Size: 5317
Comment:
|
Size: 9239
Comment:
|
Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
Line 1: | Line 1: |
Describe ListOfAstroTarget2012 here. | = Informations useful for the observations: List of astronomical Target, Pako scripts, Observing strategies = <<TableOfContents(2)>> |
Line 4: | Line 6: |
#acl NikaBolometer:read,write,delete Default = List of Astronomical Target for Nika Oct 2012 run4 = FXD: Final version before run (12/10/2011), SL update Pako help and IRAM pointing sources (14/10/2011) |
== List of Astronomical Target for Nika Jun 2012 run4 == FXD: First version before run (27/05/2012) |
Line 15: | Line 15: |
||MARS||<)> 09:27:52.1030 ||<)> 06:55:16.786||<)> 7.85 * 7.81||<)> 201.1 Jy||<)> 75.6 Jy || | ||MARS||<)> 09:27:52.1030 ||<)> 06:55:16.786||<)> 7.85 * 7.81||<)> 391.1 Jy||<)> 134.7 Jy || |
Line 17: | Line 17: |
Here are the ephemerides for [[attachment:Planethorizonv.pdf|the planets]] | Here are the ephemeris for [[attachment:Planethorizonv.pdf|the planets]] |
Line 20: | Line 20: |
[[attachment:NIKA2011QSOhorizon.pdf|Pointing quasars]] [[attachment:NIKA2011SGalhorizon.pdf|Strong galactic sources]] [[attachment:NIKA2011WGalhorizon.pdf|Weak galactic sources]] [[attachment:NIKA2011XGalhorizon.pdf|External galaxies]] [[attachment:NIKA2011Hizhorizon.pdf|High-z galaxies]] |
[[attachment:NIKA2012QSOhorizon.pdf|Pointing quasars]] [[attachment:NIKA2012SGalhorizon.pdf|Strong galactic sources]] |
Line 32: | Line 29: |
4. Extended emission from *Herschel new sources *bright galaxies M87 (again), M82, others *less bright NGC1068 22mJy at 1.3mm rising to 36 at 3mm --> Need fast speed scanning to reduce 1/f residual noise 5. Faint quasars in the 10 mJy range at 1mm (use Omont&Cox + Herschel list) test detectability in faint source mode: e.g. * J075618.14+410408.6 z= 5.09 20.15 1.3 mm 5.5 ± 0.5 Wang et al 2008, ApJ, 135, 1201 * J092721.82+200123.7 z= 5.77 19.87g 1.3 mm 5.0 ± 0.8 mJy 3.5 mm: 0.12 ± 0.03 mJy * IRAS F10214+4724 = SDSS J102434.56+470909.5 1.3mm: 10 mJy * H1413+517 14h15m46.240s +11d29m43.40s z=2.558 1.3mm 18+-2 mJy |
|
Line 49: | Line 33: |
Here is a list of IRAM pointing sources with fluxes at 3mm and 2mm (I miss fluxes at 1mm, SL) [[attachment:IRAM_pointing_sources_with_fluxes.xls]] | Here is a list of IRAM pointing sources with fluxes at 3mm and 2mm (I miss fluxes at 1mm, SL) [[attachment:ListAstroTargetNika3/IRAM_pointing_sources_with_fluxes.xls]] |
Line 53: | Line 37: |
Here is a short manual on useful "Pako for Nika" commands [[attachment:Pako_helpv8.txt]] | == Interface with the telescope: Pako == Here is a short manual on useful "Pako for Nika" commands [[attachment:Pako_helpv9.txt]] |
Line 58: | Line 44: |
[[attachment:nini.pako]] => run the initial series of commands that always have to be run at the beginning of an observing cession, updated with choice of receiver and backend allowing to get fits files, updated with correct focus and correct nasmyth offset deduced from pointing model cession from 17 to 18/10/2011 night. | [[attachment:nini.pako]] => run the initial series of commands that always have to be run at the beginning of an observing session, updated with choice of receiver and backend allowing to get fits files, updated with correct focus and correct nasmyth offset deduced from pointing model session from 17 to 18/10/2011 night. |
Line 60: | Line 46: |
[[attachment:OTF_pointing.pako]] => OTFMAP 100"x84" in 22 subscan x 10 s = 4+1 ~= 5 min (10"/s) with 2.6 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for pointing & focus). 10s = minimum subscan time possible (Pako doesn't authorizes less), hence the choice of subscan length. Scan height changed from 60" to 92" to have more margins for the useful pixels. | [[attachment:ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_pointing.pako]] => OTFMAP 100"x84" in 22 subscan x 10 s = 4+1 ~= 5 min (10"/s) with 2.6 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for pointing & focus). 10s = minimum subscan time possible (Pako doesn't authorizes less), hence the choice of subscan length. Scan height changed from 60" to 92" to have more margins for the useful pixels. |
Line 62: | Line 48: |
[[attachment:OTF_geometry.pako]] => OTFMAP 300"x220" in 56 subscan x 20 s = 19+3 ~= 22 min (15"/s) with 2.6 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for the array geometry = pixels map in sky) | [[attachment:ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_geometry.pako]] => OTFMAP 300"x220" in 56 subscan x 20 s = 19+3 ~= 22 min (15"/s) with 2.6 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for the array geometry = pixels map in sky) |
Line 64: | Line 50: |
[[attachment:OTF_ps.pako]] => OTFMAP 140"x90" in 19 subscan x 14 s = 4+1 ~= 5 min (10"/s) with 2 sample (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for point source observations) | [[attachment:ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_ps.pako]] => OTFMAP 140"x90" in 19 subscan x 14 s = 4+1 ~= 5 min (10"/s) with 2 sample (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for point source observations) |
Line 66: | Line 52: |
[[attachment:OTF_2x2.pako]] => OTFMAP 120"x120" in 25 subscan x 12 s = 5+1 ~= 6 min (10"/s) with 2 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for extended source < 2') | [[attachment:ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_2x2.pako]] => OTFMAP 120"x120" in 25 subscan x 12 s = 5+1 ~= 6 min (10"/s) with 2 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for extended source < 2') |
Line 68: | Line 54: |
[[attachment:OTF_5x5.pako]] => OTFMAP 300"x300" in 51 subscan x 20 s = 17+3 ~= 20 min (15"/s) with 1.7 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for extended source < 5') | [[attachment:ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_5x5.pako]] => OTFMAP 300"x300" in 51 subscan x 20 s = 17+3 ~= 20 min (15"/s) with 1.7 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for extended source < 5') |
Line 70: | Line 56: |
[[attachment:OTF_10x10.pako]] => OTFMAP 600"x600" in 41 subscan x 30 s = 20+4 ~= 24 min (20"/s) with 0.7 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for very extended source < 10') | [[attachment:ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_10x10.pako]] => OTFMAP 600"x600" in 41 subscan x 30 s = 20+4 ~= 24 min (20"/s) with 0.7 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for very extended source < 10') |
Line 72: | Line 58: |
[[attachment:OTF_faint_source.pako]] => OTFMAP 120"x80" in 21 subscan x 12 s = 4.2+0.8 ~= 5 min (10"/s) with 2.6 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for faint sources) | [[attachment:ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_faint_source.pako]] => OTFMAP 120"x80" in 21 subscan x 12 s = 4.2+0.8 ~= 5 min (10"/s) with 2.6 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for faint sources) |
Line 74: | Line 60: |
[[attachment:OTF_deep_field.pako]] => OTFMAP 360"x360" in 61 subscan x 20 s = 20+4 ~= 24 min (18"/s) with 1.7 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for faint sources) | [[attachment:ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_deep_field.pako]] => OTFMAP 360"x360" in 61 subscan x 20 s = 20+4 ~= 24 min (18"/s) with 1.7 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for faint sources) |
Line 76: | Line 62: |
[[attachment:OTF_sz.pako]] => OTFMAP 360"x240" in 41 subscan x 20 s = 14+3 ~= 17 min (18"/s) with 1.7 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for faint sources) | [[attachment:ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_sz.pako]] => OTFMAP 360"x240" in 41 subscan x 20 s = 14+3 ~= 17 min (18"/s) with 1.7 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for faint sources) |
Line 78: | Line 64: |
[[attachment:OTF_moon.pako]] => OTFMAP 2000''x 2000'' in 34 subscan x 40 s = 23+3 ~= 26 min with 0.17 samples (subscan step = 60) per convolved 1mm HPBW (to look at the moon in bad weather) | [[attachment:ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_moon.pako]] => OTFMAP 2000''x 2000'' in 34 subscan x 40 s = 23+3 ~= 26 min with 0.17 samples (subscan step = 60) per convolved 1mm HPBW (to look at the moon in bad weather) |
Line 82: | Line 68: |
[[attachment:Focus.xls|Full focus Excel only]], | [[attachment:ListAstroTargetNika3/Focus.xls|Full focus Excel only]], |
Line 84: | Line 70: |
[[attachment:BestFocus.ods|Best focus with basic 2nd order polynomial]] | [[attachment:ListAstroTargetNika3/BestFocus.ods|Best focus with basic 2nd order polynomial]] |
Line 88: | Line 74: |
Status of observations: [[attachment:nika_source_list.xls|spread sheet of sources with integrated time]] | == Status of observations == [[attachment:nika_source_list.xls|spread sheet of sources with integrated time]] ---- == Observing procedures and strategies for performances verifications and debugging == === Observations procedure as discussed between FXD, RZ, NP & SL on 30/5/2012 === 1. Use the EMIR pointing model as the starting reference, setting Nasmyth offsets to 0. 2. Do a "classical" POINTING (cross) 3. Do a "NIKA type" OTF-POITING 4. Implement Nasmyth correction to point on the central pixel 5. Check with POINTING 6. Idem using the WOBBLER (expected setup: SWOBBLER -25 25 ttphase 0.52 ; assymetric wobble impossible, must be wide enough w.r.t. beam, as fast as possible without being harmonic of something) 7. 1st crude FOCUS with wobbler ("classical" procedure): 6 subscans, 2mm shifts 8. 1st crude Focus without Wobbler: new NIKA style: one line OTF scan way and back; 3 scans, set focus between scans 2 mm shifts 9. 1st crude FOCUS with wobbler, 1mm shifts 10. 1st crude OTF-FOCUS (without Wobbler), 1mm shifts 11. 1st OTF-GEOMETRY (scan width = baseline x 2 + FOV + max pointing error = 1x2 + 2.5 + 1 + 0.5 = 5') 12. 1st OTF pointing session (as many quasar as possible in the 6 h slot, probably ~15 ?) => define the NIKA pointing model (15 is not enough stat for a clear determination, but should be OK at 1st order) 13. better FOCUS with wobbler ("classical" procedure): 6 subscans, 2mm shifts 14. better Focus without Wobbler: new NIKA style: one line OTF scan way and back; 3 scans, set focus between scans 2 mm shifts 15. better FOCUS with wobbler, 1mm shifts 16. better OTF-FOCUS (without Wobbler), 1mm shifts 17. better OTF-GEOMETRY (scan width = baseline x 2 + FOV + max pointing error = 1x2 + 2.5 + 1 + 0.5 = 5') 18. OTF-GEOMETRY for different foci => focus characteristics for all pixels 19. OTF pointing session => define a better NIKA pointing model 20. test skydip going at high airmass values (at least 3) 21. observe typical calibrators 1-20 Jy (e.g. OJ) 22. observe known fainter sources (e.g. Tau sources) 23. redo this procedure the next day Note: good focus depend on geometry which depend on focus ==> iterative process. How to find the elevation axis with the observation ? This is degenerate with the pointing model => Iterative approach => accumulate statistics. Due to the degeneracy one as to make a choice on the strategy for the definition of the center of rotation of the array (rotation with elevation of the sky image). After discussions the next days: at the start of the run we will choose the best of the 4 pixels at the center of the array and define it as the center for the pointing model. For skydips: do a frequency sweep at each airmass step => up to airmass = 3 or 4. This will give the position of the resonance frequency = total power. Each step has to be done manually; in the future implement Pako script and CAMADIA to to the frequency sweep automatically at each step. How to investigate the plateau, beam broadening etc. => gain of amplifiers and power on the tone are the hardware parameters that we will change => write the information in Wiki log pages (this is in the raw data anyway, but discuss with Alain to get all the info in the FITS). IMBFITS format: keep same structure as before run (e.g. with a fixed number of pixels close to the maximum available, not a varying number of pixels), except the implementation of Wobbler information (TTL = 0 - 40, with numbers in between = blancking) === Strategy to investigate the Plateau === Since we see the plateau on 31/05/2012 pointing scans with crosses patterns, we will use these fast scans to investigate the plateau, the width should be larger than the plateau itself, that is to say bigger than the array with margins ==> 3 arcmin widths. So far (01/06/2012) we identify 3 hardware parameters we could play on: * Limit the total power in the acquisition line: play with 2 different values of the DAC => at least 2 scans * Limit the number of tones generated (e.g. probe all pixels, or only one which means generating only one tone, or only one part of the array) => at least 2 scans * Move the tones frequencies by a small amount to place them on a different location on the slope of the resonance => at least 3 scans * Repeat the procedure at least twice to check repeatability => '''14 scans minimum''' ==> This should allow us to determine whether the plateau is a pure electronic effect, and have ideas on what causes it. |
Informations useful for the observations: List of astronomical Target, Pako scripts, Observing strategies
Contents
List of Astronomical Target for Nika Jun 2012 run4
FXD: First version before run (27/05/2012)
1. Planets Mars for photometric calibration (primary calibrators)
Name |
Right Ascension |
Declination |
Size (arcsecond diameter) |
Flux @ 1.25 mm |
Flux @ 2.05 mm |
MARS |
09:27:52.1030 |
06:55:16.786 |
7.85 * 7.81 |
391.1 Jy |
134.7 Jy |
Here are the ephemeris for the planets
and the other objects LST Pointing quasars Strong galactic sources
2. Usual bright quasars
- for image quality and linearity checks
3. List of bright ultracompact HII regions
- for photometric calibration checks (secondary calibrators)
Here is the full detailed formatted list Source_list_fmt2012v1.0.txt with fluxes
Here is the catalog for Pako NIKA2012v1.0.sou.txt has to be RENAMED to NIKA.sou on the pako computer Here is a list of IRAM pointing sources with fluxes at 3mm and 2mm (I miss fluxes at 1mm, SL) ListAstroTargetNika3/IRAM_pointing_sources_with_fluxes.xls
Interface with the telescope: Pako
Here is a short manual on useful "Pako for Nika" commands Pako_helpv9.txt
Here is a collection of Pako scripts to gain time and have a reference on the observations we will do (to use them rename the files without the .txt, 2nd version updated with slower mapping speed to minimize tracking errors, 3rd version include pako line continuation sign (-)):
nini.pako => run the initial series of commands that always have to be run at the beginning of an observing session, updated with choice of receiver and backend allowing to get fits files, updated with correct focus and correct nasmyth offset deduced from pointing model session from 17 to 18/10/2011 night.
ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_pointing.pako => OTFMAP 100"x84" in 22 subscan x 10 s = 4+1 ~= 5 min (10"/s) with 2.6 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for pointing & focus). 10s = minimum subscan time possible (Pako doesn't authorizes less), hence the choice of subscan length. Scan height changed from 60" to 92" to have more margins for the useful pixels.
ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_geometry.pako => OTFMAP 300"x220" in 56 subscan x 20 s = 19+3 ~= 22 min (15"/s) with 2.6 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for the array geometry = pixels map in sky)
ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_ps.pako => OTFMAP 140"x90" in 19 subscan x 14 s = 4+1 ~= 5 min (10"/s) with 2 sample (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for point source observations)
ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_2x2.pako => OTFMAP 120"x120" in 25 subscan x 12 s = 5+1 ~= 6 min (10"/s) with 2 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for extended source < 2')
ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_5x5.pako => OTFMAP 300"x300" in 51 subscan x 20 s = 17+3 ~= 20 min (15"/s) with 1.7 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for extended source < 5')
ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_10x10.pako => OTFMAP 600"x600" in 41 subscan x 30 s = 20+4 ~= 24 min (20"/s) with 0.7 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for very extended source < 10')
ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_faint_source.pako => OTFMAP 120"x80" in 21 subscan x 12 s = 4.2+0.8 ~= 5 min (10"/s) with 2.6 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for faint sources)
ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_deep_field.pako => OTFMAP 360"x360" in 61 subscan x 20 s = 20+4 ~= 24 min (18"/s) with 1.7 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for faint sources)
ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_sz.pako => OTFMAP 360"x240" in 41 subscan x 20 s = 14+3 ~= 17 min (18"/s) with 1.7 samples (subscan step) per convolved 1mm HPBW (for faint sources)
ListAstroTargetNika3/OTF_moon.pako => OTFMAP 2000x 2000 in 34 subscan x 40 s = 23+3 ~= 26 min with 0.17 samples (subscan step = 60) per convolved 1mm HPBW (to look at the moon in bad weather)
Here's an excel sheet which helps to find the best focus thanks to a 2nd order polynomial line trend fitting on beam width and amplitude (note that amplitude is much more robust):
Best focus with basic 2nd order polynomial
Status of observations
spread sheet of sources with integrated time
Observing procedures and strategies for performances verifications and debugging
Observations procedure as discussed between FXD, RZ, NP & SL on 30/5/2012
- Use the EMIR pointing model as the starting reference, setting Nasmyth offsets to 0.
- Do a "classical" POINTING (cross)
- Do a "NIKA type" OTF-POITING
- Implement Nasmyth correction to point on the central pixel
- Check with POINTING
- Idem using the WOBBLER (expected setup: SWOBBLER -25 25 ttphase 0.52 ; assymetric wobble impossible, must be wide enough w.r.t. beam, as fast as possible without being harmonic of something)
- 1st crude FOCUS with wobbler ("classical" procedure): 6 subscans, 2mm shifts
- 1st crude Focus without Wobbler: new NIKA style: one line OTF scan way and back; 3 scans, set focus between scans 2 mm shifts
- 1st crude FOCUS with wobbler, 1mm shifts
- 1st crude OTF-FOCUS (without Wobbler), 1mm shifts
- 1st OTF-GEOMETRY (scan width = baseline x 2 + FOV + max pointing error = 1x2 + 2.5 + 1 + 0.5 = 5')
1st OTF pointing session (as many quasar as possible in the 6 h slot, probably ~15 ?) => define the NIKA pointing model (15 is not enough stat for a clear determination, but should be OK at 1st order)
- better FOCUS with wobbler ("classical" procedure): 6 subscans, 2mm shifts
- better Focus without Wobbler: new NIKA style: one line OTF scan way and back; 3 scans, set focus between scans 2 mm shifts
- better FOCUS with wobbler, 1mm shifts
- better OTF-FOCUS (without Wobbler), 1mm shifts
- better OTF-GEOMETRY (scan width = baseline x 2 + FOV + max pointing error = 1x2 + 2.5 + 1 + 0.5 = 5')
OTF-GEOMETRY for different foci => focus characteristics for all pixels
OTF pointing session => define a better NIKA pointing model
- test skydip going at high airmass values (at least 3)
- observe typical calibrators 1-20 Jy (e.g. OJ)
- observe known fainter sources (e.g. Tau sources)
- redo this procedure the next day
Note: good focus depend on geometry which depend on focus ==> iterative process.
How to find the elevation axis with the observation ? This is degenerate with the pointing model => Iterative approach => accumulate statistics. Due to the degeneracy one as to make a choice on the strategy for the definition of the center of rotation of the array (rotation with elevation of the sky image). After discussions the next days: at the start of the run we will choose the best of the 4 pixels at the center of the array and define it as the center for the pointing model.
For skydips: do a frequency sweep at each airmass step => up to airmass = 3 or 4. This will give the position of the resonance frequency = total power. Each step has to be done manually; in the future implement Pako script and CAMADIA to to the frequency sweep automatically at each step.
How to investigate the plateau, beam broadening etc. => gain of amplifiers and power on the tone are the hardware parameters that we will change => write the information in Wiki log pages (this is in the raw data anyway, but discuss with Alain to get all the info in the FITS).
IMBFITS format: keep same structure as before run (e.g. with a fixed number of pixels close to the maximum available, not a varying number of pixels), except the implementation of Wobbler information (TTL = 0 - 40, with numbers in between = blancking)
Strategy to investigate the Plateau
Since we see the plateau on 31/05/2012 pointing scans with crosses patterns, we will use these fast scans to investigate the plateau, the width should be larger than the plateau itself, that is to say bigger than the array with margins ==> 3 arcmin widths.
So far (01/06/2012) we identify 3 hardware parameters we could play on:
Limit the total power in the acquisition line: play with 2 different values of the DAC => at least 2 scans
Limit the number of tones generated (e.g. probe all pixels, or only one which means generating only one tone, or only one part of the array) => at least 2 scans
Move the tones frequencies by a small amount to place them on a different location on the slope of the resonance => at least 3 scans
Repeat the procedure at least twice to check repeatability => 14 scans minimum
==> This should allow us to determine whether the plateau is a pure electronic effect, and have ideas on what causes it.