[daip] Re: CLIPM and zero-UV points

[Leonia Kogan]

Shami,

Now I see that there is a difference in TIME RANGE limits.

I do not know if this difference (0.2s) is two small for correct 
application of the FG table.

PFLAGS shows polarization combinations (RR,LL,RL,LR) which should be flagged 
if the relevant value is equal 1. So at least for RR the FG table has to flag.

Now, you show me the zero points:

  Vis #     IAT      Ant   U(klam)  V(klam)   Amp Phas Wt   Amp Phas Wt
      3  0/13:30:00  5- 7   -6006.   -2203.  0.263 180  7  0.000   0  7
      9  0/13:30:00  7- 9    6895.    2800.  0.000   0 10  0.259 -90 10
     15  0/13:30:00  2- 4    2219.    -893.  0.000   0 10  0.278 180 10
     16  0/13:30:00  1- 2      67.    7970.  0.000   0 10  0.245 180 10
     21  0/13:30:00  3- 7    7307.     217.  0.000   0 10  0.322 180 10

I see the baseline 3-7 should be flagged following the flag table lines 
you sent me in the last message:
     ROW      ANTS      TIME RANGE      CHANS      PFLAGS      REASON
  NUMBER                D/HMS
       1        2       13:29:59.9        16        1011       CLIPM
       1        5       13:30:00.1        16
       2        3       13:29:59.9         1        1011       CLIPM
       2        7       13:30:00.1         1
       3        3       13:29:59.9         6        1011       CLIPM
       3        7       13:30:00.1         6
       4        3       13:29:59.9        13        1011       CLIPM
       4        7       13:30:00.1        13
       5        1       13:29:59.9        15        1011       CLIPM
       5        7       13:30:00.1        15
       6        1       13:29:59.9        11        1011       CLIPM
<etc>
But it should be only for channel 1, 6, and 13.

I do not understand your UVFND output. What channel does it correspond?
Are you sure the output corresponds to the channels 1 6 13?
You can  use UVPRT also to check the flagging for the relevant
channels shown in the FG table.


Leonia





----- Begin Included Message -----

>From shami at spacenet.tn.cornell.edu Thu Mar 30 11:02 MST 2000
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 13:00:03 -0500 (EST)
From: Shami Chatterjee <shami at spacenet.tn.cornell.edu>
X-Sender: shami at monk
Reply-To: Shami Chatterjee <shami at spacenet.tn.cornell.edu>
To: "[Leonia Kogan]" <lkogan at zia.aoc.NRAO.EDU>
cc: Craig Walker <cwalker at zia.aoc.NRAO.EDU>, daip at cv3.cv.nrao.edu
Subject: Re: CLIPM and zero-UV points
In-Reply-To: <200003301716.KAA06207 at bonito.aoc.nrao.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Lines: 34
Status: RO

> May I ask you to use PRTAB with DOMHS=2? It will print TIMERANG in h:m:s.

PRTAB inext 'fg'; dohms 2

     ROW      ANTS      TIME RANGE      CHANS      PFLAGS      REASON
  NUMBER                D/HMS
       1        2       13:29:59.9        16        1011       CLIPM
       1        5       13:30:00.1        16
       2        3       13:29:59.9         1        1011       CLIPM
       2        7       13:30:00.1         1
       3        3       13:29:59.9         6        1011       CLIPM
       3        7       13:30:00.1         6
       4        3       13:29:59.9        13        1011       CLIPM
       4        7       13:30:00.1        13
       5        1       13:29:59.9        15        1011       CLIPM
       5        7       13:30:00.1        15
       6        1       13:29:59.9        11        1011       CLIPM
<etc>

I'm personally more concerned about the PFLAGS: there seems no way to
specify that in CLIPM, so I suspected that 1011 was maybe not a correct
value.  
However, switching it to 1111 with TABED still produced the same results. 
(ie UVCOP still retains zero points.)

Craig, I do not have the original distribution tapes for this - however,
I'll ask Ed Fomalont if he has them, or remembers anything unusual about
the data set. I've not seen this behavior with data sets from BC078
onwards (my data, March 98) so I expect that it is something to do with
Ed's writing out of data. I'll check, though.

Thanks for all the help with this problem!
Shami



----- End Included Message -----