Forum der Vereinigung der Sternfreunde

Don't worry, Bernard, this weekend I will leave the mountain being back under my beloved 4" sky.

Hi Thomas and Knud

Thanks for the LIVE tour yesterday. Very interesting and much appreciated.

Keep up the good work.

_________________
Lars Zielke

After 2 weeks out of operation the guiding unit FOVIA is working again. We now try to get some experience so that we bring this knowledge to team 3 which arrives tommorrow.

That is good news.
I am interested to know how difficult manual guiding is with the ?large? professional scope ... how frequently do you need to make adjustments, i.e. how good is the tracking? With such good seeing (<1?) and presumably a very well aligned and precision mount I would expect that unassisted tracking would be very good.

Cheers,
Bernard


From: Thomas Eversberg (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 8:08 AM
To: fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)
Subject: [fg-spek] Re: Teide 2013 WR campaign




After 2 weeks out of operation the guiding unit FOVIA is working again. We now try to get some experience so that we bring this knowledge to team 3 which arrives tommorrow.





No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3345 / Virus Database: 3199/6400 - Release Date: 06/10/13

_________________
Quicquid Nitet Notandum

Hi Noel and all!

Yesterday we got about 3500 counts in the order peaks of WR 134. Today with FOVIA guider we have almost 7500!

Bernard! Guiding by hand is not a matter of telescope size but of fiber aperture and seeing. Our 1 arcsec 50 micron aperture on the computer screen is fairly small and we zoom in by 50% (maximum possible). The star remains in a circle of say 2 arcsec within about 10 seconds. So you need to correct every 5 to 15 seconds (seeing dependend). But now we have FOVIA back in business.

BTW: Last 10min seeing is 0.37 median with a minimum at 0.23. Hardly to believe...

Cheers, Thomas

Hi Thomas,

Thanks for the info on manual guiding. While tracking is not directly a function of scope size I do believe that as large scopes (around 1m and larger) are usually professional equipment costing mega$$$ the quality of the mount, installation and location should be commensurately better than amateur equipment (poor seeing, PE and alignment error). The manual guiding results you were achieving are somewhat, but not greatly, better than I can achieve ... long live autoguiding!

Cheers, Bernard


From: Thomas Eversberg (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 10:39 AM
To: fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)
Subject: [fg-spek] Re: Teide 2013 WR campaign




Hi Noel and all!

Yesterday we got about 3500 counts in the order peaks of WR 134. Today with FOVIA guider we have almost 7500!

Bernard! Guiding by hand is not a matter of telescope size but of fiber aperture and seeing. Our 1 arcsec 50 micron aperture on the computer screen is fairly small and we zoom in by 50% (maximum possible). The star remains in a circle of say 2 arcsec within about 10 seconds. So you need to correct every 5 to 15 seconds (seeing dependend). But now we have FOVIA back in business.

BTW: Last 10min seeing is 0.37 median with a minimum at 0.23. Hardly to believe...

Cheers, Thomas





No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3345 / Virus Database: 3199/6402 - Release Date: 06/11/13

_________________
Quicquid Nitet Notandum

Looking through some images of June 10 and 11 I found 10 bad images from 70 I looked at (very slow download rate today), quite a bit more than 3%. So the problem remains and has to be solved. Some ideas will be tried out. Unfortunately some images look very bad (see below). Although they could be restored I would not trust the resulting spectrum. They certainly upset my reduction pipeline.

Regards, Martin

Am 12.06.2013 23:19, schrieb Martin Dubs:

Hello,

all that observations are not new. In our (team 1) 2 weeks we reported
* the rate of read out failures varies between 3% and 50%
* sometimes the new start of the NCPro software and the CCD interface helps
* no work with the PC during reading out images helps
* disabling of other programs work during read out helps
* sometimes the control and moving the connection of the USB cable between the PC and the interface helps.

The discussion is turning around and around itself....and the observations are going ahead.

The most simple things to do are:
* changing the 2 m long USB cable between the PC and the interface.
* posting of the installation CD of the original NCPro software to Teide by Berthold (in case of need that)
* new start of CCD all 2 or 3 hours (if there is a pause)

and enjoy the very beautiful spectra (95% of rad outs).

Cheers
lothar

_________________
Herzliche Grüße / best regards

Lothar

https://lotharschanne.wordpress.com/

Hi all! Team 3 has arrived and already got a first introduction.

Cheers, Thomas

Hi all! Good news. Team 3 already manages the entire data acquisition job without additional help from team 2 - after about two training hours. This is very appeasing for the next team changes. Gerrit Grutzeck (team 3) is also a member of team 4, hence, the next save change is already granted.

Cheers, Thomas

Hello all,

I am back to our campaign so lately, because of my mum's serious heart disease and I must take care of her, now she has been becoming better so I have some time to try my 1st spectrum of WR134 with my Lhires3.

1200L grating, C11, SONY285CCD [as the same as Atik314L+]

But here Tianjin, such a big city, esp. in summer, it is always either rainy or cloudy. Last night it was very very cloudy and only 1-mag. star can be seen by naked eye. My try of WR134 is very very bad, there only is a very very faint emission part [green arrow] about at 5411A, because the exposure time is too short.

All these is not my main aim. I find that even in the spectra of Cygny and Vega, there is always a strange bright emission line across the whole field of view! I don't know what the correct reason is?? If it is caused by the particle of dust between the lips of slit? If the answer is yes, how to remove the particle? I have used a balloon to blow the slit, is it OK? If the strange emission line is not caused by dust, what is the most possible reason? Defects of grating? I individually have doubted if it is caused by mercury light pollution? As there are a few mercury lights near my observatory. But my guess is wrong, because when Vega is at the zenith and after putting the hood onto C11, the boring emission line still appear in the spectrum of Vega! It disappears ONLY by adjusting the Hi or Low threshold bar to certain level. I do not focus accurately for Vega, as I have ever experimented with good focus but the boring emission line does exists~

I worry if this will seriously affect the quality of spectrum & make the spectrum lose its scientific value?

Need your help~

Dong

here is the profile of Cyg by Quick look function in ISIS

Hi Martin! I checked this image again in detail. Attached is a part of it. As you have indicated with red lines, such images are somewhat "split" and "shifted" exactly along certain pixel lines. The latter is important because Noel will easily be able to cut them (in the present case in three) pieces rearranging them. He said twice that this is no problem. For that I consider this very problem as "solved" because the spectral information remains.

The strange images with almost no or very noisy information are different. We had such an image this night and team 3 will kick them out as did team 2. The latter occurs mybe twice a night. They remain unsolved - but only them. That are about 3-5 a night. Every night we take about 60 spectra. So, we have a failure rate of 5 - 8 percent maximum. Translated into about campaign 120 nights we loose 6 - 10 nights. I consider that as excaptable with respect to the fact that we only have guesses about the reason. Chanhing the instrumental setup might open the box of the pandora.

Cheers, Thomas

Hi Dong,

The nearly vertical line is almost certainly the 5460A Hg emission from street lighting. The mercury street lights do not have to be near your observatory as the collective light from across the city will cause this problem. While it is always better not to have city light pollution it is not really a big problem as this sky emission will be removed when the sky background is removed during processing.

Cheers, Bernard


From: Dong Li (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 1:34 PM
To: fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)
Subject: [fg-spek] Re: Teide 2013 WR campaign




Hello all,

I am back to our campaign so lately, because of my mum's serious heart disease and I must take care of her, now she has been becoming better so I have some time to try my 1st spectrum of WR134 with my Lhires3.

1200L grating, C11, SONY285CCD [as the same as Atik314L+]

But here Tianjin, such a big city, esp. in summer, it is always either rainy or cloudy. Last night it was very very cloudy and only 1-mag. star can be seen by naked eye. My try of WR134 is very very bad, there only is a very very faint emission part [green arrow] about at 5411A, because the exposure time is too short.

All these is not my main aim. I find that even in the spectra of Cygny and Vega, there is always a strange bright emission line across the whole field of view! I don't know what the correct reason is?? If it is caused by the particle of dust between the lips of slit? If the answer is yes, how to remove the particle? I have used a balloon to blow the slit, is it OK? If the strange emission line is not caused by dust, what is the most possible reason? Defects of grating? I individually have doubted if it is caused by mercury light pollution? As there are a few mercury lights near my observatory. But my guess is wrong, because when Vega is at the zenith and after putting the hood onto C11, the boring emission line still appear in the spectrum of Vega! It disappears ONLY by adjusting the Hi or Low threshold bar to certain level. I do not focus accurately for Vega, as I have ever experimented with good focus but the boring emission line does exists~

I worry if this will seriously affect the quality of spectrum & make the spectrum lose its scientific value?

Need your help~

Dong










No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3345 / Virus Database: 3199/6406 - Release Date: 06/12/13

_________________
Quicquid Nitet Notandum

Thank you very much! Dear Bernard~

I am going to do a whole complete procedure of WR134, including bias,flat, black etc., when the weather becomes good enough to take spectrum.

cheers,
Dong

Hi,
I'm curious about how Noel could use this kind of image who has no dark, no flat, no offset, no thar available. Extracting a raw profile is still possible but how to be sure of the reliability of the data. If only one image from three of a same 1800s series how to add it with the others non readout error images.
Noel ?

Cheers
Thierry

_________________
Thierry Garrel
Observatoire de Fontcaude, Montpellier, France
SpectroBlog http://gabalou.canalblog.com/

The readout problem appears to be merely displacement of the image, as if the image is cut into four parts, and each is exchanged with the one diagonal to it.My personal worry would be to confirm if they actually match the same "data", and that any part of the image is not from the previous exposure. This can be ruled out easily by taking a bias just before a flat, making sure that the readout problem is present in the second one (the flat). All data in the problematic image should be from that second image.
Such image could come from a mis-synchronized start of reading the image on-camera, or writing the image on the computer side, as long as the reading / writing begins again upon reaching the end of the buffer being read / written.
If it is the case of this mis-synchronization, it is not a destructive operation, so data should still be reliable.





On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 10:58 AM, thierry Garrel <fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)> wrote:

--
Fil.

_________________
Fil.

Hi all! Last night team 3 finally took over at Teide and team 2 checks out.

Cheers, Knud & Thomas

Hi Bernard:

You are right the boring emission line is caused by a few hg lamps in a building site near my observatory. Last night [sky condition was OK, occasionally wind] I tried 1st time for WR134, I will upload my result later. And I also aimed at one of Hg lamps to take its spectrum. the emission line's X position is the same to that in Cyg; Vega and WR134.

Now a few photos to let you know what the surroundings is near my observatory.

cheers, Dong

Hi Dong,

I am not surprised that you can confirm the mercury light pollution, but your imaging conditions are worse than mine, in Melbourne ... which is not very surprising as it is an industrial city about three times larger!
Congratulation on trying and achieving to do scientific quality spectroscopy and for your first WR134 results.

Cheers, Bernard


From: Dong Li (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 11:49 PM
To: fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)
Subject: [fg-spek] Re: Teide 2013 WR campaign




Hi Bernard:

You are right the boring emission line is caused by a few hg lamps in a building site near my observatory. Last night [sky condition was OK, occasionally wind] I tried 1st time for WR134, I will upload my result later. And I also aimed at one of Hg lamps to take its spectrum. the emission line's X position is the same to that in Cyg; Vega and WR134.

Now a few photos to let you know what the surroundings is near my observatory.

cheers, Dong






No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3345 / Virus Database: 3199/6409 - Release Date: 06/13/13

_________________
Quicquid Nitet Notandum

Hi Bernard,

Here is my 1st experimental result. Something are not clear to me, so I'd like to ask your help. I use "File Mode".

1> whatever I use 2 order(5 Ne lines) or 3 order(4 Ne lines) in the G1200.LST, the final spectrum is always left-low & right-high. Why?
The same situation exists with/without instrument response in the General Tab. The procedure to make instrument response is:
Tab Profile → database → MILES → select HD003369 display → click Save button as REF

2> Tab Normalize. when I click "compute"button, nothing happens.

3> when use 2 order, RMS=0.735; 3 order RMS=0.000. In the ISIS tutorial, for 1200L, RMS≥0.1A, it means the result is not good enough. Mr. Leadbeater has used 2 degre + 5 Ne lines, so do I, but both sides of contuum are the same high in his spectrum of WR134. WHY?

Regards,
Dong

Hi Dong,

a) Making the wavelength calibration will not affect the continuum profile. You must perform the instrumental response and also the atmospheric correction to do that.

b) Your method of making the IR is not correct or complete. When you have saved a copy of the Miles reference profile you must then divide your raw reference star spectra by the Miles spectra for that star type, remove any large lines, smooth and then save as your IR. You then use the saved IR to correct your WR profile. Clicking the Normalise button will not produce a response curve, it will only recalibrate the spectra to have a value of 1.0 at the selected reference window (in Settings).

c) If you have, for example, only three good reference lines then you use ?order 2? to calculate the wavelength coefficients; if you have four good lines then use ?order 3?. If you have five or more lines you can use ?order 4? but only if you get a lower rms than order 3. An rms of 0.735A for a high resolution spectra is not good and I would suspect an error in the reference line wavelength values. I see from your image that the 5400A neon line is saturated, which will have some effect on the calibration.

The full processing can be done with ISIS, so it is not necessary to use Vspec.

Have you sent your raw data to the umontreal server (Noel)? If you do that then we can all download, check and process it.

Cheers, Bernard




From: Dong Li (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)
Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 2:46 AM
To: fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)
Subject: [fg-spek] Re: Teide 2013 WR campaign




Hi Bernard,

Here is my 1st experimental result. Something are not clear to me, so I'd like to ask your help. I use "File Mode".

1> whatever I use 2 order(5 Ne lines) or 3 order(4 Ne lines) in the G1200.LST, the final spectrum is always left-low & right-high. Why?
The same situation exists with/without instrument response in the General Tab. The procedure to make instrument response is:
Tab Profile ? database ? MILES ? select HD003369 display ? click Save button as REF

2> Tab Normalize. when I click "compute"button, nothing happens.

3> when use 2 order, RMS=0.735; 3 order RMS=0.000. In the ISIS tutorial, for 1200L, RMS?0.1A, it means the result is not good enough. Mr. Leadbeater has used 2 degre + 5 Ne lines, so do I, but both sides of contuum are the same high in his spectrum of WR134. WHY?

Regards,
Dong






No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3345 / Virus Database: 3199/6409 - Release Date: 06/13/13

_________________
Quicquid Nitet Notandum

Great spectra Dong! They look wonderful, glad things have improved and you are on board for the campaign.

Teide observers (and others): The Montreal server is down, probably until Tuesday. Please wait to upload data until then. I won't be able to get it back up until then.

Cheers,

Noel

Hi Bernard:
Thank you very much for your help! I have still something that I can not understand.

b) Your method of making the IR is not correct or complete. When you have saved a copy of the Miles reference profile you must then divide your raw reference star spectra What is the raw reference star spectrum? Vega? Regulus? or others? by the Miles spectra for that star type, remove any large lines, smooth and then save as your IR. You then use the saved IR to correct your WR profile. Clicking the Normalise button will not produce a response curve, it will only recalibrate the spectra to have a value of 1.0 at the selected reference window (in Settings).

c) If you have, for example, only three good reference lines then you use ?order 2? to calculate the wavelength coefficients; if you have four good lines then use ?order 3?. If you have five or more lines you can use ?order 4? but only if you get a lower rms than order 3. An rms of 0.735A for a high resolution spectra is not good and I would suspect an error in the reference line wavelength values. I see from your image that the 5400A neon line is saturated, which will have some effect on the calibration. the attached image is a reference information made by Mr. Leadbeater who uses Vspec, I use ISIS.

I have not uploaded my raw data to umontreal, because I feel that my data is not good & standard enough. But I'll do that , then you can download and help me.

Could you please write every step for reducing the IR?

And I attach the neon image for you to let you know if there is something wrong...

Regards, Dong

images

Hi Dong,

The raw reference spectra I am refering to is the star spectra you recorded for making your instrument response (IR) ... Vega, Regulus, or another.

Looking at your neon images I see you do need to put your WR star spectra in a better position, because where it is now the neon lines are very weak, so the target spectra will also not be in the best place. Usually the spectra is located at the part of the image where the response is near maximum, which you can find from your flat field.

The process of deriving the IR is well described by Christian in various places, specifically in English at http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/isis/guid ... to1_en.htm for the Lhires. Also, in French, a new more detailed description including the atmospheric correction at http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/isis/guid ... method.htm. Please have a look at these and, if you still have questions, I will try and answer them.

Cheers, Bernard

_________________
Quicquid Nitet Notandum

I am certain that there is NO light leakage on my Lhires3. But the halo always appears, and it moves up or down while I adjust the main mirror.

Hi Bernard,

The raw reference spectra I am refering to is the star spectra you recorded for making your instrument response (IR) ... Vega, Regulus, or another.------so the whole procedures to make 1200L's IR are the same to that for 2400L? The only difference now is 540nm, not 656nm. Am I correct?

The process of deriving the IR is well described by Christian in various places, specifically in English at http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/isis/guid ... to1_en.htm for the Lhires. Also, in French, a new more detailed description including the atmospheric correction at http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/isis/guid ... method.htm. Please have a look at these and, if you still have questions, I will try and answer them.
I have already noticed the new description, find that it seems only for Alpy600 and LISA, Lhires3 does not be mentioned. Does 1200L-mode really need to make atmospheric correction? At the end of tuto1_en.htm, Christian does not mention "atmospheric correction" in his 600L example, but I have read about this point in webpages of LISA. I am now confused~

Waiting for your answers....
Cheers, Dong

Hi Dong,

The derivation of instrumental response is basically the same method for low, medium or high resolution or different spectrgraphs. As you say, you need to use whatever is the most appropriate method to wavelength calibrate your spectra ... which can be a bit difficult in the 5000A region with only a neon reference as there are few strong lines in that area.

If a good amplitude calibration is important ... which is not always the case ... then if your reference star is not close to the target (i.e. nearly same altitude) you need to make atmospheric corrections to all your spectra (reference and target), it does not matter what type of instrument is used ... not difficult to do with ISIS because most of it is automated, but it needs a live internet connection to download data from Simbad.

Cheers, Bernard

_________________
Quicquid Nitet Notandum

Hello Dong Li,

i am glad that you are taking good spectra even under the polluted sky of your big city with the impressive skyline you showed above. Congratulations!
It is a pity that not more amateurs join here, many of them in probably more favorable locations.
I have added my comments at the other thread about WR response, in order not to overload this thread with too many different problems.
I hope that the hardware problems at Teide will be solved before long.

Clear skies, Martin

Hi dear Martin and Bernard:

Thank you very much for your explanation!

The information which I have learned for making IR for 1200L is from here: http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/isis/isis_tuto/tuto4.htm
It is used for Ha region, I want to know if it can be used for other spectral regions? And it is Rlhires 1.00.2 version. I wonder if these information is too old to be suitable for new ISIS?

Here http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/isis/isis_tuto/tuto5.htm. The title is "compute IR" , but all examples are for almost the whole visual region, 400nm --700nm, my CCD [SONY285] is small and covers only a little part of spectral region, I confuse which type of spectragraph tutorial 5 instructs for?

I individually feel that tutorials are a bit random and lack of systematization, esp. the advanced tutorails are written by French, I am a Chinese, I have to translate into English first by Google, but you know this kind of translation is not accurate, so sometimes it is hard for me to understand well.

Martin, I have already read your another thread, but I am so sorry that I am not yet very clear about how to make 1200L IR with new version ISIS. Could you please write a clearer procedure step by step for me?

Great thanks to you in advance.

Regards, Dong

Hi Dong,

before you can make the instrument response you have to calibrate your spectra in wavelength correctly. Take one step at a time. The references you give above are quite old, for the wavelength calibration you may study (in english!):
http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/isis/He_c ... method.htm
Just ignore the parts about the lamp and use it for your Ne lamp.
Take a spectrum of zet Aql and once you have that calibrated we look further.
Unfortunately the serveer in Montreal does not respond so I cannot look at any 2D spectra.

Regards, Martin

Hi Dong,

I agree with Martin that you should first concentrate on getting the reference star spectra and then a good wavelength calibration ... which is more important than the instrumental response. I am away from home, and my documentation, but when I return I will see if you have the correct neon line values. I am confident that if you place your spectral line on the CCD near where the flat image response is high you will get both a better neon spectra and a higher S/N target spectra.

Once you have achieved a good wavelength calibration, with a low coefficient rms value, you then use ISIS to:
a) process the reference star spectra (without an instrument response correction). We will also, for simpicity, ignore any atmospheric corrections.
b) use the Profile/Compare function to derive the raw instrumental response (IR), which is done by dividing your reference spectra by the selected Miles spectra.
c) save this raw IR
d) use the Profile/Continuum function to fit a smooth line to the raw IR (above). You do this by first removing all large lines and then adjusting the smoothing value to get a good fit to the raw IR. I find one of the automatic fits works reasonably well ... it then just needs fine adjustments.
e) save the above result as your final instrumental response (IR).
f) you can check the quality of the IR curve by reprocessing the reference spectra but now using the IR curve for the instrumental response, and then comparing the result with the Miles spectra.

g) make sure you record the reference and target stars with exactly the same optical settings ... same scope, same grating and same micrometer position.
h) use ISIS to process the target spectra the same way you did for the reference spectra, but now using the instrumental response correction.

If you do all the above you should have a well calibrated spectra. If the reference and target spectra were recorded at significantly different altitudes and/or sky conditions then you would also need to correct for atmospheric effects ... but we can discuss that later

Cheers, Bernard


----- Original Message -----

_________________
Quicquid Nitet Notandum

Hi Martin:

The next Tuesday will be sunny, recently it is always cloudy.
Thank you VERY MUCH for your helpful information! I have already found and read some comments of the Chinese version of Zen and the Art of Motorcyle Maintenance in internet, this book is of philosophy, I understand why you recommend it for me now...

I am going to do step by step according to your suggestion. And hope the umontreal server will work well, then I can upload my data for you to instruct me what and how to do for the next steps....

Thank you a lot again!!

Dong

Hi Bernard:

Thank you very much for the detailed steps!

After reading your information, I feel that they are similar to those steps used for 2400L. It seems that I finally find the reason which has been making me confused---------for Lhires user, WR campaign asks us to take spectra of Zet Aql or Regulus [telluric standard] and Del Sgr or Bet Aqr [radial velocity standard stars] every night. I did not know which star I shall select as the suitable reference one initially or to be used for IR process.
But now I become clear~

Next Tuesday, I'll try again.

Thank you again, Bernard

Dong

Hi all,

The server in Montreal is down temporarily. As I am traveling back from a conference in Greece, it won't be back up until Tuesday next week. Keep observing, and I'm sorry about the confusion.

Due the issues at Teide with the dec motor, we really need the supprt this weekend.

To the amateurs, please email me for an ftp account in Montreal! Thanks, and clear skies!

Noel

Hi,

the telescope went into the Hardlimits. Some cables and a connector had been tucked between the telescope and the fork. They will be controlled. The telescope is visited by a technical team at Monday. Until then we aren't able to observe!

Until Monday the IAC-80 isn't observing!

Hallo Gerrit,

Please also pays attention to the cables and fibers of the fiber injection on the telescope. These may also be under stress when the telescope is in an extreme position. With us, once the USB cable had loosened the ALccd5.
Care that hang loosely the fibers in each telescopic position.

_________________
Herzliche Grüße / best regards

Lothar

https://lotharschanne.wordpress.com/

Here's a quick and somewhat silly question - if I start my calibration exposures before midnight UT of a given date, but all of my science images are taken after midnight UT - should I use (as the filename prefix) the date the calibration images were begun, or when the first science image was taken? I kknow - silly, but I'm writing a script to rename all of my files to conform to the desired file name template.

Thanks!
Mike

Hi Team,i was able to gather some spectra last week end. See here http://gabalou.canalblog.com/archives/2 ... 77987.html
Is the IAC80 on the run now ?


Thierry



2013/6/16 Lothar Schanne <fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)>

_________________
Thierry Garrel
Observatoire de Fontcaude, Montpellier, France
SpectroBlog http://gabalou.canalblog.com/

IAC-80 isn't observing!

We can't reach the focus with our sytem and the FOVIA. The TO tries to fix it. We will see.

Hi Mike,

I recently had the situation you have (cal and science data on different UT days) and I left the file names as they were recorded ... different dates ... which seems the most logical and least confusing to me. The data log spreadsheet, where all the files are listed, should make the situation clear to anyone dealing with the data.

Cheers, Bernard


From: Mike Potter (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 6:05 AM
To: fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)
Subject: [fg-spek] Re: Teide 2013 WR campaign




Here's a quick and somewhat silly question - if I start my calibration exposures before midnight UT of a given date, but all of my science images are taken after midnight UT - should I use (as the filename prefix) the date the calibration images were begun, or when the first science image was taken? I kknow - silly, but I'm writing a script to rename all of my files to conform to the desired file name template.

Thanks!
Mike





No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3345 / Virus Database: 3199/6417 - Release Date: 06/16/13

_________________
Quicquid Nitet Notandum

IAC-80 is taking data again.

But we lost Regulus.

Hi Thierry ,


My congratulations ! Great spectra!!


Cheers berthold


Ps : more from me in a private message


Von meinem iPad gesendet

Am 17.06.2013 um 22:07 schrieb thierry Garrel <fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de (fg-spek-convento@vds-astro.de)>:

Hi Mike! This question is not silly at all! We have the same situation at Teide and everywhere else. It is important to stick on the already established rules. The evenning dates are important. Noel asked to make respective data directories, name them with the starting day of the session (evenning dates) and put all nightly data into them. The fits header will give respective information, anyway.

Cheers, Thomas

Hi team 3! Doesn't matter, then take zetaAql.

Cheers, Thomas

Hello together

before using darks it seems conveniently to prove the darks about read out problems. In the spectra read out failures are mostly simply to see. But in the darks there are no visible fractures.

I tested the darks.evening of 20130609 about their statistics (see annex, calculated with MIDAS). The darks N° 1 and 4 have abnormal means or medians. So they should be discarded.

Probably in other dark and bias series similar problems will arise.

_________________
Herzliche Grüße / best regards

Lothar

https://lotharschanne.wordpress.com/

Tonight the FOVIA guiding isn't working. -> manual guiding