A new geometric distortion solution for the STIS NUV MAMA
description
Transcript of A new geometric distortion solution for the STIS NUV MAMA
A new geometric distortion solution for the STIS NUV
MAMA
Jesús Maíz-ApellánizLeonardo Úbeda
TIPS
17 July 2003
Why?
• Original motivation: NUV-MAMA objective-prism utility
• Current implementation based on Walsh et al. 2001 gives large errors
• New approach: use well-known PC geometric distortion to obtain solution for NUV MAMA
Data• Central region of NGC 4214• WFPC2
– GO 6716, P.I.: Stecher F170W F336W angle 1: u4190101r, 02r u4190103r , 04r angle 2: u4190201m, 02m u4190203m , 04m
• NUV MAMA – GO 9096, P.I.: Maíz-Apellániz CN182 CN270 angle 1: o6bz02isq, iwq o6bz02j7q , jbq angle 2: o6bz01afq,(akq) (o6bz01b1q),(b3q)
Positions of the PC fields
Positions of the NUV-
MAMA fieldsPC
angle 2
PCangle 1
MAMAangle 1
MAMAangle 2
N
E
F336W PC mosaic
Technique• Find stars and measure positions (and
photometry) with HSTphot in PC data• Measure rotation and displacement between
PC fields and merge lists• Measure rotation and displacement between
PC and MAMA fields• Find stars in MAMA fields using merged PC
list and centroid positions• Calculate and test geometric distortion
Geometric distortion model
• Direct (pixel sky )
– xc = i=0,k j=0,i ai,j·(x-xr)j·(y-yr)i-j
– yc = i=0,k j=0,i bi,j·(x-xr)j·(y-yr)i-j
• Inverse (sky pixel)
– x = xr + i=0,k j=0,i ci,j·xcj·yc
i-j
– y = yr + i=0,k j=0,i di,j·xcj·yc
i-j
• xr = yr = 512
• k = 3,4,5
Testing• Consistency check of the PC solution• F336W vs. F170W PC data• Polynomial degree• Weighting schemes
– Distance between 2 PC positions– Magnitude cut
• Single-field vs. multi-field solutions• CN182 vs. CN270 differences• Comparison with Walsh et al. 2001 (ISR)• External testing
Consistency check of the PC solution
F336W vs. F170
W data
o: F170W + F336Wo: F336W
N
E
Polynomial degree
Testing• Consistency check of the PC solution• F336W vs. F170W PC data• Polynomial degree• Weighting schemes
– Distance between 2 PC positions– Magnitude cut
• Single-field vs. multi-field solutions• CN182 vs. CN270 differences• Comparison with Walsh et al. 2001 (ISR)• External testing
CN182 vs. CN270 differences
Detector coverage
Comparison with Walsh et al. 2001
Walsh et al. 2001
Comparison with Walsh et
al. 2001
uncorrected
Comparison with Walsh et
al. 2001
originalcorrection
Comparison with Walsh et
al. 2001
corrected
Comparison with Walsh et al. 2001
uncorrected original correction corrected
Plate scalesResult x scale
(mas/pixel)y scale (mas/pixel)
CN182 24.53 ± 0.04 24.79 ± 0.04
CN270 24.54 ± 0.01 24.83 ± 0.05
Walsh et al. 2001
24.53 ± 0.12 24.83 ± 0.13
External
testing
Added bonus:
testing PC photometry
Summary• New geometric distortion solution for NUV
MAMA• Provides positions with median uncertainties
of 0.4 MAMA pixels (10 mas)• No wavelength dependence detected in plate
scale or distortion but testing not quite complete
• PC astrometry and photometry in the UV is quite precise after all corrections are applied