An Observatory Project Update - One Year In
Date: Feb 18, 2023
Table of Contents Show (Click on lines to navigate)
NOTICE:
This post shares my preliminary design thoughts for a Roll-off Roof Observatory. I make no representations regarding the designs and design decisions discussed. Use this information at your own risk! If you decide to build your own version of this project - you do so at your own risk and assume all liability and risks for your effort and its results.
Background
The original post can be seen HERE.
On March 12, 2022, I published a post kicking off my project to acquire land and design and build an observatory of my very own.
Since that time…. Crickets…..
No one has heard from me on this subject!
I figured that it was time to do a follow-up and let everyone know what has been going on.
In fact, a lot of work has been going on - I just have not had any results worth reporting.
For this project to happen, my wife and I need to:
Find suitable land to build a new house and observatory, or …
Find an existing house that meets our needs and is on land suitable for the observatory, or …
Find an existing house that does not meet our needs but could - with some renovation - and is on land suitable for the observatory
These options have made the search broad in nature and caused us to do a lot of analysis around each possibility.
To be able to build both a house ad an observatory for option #1, we needed to:
Come up with a preliminary House Plan so we could price out house build costs
Come up with an Observatory Plan so that we could do the same for the observatory
Become familiar with Land Development costs for our area. Getting an approved plan, driveway costs, well drilling costs, propane tank burial costs, running power to the site, septic system costs, etc.
To act on Option #2, we needed to understand what we needed vs. what we wanted. What we can live with vs. what we cannot live with.
For option #3, needed to understand renovation costs and what could and could not be done with an existing structure.
All of this, of course, is a lot of work. It also does not help that we began this search at a time when the real estate market had gone crazy.
The Search for Land
We were looking for 2-15 acres of land south of Rochester, with dark skies and a southern view free of lights from distant towns. The land could be undeveloped, or it could have a house - if the house met our needs - or could meet our needs with a renovation.
I quickly realized that we were looking for a unicorn.
Finding something that hits on all points would be very difficult to do.
We found that the best deals were for existing houses - land development costs and home construction costs have gone through the roof due to Covid and Covid- supply chain issues - this raised the bar for this approach.
But we worked with our very patient real estate agent and tried to find something that might work.
Tough Market
Finding the right piece of land was a challenge, to begin with, but this tough market made it a lot harder. Prices listed were already very high as landowners responded to strong demands. Intense bid competition drove those prices even higher, sometimes more than $100K over the asking price. Often you only have a couple of days to size up a place and decide to make an offer. It was crazy.
As the year advanced, the market slowed down and started to normalize, and I thought this was a good sign. But the inflation caused by Covid started driving up mortgage rates, and this seemed to really shut things down. Fewer people seem motivated to sell, and more people are deciding to stay with their current homes and current low mortgage rates rather than move to a more expensive home with a higher mortgage.
Five Possibilities Found
Despite these challenges, we did find some interesting properties. When found these spurred a huge amount of activity as we researched all aspects of the property in the few short days afforded to us before offers had to be in.
During the past year of searching, we found five places that might have worked. Let me share some high-level details with you, so you get an idea of what we were seeing:
5 Acres w/ a Ranch House East of Honeoye Falls
Open land with a one-story house that was in good shape. Walkout basement. But the land was wet and muddy, there were no trees to shield from light from adjacent properties. Finally, the house used space poorly. We passed on this one.
17 Acres of Undeveloped Land Near IONIA
Beautiful land in a great location. We visited it at night to asses the sky, which was just wonderful. But it also had problems.
A stream cut the property in half - and there were many building restrictions due to the stream.
The asking price was ridiculously high for what it was - $250K for unimproved land was not reasonable.
Dev costs would be high - would need a deep well (100’+) drilled and a very long driveway put in, along with a costly septic system.
Located in a dead zone where high-speed internet service was not a certainty - this was a real problem!
We passed on this one as well.
42 Acres in Bristol Hills
Wonderful land! Rolling hills, great vistas! Perfect for Observatory. The house was a very nice ranch in great shape - not perfect, but very doable. There were also two “like new” heated outbuildings - one set up as a great shop. The other is for storage. The asking price was very reasonable Amazing!
But:
A long way from the city and services
It would require a lot of heavy equipment to manage land and maintain a long driveway. The owner was willing to sell the needed tractors and equipment at a very reasonable price.
We did make an offer on this property - and were outbid by $100K! Maybe this was a blessing. This would have taken a lot of work to maintain and as we get older this could become a burden. But what a wonderful property!
10 Acres in Avon
Absolutely beautiful land that would have worked well for an observatory. The price was good. The house was eclectic and custom - but the layout did not meet what we needed, and there was little opportunity to modify it. The house was older and needed extensive updates. At the end of the day - there were just too many stairs needed -which would not have worked out as we got older. We passed.
12 Acres in Palmyra
Beautiful land on a drumlin that would have worked great for the observatory. The house was a beautiful timber frame with an all-natural wood interior. But it was very far from services, and the drive to Rochester was long and slow. The rooms were smaller than needed, and once again, it was a house with too many steps - reluctantly, we passed.
The search Continues!
During 2023, we are continuing our search - perhaps loosening our requirements and being willing to compromise more.
The Observatory Design
As I indicated in my first post, the observatory I want to build is based on the BYO 15x15 plan used by the West Texas Observatory group. But I knew that I would need to adapt aspects of this design.
I live in Upstate New York, and we can get some real snow! The roof had to be more pitched, and it had to be rotated 90 degrees from what the WTO was using - or I could end up moving the roof only to have snow slide right off the roof and into the observatory! Not a preferred mode of operation!
We engaged an architect to do a preliminary house plan and a plan for the observatory. I figured I would need a set of stamped plans when it came time to get a permit for building the observatory, and this would provide that.
I will repeat the initial specs that I used in the first post and update the changes I made before engaging the Architect:
Observatory Specs (with updates in Blue)
Roll-off Roof Observatory Design.
The roof ridgeline runs parallel with roller tracks to prevent built-up snow from falling in
The Roller system must handle the weight of the roof and potential snow loads The Roof system is to be designed assuming a static snow load when closed. The roof will not be required to open or move with a snow load. Snow is to be removed before movement.
The Roller system must lock down automatically when the roof is closed
The roof must have scissor-like trusses to maximize open space under the roof
Interior size will be approximately 15'x17' 15'x18'
A 15’x15’ portion will hold the piers
A 3’x 15’ portion will be for storage cabinets and a countertop
Exterior Size will be 15'4" x 18'4"
Walls
2x4 stick framing, 2x6 if needed to support roof loads.
height is 7'
Standard security door - opens outward
South wall fold-down is an option
The North wall will have a space for countertop and cabinet storage.
The Interior will have four piers.
12" Sonotube -40" 39 inches high - steel reinforced with mounting bolts on top. Height is to be adjusted such that Polaris can be seen by all scope,s and scopes will clear the roofs when in the park position.
Alternative - concrete foundation at floor level with bolts that steel pier can be bolted to
Each Pier foundation is a 36"diameter hole 4 feet deep - isolated from each other and observatory foundations
AC power feed to each pier
Slab
Outer footing + slab is 12" deep
The concrete slab is 6 inches deep on a 6-inch bed of gravel
Shall be isolated from pier foundations
Will allow power to enter the building and route to 4 piers, and outside wall
Roof
Must be pitched to handle snow
Normal roof shingles - or perhaps metal roof for better shedding of snow load
Steel Track and rollers to allow the roof to roll off easily
Rear roof supports must be on concrete footings
Must have a way to adjust the level of the support rails
Must have weather stripping to prevent snow, rain, and insects from ingressing around the track area
Quiet computer-controlled motor for opening and closing the roof.
At the full close and fully open positions, the roof must engage interlocks with the main wall of the observatory such that they are locked in position to prevent wind damage.
Must have a way of closing the roof if there is a power failure
Utilities
20amp service to building
Option for ethernet line
Power plugs on each wall
Power to each pier
White light LED lighting
Red light LED lighting
Provision for a sky camera on the roof
Security system for door & roof
Security camera with a view inside and outside of the observatory
Provision for a weather station
Exterior design to match the house
Based on this, the architect generated an initial preliminary plan:
Overhead view and Floor plan.
South and East Elevations
Building detail
Reviewing the Design
I shared this with my local astrophotography colleagues Dan Kuchta, Gary Optiz, and my Friend Rick Albrecht (a very talented mechanical engineer with lots of Astro projects under his belt), and a few concerns came out that caused me to rethink things a bit.
With walls 7' high, there was a concern that scopes would not be able to image low enough in the sky - especially to the South.
With the piers being 5’ 1” apart, would this allow scopes to get in the way of one another (i.e. blocking each other’s view)? Especially since I have two long scopes now.
Would each scope be able to see over the roof when in the open position to see Polaris for PA Alignment?
To answer these questions, I laid out the current dimensions on my driveway and set my scopes up where the piers would be. I had my (very patient) wife hold a pole set to key heights, and I checked the sight lines.
The four bricks define the corners of the observatory. Hard to see, but there are blue X’s for the Pier positions. (click to enlarge)
My three existing scopes are now setup over the X’s marking the pier positions. (click to enlarge)
All scopes facing West. There appears to be sufficient physical clearance. (click to enlarge)
All scopes facing East. There appears to be sufficient physical clearance. (click to enlarge)
Scope facing North, Pole is the height of the wall shown in the first design plan (7’ 4”). (clic to enlarge)
Scopes facing North. Pole represents the height of the roof peak. Not clear I will have sufficient clearance for PA. (click to enlarge)
Scope are facing North. The pole represents the height of the W wall. (click to enlarge)
Another shot showing the North wall height (click to enlarge)
After doing this exercise, It did seem like some of the concerns were justified. The Architect raised the walls higher than I wanted to begin with, and this made the roof peak that much higher as well. I decided that I needed to do some calculations.
So How Far Down?
So - How far down towards the horizon do I want my scopes to be able to reach? Most people do not do Astrophotography below 30 degrees of elevation because you are looking through so much atmospheric slop. In general, I subscribe to this myself. However, there are some objects to the south that - if I ever want to image, I need to dip below that 30-degree point.
Looking for objects that I have shot in the past that were on the low side, I went to Stellarium and found how low they were at their high point:
M16 - The Eagle Nebula - 25 degrees (click to enlarge)
IC 4592 - The Blue HorseHead Nebula - 21 degrees (click to enlarge)
M 17 - The Omega Nebula - 23 degrees (click to enlarge)
M20 - The Trifid Nebula - 20 Degrees - Click to enlarge)
Messier 8 - The Lagoon Nebula - 22 degrees. (click to enlarge)
NGC 7293 -The Helix Nebula - 20 degrees (click to enlarge)
Based on this, there are times when I really would like to go as low as 20 degrees - if possible.
Computing the Angles
So I created a spreadsheet and computed the lowest angle that could be seen for each scope. Using the following parameters:
The height of the center of the Telescope tube:
At the mount’s highest point (facing North)
At the mount’s lowest point (facing South)
The radius of the tube (So I could compute the bottom edge of the FOV)
The distance of the tube to the Wall in question
The height of the wall
I computed the lowest angle that could be seen in various Observatory configurations. These included:
With Walls at 7', 6.5', and 6' heights
With Piers 1' further apart while maintaining the pier distance to the South wall. In other words, move the piers East and West and further to the North.
The computations were very helpful. I finally converged on a set of changes.
Spec Updates for the Next Design Iteration
Here are the updated specs I feedback to the Architect:
The walls will be 6’ in height, and the door must be cut down (obviously).
The Southside piers will be the same distance from the wall as it is now. This maximizes how low in the sky I can see towards the South.
The distance between the piers will be increased by 12”
E and W piers will be 6” closer to the walls
The N piers will be 12” closer to the N wall
This arrangement should allow sky access (worst case) of:
down to 18 degrees toward the South
down to 20 degrees toward the East or West
down to 40 degrees toward the North from the North-most Piers should allow all scopes access to Polaris.
down to 26 degrees towards the North from the South-most Piers should allow all scopes access to Polaris.
The larger pier baseline should help with scope getting in the way of each other.
All scopes will be clear of the roof when it closes, assuming they are in the parked position.
A larger diameter scope would fit as well.
The tallest point with my current scopes, mounted I have measured and computed above, is 72.5”. The walls would be 6’ high, and then you add the diameter of the wheels on the track (4-6”) before the scissor truss starts, I should be good.
The Next Design Iteration
Based on the above, the Architect made the next version of the design:
Final Design Iteration based on 6’ high walls.
Final design iteration
Final design Iteration showing head room that will work great for me, since I am 6’6” tall!
With this configuration, once I clear the admittedly low doorway, I will have a minimum of 7’ 2.75” of clearance, so I don’t bash my head as I move around the observatory!
What Remains?
The current design lays out the fundamental dimensions of the Observatory. However, there are still some design challenges that remain.
I still have to spec out the track system. The roof section - assuming the use of metal roofing - is expected to weigh in at ~7000 lbs. I plan on using a v-track and steel wheels for that track that will be spec’ed for the loads on one side of the roof and a flat metal track on the other side with flat wheels so that the tracking is not over-constrained.
Using two V-tracks can over constrain the design. Using one V-track and one flat track resolves this issue. Drawing and concept by Rick Albrecht.
I would also like to design a mechanism such that when the roof is closed, it engages the frame and automatically locks it down.
As the Roof closes, it engages the building frame locking the roof into position. Concept and Drawing by Rick Albrecht.
I also need to finalize what hardware I will use on the roof-support posts so that over time I can adjust them to compensate for any settling that may happen.
This leveler is very heavy-duty and would work, but it is also more costly and I would need four of them!
This lighter weight and less expensive leveler is availible at Home Depot - but may not be strong enough for my needs.
Hoping Things Come Together in the Next Year!
Our search continues, and hopefully, we will find the right piece of land and move forward next year. The real estate market will heat up soon, and I have my fingers crossed.
Complicating things is that there are some health issues I must address in the short term, and that will pull us off task somewhat. But I am keeping my fingers crossed and hoping that a year from now, I will be operating from my own observatory!
Stay Tuned!
Pat
