Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Beam normalization is wrong #24

Open
bennahugo opened this issue Feb 5, 2020 · 3 comments
Open

Beam normalization is wrong #24

bennahugo opened this issue Feb 5, 2020 · 3 comments

Comments

@bennahugo
Copy link
Contributor

@kmbasad @SpheMakh @o-smirnov

Ok there is something wrong with the way the final products have been normalized:

It appears to me that the boresight is normalized to [[1 0], [0 1]] while the off axis is left unnormalized, because the crosshand phase shows extreme ramps even just barely off boresight (<1'). My idea was to use unnormalized beams which contain the residual electronic OMT and digitizer ripples and impedances at boresight, and absorb them into diagonal and offdiagonal CASA solutions while calibrating. However this information is now effectively destroyed. Here are the two side by side (yaxis degrees, range +/- 90 deg):
image

Looking at the code (as far as I can tell) it seems the normalization routines (normalise_multifreq) are no longer called and the errors are baked into the zernike coefficients. I need to track down where this is going wrong - in the way you process them for fitting or the way Mathieu normalizes. Where can I find the original measured fits files from which these coefficients were derived?

@bennahugo
Copy link
Contributor Author

This is why circular polarization is not corrected when applying the beams in DDFacet as it stands.

@SpheMakh
Copy link
Collaborator

SpheMakh commented Feb 5, 2020

As I said earlier, both sets of beams go through the same treatment in eidos. So the problem probably lies in the input holography beams. In the meantime, we should all use the EM simulations

@kmbasad
Copy link
Collaborator

kmbasad commented Nov 14, 2020

Sorry for such long delay, but I will start maintaining EIDOS again from this month. Do you still have this problem?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants