Miami-2016-01 experiment with new MOBYrefresh blue Resonon - BS01 cfg004

Data collected in Miami after Hawaii-2016-02 data collection in Hawaii. The Resonon tubing was loose once it arrived in Miami but there was no damage.

Problems seen (and solved):

  1. Wavlength moved after shipping: See Page Num 1.04, the movement was different for different tracks the maxs's where -5 nm to +2.5 nm
  2. The tracks moved after shipping: See Page Num 1.05, All the tracks shifted in one direction by 2-3 pixels.

Good stuff seen

 

All the raw data files and their images , Table of KEYWORDS variable
Page Number
Link
Description
Date
1.01
Day 01 - 19 Apr Raw Data , Table
Hg(A) Lamp and sunlight: All tracks
Apr 19, 2016
       
 
Day 01 - Hg(A) Lamp and sunlight: All tracks
1.01 Solar data A look at the Solar data (cross and long track) May 5, 2016
1.02 Comp solar w/ shipping Comparing the location of the Fraunhofer lines before and after shipment to Hawaii May 5, 2016
1.03 rough wavecal Wavecal with the Hg(A) lamps May 5, 2016
1.04 wavecal comp Comparing the wavecal with the Hg(A) lamps from Hawaii and Miami May 6, 2016
1.05 Track movement Looking at track movement with the Solar data May 6, 2016
       
 
DATA PLOTS that cover many days
100.01      
       

 

DAY 01 EMAIL from Art
Hi Steph,
I know you are dealing with the MOS data today but Ken and  I were trying out some basic data acquisition with the BS and  I wanted to send you some files for whenever you have a chance.
Good news is that there is a slick one line function in the  andor sdk to save a scan as a fits file. It writes all the   keywords Mike has been using (it must be the same underlying  function that is in SOLIS).
We captured a few images if you want to try them. Use sftp  into optilab and then in the directory  /home/moby3/tmp/testfits160419
There are these files:  
image101.fits: Hg(A) lamp, 0.1 sec integration time  
image102.fits: Hg(A) lamp, 1.0 sec integration time  
image103.fits: sunlight, 0.1 sec integration time  
image104.fits: sunlight, 0.5 sec integration time  
image105.fits: dark, 0.1 sec integration time  
image106.fits: dark, 0.5 sec integration time  
A few notes on these files:  
1. I saved as 32 bit integers by accident. But there is a 16 bit  option I should have used/will use for next time.  
2. the "dark" files above were actually taken with the  shutter open but with a cover over the fiber ends, so  not really a dark from the camera perspective.  
The bad news is that because the function is so canned, I  haven't found a way to insert our own comments (things you  were mentioning like which fiber shutters were open).  There may or may not be a way to do that (e.g. by  adding keywords) but I haven't found an easy way yet.
Also, it seems this canned routine is one image per file,  so each scan would have a corresponding fits file, which  will have some plusses and minuses relative to a format with  say dark, light, dark all in one file.
For the same reason, it's not as easy to write a fits file  for data we've processed on board.  I think if I do the  binning on camera it should probably write the fits just  fine (we can test that assumption). But if I read a whole  image then average myself I doubt it will write those  averages to a file with this nice simple function.
There is a fits library I can download to be able to  add some of this functionality, but worth some discussion  at this point if we want to stick with fits or not before  I start down that road.

Art

Stephanie's notes:

I renamed the files to match Mikes filenaming convention so my automated programs would work.

There are these files new names:  
image101.fits: s2016041901.fits
image102.fits: s2016041902.fits
image103.fits: s2016041903.fits
image104.fits: s2016041904.fits  
image105.fits: b2016041901.fits 
imagexxx.fits: b2016041902.fits  - no 1 sec dark file exists
image105.fits: b2016041903.fits  
image106.fits: b2016041904.fits 

Additional DAY 01 EMAILs

Something is way wrong, either the set up in Miami had no UV flux (different tile, glass in the optical train, …) or the BS has changed. This is a significant change in the relative spectral distribution.
carol
HI Carol,
I wouldn’t worry about it….like I said, this was a quick check…I looked through the window of my lab (probably double paned)…..it was just to get a quick check of the fraunhofer lines.

I am afraid to work the system outside, until I figure out why the spec leaks air….

ken

By the way….Art reminded me that for some of our measurements, because I wanted to keep the signal low and integration time reasonable, we made them with the plastic protective caps on the end of the fiber tips……

Ken