Campuses:
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| imagerteleconnotes20180411 [2018/04/11 23:09] – wenxx181 | imagerteleconnotes20180411 [2018/04/11 23:54] (current) – wenxx181 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
| * Rejection needed; a measure of signal level | * Rejection needed; a measure of signal level | ||
| * right side: Rejection needed below 1 um arcmin | * right side: Rejection needed below 1 um arcmin | ||
| + | * slide 5 | ||
| + | * horizontal lines: below which the signal would be rejected. For example, the signal from galaxy would be rejected below purple line | ||
| + | * vertical lines: middle red line is shield; pink and red are where moon and earth would appear | ||
| + | * the area between the lines (~ -180 to ~ 40 deg) is the direct view | ||
| + | * Closures are not included. Adding a closure similar to Planck, covers PR. | ||
| + | * We are not going to calculate with shields at the moment. We are not sure if there will be issue. It's beyond the scope of current study. | ||
| + | * Brian: one of main sidelobes could be from the bump close to focal plane, ADR. Shaul: the size of the bump has been reduced, the figure in slide 2&3 is not accurate, so it may not be a problem. | ||
| + | * Moving ADR down: 1) magnetic field from SUIQD, 2) sidelobe, 3) cooling issue | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Imager topics to discuss in the workshop/ | ||
| + | * The overall instrument is reasonablly complete | ||
| + | * 1/f noise and modulator | ||
| + | * no modulate can accommodate with large aperture | ||
| + | * not clear how 1/f might affect our low-l value | ||
| + | * what are the possibilities of 1/f, what can we intelligently say about this | ||
| + | * Jeff: we suggested for TeamX based on data we have, progress of tests one should do. We have a lot qualitative understandings, | ||
| + | * Time-domain simulation can predict something sensible. | ||
| + | * cosmic rays: | ||
| + | * for Planck, two problems: | ||
| + | * 1)high rate | ||
| + | * due to hitting not just the bolo but entire silicon | ||
| + | * thermal issue, can be addressed | ||
| + | * 2)long duration, high time constant | ||
| + | * not 100% understood, related to heat capacity. | ||
| + | * we can use data from Planck and SPIDER | ||
| + | * testable | ||
| + | * The combination of both makes it problematic. | ||
| + | * "Would you reduce to the level that your Low-l measurement is not affected?", | ||
| + | * People who do simulation should be able to help, e.g. Brandon, HFI simulation. | ||
| + | * 1/f. We have some simulation from CORE, 1/f knees, we can estimate impacts on low-l are. | ||
| + | * ADR + Temperature stability | ||
| + | * summarize the discussion between Brandon and Shaul | ||
| + | * ADR is not going be a driver, fluctuation is not going to be a driver in overall focal plane temperature stability | ||
| + | |||
| + | * SPIE papers | ||
| + | * prepare 1 week for comments | ||
| + | * It would be good to have outlines for the SPIE papers. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||