[evlatests] Oddities at L-band (pointing, Tcal, Tsys, Psum, etc.)

Rick Perley rperley at nrao.edu
Tue Aug 13 17:18:57 EDT 2013


    Interesting.  I've generated the (power) bandpasses for all 
antennas.  ea11 shows a decline in its bandpass by about 12 dB between 
1020 and 1200 MHz -- far less than indicated below.  But I used a tuning 
to set the bandpass edges at 1009 to 2033 MHz, which seems to help to 
get rid of the big low-frequency roll-off.  With this tuning, some 
antennas show almost no low-frequency roll-off at all -- less than -5 dB. 

Barry Clark wrote:
> Here's the soida output for receiver L38 installed in antenna
> 11.  This is for the R side, that is, IF A.
>
> Fsky,  1st LO,  2ndLO,  Time,  Gain,  Trcvr,  Tcal
>
>   1000 , 1000 ,   0 ,45915.4 , +13.0 ,  1879.1 ,  49.71
>   1025 , 1025 ,   0 ,45989.2 , +16.8 ,   747.1 ,  14.50
>   1050 , 1050 ,   0 ,46062.9 , +18.0 ,   653.6 ,  18.89
>   1075 , 1075 ,   0 ,46136.8 , +19.4 ,   412.3 ,  14.61
>   1100 , 1100 ,   0 ,46152.7 , +39.2 ,    71.7 ,   6.69
>   1125 , 1125 ,   0 ,46166.2 , +36.7 ,    49.7 ,   3.52
>   1150 , 1150 ,   0 ,46180.6 , +52.7 ,    30.3 ,   2.04
>   1175 , 1175 ,   0 ,46195.6 , +56.7 ,    22.0 ,   1.48
>
> I can't say I blame it for getting a little confused, with the
> gain dropping by 40 dB.
>
> On 08/13/2013 02:59 PM, Barry Clark wrote:
>   
>> There is no such thing as an A/C Psum.  There is an A Psum and
>> a C Psum.  I guess you are adding them together, which is OK
>> if they are both reasonable.  But they might not be.  In any event,
>> it looks like a cable/detector problem.  In which case, the
>> same antennas should show up the same way at all bands.
>>
>> Tcals may not care about a severe receiver rolloff, but the soida
>> rack certainly does.  It gets confused and sputters nonsense.
>>
>> On 08/13/2013 02:24 PM, Rick Perley wrote:
>>     
>>>       Answers to Barry's questions:
>>>
>>> Barry Clark wrote:
>>>       
>>>> On 08/13/2013 10:05 AM, Rick Perley wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>>        3) I used a central subband (#8 -- 1480 MHz, nice and stable) to
>>>>> look at the PSum values.  They should all be reasonably close to each
>>>>> other if 'set and remember' is working right.   I'm prepared to accept
>>>>> that 'reasonably close' means with 50% of some median value.  But this
>>>>> is not the case.  The median value for the subband appears to be about
>>>>> 10 counts.  In LCP, all antennas are within 50% of this.  But in RCP,
>>>>> there is a very different story:  ea02R, ea07R and ea13R are all at 1
>>>>> count, or less!  That's a factor of 10 too low!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> What do the Psums in the other subbands do?  If there is a lot
>>>> of interference in some subband, you could have big numbers there
>>>> that make the average Psum sensible.  If not, it could be that
>>>> the wire between the T304 detector and the sampler has a lot of
>>>> attenuation.  Do both polarizations do this?
>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>       They all behave in the manner described above.  A quantitative
>>> example for ea02 (almost exactly the same values are seen in ea07.  ea13
>>> is discrepant only in the A/C side -- B/D looks o.k.).
>>>
>>>            Subband#       AC PSum           BD PSum
>>>                1                      .41
>>> .25          (band edge attenuation)
>>>                2                      .65                        12
>>>                3                      1.1                         8.2
>>>                4                      .95                         8.2
>>>                5                      .82                         8.5
>>>                6                      .61                         7.6
>>>                7                      .58                         5.9
>>>                8                      .73                          7.1
>>>                9                      2.2                          20
>>> (RFI Zone of Death!)
>>>               10                      3                            23
>>>               11                      2.5                         15.7
>>>               12                      1.5                         10.3
>>>               13                      1.3                          9.5
>>>               14                      1.0                         8.0
>>>               15                      .83                         5.9
>>>               16                      .47                         3.7
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>       So, there is no evidence from these values, nor from the spectra,
>>> that there is any signal in the RCP side which would have caused the
>>> levels within the subbands to be as low as they are.
>>>
>>>       This problem seems only to be in the RCP side.  All LCP values are
>>> within 'norms' (+/- 50% of the median)
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>>>>         
>>>>>        5) In perusing the Tcal tables, some curiosities are found:
>>>>>
>>>>>        a) ea07 has a Tcal about 8K -- 5 times higher than any other
>>>>> antenna!  Is this right?
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> Right or not, that's what the Soida documents say.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>       Righto.  I do note that the visibilities from this antenna (both
>>> polarizations) are about as expected, and the Tsys values, although
>>> higher than normal , are in line with the observed amplitudes.  (In
>>> other words, the listed Soida documents are in keeping with the data.)
>>> This raises the question of why is this receiver so different  than the
>>> others ...?
>>>       
>>>>>        b) ea11, ea14 and ea17 all have incredibly high Tcal values listed
>>>>> for the first two subbands (values exceeding 55K for ea11!!!), but
>>>>> normal (1.5K) values for all other subbands.  Can this be real?  I
>>>>> didn't think the noise diodes could have output powers 30 times higher
>>>>> than the mean in the bottom 200 MHz of the band...
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> This is due to the (ahem) feature that the Tcal stowed in the SDM
>>>> is the interpolation to the subband reference frequency (lower
>>>> edge) combined with the fact that the bandpasses of these receivers
>>>> appear to go really whacky below about 1150 MHz.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>       The Tcal values shouldn't know or care what the bandpass looks
>>> like.  While it is true that these antennas do have a significant
>>> low-frequency rolloff in their spectra, there are others which decline
>>> similarly, but without the spectacular (and unphsysical) rise in Tcal in
>>> the lowest subbands.
>>>       I'll be keen to see how the improved interpolation scheme works.
>>>
>>>       
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> evlatests mailing list
>>>> evlatests at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
>>>> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evlatests
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> evlatests mailing list
>>> evlatests at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
>>> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evlatests
>>>       
>> _______________________________________________
>> evlatests mailing list
>> evlatests at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
>> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evlatests
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> evlatests mailing list
> evlatests at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/evlatests
>   



More information about the evlatests mailing list