From: <adeller_at_email.protected>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:15:32 +1100 (EST)

Hi Jim,

I have split the button/heading into an actual heading and an actual
button and updated the notes, making everything a fair bit clearer. With
the beam scaling, it would be possible but would require calculating a
higher resolution FFT and then rebinning, which might slow down
calculations to an unacceptable level. What I would actually implement
would be a 'zoom in' 'zoom out' option which allowed you to repeatedly
either halve or double the scale. As it stands you can make a fairly rough
estimation using the scale in mas shown on the left of the display.

Adam

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, Jim Lovell wrote:

>Hi Adam,
>
>The beam shape feature is very nice! Is it possible to change the "uv
>Coverage" heading so that it's more obvious it's a button? Also, is it
>possible to show just the inner region of the beam, e.g out to the first
>set of sidelobes, so that it's possible to get a visual estimate of the
>beam size/FWHM?
>
>Cheers,
>Jim
>
>On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 18:12 +1100, Adam Deller wrote:
>>> Hi Tasso,
>>>
>>> The rescaling has been fixed - that was something I had left in the
>>> too-hard basket but I realised was actually very easy.
>>>
>>> The baseline summaries now display sensitivity and source uptime, but
>>> unfortunately there is no easy way of highlighting baselines which cannot
>>> see the source. It does clearly show that uptime is zero in this case
>>> though.
>>>
>>> Also, I've added to the notes down the bottom of the page to make it clear
>>> that you can swap between uv Coverage and beam shape by clicking on the
>>> heading "uv Coverage". I realised that this wasn't really made clear
>>> anywhere. So everyone, if you hadn't spent a few minutes checking out the
>>> beam shapes of different configurations, try it, its really cool!!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Adam
>>>
>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Tasso Tzioumis wrote:
>>>
>>>> > Hi Adam,
>>>> >
>>>> > A couple of more points on the calculator that may be easy to implement:
>>>> >
>>>> > When one uses telescopes very far apart, there is little mutual
>>>> > uv-coverage. When there is no common time the baselines are flagged in
>>>> > the list as N/A and no sensitivity is reported. However, the uv-plot it
>>>> > is still scaled to maximum possible baseline.
>>>> > Here is a couple of suggestions to improve things:
>>>> > 1. Rescale the uv-plot to use ONLY the baselines that exist, not the N/A
>>>> > 2. Change the listing to also report "Coverage (hrs)" for each
>>>> > baseline. Then you can list the sensitivities for all baselines (it is
>>>> > useful to know sometimes even if no mutual coverage) and make the
>>>> > coverage 0 hrs (or N/A or an *, or red colour). This will give all the
>>>> > information that there is now and a little more.
>>>> >
>>>> > I think you already calculate the coverage times, so it should easy to
>>>> > implement. I'll not do it if it requires major effort.
>>>> >
>>>> > Cheers
>>>> > Tasso
>>>> >
>>>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> > Tasso Tzioumis, Australia Telescope National Facility, CSIRO
>>>> > Location: Cnr Pembroke & Vimiera Rds, Marsfield, NSW, 2122, AUSTRALIA
>>>> > Post: PO Box 76, Epping, NSW 1710, AUSTRALIA
>>>> > Phone: +61 2 9372 4350 Fax: +61 2 9372 4450 or 4310
>>>> > Email: Tasso.Tzioumis_at_csiro.au
>>>> > URL: http://www.atnf.csiro.au/~atzioumi/
>>>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> >
>--
>Jim Lovell, Jim.Lovell_at_csiro.au
>ATNF c/o RSAA, Mt Stromlo Observatory, Ph: (02) 6125 6715
>Cotter Road, Weston ACT 2611 Fax: (02) 6125 0260
>Australia Mobile: 0412 127364
>WWW: http://www.atnf.csiro.au/people/Jim.Lovell
>Photoblog: http://jejl.blogspot.com
>At Tidbinbilla Ph (02) 6201 7869 (RA Lab), x7800 (switch), x7940(shift)
>
Received on 2005-03-22 12:15:52