|
Size: 549
Comment:
|
← Revision 5 as of 2012-12-20 10:49:56 ⇥
Size: 698
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 1: | Line 1: |
| The synchronization problems were of different kind | The synchronization problems were of different kind: |
| Line 3: | Line 3: |
| - data for some subscans were not available, i.e. the IMBFits tables are either empty or have wrong data | - data for some subscans were not available, i.e. the IMBFits tables are either empty or have wrong time slot of data |
| Line 5: | Line 5: |
| - data after the start of a scan are first set (i.e. not 0) then 0 | - data after the subscan start are first set (i.e. not 0) then 0 |
| Line 9: | Line 9: |
| - time steps between the records sometimes do not correspond to the nominal sampling rate |
|
| Line 10: | Line 12: |
| as the IMBFits files of 1mm & 2mm were created at the same time indicates that the creation of the IMBFits did not take so long but that the NIKA data were first available after such time delay | the IMBFits files of 1mm & 2mm were created at the same time, this indicates that the creation of the IMBFits did not take so long but that the NIKA data were first available after such time delay - EMIR data are declared to be NIKA ! |
The synchronization problems were of different kind:
- data for some subscans were not available, i.e. the IMBFits tables are either empty or have wrong time slot of data
- data after the subscan start are first set (i.e. not 0) then 0
- data before the subscan end are 0
- time steps between the records sometimes do not correspond to the nominal sampling rate
- the IMBFits were created 5 to 10 minutes after the observation was finished;
the IMBFits files of 1mm & 2mm were created at the same time, this indicates that the creation of the IMBFits did not take so long but that the NIKA data were first available after such time delay
- EMIR data are declared to be NIKA !