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

User Tools


imagerteleconnotes20180314

Differences

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

Link to this comparison view

Next revision
Previous revision
imagerteleconnotes20180314 [2018/03/14 11:59] – created kyoungimagerteleconnotes20180314 [2018/03/23 13:25] (current) wenxx181
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== Telecon 20180314 ====== ====== Telecon 20180314 ======
  
-Attending:+Attending:Brian, Roger, Toki, Shaul, Kris, Karl, Qi, Amy
  
-Notes by :+Notes by : Qi
  
 === Agenda=== === Agenda===
  
-* TeamX studies (next two weeks) +  * TeamX studies (next two weeks) 
-* Calibration and performance verification +  {{::cpv.pdf|Calibration and performance verification}} 
-* Latest focal plane, instrument alpha, beta, ADR location, GRASP . . . +  * [[TempStability20180314|Temperature Stability ]] 
-       *  {{::focalplane_update_20180214.pdf|Focal plane slides}}+  * Latest focal plane, instrument alpha, beta, ADR location, GRASP . . . 
 +    *  {{::focalplane_update_20180214.pdf|Focal plane slides}}
     * Adjusted system to alpha = 30, beta = 65.      * Adjusted system to alpha = 30, beta = 65. 
-      * ADR position image:{{::180222_pico_beta65deg_karl_edits_adr.jpg?100|}}+      * Changes made: {{::2satellite_changes_20180314.png?direct&100|satellite changes}} 
 +    * GRASP status: {{::grasp_status_20180314.pdf|grasp slides}} 
 + 
 +=== Note === 
 + 
 +  * TeamX 
 +    * Next week: Instrument study 
 +    * 2nd week: Mission study 
 +    * The results will go to independent cost analyzer 
 +    * TeamX team is tailoring slides; we have option to add a narrative document 
 +    * Shaul will send note about existence of telecons after TeamX 
 + 
 +  * CPV 
 +    * For Mission study 
 +    * Planck had this phase, we will have too; we need to include this phase in our timeline 
 +    * Based on ‘Planck HFI Core Team’ et al. 2011 
 +      * CPV = “6 weeks before first survey” 
 +      * Last two weeks of data have been included into the “1st survey data” 
 +      * Slide3, Planck CPV 
 +      * Slide4, PICO; Shaul only spent a few minutes; we can and probably should add more items 
 +      * Cosmic rays 
 +        * "What would change given the possible measurements during CPV?""Nothing" except some characterizations 
 +  * Temperature Stability 
 +    * Roger and Shaul are communicating; the results will go to Cryogenic Design 
 +    * Roger 
 +      * T stability of focal plane 
 +      * ADR, thus we should not assume same stability as Planck. 
 +      * The concern is that the real numbers we use 
 +        * Loop gain = 1000 from thesis, very high, Roger think L~10 is more reasonable. 
 +        * Alpha is also too large by a factor of 10 or more. 
 +        * Toki agrees with Roger. Alpha is about ~100. 
 +      * For LiteBird, super relaxed, requirement For T stability is very low. 
 +      * Shaul: LiteBird no ADR, we don’t know what it should be for continuous ADR. 
 +      * Roger: 1%Single ADR would heat the focal plane. 
 +      * Shaul: timescale matters. We can calibrate on dipole. If the fluctuation is fast, then it’s problematic. On spin-spin basis (~1min), we would have dipole calibration. Timescale is unknown for CADR. 
 +      * LiteBird: single shot, not ADR. ADR had been discussed. **Toki is going to dig out more information.** 
 +      * Shaul: we will get information from Toki aobut LiteBird. 
 +      * Roger: by next week, If we have a figure from Toki on requirement, we can have a number, we can put a reqirement on the fridge. Temperature constrained within some range.We are looking for “changes in detector response over some timescales”. 
 +      * Roger: if you cycle ADR, before next cycle, you can do calibration. 
 +      * Amy: on one hand, amount of requirement on changing responsivity and time scales; use calculation to infer Bath stability and timescale; we don’t need to go into too much details at this stage. More importantly, Decal Panel, risky or not. 
 +      * Shaul: have no idea wether this is an issue or not; we don’t know ADR, fluctuation and timescale. Goddard may care cost, then they give us amplitude and timescale. Shaul will follow up. 
 +      * “Common modes”, If the two polarization go down and up together. 
 +      * Shaul will write to Tom, and with information Toki will proved, we will see what we need. 
 +      * Kris: since this is a study, other techonologies could be mentioned. 
 +      * Shaul: we will say there are emerging technolgy that may end being competative. 
 + 
 +  * Focal Plane Status(Karl) 
 +    * Slide2: nominal focal plane 
 +    * Slide3: along the scan direction 
 +      * Questions: 1) slight wider, looks more wasted space; 2)Center: pink is high-frequency, needs to be in the contour; we can futz around to make it good. 
 +    * Slide4: two cases comparison. 
 +    * Amy: either should be fine.  
 +    * Slide5: bump bond; stack multiple TDM chips below wafer. 
 + 
 +  * GRASP: 
 +    * Shaul: we understand now, working on slides. 
 + 
imagerteleconnotes20180314.1521046774.txt.gz · Last modified: 2018/03/14 11:59 by kyoung