Hi Michael,

It looks like the latest WSC observing script was not used in these two runs, where the offset calibrator is a point source (2005+7753) rather than the one with the beautiful and extended jet (1632+8233). See my email dated October 28 with subject "Re: 2nd WSC: using 1800+784" for the new script.

Looking at the data/results of these two runs show:

In WICloop_000.55138.949816099535:
- No zero point amp dropouts
- Data in general look good. In the bandpass, several IFs show phase slopes between ~ -10 to 10 degrees.
- In the Stokes I images of the primary calibrator, IF3 images are noisier than IFs 1 and 2 IFs by about 25 to 40% (depending on how many channels are averaged). IF4 is also noisier, but to a lesser extent.
- Comparing the various channel averaged images shows (as seen in IFs 1 and 2) for the primary calibrator:
-the rms noise improves by about a factor 2 from single channel to 10 channel averaged images (instead of 3.16).
-the rms noise improves by about a factor 1.5 from 10 channel averaged to 100 channel averaged images (instead of 3.16).
-the rms noise doesn't change from 100 channel averaged to 230 channel averaged images (instead of improving by 1.52).
- The dynamic range after averaging all IFs and almost all channels for the primary calibrator is 7200 to 1.
- Couldn't look at the phase transfer (wrong model).

In WICloop.55138.9268534838:
-Similar results to the above, with IF4 becoming worse than IF 3 in varios images (with both being worse than IF 1 and 2 by up to ~60%).
-The dynamic range after averaging all IFs and almost all channels for the primary calibrator is 6000 to 1.

BLCAL was not used in either case.


On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 5:54 AM, Michael Rupen <mrupen@aoc.nrao.edu> wrote:

Hi Emmanuel et al. --
I took two WICloop data sets yesterday (Tuesday 3nov09):


Both may be found as SDMs, MS, and UVFITS in


Basically we want to know how the data look, and whether we can transfer
phase correctly to the calibrator offset from the phase center.

Steve: both data sets include weather tables, if you'd like to check
that those are getting through to CASA correctly.

Thank you much --



Details of the observations:
* C band
* Subbands 2 3 6 7 (set up to avoid RFI at L band, and I didn't get
around to changing this for these observations)
* 128 MHz/subband, 256 channels per subband --> 0.5 MHz channel sep'n
* Dual pol'n (RR, LL) with auto-correlations
* 1 second dumps
* EVLA script: /home/mchost/evla/scripts/widar/WICloop.evla
- attenuators fixed just before 3rd scan
- fshift= 20 kHz
- lower edge of 1 GHz baseband= 4488 MHz

Software versions & WIDAR-0 configuration:
* b101-t-{1,3}, b102-t-{1,3}
- each BlB does RR+LL w/ auto-corr'n for one subband
- 4 CCCs/corr'n --> 256 channels
* each BlB sends output to a separate NIC in node 02 (02-{1,2,3,4})
- rate per NIC= 624 frame/sec
* CBE: wcbe-20091029.0
- configuration: w0_12ant_sb2367dualpoln_autocross3nov09_sdm1.xml
* StB, BlB all green during these observations
- This is after Barry's fshift fix, but before Raltron removal
* asdm2MS-test v. 1.30
* exportuvfits: CASA Version 3.0.0 (build #9371)
Built on: Sun 2009/11/01 21:59:05 UTC


-- JuergenOtt - 2009-11-04
Topic revision: r1 - 2009-11-04, JuergenOtt
This site is powered by FoswikiCopyright © by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding NRAO Public Wiki? Send feedback