pity considering the cost of these filters. This leaves us to experimenting and find more cost effective solutions (at least for imaging) ;-)
Christian Viladrich
Co-author of "Astronomie Planétaire"
http://www.astroplanetes.com/
Co-author of "Astronomie Solaire"
http://www.astronomiesolaire.com/

GeorgeIonas
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 922
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 1:21 pm
Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by GeorgeIonas » Wed May 23, 2018 9:50 pm

Hi Christian,

I agree with you, we need to find a cost effective solution but at present even if the Beloptik UV/IRcutKG3 filter lasts for 6 years as did my BF30 it is still at present the cheapest option.

George
DS External SM90 Etalons, Single External SM40 Etalon, BF30, WO FLT98 f/6.3, Tak FS-102 f/8, Tak FS-60C f/5.9, DMK51, DMK21

User avatar
rsfoto
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 794
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by rsfoto » Thu May 24, 2018 3:45 pm

christian viladrich wrote:
Wed May 23, 2018 7:01 pm
Unfortunately, it is not usual to have rusted BF30. This is really a pity considering the cost of these filters. This leaves us to experimenting and find more cost effective solutions (at least for imaging) ;-)
Hi Christian,

¿ what do we need as filters ?

Do you have specifications ... ?

I think there is more of a mistery behind it in order to cash a good amount of money ¿ or am I wrong ?
regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

User avatar
rsfoto
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 794
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:30 pm

Re: Replacing the Rusted BF30 Filter

Post by rsfoto » Thu May 24, 2018 7:09 pm

Hi,

As far as I know Valery a member of this forum makes such filters ¿ right ?

What is his opinion about this ?
regards Rainer

Observatorio Real de 14 San Luis Potosi Mexico

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest