1dcut.png
same_pupils_1D.png
Subaru_LAM_comparison.png
[PIPE2D-694] Difference in illumination between Subaru and LAM Created: 13/Jan/21 Updated: 24/Mar/21 Resolved: 24/Mar/21 |
|
| Status: | Done |
| Project: | DRP 2-D Pipeline |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Task | Priority: | Normal |
| Reporter: | ncaplar | Assignee: | ncaplar |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Attachments: |
1dcut.png
same_pupils_1D.png
Subaru_LAM_comparison.png
|
| Story Points: | 2 |
| Sprint: | 2DDRP-2021 A, 2DDRP-2021 A3 |
| Description |
|
The illumination between Subaru and LAM data seems to be different. That is most obviously seen in the defocused images. This is surprising given that pupils should be exactly the same in two sets of data. See the attached images. During conversation on Jan 12, JEG asked me to compose few examples to characterize the issue. We plan to send these to Graham to inquire about possible differences in the collimators at Subaru and LAM. |
| Comments |
| Comment by ncaplar [ 24/Mar/21 ] |
|
I see with further analysis that I have made a mistake and I was comparing the data from LAM taken with F/2.5 pupil with the data with F/2.8 pupil at Subaru. These are obviously different. When comparing the data taken with the same pupil, there is a minimal difference (same_pupils_1D.png). Therefore this is a nonexistent problem. |