Back to NIKA2 Run1 Main page

Tests of the observing modes

Page last updated, HA, 2015-10-23

Status of the tests

Note on the meaning of current status:

• Not tested : not tested yet
• Tested AR : data has been taken, processing results are pending.
• Tested NOK: data taken, not working properly
• Tested OK: test data taken on at least a target and analysed. Analysis shows the Obs Mode is OK
• Fully tested OK: test data taken on many targets (bright, faint, etc..). Analysis shows the Obs Mode is OK

Pointing

nkpoint b

nkpoint b has been used from 2015-10-21 onward to point on Mars and Uranus. No problems have been noticed so far, neither on the Pako side or on the nk_rta side. No detailed analysis beyond running the RTA have been done to my knowledge. Any needed ?

• Pako script: OK
• Analysis: OK

nkpoint f

tested on 2015-10-23 on scan 31. The RTA failed, so the status of this Obs mode is still to be tested.

nkpoint l

Used on a few sources at the Jy level on 2015-10-23. Worked fine. Should be tried on fainter sources.

24/10 : on source 0420-014 (scan 3 and 4) and source 3c84 (60, 61), we have compared pointing with nkpoint b and nkpoin l. results are quite different (LP, FM and AB)

Focus

focustrack z

Used on 2015-10-23 for focus on Uranus, 3C84 and Mars. If the atmosphere is stable, the method seems good, and result are reasonably reproducible (see the log for the Mars sequence for example). If the atmosphere is unstable (variable opacity), the fit looks much worse. In this case, it is on no use to add subscans for now, because the longer the observation, the more likely is the atmosphere to change opacity. This statement clearly conflicts with fundamental theorems/laws of statistics, i.e. is incorrect; RZ. The situation should improve when the opacity correction is on in the RTA. An alternative could be to fit separately consecutive triplets of -1, 0, 1 positions, and average the fits afterwards.

focustrack x,y

Same remark as focus z, see RTA results of 2015-10-23 Same bug as found for z. Data are correct. Plot and fit are wrong. 2015-10-28 see Uranus scans around 40

focusliss z

On 2015-10-23, after getting a good focus on Mars with focus track, the 3 focusliss were taken, to be able to compare. Unfortunately, the RTA did not manage to reduce then. Also, the maps displayed by the RTA looked very noisy. Could someone look again at these data ?

focusliss x,y

Same remark as for focusliss z.

Skydips

skydip_DIY

skydip_DIY tested on:

• Oct 21, scans 18 and 58

• Oct 22, scan 118

• Oct 23, scans 13, 28, 57

Pako script seems fine. FXD and NP working on analysis

• Pako script: OK
• Analysis results: pending.

skydip_tip

Tested on Oct 21 after track 19. Nothing happened, antenna did not move.

• Pako script: NOT OK

Lissajous Maps

nkliss

• Tested on Jupiter + satellites on Oct 21 scan 22

• Test results here

  • Pako script: OK
  • Analysis results: seems OK. Would be good to check again on faint source to see if the noise problems we had with NIKA are still present.

OTF Maps in Azimuth Elevation

nkotf_square

• Tested on Jupiter + satellites on Oct 21 scans 24-25

• Test results here

  • Pako script: OK
  • Analysis results: seems OK

nkotf .... azel

• Tested on Jupiter + satellites on Oct 21 scans 27, 29, 30

• Test results here

  • scan 30 (tilted map) not reduced
  • Pako script ok for angles 90 or 0, not analysed for tilted
  • Analysis results: seems OK
• Test of faint source retrieval in azel maps

  • 3.5 hours on HLS091828

OTF Maps in Ra - Dec

• Tested on Jupiter + satellites on Oct 21 scans 31, 38

• Test only for angles 90 or 0. Other angles not tried as of 2015-10-22

• Test results here for angles 0 and 90

  • To be updated

• Test on faint extended Sources