TTA Tools: Wednesday, 2 pm MT, 4 pm ET, 19 September 2018


CV-331/GB-137/SO-317, 331 Hub Audio 434-817-6286


  • Observing Constraints (Ryan, Lorant, Dana)
  • Filler Proposals (All)
  • Sponsored Proposals (All)
  • AOB


Attending: DanaBalser, JeffKern, AnandCrossley, RyanLynch, ToneyMinter, MarkClaussen, AmyMioduszewski, LorantSjouwerman, StephanWitz

  • General Structure. We briefly discussed the overall structure diagram. LorantSjouwerman felt that the Programs should not be included since they are not part of the proposing software. But this would also include Projects and Scheduling Blocks. The reason to keep these components is to be able to define the interfaces to downstream software and make sure our structure leads to scheduling the observations properly and generating SRDPs.
  • Observing Constraints. We divided up observations with different types of constraints into two broad categories.
    • Strong/Weak Fixed Observations: The date/time is fixed but there may be some flexibility (e.g., only a sub-set need to be executed). We agreed that a list of (UT start, UT end, duration) be specified. This does allow for a delta; that is duration does not have to equal (UT end - UT start). The software should allow the list to be grouped with a number n that need to be observed where n is greater than or equal to one.
    • Regularly/Irregularly Spaced Windowed Observations: The observations can start in different ways: a UT time can be specified, a trigger (both internal or external), a date range (e.g., sometime in August), etc. A cadence is then specified which is a list of numbers and associated deltas. We may want to assume some grouping to allow for more complexity.
  • Sponsored/DDT. We discussed the concept of having a Current and Semester proposal type to distinguish how the proposal is reviewed. That is, if a proposal is a DDT it will be considered for the current semester. This has two consequences: the telescope resources will be different and the proposals will either be reviewed by the director or the SRPs. In principle we could just note the semester in question. For example, if the proposal is submitted July 15, 2018 and the user specifies current (or 18B) then the proposal will be reviewed by the director; whereas if the user specifies semesters (or 19A) then it will be considered for the 19A SRPs. DDT could be specified with the Allocation Flag. Sponsored proposals are handled in many different ways but these all bypass our review system.
    1. WVU: tied to the fiscal year.
    2. SHAO: tied to the semester.
    3. NanoGrav: start on 1 December.
    4. BTL: tied to the calendar year.
    5. USNO: requested monthly.
  • Next Two Weeks. JeffKern will run these meetings and we will go through the Use Cases listed. The goal will be to generate a diagram for each Use Case.

-- DanaBalser - 2018-09-19
Topic revision: r2 - 2018-09-22, DanaBalser
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