Campuses:
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| imagerteleconnotes20180124 [2018/01/24 15:06] – kyoung | imagerteleconnotes20180124 [2018/02/01 11:29] (current) – bcrill | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
| Attitude control | Attitude control | ||
| - | * Bill?: points out having 2 or more scan modes would have been very helpful for Planck. Break time constant and beam shape degeneracies. | + | |
| + | * Ben: thinking about map to understand definitions of pointing knowledge, control and stability; that's how engineers talk about them. | ||
| + | * PICO rquires 6 arcsec pointing knowledge, which about 1/10 of the smallest beam. | ||
| + | * Shaul thinks we do not need more than 1 degree of pointing control. | ||
| + | * Bill: pointing stability is associated with spin; we may also think about how stable spin axis is aligned with star camera. | ||
| + | | ||
| * Jacques: 3 star sensors garuntees 1'' | * Jacques: 3 star sensors garuntees 1'' | ||
| * Jacques: Thoughts from CORE, | * Jacques: Thoughts from CORE, | ||
| - | | + | |
| - | * 24'' | + | * 24'' |
| - | * Shaul: reaction wheels are current assumption for PICO | + | * Shaul: reaction wheels are current assumption for PICO |
| * **A/I** Shaul to check with Amy about 24'' | * **A/I** Shaul to check with Amy about 24'' | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Additional note from Brendan: Planck achieved 2 arcsecond rms pointing reconstruction [[https:// | ||
| + | |||
| I + T, lessons from Planck, options for PICO. (Tomo) | I + T, lessons from Planck, options for PICO. (Tomo) | ||
| Line 48: | Line 56: | ||
| * page 19, calibrations done for Planck shown. | * page 19, calibrations done for Planck shown. | ||
| * spectral response not fully measured on ground, can't be sense | * spectral response not fully measured on ground, can't be sense | ||
| - | * Shaul: has Planck over tested any optics? | + | * Shaul: has Planck over tested or under tested any optics? |
| * Bill: most valuable was cold photogrammetry of flight optics. Other tests were of interest, but not as critical. | * Bill: most valuable was cold photogrammetry of flight optics. Other tests were of interest, but not as critical. | ||
| - | * Mirror material? | + | * Mirror material? |
| - | * Shaul: TeamX assumed aluminum mirrors. Silicon carbide may over run cost. Aluminum | + | * Shaul: TeamX assumed aluminum mirrors. Silicon carbide may over run cost. Aluminum |
| * Discussion on hold until next week due to time. | * Discussion on hold until next week due to time. | ||