1. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 1 4th Philae Science Workshop Venice, 30 March – 1 April ROMAP Status I. Apáthy, U. Auster, G. Berghofer, A.P. Remizov and the ROMAP team

2. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 2 Outline  ROMAP Status / Data received in 2008-2009  General status / Checkouts  Steins Flyby data  Operation during Cruise  SPM checkout  Interference tests  Asteroid flyby  On Comet Operation  Operation during descent  Operation during scientific sequences  Question List  List of CoI’s

3. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 3 AFT finger prints  During AFTs the variable magnetic field characteristics represent the power consumption of the Lander  The field is generated by a current loop caused by a electrical contact between Lander and Spacecraft structure  1nT corresponds approximately to 1mA

4. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 4 AFT finger prints PC8: 2008-07-10

5. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 5 AFT finger prints PC8: ROMAP ROLIS Mini Test 2008-07-10 Nearly undisturbed magnetic field data during the MINI test

6. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 6 AFT finger prints PC9: 2009-02-01

7. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 7 SPM Checkout PC8: 2008-08-01 HV housekeeping channel: blue line: Romap has been switched on a second time, went successfully after 18min into the surface mode level 0, after further 33min into level 1 and after further 66min into level 2

8. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 8 Steins Flyby  Steins FlyBy results analysis § Magnetic field data are disturbed by both, magnetic field generated by lander supply current and by spacecraft interferences. § Main disturbance source is the alternating heating of the MUPUS pen. Figures show the disturbance at CA +/-30min and zoomed out for 25sec.

9. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 9 Steins Flyby Fast mode data, offset corrected, +/-30min around CA Data are disturbed by about 100nT field jumps generated by the supply of the MUPUS pen heating

10. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 10 Steins Flyby Fast mode data, offset corrected, 25sec zoomed out, 10min before CA MUPUS disturbances can be characterized as two kind of pulses with a repetition rate of about 5sec.

11. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 11 Steins Flyby Spectrogram of the high frequency disturbances. The influence of the reaction wheels is clearly visible.

12. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 12 Steins Flyby  Results summary § Magnetic field measurement was disturbed by the MUPUS supply current. This interference occurs unexpected. In the flyby SCrOP no pulsed heating was mentioned. Consultation for mission planning could be better. For future scientific relevant mission phases, ROMAP request for power profiles of other active instruments. § For the first time both magnetometers (on Lander and Orbiter) worked in parallel at full s/c activity. A true interference test! ROMAP data can be used by the RPC-MAG team for further investigation of potential s/c disturbance sources. § The magnetic field measurement shows that Steins doesn’t interacts significantly (>1nT) with the solar wind. The global magnetization of Steins has to be therefore less than 1mAm²/kg.

13. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 13 Cruise Operation  RMP_1: Regular Switch-ON of ROMAP (Must)  MAG during ExtAFT, SPM during active checkouts  RMP_2: Check SPM high voltage (Desirable)  SPM high voltage level 0-2, level 3-4 optional  RMP_3: Activation of Penning HV(Optional)  Risk assessment is necessary before execution.  RMP_4: Common RPC and ROMAP measurements (Desirable)  During asteroids Fly-bys and solar wind passages  RMP_5: Support to Orbiter Interference Tests (Optional)  On request of RPC-MAG  RMP_6: New Philae internal interference tests (Must)  The Lander shall run on Secondary Battery only

14. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 14 Descent Operation  Measurement Scenario  switching on time: preferred 2-5 hours before release  switching off time: tbd. after landing  no command, ROMAP in Slow Mode  Expected observations  Lander Release  Landing gear & Romap boom deployment  Cometary Magnetism  Resources  Operation time: 6 hours (Mag)  Power consumption: 6Wh  Data volume: 0.22Mbyte

15. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 15 Cometary Operation  Measurement Intervals & Resources  Operation time: 4 hour intervals - day (Mag+SPM) 8 hour intervals - day and night (Mag +SPM)  Power consumption: 1 Watt continuously  Data volume: 60 kbyte/hour  Repetition necessary - long term lander  Constrains  4h surface mode noon centered  RPC on  Preferred Partners  Concert, Civa, Rolis, Sesame, Mupus ?

16. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 16 List of CoI’s H.U. Auster 1, I. Apathy 2, G. Berghofer 3, A. Remizov 4,7, R. Roll 4, K.H. Fornacon 1, K.H. Glassmeier 1, G. Haerendel 6, I. Hejja 2, E. Kührt 9, W. Magnes 3,D. Moehlmann 9, U. Motschmann 5, I. Richter 1, H. Rosenbauer 4, C.T. Russell 8, J. Rustenbach 4,6, K. Sauer 4, K. Schwingenschuh 3, I. Szemerey 4 and R. Waesch 9, 1 Institut für Geophysik und extraterrestrische Physik der TU Braunschweig, Germany 2 KFKI Budapest, AEKI, P.O. Box 49, H-1525 Budapest, Hungary 3 Space Research Institute Graz, Schmiedlstrasse 6, A-8042 Graz, Austria 4 MPS Lindau, P.O. Box 20, D-37189 Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany 5 Institut für TheoretischePhysik der Technischen Universität Braunschweig 6 MPE Garching Giessenbachstrasse, Postfach 1603, D-85740 Garching, Germany 7 IKI Moscow, Profsoyuznaja Street 84/32, 117810 Moscow, Russia 8 IGPP at UCLA Los Angeles, California 90095-1567, USA 9 DLR, Institut für Planetenforschung, Rutherfordstrasse 2, D-12489 Berlin, Germany

17. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 17 Finito Thank you for your attention!

18. 4th Philae Science Workshop, Venice 2009 18 Question List (1) Which major open issues need to be performed with your Philae experiment during cruise and when? (2) Is the instrument fully commissioned and ready for the on-comet science during the 1st 5 days after landing and is it expected to work according to specifications? (3) If your answer to question (2) is not a clear "yes", please provide explanations on to what is missing, when it should be done and whether full performance is likely to be recovered? (4) Is the instrument fully commissioned and ready for the on-comet science of the long-term mission and is it expected to work according to specifications? (5) If your answer to question (4) is not a clear "yes", please provide explanations on to what is missing, when it should be done and whether full performance is likely to be recovered? (6) What are the science goals for the long-term mission and which specific modes of the experiment are to be used, what are the relevant requirements and constraints? (7) What are the actual values for the power, energy, data volume and rate as well as any other parameter constraining the instrument modes? Penning see report See report See SSR Yes (no) Penning see report