[INSTRM-1503] Testing dot-crossing algorithm on PFI test stand Created: 14/Jan/22 Updated: 25/Feb/22 Resolved: 25/Feb/22 |
|
| Status: | Done |
| Project: | Instrument control development |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Task | Priority: | Normal |
| Reporter: | chyan | Assignee: | chyan |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | EngRun | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Story Points: | 4 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Sprint: | PreEngRun05 B, PreEngRun05 C | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Reviewers: | hassan | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
The dot-roach algorithm is important to placing cobra behind the dot. We need to test this algorithm on test bench before going to telescope. |
| Comments |
| Comment by cloomis [ 15/Jan/22 ] |
|
Do you mean dot-roaches itself? Or running the dot-crossing passes so that we can run Neven's algorithm to place the dots? We can test the crossings now: those only need an MCS camera. dot-roaches itself can only be run on the real PFI, because it needs the SPS. But we can tune the blind moves by running them near the dots, and figuring out the best move strategy. Which are you proposing? Or should we actually have two tickets? |
| Comment by chyan [ 17/Jan/22 ] |
|
I am actually referring to dot-crossing, for dot location placing. So I updated the title. |
| Comment by chyan [ 25/Jan/22 ] |
|
A phi-crossing and a theta-crossing data were generated. Those data set are located in /data/raw/2022-01-24/mcs. phi-crossing 71447 - 71487 |
| Comment by chyan [ 08/Feb/22 ] |
|
ncaplar I did another two set of theta-crossing 71799 - 71820 I was asking for 40 exposures in a script, however, it returns only 20 and 24, some of the requested frames are missing. I see some strange error messages and I think they are relevant. cloomis Would you please take a look of the error? 2022-02-08T06:33:15.467 fps : text="cobraMoveSteps stepsize = -25 completed" Traceback (most recent call last): File "/software/mhs/products/Linux64/tron_actorcore/2.2.8/bin/oneCmd.py", line 161, in <module> main() File "/software/mhs/products/Linux64/tron_actorcore/2.2.8/bin/oneCmd.py", line 157, in main printTimes=(not opts.noTimes)) File "/software/mhs/products/Linux64/tron_actorcore/2.2.8/bin/oneCmd.py", line 45, in __init__ modelNames=modelNames) File "/software/mhs/products/Linux64/tron_actorcore/2.2.8/python/actorcore/Actor.py", line 82, in __init__ self._reloadConfiguration() File "/software/mhs/products/Linux64/tron_actorcore/2.2.8/python/actorcore/Actor.py", line 150, in _reloadConfiguration self.configureLogs() File "/software/mhs/products/Linux64/tron_actorcore/2.2.8/python/actorcore/Actor.py", line 166, in configureLogs opsLogging.setupRootLogger(self.logDir) File "/software/mhs/products/Linux64/tron_actorcore/2.2.8/python/opscore/utility/sdss3logging.py", line 266, in setupRootLogger rootHandler = makeOpsFileHandler(basedir) File "/software/mhs/products/Linux64/tron_actorcore/2.2.8/python/opscore/utility/sdss3logging.py", line 221, in makeOpsFileHandler handler = OpsRotatingFileHandler(dirname=dirname, basename=basename) File "/software/mhs/products/Linux64/tron_actorcore/2.2.8/python/opscore/utility/sdss3logging.py", line 87, in __init__ self.doRollover() File "/software/mhs/products/Linux64/tron_actorcore/2.2.8/python/opscore/utility/sdss3logging.py", line 185, in doRollover raise RuntimeError("logfile %s already exists. Would append to it." % (path)) RuntimeError: logfile /software/mhs/logs/actors/oneCmd/2022-02-08T06:33:15.log already exists. Would append to it. |
| Comment by hassan [ 11/Feb/22 ] |
|
Problem with log file is due to 1-second time resolution in log file name timestamp causing existing log file to be overridden if oneCmd execution speed is faster than 1 sec. Switched to millisec resolution in |