Agenda:

• Optics and Packing
  • Update on packing of optical systems (UMN)
  • Ray tracing examination of stray light and DLFOV comparison, Optics Study 2017-07-31 (UMN)
  • Firing up far sidelobe analysis, Tran et al. (2010) (Brad)
  • Anyone at JPL to run GRASP? (Amy)
  • Are we using the right shield geometry? (Amy)
  • Moving forward with deployables (Amy)
• Scan
  • Scan angles with current focal plane (Kris) and general trade-offs (Julian)
  • Hydrazine or flywheels? What are reasonable spin and precession rates? (Amy)
• Focal Plane
  • current baseline: multi-chroic TES; anyone interested in developing other options so that we can point to concrete alternatives (e.g. KIDs)? multi-chroic MKIDs
  • Questions for the baseline (Jeff, Roger)
    • what is the plan for detector technology for the high frequency bands of the imager?
      • absorber coupled above 660 GHz, conservative default
      • Nb-nitride or similar material to enable use of the same pixel architecture at higher frequencies, requires development
    • are the distribution of colors for pixels as described by the worksheet reasonable? Band Definitions worksheet as of 2017-07-31
    • yes, from a technological stand point
    • are the bandwidths assumed reasonable?
      • 2.2:1 is constant with horn and antenna coupled
      • more bands could likely fit in the low frequency horns
      • we may be space limited at the high frequencies, that could drive us to 2 bands at lower frequencies than assumed, however this depends on the pixel size.
    • what should we assume about beam sizes as a function of frequency, specifically for the high frequency bands? Is it reasonable to assume single mode coupling all the way to the highest frequencies?
      • we can assume it scales as lambda / D

Actions: