Intro
Monitoring the 12meter total power has shown
that it varies. As the temperature increases the total power
goes down.
On 8nov21 a peltier cooler was installed to temperature
stabilize the cal diode. If the cal diode output is constant,
then it can be used to correct for gain variations in the
system (as long as the gain variations are slower than the
25Hz cal).
On 17jan22 2 minutes of data was taken with the winking cal.
The winking cal was then used to correct for gain variations (more info)
On 16mar22 15 minutes of data was taken with the winking cal
to see how far (in integration time) we could extend the
correction. The results are reported below.
Setup:
The analysis used the 25Hz hardware winking cal data taken on
16mar22. The setup was:
- 7 172 MHz bands were recorded with 512 freq
channels/band
- the band frequencies were:
- 8219.00 8363.00 8505.00 8647.00 8789.00 8931.00 9073.00
MHz.
- the 25Hz hardware winking cal cycled with 20 milliseconds
cal on followed by 20 milliseconds cal off
- the spectra were dumped at 2 milliseconds (giving 10
samples per calOn and cal Off.
- the spectra around the transition were excluded giving
8*2ms = 16 ms for cal on and 16 ms caloff for each cal cycle
- Data was taken for 900 seconds tracking blank sky giving
900/.04=22500 cal cycles in the 900 secs of data.
How to correct for gain variations
The hardware cycles at 40ms (20ms on ,20ms
off). It can be used to correct for slow gain variations in
the electronics.
Let:
- tpOnM= measured total power calOn
- tpOffM =measured total power calOff (this is also Tsys).
- tpOffC =the tpOff corrected for the gain variations
- g(t) be a slowly varying electronic gain variation (slower
than the 40ms cal calcyle).
- The correct tpon,off would be:
- tpOn=g(t)*tpOnM
- tpOff=g(t)*tpOffM
- tpCalM=tpOnM- tpOffM = g(t)*(tpOn -
tpOff)=g(t)*calDiodeOutput
- The calDiode output is temperature stabilized with a
peltier cooler.
- tpOffC=tpOffM/tpCalM= tpOff*gt/(g(t)*calDiodeOutput) =
tpOff/calDiodeOutput .. with the g(t) canceled
- This works if g(t) is relatively constant during the cal
cycle.
What the correction does to the
noise statistics
Dividing the tpOff (tsys) by the cal
deflection will increase the rms noise level.
Let:
- bw be the total power bandwidth used
- tau be the integration time. For a single calcycle
we have 16 ms calon,16ms calOff (since we dropped 2 2ms
sample around the cal transition).
- The radiometer eq gives:
- deltaTp/Tp = 1/sqrt(bw*tau) = expRms.. expected rms
- deltaTp= Tp*expRms
- deltaTpOn,deltaTpOff then come from the radiometer
equation
- when adding or subtracting noisy variables:
- d(a+b) = sqrt(da^2 + db^2)
- When dividing noisy variables:
- x/y = sqrt ((dx/x)^2 + (dy/y)^2)
- deltaTpCal=sqrt(deltaTpOn^2 + deltaTpOff^2) =
expRms*sqrt(tpOn^2 + tpOff^2)
- deltaTpOff/tpCal= sqrt( expRms^2 + expRms^2*(tpOn^2
+ tpOff^2)/(tpon - tpOff)^2)
- or
- deltaTpOff/tpCal= expRms*sqrt(1. + (tpOn^2
+tpOff^2)/(tpon-tpoff)^2)
- The ratio of tpCal/tpOff varies from .27 to .39 between
the 2 pols and across the 1ghz band.
- using .33 for the cal fraction of Tsys
- the theoretical rms should increase by about a
factor of 5 because of the division by the cal deflection.
To not blow up the errors so much we can:
- smooth the cal deflection before dividing
- this will decrease the noise, but it may not do as good
a job the smoothed value gets close to the g(t)
variations.
- fit a function (polynomial) to the cal deflection.
- this will add no extra noise, but it depends how well we
cat fit the g(t) variations in the cal deflection.
Processing the data.
For freq band of 900 seconds of data:
- The calOn and caloff spectra were input
- they were averaged to 16 milliseconds giving 1 cal on,
off spectra per cal cycle (40 ms)
- The spectra were bandpass corrected:
- The median cal off bandpass was computed and then
divided by it's mean value.
- Each of the 22500 calon, and calOff spectra were then
divided by the normalized average bandpass
- this will cause the freq channels be be weighted more
evenly when computing the total power across the band.
- A mask for bad freq channels was created for each
freq band to exclude rfi.
- the rms/mean was computed for each freq channel using
the 22500 calon and caloff spectra
- The resulting rms/mean spectra has been flattened in
freq.
- a linear fit was done to the calOn,and calOff rms/mean
spectra
- Any points >3 sigma from the mean were flagged as
bad (rfi)
- 4% of the band on each edge was also flagged (20 extra
channels on each edge where the filter falloff was
largest).
- we ended up with about 155MHz/band after excluding the
bad channels (the 2nd freq band (8363MHz ended up
with 129MHz)
- The total power was then computed for the 22500
calON,calOff points for each pol and freq band.
- this will be called the "uncorrected" total power since
it includes electronic gain variations with time.
- the gain correction was tried with various methods:
- divide tpOff by tpCal by 40 ms sample
- this should give the best gain variation correction,
but it will blowup the rms error
- divide tpOff by a smoothed version of the tpCal (25
samples.. or .16*25=.4 seconds)
- this will give smaller rms errors, but may not do as
good a job correcting for the gain variation.
- Fit an nth order polynomial to tpCal and then divide
tpOff by the fit
- this will keep the rms error unchanged but may not do
a perfect job of fitting the gain variations.
- A check was then made to see if the noise statistics
improved as we increased the integration time.
- the tpOn/tpCal was used (no smoothing or fit). It should
do the best job of cancelling the gain variations.
- The 155 MHz band was also broken up into 25 MHz sections
and the previous test was redone
- this was to check to see if some low level rfi was
causing problems.
Looking at the results:
Uncorrected
total power calOff vs time (.ps) (.pdf)
- the tpCalon (black) and tpCalOn (red) are over plotted.
- they have been normalized to their median value.
- Each row is a different freq band
- The left column is polA, the right column is polB
- There is a variation of up to +/- .5% for the 900 seconds.
Over
plot tpCaloff for the 7 freq bands (.ps) (.pdf)
- The top Frame is polA, the bottom frame is polB
- The tpCalOff from the 7 bands in over plotted in different
colors.
- Each band has been normalized to their median value.
- The largest variation in amplitude is common to all
7 freq bands.
Over
plot tpOff with and without corrections (.ps) (.pdf)
- TpOff is plotted. each plot has been normalized by it's
median value.
- The upper two frames are polA,B of a freq band
- the lower two frames are polA,B of the next bad. (there
are 4 pages)/.
- Black: no correction
- red : divide by tpCal
- green: divide by smoothed tpcal (25 samples=.4 seconds)
- The expected rms should be .0063
Divide
TpOff by a polynomial fit to tpCal and then compute the
measured rms. Compare with no correction.(.ps) (.pdf)
- Page 1 rms vs polynomial fit order
- The x-axis is the order of the polynomial fit used (1st
to 5th order)
- The vertical scale is the measured rms/mean
- top frame : polA
- bottom frame: polB
- The colors show the 7 freq bands.
- The purple line is the expected rms
- For polA the rms continues to improve out to the
5th order
- For polB the rms bottoms out at the 4th order fit.
- Page 2: tpOff/4th order fit and then try various
integration times.
- tpOff was divided by a 4th order fit to tpCal
- the data was then smoothed by .016 to 62 seconds
- after each smoothing, the rms was computed.
- The plots show how the rms improved as the smoothing
time was increased.
- Top frame: PolA
- Bottom frame: PolB
- the axis are log scale.
- the colors show the different freq bands.
- the straight lines are the expected rms/mean
- the measured rms/mean decreases with increasing
integration, but it is many orders of magnitude from the
theoretical value.
- the spread in the rms curves with frequency is
probably because the 4th order fit did a better job
with some frequency bands.
- Page 3: rmsTpoff/tpoff with no corrections.
- the data was smoothed similarly to page 2.
- after each smoothing, the rms was co
- Top frame: PolA
- Bottom frame: PolB
- the axis are log scale.
- the colors show the different freq bands.
- the straight lines are the expected rms/mean
- the polA values are similar to tpOff/4thorderFit (since
polA did not have much gain variation for these 15
minutes.
- the polB values are much worse than the
tpOff/4thorderFit (polB had a lot more gain variation).
Using
tpOff/tpCal plot the rms/mean for different
integration times (.ps) (.pdf)
- TpOff was divided by tpCal (each .016 ms sample).
- Each page is a different frequency band.
- the rms will increase by dividing by tpCal\, but this
should do the best job of cancelling any gain variations
after the cal injection.
- the data was then smoothed by .016 up to 62 seconds.
- for each smoothing the rms/mean was computed and plotted
- Black is PolA, Red is polB
- the straight lines (with the +) are the expected
rms/mean
- the dashed lines are a linear fit to the log of
rms,integration using the first 2 points
- this gives an idea where the measured rms/mean
deviates from the expected rms.
- The rms/mean turns over around 1 to 2 seconds
integration time.
- PolB does a little better than PolA
- PolB min rms/mean: .0005 Tsys at 1-2 seconds
integration
- PolA min rms/mean: .0006 tsys at 1-2 seconds
integration.
- the rms/mean starts to deviate from the dashed line at
.1 to .4 seconds of integration.
Break
the 155MHz band into 25MHz sections to see if any rfi affects
things (.ps) (
.pdf)
- The 155 MHz from the 8219 MHz band was split
into 6 25 MHz bands and then reprocessed (as above)
- * is the measured rms from the 6 bands
- + is the expected rms
- Black in polA, red is polB
- There is no large change in processing the 25MHz bands
separately
- so the rfi is probably not causing a degradation.
Summary:
- the gain correction was corrected by dividing
by the calDeflection.
- The correction was done by:
- dividing by the calDeflection (the .016 ms samples0
- dividing by a smoothed version of the calDefl
- fitting a polynomial to the cal deflection
- for the 900 secs we ended up using a 4th order
polynomial.
- With the 4h order fit we got down to .0002 Tsys (for polB)
- the rms continued to decrease with increasing
integration time ( but no where near the expected
rms/mean)
- When dividing by the .016 ms caldefl samples
- the rms/mean turned over around 1-2 secs integration
time.
- the best value was about .0004 Tsys (for polB)
- What could be causing the rms to not follow the expected
slope.
- the gain variation is occurring before the cal insertion
(before the lna).
- It could be a noise variation (say the atm) rather than
a gain variation
- We have previously seen a gain variation with temperate(more
info)
processing: x101/220316/wcalstability.pro