SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA COS Monthly Status Review 18 January 2007.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ILARIA PASCUCCI Space Telescope Science Institute Department of Physics & Astronomy, Johns Hopkins University Monitoring of the Wavelength Calibration.
Advertisements

Return to Hubble: Servicing Mission 4 Dr. Frank Summers Space Telescope Science Institute April 2, 2009.
Some examples of Type I supernova light curves Narrow range of absolute magnitude at maximum light indicates a good Standard Candle B band absolute magnitude.
Calibration Scenarios for PICASSO-CENA J. A. REAGAN, X. WANG, H. FANG University of Arizona, ECE Dept., Bldg. 104, Tucson, AZ MARY T. OSBORN SAIC,
Early Results from the COS Time-Dependent Spectroscopic Sensitivity Programs Rachel Osten TIPS presentation, Jan. 21, 2010.
SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA COS Science Calibration & Instrument Status TIPS 20 Nov 2003 Last COS TIPS Aug 2003.
Post-SM4 Sensitivity Calibration of the STIS Echelle Modes Azalee Bostroem With help from: Ralph Bohlin, Alessandra Aloisi, Charles Proffitt, Kenneth Hart,
The Search for New “r-process-Enhanced” Metal-Poor Stars Timothy C. Beers Michigan State University.
Mg II & C IV Absorption Kinematics vs. Stellar Kinematics in Galaxies Chris Churchill (Penn State) J. Charlton J. Ding J. Masiero D. Schneider M. Dickinson.
SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA TIPS / COS Update The NUV Gratings 18 October 2007 Last COS TIPS presentation: 21 December.
Study of NICMOS Non-linearity B. Mobasher, A. Riess, R.de Jong, S.Arribas, E.Bergeron, R.Bohlin, H. Ferguson, A. Koekemoer, K. Noll, S. Malhotra, T. Wiklind.
1 Brainstorming for Presentation of Variability in Current Practices Scenario B. Contor August 2007.
TIPS presentation 19 July 2007Charles Proffitt COS-STIS TeamPage 1 STIS FUV MAMA Dark Current Charles Proffitt COS-STIS Team.
CCDs in space: the effects of radiation on Hubble’s Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS) Max Mutchler, David Golimowski (Space Telescope Science Institute),
SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA TIPS / COS TV Update 21 December 2006 Agenda Agenda Testing Setup and Status Testing Setup.
Cosmic Origins Spectrograph Hubble Space Telescope James C. Green University of Colorado Cosmic Origins Spectrograph Instrument Design and Capabilities.
Molecular Gas and Dust in SMGs in COSMOS Left panel is the COSMOS field with overlays of single-dish mm surveys. Right panel is a 0.3 sq degree map at.
1 GALEX Angular Correlation Function … or about the Galactic extinction effects.
The Evolution of Quasars and Massive Black Holes “Quasar Hosts and the Black Hole-Spheroid Connection”: Dunlop 2004 “The Evolution of Quasars”: Osmer 2004.
SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA COS Status FUV Detector “1-bounce design” NUV Detector HST aberration fully-corrected Calibration.
SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA COS TAGFLASH System Requirements Review COS Lamp Lifetime Estimates for TAGFLASH Scenarios.
Blue Channel spectroscopy of quasar absorption lines: Metal abundances and dust in DLYAs Jill Bechtold, Jun Cui (Steward Observatory) Varsha Kulkarni,
Cosmic Origins Spectrograph Hubble Space Telescope Jon A. Morse University of Colorado Cosmic Origins Spectrograph Science Goals and Observing Strategy.
18 May 2006 Slide 1 of 10 STScI TAGFLASH Ground System Development Current ground system could support immediate COS launch Current ground system could.
The Future of Direct Supermassive Black Hole Mass Measurements Dan Batcheldor Rochester Institute of Technology - The Role of SMBHs measurements. - Current.
TIPS COS Overview - Keyes : 18 May 2000 COS Overview v CDR: April 2000 v FUV delivery: January 2001 v Environmental (Thermal-Vac): spring 2002 v Launch:
Swift/BAT Census of Black Holes Preliminary results in Markwardt et al ' energy coded color.
The Status of COS Flat Fields Tom Ake TIPS 21 August 2008.
Selection of the New COS/FUV Lifetime Position Cristina Oliveira Jan TIPS Meeting - COS/FUV Lifetime1.
Hubble 4th-generation instrument for Servicing Mission 4
Prospects for observing quasar jets with the Space Interferometry Mission Ann E. Wehrle Space Science Institute, La Canada Flintridge, CA, and Boulder,
Sackler DSI Trustees: 2001, Aug, 01Richard McMahon ( 1 DAZLE: Dark Ages “Z” Lyman Explorer (visiting a Time when Galaxies are Young)
1-D Flat Fields for COS G130M and G160M Tom Ake TIPS 17 June 2010.
SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA COS Monthly Status Review 15 January 2002.
Expectation-Maximization (EM) Case Studies
The Future of the Hubble Space Telescope Steven Beckwith April 25, 2005 Space Telescope Science Institute.
SNAP Calibration Program Steps to Spectrophotometric Calibration The SNAP (Supernova / Acceleration Probe) mission’s primary science.
CALIBRATION However, nothing on upper rungs would get done without good instrument calibrations The Cosmic Sexiness Ladder.
SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA COS Monthly Status Review 18 January 2007.
TIPS COS Status: SMOV update III STScI/CU COS Team 17 September 2009.
COS Training Series II. Optimizing Observations --- David Sahnow February mm.
TIPS - Oct 13, 2005 M. Sirianni Temperature change for ACS CCDs: initial study on scientific performance M. Sirianni, T. Wheeler, C.Cox, M. Mutchler, A.
SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA SMOV4 Requirements Review Cosmic Origins Spectrograph Scott D. Friedman STScI 30 July 2003.
1 JULIA ROMAN-DUVAL & COS/STIS TEAM AUGUST 12, 2014 MOVING COS/FUV TO LIFETIME POSITION 3 See also Poster by Proffitt et al.
The Status of HST/COS and HST/STIS Cristina Oliveira 8/12/14COS and STIS Cal Workshop1 SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA.
HST Quarterly Review Page 1 Space Telescope Science Institute 15 October 2003 SI Status: COS STScI COS Program Activity SubprojectSTScI Activity Instrument.
SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA COS Monthly Status Review 24 October 2007.
SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA TIPS / COS 17 January 2002.
SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA COS Monthly Status Review 22 January 2003.
High energy Astrophysics Mat Page Mullard Space Science Lab, UCL 1. Overview.
STIS Status TIPS, September 17, 2009 Charles Proffitt for the STIS team.
SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA TIPS Cosmic Origins Spectrograph 20 September 2001.
Sample expanded template for one theme: Physics of Galaxy Evolution Mark Dickinson.
July 25th, 2000WFC3 Critical Science Review1 Performance Summary in Key Science Areas Verify that WFC3 as designed is capable of carrying out the WFC3.
Application of a Charge Transfer Model to Space Telescope Data Paul Bristow Dec’03
Validation of HLA Source Lists Feb. 4, 2008 Brad Whitmore 1.Overview 2.Plots 3.Summary.
Characterization of the Post-Launch Line Spread Function of COS
Single Object & Time Series Spectroscopy with JWST NIRCam
R-PROCESS SIGNATURES IN METAL-POOR STARS
COS FUV Flat Fields and Signal-to-Noise Characteristics
Calibration of the Cosmic Origins Spectrograph
Quasars, Active Galaxies, and super-massive black holes
Proxima Centauri, the red star at the center, is the closest star to the sun. A star is a large, glowing ball of gas in space, which generates energy through.
Black Holes in the Deepest Extragalactic X-ray Surveys
Observing Very Young Stars with GPI
High Resolution Spectroscopy of the IGM: How High
A star is a large, glowing ball of gas in space, which generates energy through nuclear fusion in its core. The closest star to Earth is the sun, which.
Presentation transcript:

SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE Operated for NASA by AURA COS Monthly Status Review 18 January 2007

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 2 of 19 Agenda  Assess past scientific usage of STIS NUV MAMA detector –Include usage statistics from cycles 9-13 –Science programs include cool stars, hot stars, black hole accretion, ISM, IGM, galaxies, and QSOs  Establish common ground for comparison of STIS and COS modes  Comparison of STIS and COS efficiency and sensitivity  Assess impacts of COS performance degradation on typical science

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 3 of 19 STIS Characteristics  STIS NUV Usage (cycles 9-13) –E230M is main M mode component by exposure time usage –E230M usage is approximately 6% of HST exposure time –We will not consider G230M (R~10000) in subsequent comparisons  FUV/NUV MAMA usage ratio –59:41 split averaged over cycles Spectral Element Percent of total NUV usage (cycles 9-13) E230H16.6% E230M34.7% G230L33.5% G230M7.6% other7.5%

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 4 of 19 STIS Characteristics  E230M Physical characteristics –R=30,000 (2 pixels) –Typical extraction height = 7 pixels –Resel to compare with COS (R=20,000): >3 pixels x 7 pixels = 21 pixels –STIS NUV/MAMA Dark (on-orbit value) >Dark per pixel = 1.26 e-3 counts/sec/pixel >dark per COS-comparison resel (3x7) = 2.65 e-2 cts/sec/resel >WORST-CASE COS dark assumed = STIS on-orbit dark –Typical aperture for E230M is 0.2x0.2 >Aperture throughput is approximately 75%

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 5 of 19 COS Characteristics  Estimate 1000 orbits of COS usage as upper limit –What is FUV/NUV ratio? We estimate 60:40  G185M, G225M, G285M characteristics – Å per pixel for G185M and G225M –0.04 Å per pixel for G285M –In comparisons use native dispersions in 3-pixel resel  COS/NUV MAMA resel and extraction box (21 pixels) –3 pixels along dispersion –assume 7 pixel extraction height  COS/NUV MAMA Dark –Dark per pixel = 2.10 e-4 counts/sec/pixel (ground values = best-case) –Dark per 3x7 extraction box = 4.41e-3 cts/sec/box (ground values) –WORST-CASE COS dark assumed = STIS on-orbit dark: >1.26e-3 cts/sec/pixel >2.65 e-2 cts/sec/extracted resel (3x7 pixels)  Typical aperture is PSA: assumed throughput is 100%

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 6 of 19 The Degradation Scenario (from D. Leckrone)  Linear extrapolation of observed degradation to 9/11/2008 launch date at ~ 0.5% per month yields additional ~11% loss of sensitivity before COS gets to orbit; compared to TV I values: –G285M will have lost ~25% throughput waiting to fly –G225M will have lost ~20% throughput waiting to fly  In comparisons to follow, we have assumed 25% degradation (i.e., launch throughput = 0.75 x TV I throughput)

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 7 of 19 Variances in measured COS sensitivities in vacuum 2006/2003

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 8 of 19 Sensitivity Comparison: COS TV I vs STIS (no dark included)  STIS aperture throughput included  No COS degradation included  No dark included

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 9 of 19 Sensitivity Ratio: COS TV I vs STIS (no dark included)  STIS aperture throughput included  No COS degradation included  No darks included

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 10 of 19 Observing Efficiency Comparison: COS vs STIS – darks included

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 11 of 19 Observing Efficiency Comparison: COS vs STIS – darks included

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 12 of 19 Impacts – Single COS grating setting used  Single COS grating setting used: –Bright limit (ignore background): simply increase science exposures to compensate for sensitivity loss: x to achieve same S/N >In bright limit: STIS/COS(no-loss) exposure ratio ~3x; so COS S λ must degrade to 0.33 TV I level for COS=STIS efficiency –Faint “limit”: >For a 40-orbit COS observation to achieve S/N=10 at 2500 Ǻ.: No-loss case with ground dark: F λ =2.0 e-16No-loss case with ground dark: F λ =2.0 e-16 No-loss case with worst-case dark: F λ =4.0 e-16No-loss case with worst-case dark: F λ =4.0 e-16 With 25% degradation and ground dark: F λ =2.5 e-16 ; however, this flux requires 26 orbits in no-loss case (1.5x longer with degradation)With 25% degradation and ground dark: F λ =2.5 e-16 ; however, this flux requires 26 orbits in no-loss case (1.5x longer with degradation) With 25% degradation and worst-case dark: F λ =5.5 e-16 ; however, this flux requires 24 orbits in no-loss case (1.7x longer with degradation)With 25% degradation and worst-case dark: F λ =5.5 e-16 ; however, this flux requires 24 orbits in no-loss case (1.7x longer with degradation) –the limiting flux for a STIS 40-orbit observation is 1.2e-15

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 13 of 19 Impacts – Multiple COS grating settings used  Multiple COS grating settings used: –COS-to-STIS efficiency advantage scales as ratio of COS-to-STIS sensitivity advantage to the number of COS exposures required. >If COS is ~3x as efficient as STIS, then STIS is more efficient if more than 3 COS exposures are needed to map a spectral region –Approximately 15 COS exposures are needed to record the entire Ǻ region, which requires 2 STIS exposures –Approximately 8 COS exposures are needed to record the entire spectral region for a single STIS G230M exposure

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 14 of 19 Impacts: Ratios of exposure to achieve same S/N with degraded sensitivity ObjectFlux COS Exposure ratio to reach S/N = 10 25%-degraded S λ vs no-loss COS S λ with COS ground dark (with worst-case on-orbit dark) COS/STIS Exposure ratio to reach S/N = 10 25%-degraded COS S λ vs STIS S λ with COS ground dark (with worst-case on-orbit dark) 1.e (1.34) 0.43 (0.44) 1.e (1.41) 0.29 (0.36) 1.e (1.64) 0.09 (0.24) 5.e (1.69) 0.07 (0.23) 2.e (1.74) [>40 orbits] 0.05 (0.22) [>40 orbits] 1.e (1.76) [>40 orbits] 0.04 (0.21) [>40 orbits] 0.04 (0.21) [>40 orbits]

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 15 of 19 Impacts: Large STIS programs using E230M  with ProgramID orbits / No. Targets F λ [S/N] Title/Comment 8111 (C. Sneden) 57 / 1 1.e-14 [S/N~40] CS : A Rosetta Star for the Age and Early History of the Galaxy (ultra-metal poor Halo star) 8471 (E. Jenkins) 40 / e-15 [S/N<10] D/H in Quasar Absorption Line Systems 9040 (D. Reimers) 38 / 2 4. e-15 [S/N~15] Baryons in Intermediate Redshift (z > 1) O VI Absorbers (even split between targets) 9173 (J. Bechtold) 30 / 1 2. e-15 [S/N~10] The Pattern of Heavy Element Abundances in a Damped LyAlpha Galaxy 9186 (J. Webb) 45 / 2 5.e-15 [S/N~25] D/H in Lyman Limit 9359 (R. Cayrel) 48 / 1 3.e-14 [S/N=50] The Old Star CS , the Age of the Universe, and the Nature of the r-process (halo uranium star) 8673 (B. Jannuzi) 42 / 3 4. e-15 [S/N~15] The Properties of Lyman-Alpha Absorbers at Redshifts Between 0.9<z< (cy 13 planned) (J. Howk) 130 / 6 1. e-14 Testing the Warm-Hot IGM Paradigm (6 targets / even split between FUV and NUV)

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 16 of 19 Impacts: COS Orbits Required to Execute Large STIS programs using E230M (worst-case COS dark)  with ProgramID STIS orbits / No. Targets F λ [S/N] COSsettings COS orbits no-loss S λ Total orbits needed COS orbits degraded S λ Total orbits needed 8111 (C. Sneden) 57 / 1 1.e-14 [S/N~40] 8 15/setting12020/setting (E. Jenkins) 40 / e-15 [S/N<10] * 8 6/setting4810/setting (D. Reimers) 38 / 2 4. e-15 [S/N~15] 3 8/setting2412/setting (J. Bechtold) 30 / 1 2. e-15 [S/N~10] 3 5/setting158/setting (J. Webb) 45 / 2 5.e-15 [S/N~25] 8 10/setting8014/setting (R. Cayrel) 48 / 1 3.e-14 [S/N=50] 8 15/setting12020/setting (B. Jannuzi) 42 / 3 4. e-15 [S/N~15] 8 9/setting7213/setting (J. Howk) 130 / 6 1. e /setting6647/setting94 *=at STIS detection limit

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 17 of 19 Impacts  E230M used in programs requiring 1573 orbits over 7 cycles (excluding snaps and HDF-S) –Corresponds to ~225 orbits per cycle or 6-7% of HST observations per cycle  There were long E230M observations of faint targets: 430 of 1573 orbits were in programs requiring more than 15 orbits per E230M grating setting –About half of these are at the STIS effective faint limit (1-5 e-15) –Most of remainder are brighter targets (~1.e-14) requiring higher S/N (25-50). >These brighter targets are in the flux range where COS exposures are not seriously impacted by background considerations; hence COS exposure will scale with inverse of COS sensitivity degradation.  For the flux-level of faintest STIS targets (~1.e-15) COS exposures would be increased by 50-60% due to the assumed 25% sensitivity degradation: –However, as noted in table on slide 14, at these flux levels a 25%-degraded COS is still 4x more efficient than STIS.

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 18 of 19 Impacts: Summary and Questions  For observing the fainter targets with degraded S λ, two considerations important: –Brighter limiting flux for observation at a particular S/N –Increase of exposure time to reach a target at a specific S/N  For most STIS targets the modest difference in COS limiting flux due to the degradation does not appear to be an important consideration  Targets with the faintest fluxes attempted by STIS (~1.e-15) in 40 orbits are important, but with 25% degradation and worst-case background would require ~12-13 orbits for a single grating setting with COS (or ~7-8 orbits if no degradation). –Question: is 8 versus 12 orbits significant for science at this flux level? >Depends on number of targets and/or COS grating settings required >In most cases where multiple COS grating settings are needed; COS probably would not be chosen as the SI of choice  The difference in limiting flux between 25% degradation and no degradation (for S/N=10 at 2500 Å and worst-case background) is 6. e-16 versus 4. e-16 (or for best-case dark, 2. e-16) –Is there any significant new science in this regime that might be achievable with an un-degraded COS? >Most new discovery space expected to be with FUV channel

Keyes – 18 January 2007 Slide 19 of 19 Impacts: Summary  For the degradation scenario considered here, our assessment of the impact on likely GO science yields no compelling reason for NUV grating change