Pointing model 15, may04
Links to plots:
The input data
used to compute model 15 (.ps) (.pdf)
The model15
fit with residuals (.ps) (.pdf)
Checking
the model by removing a source at a time and recomputing the model (.ps)
(.pdf)
The azimuth
encoder table results (.ps) (.pdf)
Measuring
the constant offset terms for the other receivers (.ps) (.pdf)
Variogram
of the raw errors and pointing residuals (.ps) (.pdf)
Links to sections:
Background.
Data used to compute the model.
Fitting the model.
Checking the validity of the
model.
Azimuth encoder table.
Measuring the constant offsets for
the "other" receivers.
Variogram of the pointing residuals.
Background. (top)
-
Jan04 new stiffer leaf springs installed dome, side roller bearing one
side tightened up.
-
Turret floor reinforced (weight added).
-
3 compressors added to the top of the dome (upper left side).
-
kevlar cables installed.
-
alfa installed.
-
turret encoder lost index and then recalibrated.
-
tiedown 4 jack replaced. position of tiedown re established use tape measure.
No time for an az swing to check the 1 az term of the tilt sensors.
-
501 points were used for the model.
-
The model data was taken with model14 installed.
-
The data was taken with heiles calibration scans rather than the turret
scans.
Data used to compute the model.
(top)
The data
used to compute model 15 (.ps) (.pdf)
was taken using model14 (the previous model). Figures 1-5 show these
errors. Figures 6 and 7 remove the model 14 correction and show the raw
telescope pointing error. All errors are great circle arc seconds.
-
Fig. 1 is the azimuth/zenith angle coverage for the input data.
-
Fig. 2 is the pointing error (za error top, az error bottom) plotted versus
azimuth. This is relative to model 14. The left half of each plot is the
northern portion of the dish (southern sources with declination < 18.2
degrees). The right half of each plot is the southern portion of the dish
(northern sources).
-
Figure 3 is the pointing error (za error top, az error bottom) versus zenith
angle for the input data. There is a linear ramp in za error of .83 asecs/degZa
relative to model14. The feed tower used to sag downhill as the dome went
up in za. model14 would then compensate for it. We have now added kevlar
cables so the feed tower doesn't sag as much. On the other hand, there
is more weight on the dome so the platform is tilting more as you go up
in za. Both of these are probably contributing (in opposite directions)
to this tilt (it looks like the weight is winning).
-
Figure 4 is the za and azimuth errors plotted by source order. The sources
are color coded.
-
Fig. 5 is the magnitude and direction of these errors plotted versus
azimuth and za. 1 tick mark is 5 arc seconds. At the bottom is a table
of the average magnitude and rms for the entire dish and computed for every
5 degrees in za.
-
Fig. 6 has the raw az, za errors plotted versus azimuth. The model 14 correction
has been removed. Model 15 will be fit to this data set. Fits to 1az, 2az,
and 3az have been over plotted with the amplitude and phase angle of the
maximum.
-
Fig. 7 shows the same raw errors plotted versus za. T
Fitting the model.
(top)
The model is fit to the raw errors. An encoder table
spaced every .5 degrees in za is computed for azimuth and zenith angle
errors and then removed. The final residuals are great circle errors.
The telescope must move in that direction from the computed position to
point at the source. The model15
fit with residuals (.ps) (.pdf)
are:
|
za residuals |
az residuals |
total residuals [asecs] |
mod15 noEncTable |
6.07 |
7.08 |
9.33 |
mod 15 with Enc Table |
2.41 |
4.20 |
4.84 |
-
Fig. 1 plots the residuals versus za for the azimuth and za errors. The
encoder table has not yet been removed. The computed encoder table
is over plotted in red.
-
Fig. 2 plots the azimuth and za (raw Errors - ( model + encoderTable) )
residuals versus za.
-
Fig. 3 plots the azimuth and za (raw Errors - (model + encoder table) residuals
versus azimuth. There is more scatter in the azimuth residuals that the
za. The tilt sensor measurements show a 6az term over part of the
dish. The encoder rack gear for the azimuth also has some runout. It will
cause a azimuth scatter (with a za dependence since these are great circle
errors).
-
Fig. 4 plots the za and azimuth residual errors by source.
-
Fig. 5 shows the za, az model residuals plotted versus source declination.
-
Fig. 6 has the residual error plotted versus azimuth and zenith angle.
1 tick mark is 5 arc seconds. A table of the average error and the errors
every 5 degrees za is at the bottom of the plot. Also included is the model
parameters and values.
These residuals are the 2nd best residuals we've measured.
The best set of residuals was the first model in may98 (see pointing
residuals for a complete list). The dome side roller bearings
on both rails were adjusted to a small tolerance in may98. After that the
roller bearings started to break (since the distance between the two rails
was not a constant distance as you went up in za). After tmay98,
the bearings on both sides were loosened up leaving slop in the horizontal
motion as the dome went up and down in za. In jan04 of this year
the bearings for a single elevation rail were tightened. The other end
was left loose. This forced the dome to follow the path of the right elevation
rail. Since the bearings were adjusted to a small tolerance, the motion
was repeatable and the model encoder table could take the motion out. The
bearing on the other side did not break since it was left with lots of
clearance.
Checking the
validity of the model. (top)
The validity of the model is tested by removing
a source at a time from the data set and recomputing the model (.ps)
(.pdf).
This was done for all 24 sources in the model.
Fig 1 has the model residuals removing one source at a time. 0 is J1041+027,
1=J1150=003.. to 23=2253+161. The black line is the total rms residuals
while the red it the azimuth and the green is the zenith angle. The top
plot does not include the encoder table while the bottom plot includes
it. Removing the 10th source J0137+331 makes the largest improvement
in the model. This source was taken 9:30 am to 11:30 am. At the edges,
the tiedown cables had lost tension.
Figure 2 plots the mean pointing error and its rms for each source track
that was not included in the model. The model was evaluated without source
i, then the mean and rms of the pointing model along the az,za track for
source i was computed.
Azimuth encoder table.
(top)
An azimuth encoder table for azimuth residuals was built
by smoothing the great circle azimuth residuals in azimuth and then removing
this from the (model-zaEncTbl) azimuth residuals. I first tried smoothing
the little circle errors (azErr/sinza) thinking that the azimuth
encoder wrack gear was the largest culprit and it should give a little
circle error. The residuals didn't get much better. The low za errors were
messing up the averages. This must mean that the azimuth residual errors
are great circle and not little circle.
The table step has 1 degree steps in azimuth. Different
az smoothing was tried. The az
encoder table results (.ps) (.pdf)
are shown in the figure: (the azimuth encoder table has not been installed).
-
Fig 1 top is the azimuth encoder table made by smoothing to 1 through 6
degrees azimuth (bottom to top).
-
Fig 1 bottom plots the azimuth encoder residuals (black line) for azimuth
smoothing 1 through 19 degrees. The green line is the azimuth residuals
without the azimuth encoder table. The red line is the total residuals
(za plus az) for the various smoothing.
-
Fig 2 over plots the azimuth residuals and the az enctable smoothed to
3 and 6 degrees azimuth.
-
Fig3 is a fourier transform of the azimuth encoder table (built with 1
degree smoothing). The top plot is plotted versus cycles and the bottom
plot versus period (in degrees). The power is at 4 cycles and 12 cycles
(90 degree spacing and 30 degree spacing). (I think the az encoder rack
gear has 15 degree sections...see
az rack gear)
Measuring the constant
offsets for the "other" receivers. (top)
The model includes constant terms (great circle) in azimuth and zenith
angle for each receiver. These terms can differ receiver to receiver because
of positioning error of the horn on the rotary floor. The model is made
with sband narrow. After the model we need to compute what the constant
offsets for the other receivers are (ideally it would remain constant).
On 21may04 8 sources were tracked with sbn and the
new model 15 installed. 3 of these sources had been used in making the
model (J1021+219, J1737+063, and J1925+211). The offsets for the other
receivers (not sband narrow) were measured on 15/16
may04 tracking these same sources (typically 2 sources per receiver).
Before each receiver was used, an offset was included to get the receiver
close to where it was supposed to be. The mean offset in the pointing errors
between sbn and the "other" receiver is then added to the constant terms
used to track these sources.
The plots
show the tracking error for sbn and the other receivers. (.ps)
(.pdf).
The first 9 plots show the sbn error and the other receiver error
(one per page). Black is the sbn measurement. Red, green, blue, purple
are the up to 4 frequency bands of the "other" receiver. The left column
has azimuth errors while the right column is za errors. The numbers
printed are the mean(sbnErr) - mean(rcvrErr) in arcseconds. The figures
are:
-
327 Mhz. 3 frequency bands, 1 source were taken.
-
430 Mhz . 3 frequency bands , 1 source were taken.
-
610 Mhz . 3 frequency bands, 1 source were taken.
-
lbw. 4 frequencies, 3 sources.
-
sbw. 3 frequencies, 2 sources.
-
sbh. 4 frequencies, 2 sources.
-
cband. 4 frequencies, 2 sources.
-
cbandHi. 4 frequencies, 2 sources.
-
xband. 4 frequencies, 2 sources.
-
Mean(sbn)-mean(rcv) for each source and frequency band. black is the azimuth
error and red is the za error.
Ideally the (sbn-rcv) value should be the same for all
sources and frequencies of a receiver. Lbw and sbw have 1 source
(J1737+063) that sticks out from the other measurements for that receiver.
This is probably because the sbn track for this source had some trouble.
It was not included in computing the offset for the receivers.
Figure 9 also shows that cband high has a za pointing
offset that is a function of frequency. This is probably because the coma
for the receiver is a function of frequency and it is changing the pointing
offset. For cband hi the first 3 frequencies (6600,6900, 7200) were used
to compute the pointing offset since they were similar and close to the
methanol line.
The offsets for the individual receivers as calculated
from the above data is shown in the table below.
model 15 receiver offsets.
rcvr |
azOffset asecs |
za offsets asecs |
sbn |
-40 |
-102.55 |
327 |
-106.17 |
25.22 |
430 |
-35.48 |
-97.48 |
610 |
-45.35 |
-15.65 |
lbw |
-45.53 |
-116.21 |
sbw |
-38.77 |
-89.56 |
sbh |
-44.09 |
-86.12 |
cb |
-42.45 |
-80.32 |
cbh |
-40.89 |
-87.14 |
xb |
-38.97 |
-85.85 |
The azimuth offset is similar for all receivers but 327 (327,430, and
610 were not surveyed into position). The receivers: sbw,sbh,cb,cbh,xb
all have similar za offsets. sbn and lbw differ from this mean value (85.8)
by 16 and 30 arc seconds. These two receivers were not moved in the za
direction after the survey because there was no room in the hole in the
floor to move the receiver.
processing: x101/model/may04/verify.pro
Variogram of the pointing residuals.
(top)
A variogram
of the raw errors and pointing residuals (.ps) (.pdf)
shows the correlation of the measurements versus separation of the points.
The residual error and raw pointing error difference is computed for all
points on a pair wise basis. A metric is then defined for the point separation
and is used to bin the data. The variance of the pair differences for each
bin is then computed and plotted versus the distance. For each figure the
top plot is the pair wise difference of the pointing residuals (including
the zaencoder table) while the bottom plot has the pair wise difference
of the raw errors input to make the model.
This data can be used to interpolate the residuals
onto an az,za grid (it gives the nugget (y intercept), range (where the
variance increases), and the sill (value where the variance levels
off) for the krigging routine)
-
Fig. 1 is the variogram using the great circle angular separation of the
points as the metric. The separation was binned to .3 degrees steps. The
za correlation increases until za=2. degrees and then levels off.
The az residuals variance increases till about 5 degrees. The 25 foot spacing
of the north south main cables is about 1.6 degrees (1.5 degrees is close
to the 25 foot spacing of the main cables ). The large correlation in the
bottom plot is the 1az term of the raw pointing errors.
Fig. 2 projects the points into the xy plane and then measures the
distance (since the kriging would be done in this plane). It looks the
same as that of figure 1.
processing: x101/model/may04/doall.pro
home_~phil