[evlatests] C-Band Sensitivity Issues
Charles Kutz
ckutz at nrao.edu
Tue Jul 15 17:27:14 EDT 2008
>It is probable that the existing Tcal values are incorrect, leading
>to incorrect Tsys.
If someone can dump the C-Band Tcal values out of the data base for me,
I will cheerfully investigate and resolve this issue.
Chuck
Rick Perley wrote:
> The data shown by Emmanuel yesterday morning indicated that many or
> most EVLA antennas are performing far short of requirements at C-band,
> and there is some evidence that the more recent antennas are less
> sensitivity that the older ones.
> I took some data yesterday afternoon at L, C and X bands to
> investigate this issue a bit. The primary goals were to see if the
> spread in sensitivity could be correlated with system temperature, and
> if any correlations could be seen in performance with band.
>
> A) X-Band. This band is useful as a diagnostic, as the receivers
> are unchanged between EVLA and VLA, and there is minimal electronics.
> The EVLA sensitivity requirement is for the antenna SEFD to be 300
> Jy (or, Tsys/effic. = 53K).
> The data from yesterday show that eleven antennas (9 EVLA, 2 VLA)
> antennas are performing near, or better than, this level. Recent EVLA
> antennas numbered 1, 2, and 4 are in this group. Eight antennas (5 VLA,
> 3 EVLA) are high by about 10% (not bad) -- recent EVLA antenna #1 is in
> this group. Five antennas are high by 20 to 30% (3 VLA, 2 EVLA).
> Two antennas are particularly poor:
> 17 is high by a factor of about two on all four IFs. The Tsys is
> claimed to be 130K, so this is the likely cause.
> 25 is high by a factor of nearly three. Tsys is claimed to be 25K
> -- so the receiver is likely o.k.
>
> Overall -- EVLA performance is better than VLA, and although the
> mean sensitivity is a bit worse than spec (320 Jy, cf. requirement of
> 300 Jy), there's no reason for alarm.
>
> B) C-Band. Here the EVLA requirement for SEFD is 245 Jy (this is a
> tough spec!), equivalent to Tsys/effic = 44K.
>
> As noted yesterday, *none* of the EVLA antennas meet this spec --
> not even close. The best four antennas are all 'old' EVLA antennas (13,
> 14, 16 and 18) -- their mean SEFD is 310 Jy. The average SEFD over
> all the EVLA antennas (excluding two which are clearly discrepant) is
> about 380 Jy. Pretty poor.
> The mean SEFD amongst VLA antennas is definitely worse than that of
> the EVLA -- about 440 Jy, with a remarkable spread, from about 350 Jy
> (for 27, 20, and 22) to 540 Jy (6, 8, 10, and 15). There is good
> evidence that most of the variation amongst the VLA antennas is due to
> system temperature, as there is a good correlation between the claimed
> Tsys and the SEFD values.
>
> I have searched for a similar correlation between SEFD and Tsys for
> EVLA antennas -- and although I believe there is one, it's crystal clear
> that the recorded values of Tsys are only approximately correct:
> a) The four best EVLA antennas all have believable Tsys values --
> about 30K.
> b) All other EVLA antennas have recorded Tsys values which are far
> too high -- typically 80 to 100 K. But these are not believable numbers
> -- (the SEFDs are not THAT bad), and there is little correlation between
> the Tsys values and the SEFDs.
>
> It is probable that the existing Tcal values are incorrect, leading
> to incorrect Tsys. It is difficult to diagnose problems in
> sensitivity without believable Tsys values, so I think it important that
> we get modern, correct values of the Tcals into the EVLA parameters
> database.
>
> Three antennas are particularly poor, and could use quick attention:
>
> 12: SEFD = 700, with a (believable) Tsys = 75. (
> 19: SEFD = 900 (four times too high!), with a claimed Tsys of 190
> -- this could be close to correct.
> 24: SEFD = 600, with a claimed Tsys of 50 (better than most!).
>
> _______________________________________________
> evlatests mailing list
> evlatests at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evlatests
More information about the evlatests
mailing list