Image Stability

26

description

Image Stability. ACS SMOV image stability test (prop 9017) went from a cold soak (anti-solar pointing) for 8 orbits to a hot attitude (including off-nominal roll) Nominal jitter (typically about 3 mas RMS and 10 mas peak-to-peak) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Image Stability

Page 1: Image Stability
Page 2: Image Stability

Image StabilityImage StabilityImage StabilityImage Stability

ACS SMOV image stability test (prop 9017) went from a cold soak (anti-solar pointing) for 8 orbits to a hot attitude (including off-nominal roll)– Nominal jitter (typically about 3 mas RMS

and 10 mas peak-to-peak) – Smooth drift at rates up to about 6 mas/hr in

both the HRC and WFC (same direction). – Drift may be due to FGS's or to rigid body

movement of the ACS wrt the OTA– Similar to image drift rates for other SIs.

Page 3: Image Stability

Calibration – Flat FieldsCalibration – Flat FieldsCalibration – Flat FieldsCalibration – Flat Fields

L-flat for the F555W filter, the plot is a 4th order least-squares fit to the stellar photometry. – ~10% gradient from upper left to lower

right– (Mack, van der Marel, Bohlin, Blakeslee,

Cox)

Page 4: Image Stability

Flat field – Sanity ChecksFlat field – Sanity ChecksFlat field – Sanity ChecksFlat field – Sanity Checks

Ratio of the F555W photometry in the CRJ to the DRZ image, corrected for distortion. – White is 1.10 and black is 0.93.

Pixel Map from Geometricdistortion – ratio produces 1% residual

Page 5: Image Stability

SensitivitySensitivitySensitivitySensitivity

0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2

F220W

F250WF330W

F344N

F435WF475W

F502N

F550M

F555WF606W

F625W

F658NF660N

F775W

F814WF850LP

F892N

• Inflight sensitivity vs prediction from components

0.85 0.95 1.05 1.15 1.25

F435W

F475W

F502N

F550M

F555W

F606W

F625W

F658N

F660N

F775W

F814W

F850LP

F892N

HRC WFC

Page 6: Image Stability

WFC Distortion CalibrationWFC Distortion CalibrationWFC Distortion CalibrationWFC Distortion Calibration

• 4th order 2D polynomial fit matches observed distortion well - RMS residual 1.1 mas (.02 px) - peak deviation ~ .2 px

Page 7: Image Stability

WFC CCD Amplifier Cross-talkWFC CCD Amplifier Cross-talkWFC CCD Amplifier Cross-talkWFC CCD Amplifier Cross-talk

• Low-level “ghosts” of extended objects mirrored in alternate quadrants• Slight “droop” (fractional e-) in bias level of all 3 alternate amps• Ghosts do not appear to be proportional to target signal

Hard (2 e-) stretch ofWFC UGC10214 image

Page 8: Image Stability

WFC: Long wave haloWFC: Long wave haloWFC: Long wave haloWFC: Long wave halo

B acks id e i llu m in ate d,th in n ed C C D (~1 5 m )

S od a g lass h ead er200 0 m

He ad er m eta liz atio n

CC D Pac kage Cro ss -se ction

Al metal layer reflects long- photons

F814w F850LP

Page 9: Image Stability

WFC: Long wave haloWFC: Long wave haloWFC: Long wave haloWFC: Long wave halo

F775W F850LP FR1016N - 996

FILTER ETC Measured 80%5x5 px 5x5 px Ensq (px)

F775W (I) 0.8 0.79 5.2F850LP (z) 0.76 0.68 7.1FR1016N-996 0.73 0.49 15

IR Encircled Energy Performance

Page 10: Image Stability

Optical “Ghosts”Optical “Ghosts”Optical “Ghosts”Optical “Ghosts”

Two ghost features have been identified with >0.1% of target energy:

WFC CCD to window reflection produces pairs of elliptical ghosts with ~ 0.2% integrated energy

F660N [NII] filter produces halos with ~2% of integrated energy due to reflection between its surfaces

Page 11: Image Stability

Cats-Eye Nebula

NGC 6543 (HRC)

[OII] 3727 [OIII] 5007 H

Ramp filter

Page 12: Image Stability

Coronagraph performanceCoronagraph performanceCoronagraph performanceCoronagraph performance

• Target acquisition functions• executed proposal second time with dithering to determine optimum location under each occulting spot

Page 13: Image Stability

Coronagraph Dither Coronagraph Dither ResultsResults

Coronagraph Dither Coronagraph Dither ResultsResults

Page 14: Image Stability

Coronagraph PerformanceCoronagraph PerformanceCoronagraph PerformanceCoronagraph Performance

Page 15: Image Stability

SBC – First Light ImageSBC – First Light ImageSBC – First Light ImageSBC – First Light Image

Globular star cluster NGC6681. This cluster, with [Fe/H] = -1.5, is rich in Blue Horizontal Branch stars.The image combines first light data taken with three filters F125LP, F150LP, and F165LP.

Page 16: Image Stability

Solar Blind ChannelSolar Blind ChannelSolar Blind ChannelSolar Blind Channel

Page 17: Image Stability

CALACSCALACSCALACSCALACS

• First generation updates to CALACS & PyDrizzle are complete, software is frozen for distribution in next STSDAS

•Includes ST-ECF AXE software for grism/prism

Mosaic generated from 18 images of 47 Tuc

Page 18: Image Stability

HDF-N: i+ z & grism HDF-N: i+ z & grism HDF-N: i+ z & grism HDF-N: i+ z & grism

WFC - 2x i- 3x z orbits - “HDF overlay”

Grism: 3 orbits

Page 19: Image Stability

HDF-N ACS Grism HDF-N ACS Grism examplesexamples

HDF-N ACS Grism HDF-N ACS Grism examplesexamples

Emission-line galaxy with continuum and knots - [OIII] 5007 and H 6563

Redshift z = 0.319 F814AB = 22.5

(WFC 2x i + 3x z orbits, 3 grism orbits)

Page 20: Image Stability

HDF-N SN2002dc HDF-N SN2002dc HDF-N SN2002dc HDF-N SN2002dc

WFC 2x i + 3x z orbits, 3 grism orbits

Galaxy & SN z=0.475

• Identified from difference imaging with WFPC2 HDFN

Page 21: Image Stability

HDF-N SN2002dcHDF-N SN2002dcHDF-N SN2002dcHDF-N SN2002dc

• Galaxy and SN at z=0.48

• SN mag. is 22.7 (i)

• Type I (probably Ia)

Galaxy & SN z=0.475

Page 22: Image Stability

SN2002dd SN2002dd SN2002dd SN2002dd

Galaxyz=0.79

• Identified from extracted spectra !

SnIaz=1.06

Page 23: Image Stability

HDF-N SN2002ddHDF-N SN2002ddHDF-N SN2002ddHDF-N SN2002dd

• Follow-up with DD proposal

Page 24: Image Stability

Cool Image – A1689Cool Image – A1689Cool Image – A1689Cool Image – A1689

CourtesyACS Science Team

Page 25: Image Stability
Page 26: Image Stability

Image StabilityImage StabilityImage StabilityImage Stability