Differences

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

--- imagerteleconnotes20171107 [2017/11/07 13:45] – hanany
+++ imagerteleconnotes20171107 [2017/11/07 16:13] (current) – kyoung
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ====== Telecon 20171107 ======
+Attending: Brian, Julian, Al, Roger, Jeff, Jacques, Jon G.
 __Agenda:__
-* Preparations for TeamX in Dec.
+  * Preparations for TeamX in Dec.
-  * Finalizing optics with/out deployables + focal system (Karl, Qi)
+    * Finalizing optics with/out deployables + focal system (Karl, Qi)
-    * {{::1.2m_vs_openv3d_20171102.pdf|Comparing 1.2 m crossed and 1.4 m open}}
+      * {{::1.2m_vs_openv3d_20171102.pdf|Comparing 1.2 m crossed and 1.4 m open}}
-  * Telescope: material, alignment, testing
+    * Telescope: material, alignment, testing
-  * Cooling
+    * Cooling
-* Mission
+  * Mission
-  * Scan angles (Gorski)
+    * Scan angles (Gorski)
-  * TM data rates [as a function of smallest beam size (??)]
+    * TM data rates [as a function of smallest beam size (??)]
-* Systematics + noise
+  * Systematics + noise
-  * Combining our telecons with systematics group
+    * Combining our telecons with systematics group
-    * impact of low frequency noise
+      * impact of low frequency noise
-    * Sidelobes (Grasp / Analytical calculation)
+      * Sidelobes (Grasp / Analytical calculation)
-    * Gain stability
+      * Gain stability
-    * pol angle calibration
+      * pol angle calibration
 === Notes ===
-Atd:
+Prep for Team-X meeting in mid-Dec.  They will cover telescope + focal plane + Cooling = instrument
+  - Optics of 1.2m vs 1.4m.  1.4m open has better resolution and sensitivity.
+    - No glaring issues with open, even though it is less traditional.
+    - Brian: Does baffle create sidelobes?
+      - Shaul: Goal is to do a basic GRASP calculation to figure this out. In contact with Brad Johnson
+    - Karl will calculate sensitivity of crossed at 4K. Maybe something to pursue.
+  - Should we go to Team-X with multiple options?
+    - Al: They tend to split their time evenly amongst options they are given.  Would need to make clear what our focus is if we bring multiple options.  Prefer taking just 1 workable option.  It's time to finish with optics and move focus to other issues which need work.
+      - Shaul: Our case is 1 basic framework with options being changes on top of this.
+      - Al: Team-X can do this if the scope is made clear in pre-session.  However may not be most effecient use of Team-X time/expertise.
+  - Gathering telescope quotes:
+    - Brain, JPL, and Shaul.
+    - Components are fraction of cost.  Majority of cost is testing.
+      - Al: WMAP testing was cold photograms, warm beams, accounted for cooling deformation with models
+      - Jacques: Planck testing was sidelobes warm, deformation and alignment as mirror cooled, no end-to-end cold test with flight system.
+        - CORE estimate, very unofficial, was $10-20 million
+  - Cooling:
+    - Chris Payne working on strategy
+    - continuous ADR cost from Goddard slow to come in.  Working on this.
+    - Possible single shot ADR from Europe. planned for Athena mission.
+      - Jacques: Same group is developing continuous ADR.  Probably low TRL currently.  Jacques willing to connect people if needed. (not needed currently)
+    - Roger: Will send around BLISS ADR system. Was a bench test system at JPL.
+Skip Mission discussion for now, deadline in March although work needs to begin.
+Systematics
+  - What do we need for 1/f? Sidelobes? Gain stability? pol angle calibration?  And how to simulate this.
+  - Sidelobes: Estimate in GRASP via Brad J.
+    - Jacques: This job is very large and approximations are often done.
+    - Shaul: Plan is to do a course model to get representative levels.
+  - Julian: Simulation pipelines exist to take scan + sidelobes, produce maps, and estimate systematic errors in parameters.
+    - need proper inputs
+    - simulation of mitigation of sidelobes is harder.  Need a way to estimate your sidelobes and your mitigation method separately, then combine in simulation.
+    - typically simulate each systematic separately, then do 1 sim with all systematics to see overall effects.
+      - Shaul: this can get infinitely complex. We'll focus on the 3 issues highlited by systematics group first.
+    - All these are doable, suggestion: Do 4-5 locations on focal plane.
+      - Jacques: do 4 detectors simultaneously so you get 1 Q and 1 U measurement.

User Tools

Differences

Page Tools