Re: LBA sensitivity calculator
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]
From: <Jim.Lovell_at_email.protected>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:18:38 +1100
Hi Adam,
The beam shape feature is very nice! Is it possible to change the "uv
Coverage" heading so that it's more obvious it's a button? Also, is it
possible to show just the inner region of the beam, e.g out to the first
set of sidelobes, so that it's possible to get a visual estimate of the
beam size/FWHM?
Cheers,
Jim
On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 18:12 +1100, Adam Deller wrote:
>Hi Tasso,
>
>The rescaling has been fixed - that was something I had left in the
>too-hard basket but I realised was actually very easy.
>
>The baseline summaries now display sensitivity and source uptime, but
>unfortunately there is no easy way of highlighting baselines which cannot
>see the source. It does clearly show that uptime is zero in this case
>though.
>
>Also, I've added to the notes down the bottom of the page to make it clear
>that you can swap between uv Coverage and beam shape by clicking on the
>heading "uv Coverage". I realised that this wasn't really made clear
>anywhere. So everyone, if you hadn't spent a few minutes checking out the
>beam shapes of different configurations, try it, its really cool!!
>
>Cheers,
>Adam
>
>On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Tasso Tzioumis wrote:
>
>>> Hi Adam,
>>>
>>> A couple of more points on the calculator that may be easy to implement:
>>>
>>> When one uses telescopes very far apart, there is little mutual
>>> uv-coverage. When there is no common time the baselines are flagged in
>>> the list as N/A and no sensitivity is reported. However, the uv-plot it
>>> is still scaled to maximum possible baseline.
>>> Here is a couple of suggestions to improve things:
>>> 1. Rescale the uv-plot to use ONLY the baselines that exist, not the N/A
>>> 2. Change the listing to also report "Coverage (hrs)" for each
>>> baseline. Then you can list the sensitivities for all baselines (it is
>>> useful to know sometimes even if no mutual coverage) and make the
>>> coverage 0 hrs (or N/A or an *, or red colour). This will give all the
>>> information that there is now and a little more.
>>>
>>> I think you already calculate the coverage times, so it should easy to
>>> implement. I'll not do it if it requires major effort.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Tasso
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Tasso Tzioumis, Australia Telescope National Facility, CSIRO
>>> Location: Cnr Pembroke & Vimiera Rds, Marsfield, NSW, 2122, AUSTRALIA
>>> Post: PO Box 76, Epping, NSW 1710, AUSTRALIA
>>> Phone: +61 2 9372 4350 Fax: +61 2 9372 4450 or 4310
>>> Email: Tasso.Tzioumis_at_csiro.au
>>> URL: http://www.atnf.csiro.au/~atzioumi/
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:18:38 +1100
Hi Adam,
The beam shape feature is very nice! Is it possible to change the "uv
Coverage" heading so that it's more obvious it's a button? Also, is it
possible to show just the inner region of the beam, e.g out to the first
set of sidelobes, so that it's possible to get a visual estimate of the
beam size/FWHM?
Cheers,
Jim
On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 18:12 +1100, Adam Deller wrote:
>Hi Tasso,
>
>The rescaling has been fixed - that was something I had left in the
>too-hard basket but I realised was actually very easy.
>
>The baseline summaries now display sensitivity and source uptime, but
>unfortunately there is no easy way of highlighting baselines which cannot
>see the source. It does clearly show that uptime is zero in this case
>though.
>
>Also, I've added to the notes down the bottom of the page to make it clear
>that you can swap between uv Coverage and beam shape by clicking on the
>heading "uv Coverage". I realised that this wasn't really made clear
>anywhere. So everyone, if you hadn't spent a few minutes checking out the
>beam shapes of different configurations, try it, its really cool!!
>
>Cheers,
>Adam
>
>On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Tasso Tzioumis wrote:
>
>>> Hi Adam,
>>>
>>> A couple of more points on the calculator that may be easy to implement:
>>>
>>> When one uses telescopes very far apart, there is little mutual
>>> uv-coverage. When there is no common time the baselines are flagged in
>>> the list as N/A and no sensitivity is reported. However, the uv-plot it
>>> is still scaled to maximum possible baseline.
>>> Here is a couple of suggestions to improve things:
>>> 1. Rescale the uv-plot to use ONLY the baselines that exist, not the N/A
>>> 2. Change the listing to also report "Coverage (hrs)" for each
>>> baseline. Then you can list the sensitivities for all baselines (it is
>>> useful to know sometimes even if no mutual coverage) and make the
>>> coverage 0 hrs (or N/A or an *, or red colour). This will give all the
>>> information that there is now and a little more.
>>>
>>> I think you already calculate the coverage times, so it should easy to
>>> implement. I'll not do it if it requires major effort.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Tasso
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Tasso Tzioumis, Australia Telescope National Facility, CSIRO
>>> Location: Cnr Pembroke & Vimiera Rds, Marsfield, NSW, 2122, AUSTRALIA
>>> Post: PO Box 76, Epping, NSW 1710, AUSTRALIA
>>> Phone: +61 2 9372 4350 Fax: +61 2 9372 4450 or 4310
>>> Email: Tasso.Tzioumis_at_csiro.au
>>> URL: http://www.atnf.csiro.au/~atzioumi/
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
-- Jim Lovell, Jim.Lovell_at_csiro.au ATNF c/o RSAA, Mt Stromlo Observatory, Ph: (02) 6125 6715 Cotter Road, Weston ACT 2611 Fax: (02) 6125 0260 Australia Mobile: 0412 127364 WWW: http://www.atnf.csiro.au/people/Jim.Lovell Photoblog: http://jejl.blogspot.com At Tidbinbilla Ph (02) 6201 7869 (RA Lab), x7800 (switch), x7940(shift)Received on 2005-03-22 11:19:15