| FILE TYPE LINK LEGEND: | HTML | PPTX & PPT | XLSX | DOCX & DOC | JPG, PNG, GIF |
→ PICO Wiki ARCHIVED SITE - HOME
Telecon 20171003
Attending: Al, Roger, Jacques, Jeff F., Shaul, Karl, Qi, Ranajoy, Brian
Agenda:
- Imager + Spectrometer (Karl) Spectrometer Slides (.pdf)
- Focal plane + noise model (Karl) Noise model slides (.pdf)
- optical system (Qi) crossdragone_d100cm_f4.5_fov10deg_10032017.pdf (.pdf)
- Scan parameters (Shaul (for Kris))
Notes:
Imager + Spectrometer (Karl)
- mini-PIXIE, 20 cm mirrors, 10x38x48 FTS
- Same boresight angle
- Share same cooling system
- mass of mini-PIXIE, ~20 kg in total, barrel contributes most of it.
- detector assembly is < 1kg
- Imager focal plane mass: not known yet. A/I Brian to ping Roger.
- with Open Dragone
- same boresight as Imager, although not necessary
- quite small, fits easily
- with Cross Dragone
- boresights don't match, but scan pattern does (beta is same in both cases)
- Al: it’s okay. There will be some time delay between imager and spectrometer scans, but it does not matter much.
- Boresight and spin axis
- It’s not required to have boresight along the spin axis. PIXIE did plan to align with spin axis,allows fitting of Q/U of each pixel before moving to next pixel.
- It’s okay to not do this. The current main driver is the sky coverage.
- FTS box is not required to be with optical tubes, it can be anywhere as long as an optical path exists.
- The detectors can even be on the Imager focal plane.
- Tradeoffs:
- question of cost, might limit imager size
- Current primary costs: cooling, telescope, readout, and detectors
- marginal costs when increasing
- Aside:
- Check Open Dragone fit, to see if there is conflict between mirrors and cone. A/I UMN to check.
- structural issues with support for mirrors?
- Brian: JPL is working on this question.
Noise Model (Karl)
- Biggest change: safety factor → 2
- Squid is the largest contribution
- Using 3.5 pA/rt(Hz). A/I Karl checking with Hannes at NIST about proper number to quote.
- Roger: all these numbers are fine.
- Cross check between Karl and Roger. noise matches except for:
- bunching noise, a factor of 2
- bunching noise does not contribute too much, ~15%; all other are same
- A/I Karl, track down 2 in bunching noise. Possibly polarization related.
- Richard’s correction on Coma
- more detectors at high frequencies, for both Open and Cross Dragone
- can weight CMB frequencies more heavily.
- Can optimize edge taper
- including correlated photon bunching noise from CMB (correctly) and mirrors (incorrectly, but with factor of 2)
- Next step: Karl to implement full correct calculation for mirrors.
- best mapping speed is near 2 F lambda. Current Open Dragone pixels are at 2 F lambda.
Optics (Qi)
- New cross-dragone with +/- 10 deg FOV
- f/4.5, 1m aperture, requires deployable shields.
- deployable shields should be V-grooves as well. leave design to thermal engineers. Just put place-holder in current model
- both cross dragones' focal planes view sky after 1 reflection off tertiary
- total sensitivity is better than Open dragone (baseline)
- assumes full telescope is 4 K
- also number of detectors is larger. 3k for Open, 7k and 11k for new crossed designs.
- How does larger f-number give better sensitivity? Opposite what is normally said. From CORE, increasing f-number gave no benefit since pixels grew at same rate focal plane grew.
- A/I Karl/Qi to sort out scaling of focal plane with f-number.
Scan delayed to next week.
Last modified: 2017/10/10 12:55 by hanany
