[evlatests] [evla-sw-discuss] parameter simplification for the VHF receivers

[Bryan Butler]

problem is, if we change this at the executor, MCAF will never know. 
that's what i'm concerned about.  now, if it's *always* the same, then i 
guess we could program it into MCAF but those kinds of hard-coded 
solutions always concern me (and i know i'm not alone!).  i guess we 
could overload the intents, yet again, and add one for this kind of thing.

	-bryan


Michael Rupen wrote, On 6/29/12 12:48 PM:
> In the SDM, the Feed Table has separate rows for each Spectral Window.
> Thus one can track the feeds & receivers independently for each SpW, which
> is what we want. This would require a change in MCAF, which currently
> assumes all SpWs in the same configuration use the same receiver. That's
> not a big deal, except the Executor (or someone) has to tell MCAF which
> SpW use which receiver/feed; or we embed the knowledge that 0-100 MHz
> (say) is 4-band or whatever, in MCAF itself.
>
> Michael
>
>
>>
>> do they come through different receivers within the box?
>>
>> i'm concerned about being able to distinguish between them in the SDM.
>>
>> -bryan
>>
>>
>> Ken Sowinski wrote, On 6/27/12 9:30 AM:
>>> Currently parmainator distinguishes between 75 MHz and 300 MHz for
>>> band related paramters. The parameters of interest are subreflector
>>> rotation and focus and band-dependent delays. Also there are T_cals,
>>> which are now obsolete in the paramters DB, and tables of attenuator
>>> settings, also obsolete.
>>>
>>> I suggest that we have only one band code "VHF" to select the low
>>> frequency receivers. Receiver.java will transform any reference
>>> to "75MHz" or "300MHz" to "VHF". This allows us to keep only
>>> one set of parameters in the DB, rather than two identical sets;
>>> prevents possible mistakes when two sets are maintains; more
>>> accurately reflects the current hardware; and, eliminates the confusing
>>> necessity of having to know whether the script selected "75MHz" or
>>> "300MHz".
>>>
>>> The rational is that there is one receiver box containing all
>>> receivers. Its single output (dual polarization) is conneted
>>> to one T301 input. Regardless of which band is selected, the
>>> hardware configuration is the same and the same wideband signal
>>> is presented to the T304.
>>>
>>> Would doing this prevent anything that would be practical and useful
>>> with the current scheme?
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> evla-sw-discuss mailing list
>>> evla-sw-discuss at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
>>> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evla-sw-discuss
>> _______________________________________________
>> evla-sw-discuss mailing list
>> evla-sw-discuss at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
>> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evla-sw-discuss
>>