Differences between revisions 5 and 6
Revision 5 as of 2024-09-28 20:16:50
Size: 1425
Comment:
Revision 6 as of 2024-09-28 20:27:53
Size: 2394
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 5: Line 5:
summary of operations : third day of measurements:
Line 7: Line 7:

 * all observational time was dedicated to the alignement
 * we run multiple ON scans, changing the azimuth and the elevation of the antenna, keeping the source fixed
 * we estimated (through on-the-fly intensity polarization maps) that the best alignment is found when the antenna is set with offsets of -2' in Az and -15' in El
Line 13: Line 14:
second day of measurements:

 * acquired ON-OFF scans of the mm source
 * we changed the polarizer's orientation by the following angles: 90º, 105º, 120º, 135º, 150º, 165º, 180º, 195º, 210º, 225º, 240º, 255º, 270º, 285º, 300º, 315º, 330º
 * we acquired files to check the noise level of the mountain, the pws of the source with and without the chopper and finally with the hwp
 * we had issues with the tuning: within every scan a tuning was done, so we observed a flat interval in the signal
Line 15: Line 23:
 * with the source off, the hwp placed on the optical path but not spinning, we pointed the sky (close to the north pole) and then a source, on it we performed focus scans and pointing to check the corrections in the first day of measurements, we performed the following activities:

* with the source off, the hwp placed on the optical path but not spinning, we pointed the sky (close to the north pole) and then a source: on it we performed focus and pointing and applied corrections
Line 17: Line 27:
 * on the acquisition software, we looked for resonances and tuned them (with hwp still off), which was quite easy  * on the acquisition software, we looked for resonances and tuned them (with hwp still off); the saved parameter was already well adapted to the mountain load

COSMOCal project

saturday september 28 2024

third day of measurements:

  • all observational time was dedicated to the alignement
  • we run multiple ON scans, changing the azimuth and the elevation of the antenna, keeping the source fixed
  • we estimated (through on-the-fly intensity polarization maps) that the best alignment is found when the antenna is set with offsets of -2' in Az and -15' in El

friday september 27 2024

second day of measurements:

  • acquired ON-OFF scans of the mm source
  • we changed the polarizer's orientation by the following angles: 90º, 105º, 120º, 135º, 150º, 165º, 180º, 195º, 210º, 225º, 240º, 255º, 270º, 285º, 300º, 315º, 330º
  • we acquired files to check the noise level of the mountain, the pws of the source with and without the chopper and finally with the hwp
  • we had issues with the tuning: within every scan a tuning was done, so we observed a flat interval in the signal

thursday september 26 2024

in the first day of measurements, we performed the following activities:

  • with the source off, the hwp placed on the optical path but not spinning, we pointed the sky (close to the north pole) and then a source: on it we performed focus and pointing and applied corrections
  • we moved to the mm source by running track command on pako, using the coordinates known from holography
  • on the acquisition software, we looked for resonances and tuned them (with hwp still off); the saved parameter was already well adapted to the mountain load
  • we started spinning the hwp at nominal 3Hz frequency
  • we switched on the mm source along with the chopper, modulating at 1Hz
  • at first, we saw no signal, but then we realised that the source's polarizer was set to 0º, hence minimising the signal, so we turned it to ~45º the signal appeared, with the correct hwp + chopper modulations
  • at this point, we started procedure to maximise the signal, by tilting the mm source in Az and El : here came some problems --> lost resonances, irregular signal (appearing and disappearing) and we could not go back to initial situation

  • so we closed the vertex to see if the problem was in kids or in real signal, and we saw a constant signal of ~2kHz
  • we opened the vertex again, tuned the resonances and the situation was quite stable again, so we took 3 ON-OFF scans

DailyReportsNika2Run67-2 (last edited 2024-09-30 21:11:51 by NikaBolometer)