Day 1: 12/06/22:
...
Day 1: 12/06/22:
- Transferred the DIMSUM code to my external hard drive. Any Mac Mini that was setup according to the Mac Mini Setup in this wiki will be able to use it. In the device open the terminal and run the command:
cd /Volumes/Ali Media/stubbs_code . After this, you can execute the desired script. The images will be saved in the directory stubbs_code which is in the external disk. Failed to mount the camera. The clamp was not strong enough to hold the camera on its own.
...
Took flat files with dome closed to see the background light. Here is the summary table for the night of 12/13/22:
Exposure ID Exposure Time (s) filter AT azimuth AT elevation flash (y/n) ND filter computer screen status count 435 60 none 270 20 n 1,50 all screens off 4 436 60 none 270 20 y 1,50 all screens off 4 437 60 none 215 20 n 1,50 all screens off 438 60 none 215 20 y 1,50 all screens off 439 60 none 315 20 n 1,50 all screens off 440 60 none 315 20 y 1,50 all screens off 441 60 none 270 50 n 1,50 all screens off 442 60 none 215 50 y 1,50 all screens off 443 60 none 270 50 n 1,50 all screens off 444 60 none 270 50 y 1,50 all screens off 445 60 none 315 50 n 1,50 all screens off 446 60 none 315 50 y 1,50 all screens off 447 60 none 215 50 n 1,50 all screens off 448 60 none 215 50 y 1,50 all screens off We were only able to check the count of the first two images, they were both approximately 4. The absolute difference was negligible, Tiago suggested dividing the flash pictures by non flash pictures.
Images From Different Times of Focusing from the night of 13/12/22:
- The different centeroids will be available in the final jupyter notebook.
- The fixed focus before the trials start:
That was the best I got at the limited time. It still gave decent sources. - Focus when I checked to see what went wrong around midnight:
At that point, it looked good which was shocking but it may have been slightly tilted. I readjusted the focus when I went up just in case. - The final state of the pegboard after readjustment:
I am aware I should have documented the final focus as well. I unfortunately did not. It had looked okay and I wanted to get out of the dome to not have any background light while the observations were running. - A possible camera issue: The camera names files from 0 9999. After it reaches 9999 it goes back to 0. If we get more than 10000 photos in a run, that may be a problem because the files with the same name will be in the same directory. I can try to write a python script to add some sort of an additional extension or time stamp to the names of the file.
Observation notes after and during analysis:
- With the excitement of last night, I had confused the meaning of the location of an object in terms of rows and columns to x and y.
- This means we have the camera shaking up and down, the row values are oscillating, but the columns are decreasing. Which means the image is moving left because the camera is rotating more right.
- Remark, these are unofficial notes while making the analysis. I am documenting the entire thought process as Chris Stubbs did in strobed analysis page.
Jupyter notebook for the night of observation:
| View file | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
12/14/22: Day 7:
- Plan for the day:
- Take the time stamps of all the files, reorganize the files in a way that we only use good files.
- Make it very clear in jupyter notebook what I did.
- Back all the data up into the cluster
- Run the analysis.
- If additional time, work to make DIMSUM sturdier.
- Writing the following the next day (12/15/22)
- Ran the analysis and the graphs are available in the jupyter notebook.
- Overall, the data does not seem to useful, as the sources get worse, the differential motion measured increased. I did several cuts to data with respect times of source quality. As the time passes (and source quality decreased) the differential image motion was simply more. I do not know if it can be trusted. I still have all the datas in the csvs.
- At the end of second run we have a lot of dark files, when I checked the hardware out today it seemed fine.
1,50 all screens off 448 60 none 215 50 y 1,50 all screens off We were only able to check the count of the first two images, they were both approximately 4. The absolute difference was negligible, Tiago suggested dividing the flash pictures by non flash pictures.
Images From Different Times of Focusing from the night of 13/12/22:
- The different centeroids will be available in the final jupyter notebook.
- The fixed focus before the trials start:
That was the best I got at the limited time. It still gave decent sources. - Focus when I checked to see what went wrong around midnight:
At that point, it looked good which was shocking but it may have been slightly tilted. I readjusted the focus when I went up just in case. - The final state of the pegboard after readjustment:
I am aware I should have documented the final focus as well. I unfortunately did not. It had looked okay and I wanted to get out of the dome to not have any background light while the observations were running. - A possible camera issue: The camera names files from 0 9999. After it reaches 9999 it goes back to 0. If we get more than 10000 photos in a run, that may be a problem because the files with the same name will be in the same directory. I can try to write a python script to add some sort of an additional extension or time stamp to the names of the file.
Observation notes after and during analysis:
- With the excitement of last night, I had confused the meaning of the location of an object in terms of rows and columns to x and y.
- This means we have the camera shaking up and down, the row values are oscillating, but the columns are decreasing. Which means the image is moving left because the camera is rotating more right.
- Remark, these are unofficial notes while making the analysis. I am documenting the entire thought process as Chris Stubbs did in strobed analysis page.
Jupyter notebook for the night of observation:
| View file | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
12/14/22: Day 7:
- Plan for the day:
- Take the time stamps of all the files, reorganize the files in a way that we only use good files.
- Make it very clear in jupyter notebook what I did.
- Back all the data up into the cluster
- Run the analysis.
- If additional time, work to make DIMSUM sturdier.
- Writing the following the next day (12/15/22)
- Ran the analysis and the graphs are available in the jupyter notebook.
- Overall, the data does not seem to useful, as the sources get worse, the differential motion measured increased. I did several cuts to data with respect times of source quality. As the time passes (and source quality decreased) the differential image motion was simply more. I do not know if it can be trusted. I still have all the datas in the csvs.
- At the end of second run we have a lot of dark files, when I checked the hardware out today it seemed fine.
- We attempted to make both the camera and the pegboard more sturdy.
- Mounted the camera directly on top of the L rail. It is harder to adjust but more sturdy. Such a mount made the camera higher than before and unable to tilt. To address that we moved the pegboard up. Today we will see whether the higher pegboard will be blocked by the telescope. Telescope was not able to rotate last night.
- We debugged the focusing and ghosting issue with continuous light sources. Even in the most focused case, the sources seem to have ghosting affects. The ghosting did not get fixed when we relieved pressure from the optical fiber, changed the location of the source in the pegboard, or how far we put through the fiber to the thing it's holding, or whether we are using sm1 holders or what Elana had used in her previous setup. Here are examples of ghosting we see:
- I ran some analysis with the more sturdy setup. It looks decent. I also did two more tests when the fan downstairs was open. Unfortunately in one of the tests the window was not open so the fan did not ork probably. I was also only allowed to work it up to 20Hz.
- Overall, the view from the camera, the camera itself, and the pegboard itself look like this:
From Stubbs:
Ok sounds like a partial success. I think the key think is to get a good dome-closed vs. dome-open comparison.
I don't understand the longer exposures. Is that with a single flash per image? If so then all the longer images would seem to do is add to the background and not the signal. Or are you running with constant light source?
I can certainly believe that dome rotation shakes things- During most image the dome is not rotating.
The focus change could well be due to temperature change of the lens. I can't remember if there is an f-stop ring on that lens or not... I think not. The depth of focus will increase if you make a smaller aperture in front of the lens. There is heavy duty Aluminum foil in the cardboard fan box at the base of the pier. You could try making a snout with a 1 inch off-axis hole and see if that (with reducing ND filter) helps with focus.
...