Go to the U of M home page
School of Physics & Astronomy
Probe Mission Study Wiki
imagerteleconnotes20171017

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Next revision
Previous revision
imagerteleconnotes20171017 [2017/10/17 11:28] – created hananyimagerteleconnotes20171017 [2017/10/18 09:42] (current) kyoung
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== Telecon 20171017 ====== ====== Telecon 20171017 ======
  
-Attending:  +Attending: Brian, Julian, Shaul, Karl, Qi, Roger, Kris, Jacques
  
 __Agenda:__  __Agenda:__ 
  
   * optical system + noise model + focal plane options (Young, Wen)   * optical system + noise model + focal plane options (Young, Wen)
 +    * {{:open_dragone_optics_20171017.pdf| 1.4 m Open Dragone Options }}
 +    * {{:crossdragone_d120cm_f2.5_fov4_10deg.pdf| 1.2 m Crossed Dragone}}
   * TM rates for large/small aperture systems (??)   * TM rates for large/small aperture systems (??)
 +  * {{::probe_scanning.pdf|Scan angles}}
   * Scan angles + full sky scan simulations + integration with systematics (Gorski, Delabrouille, + all)   * Scan angles + full sky scan simulations + integration with systematics (Gorski, Delabrouille, + all)
  
Line 12: Line 15:
  
 __Notes:__ __Notes:__
 +
 +Open Dragone: optical system + noise model + focal plane options (Young)
 +  * Size of pixel defined on lowest or middle frequency band.
 +    * middle band means smaller pixel, higher sensitivity
 +    * 10 dB edge taper + middle band size, overall the best in terms of mapping speed
 +    * lowest band has 4.8 dB edge taper
 +    * edge taper is at 4K stop
 +    * Using 10 dB at middle of band moving forward.
 +
 +  * For Open Dragone, the DLFOV is small. The outer area of the focal plane is not usable for high frequency, thus it’s hard to trade low -frequency detectors for more high-frequency detectors.
 +    * We don’t know what we need for low frequency, it depends on the synchrotron structures.
 +    * Plan is to optimize mirror shapes to increase ~150 GHZ DLFOV so trading low sensitivity for high sensitivity is an option.
 +
 +  * Open Dragone Optics
 +    * V3.D: focal plane further from stop, linearly 10% more focal plane compared to baseline
 +     * looks good, has room for mechanical structure of focal plane
 +     * Karl is working on coma correction to this telescope, and hopefully we will have larger DLFOV **(AI)**
 +    * V4: 10% less DLFOV compared to baseline.  Overall smaller telescope, allows roughly 2-3 deg. increase in alpha.
 +    * sensitivity calculation uses edge taper defined as lowest band, can be done using middle band
 +
 +Large-aperture Cross Dragone (Wen)
 +  * Follow-up to matrix from previous week.  Now we have a baffled, large cross dragone.
 +  * Reminder: Why 50cm? De-scoped to save cost, if imager + spectrometer is emplemented.
 +    * Still questions as to whether just 140cm --  50 cm saves cost.  
 +    * Idea here is to provide options to cost and be decided on by the EC.
 +  * Cross Dragone has large DLFOV if not limited by vignetting (blockage, mirror sizes etc)
 +    * current case is limited by vignetting and blockage, not image quality.
 +    * unlike Open Dragone case, we can trade detectors at low frequency for high-frequency detectors more easily
 +    * ~ 3K detectors (Open)  VS ~ 5K detectors (Cross)
 +    * F number: 1.5 (Open)  VS  2.5 (Cross)
 +    * more detectors + larger F#, means Cross Dragone has larger focal plane
 +
 +  * We have filled the matrix of telescope categories
 +    * optics design is wrapping up.  Polishing will be done to improve sensitivities.
 +    * the large/small, open/cross options provide input to trade-off decisions.  
 +
 +Scan (Kris)
 +  * Simulation
 +   * note WMAP Q/U map in V band; Probe with alpha = 22 deg, beta = 73 deg, is close to WMAP
 +   * fast spin + different precession (fast, slow, very slow)
 +     * for T spin 20s (3 rpm) is fast, Kris do 1 rpm **(AI)**
 +     * slowest precession, more non-smooth features, higher resolution needed
 +   * LiteBird & Core use same convention of alpha and beta, Kris will change his definition
 +  * The simulations are the average over 1 year
 +   * simulating over other different periods will be very useful, give more opportunities to look into the scanning.
 +     * Jacques: maps with no holes over week timescales are useful.
 +     * Kris will do two-week simulation **(AI)**
 +
 +Scanning strategy
 +   * Julian: 6 + 1 parameters; precession angle alpha, spin angle beta, 3 rotation rates (spin, precession, HWP), radius of L2 orbit, + data (or sample) rate.
 +   * Jacques will lead to make table of scan drivers, wants, and evaluation metrics in wiki **(AI)**
 +     * Shaul to make table of hardware or engineering limits on 6 + 1 parameters **(AI)**
 +   * Brian: there may not be many options of the L2 orbits
 +     * there could be, we need more information input from project
 +     * Jacques: Planck had radius L2 = 300,000 km, small. Needed 380 kg fuel for insertion.
 +     * Brian and Amy to check details of L2 orbit **(AI)**
 +  * Amy told Shaul that we will probably have a steerable antenna for tele-communication; also fly wheels for pointing
 +  * Kris: demonstration of full scan + systematics + map making is also important
 +    * Julian: Agree, the machinery exists to do these sims.  They need to be in time domain.  They're computationally cheap.  Need limits on the input parameters and evaluation metrics.
 +  * Shaul’s comments on this scan parameters study: 1) optimization of parameters; 2) systematics given parameters
 +  * When mapping + noise correlation? Julian: As soon as we have the tables from Jacques, we will have a range of parameters.
 +  
imagerteleconnotes20171017.1508257727.txt.gz · Last modified: 2017/10/17 11:28 by hanany