Campuses:
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
beams_and_cl_1 [2018/07/13 04:13] – hivon | beams_and_cl_1 [2018/07/16 09:25] (current) – hivon | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====== Beams and C(l) ====== | ====== Beams and C(l) ====== | ||
- | --- // | + | --- // |
+ | |||
+ | [[systematicswg|Back to Systematics WG]] | ||
+ | === 2018/07/16 === | ||
+ | The beam computed at 150GHz, at a location offset by 10cm in the X (=co-scan) direction is now also available, on top of the central beam and Y=10cm beams generated earlier this month.\\ | ||
+ | {{: | ||
+ | |||
+ | Two different effects are now visible on the power spectra: | ||
+ | * an overall rotation of the polarization by 1.74 deg, showing up as a strong EE to BB leakage when the full IQU beam is used instead of assuming a copolar beam (something we did **not** see in the (X,Y)=(0,0) and (0,10cm) cases) | ||
+ | * the ell-dependent leakage from EE to BB seen previously is now larger than before. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{: | ||
+ | {{: | ||
=== 2018/07/13 === | === 2018/07/13 === | ||
- | Same exercise as on July 02, this time considering a beam at 150GHz located 10cm in the Y (=cross-scan | + | Same exercise as on July 02, this time considering a beam at 150GHz located 10cm in the Y (=cross-scan) direction from the focal plane center (in a focal plane of 45cm in diameter).\\ |
- | We see this time a much larger contamination of BB, which looks like an ell-increasing leakage from EE to BB, probably due to the m=4 components of the beam map. | + | We see this time a much larger contamination of BB, which looks like an ell-increasing leakage from EE to BB, probably due to the m=4 components |
+ | As for the central beam, the pure copolar and full IQU beam models return the same power spectra. | ||
{{: | {{: | ||
- | {{: | + | {{: |
=== 2018/07/02 === | === 2018/07/02 === |