1 / 28

1. Summary of the status of the archive

1. Summary of the status of the archive. STAFF-SC NBR and HBR mode. ¤ Monthly produced on LPP web site: http://www.lpp.polytechnique.fr. a. STAFF-SC (continued).

questa
Télécharger la présentation

1. Summary of the status of the archive

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 1. Summary of the status of the archive • STAFF-SC • NBR and HBR mode ¤Monthly produced on LPP web site: http://www.lpp.polytechnique.fr 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  2. a. STAFF-SC (continued) • Leap second correction: A new version (03) of DWF and CS for 30-31st Dec. 2005, 1st, 2nd and 3rd January 2006 has been produced and will be delivered soon. • TCOR: we got recently (March 2009) time calibrated data until end of november 2007, DWF and then CS will be produced and delivered. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  3. Summary of the status of the archive(continued) ¤Note that 24 hours of CPU time are required to process one month of data Version 3 has a best decom since CD are concatenated (less waste) b. STAFF-SA For information : • STAFF-SC - L1 waveform: 4.2 Go/month. - L2 complex spectra: 3. Go/month. • STAFF-SA - L2 AGC, PSD, SM : 11. Go/month. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  4. 2. Status of the recommendations from 3rd Operation review (2008) • T1: About caveat information short term activities. STAFF-SA SM/PSD in eclipse: K. Yearby suggests to create them considering that the SRP (Sun Reference Pulse) times is not recorded in the S/C housekeeping in eclipse umbra. Under-development. • T2:(cf T1). The S/C housekeeping data are necessary to check the data consistency,and have to be available at CAA! S/C HK are not corrected by TCOR. Should be done? • T3: Calibration report: a first draft has been sent in january 2009. Available on CAA website. • T4: User Guide: idem. • T5:All data from year 2001-2009 will be provided before June 2010 depending on TCOR availability. • T13:STAFF-SC CS and STAFF-SA PSD/SM have been provided for years 2001-2005 (in December 2008). 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  5. 3. Status of the action items • CC8-AI-1: CLOSED (9th Cross-Cal. workshop). - Magnetic Field: one paper divided in 2 parts: STAFF-SC/FGM and STAFF-SC/STAFF-SA. Leader team: LPP. - Electric Field: one paper: STAFF-SA/EFW/Whisper. Leader team: LESIA. • CC8-AI-6: CLOSED (9th Cross-Cal. workshop). - Comparison STAFF-SC/FGM: * The 2 spin-plane DC field componentsin SR2 system (time resolution: a few spin period). * Filtered waveform components(time resolution: 1/25Hz and 0.5Hz<F<4Hz). - Comparison FGM/STAFF-SC/STAFF-SA: * Power spectra on one plot from low frequencies up to 4kHz average on a time scale chosen by the user. - Power dynamic spectra from the lowest frequency to 4 kHz in a reference system (SR2, …) chosen by the user: in electric (x, y, x+y) and in magnetic (x, y, z, x+y+z). 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  6. 3. Status of the action items (continued) • CC8-AI-7: CLOSED (9th Cross-Cal. workshop). Survey parameters (1-minute averages) - STAFF-SC: total power inferior to the proton gyrofrequency, above the proton gyrofrequency, and on all band (above fs). - STAFF-SA: total power for frequency inferior to electron gyrofrequency and superior to electron gyrofrequency. • CC8-AI-9: CLOSED (9th Cross-Cal. workshop). Multi-experiment plots: - For wave: on the whole frequency range. - For particles: on the whole energy range. • CC8-AI-13: CLOSED (9th Cross-Cal. workshop). Feasable to produce data files from the commissioning phase. Janv. 2001 is already delivered. - STAFF-SC: Sept. 2000-Jan. 2001 - STAFF-SA: Electric: from Dec. 2000. Magnetic: Sept. 2000-Jan. 2001 CC8-AI-45: OPEN, due date 10th Cross-Cal. Workshop. STAFF-SA suggests that WBD initiates the cross-calibration study between STAFF-SA and WBD. • STA08-AI-1 and AI-2: OPEN, due date 30 Sept. 2009. SM and PSD datasets caveat : cf T1. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  7. 4. Management 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  8. 5. Status of software development a. STAFF-SC production chain • L2 products -Version 02:An error on the label of the units in complex spectra (SC) has been discovered (nT/√Hz, instead of nT). Software correction has been done and data re-delivered. - Version 03:This version is under development to include some updates. Once written, the 2006 CS will be produced. New data headers will be included to allow the add of caveat files, to update laboratory name and emails. S/C HK used to calculate the phase are not corrected by TCOR.  Error on the spin phase is ~0.2°, but can reach 90° near the leap second (K. Yearby communication). Question: S/C HK will be corrected or not??? • Data quality verification tool: - to verify that the new format L2 data are consistent with the previous one. - to verify the quality of calibrated complex spectra. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  9. 5. Status of software development (continued) b. STAFF-SA production chain • L2 products - Version 03:to correct the phase angle between the solar sensor and the STAFF antennas, the error being of 38°. It has been applied in the level 1 level 2 processing. Data have been re-processed and re-delivered. - Version 04 is under-development: *Production of NEW dataset headers (SM, AGC, PSD): to include caveat files; to update laboratory name and emails. *Correction of EOF. *PSD negative values: caveat files. *SM: caveat files when PSD have negative values. *PSD/SM: caveat files in eclipses case will be produced and included in the header of the datafiles. • L3 products:the specificationof the chain is under-development. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  10. ALL S/C FGM S/C #1 STAFF 6. Experiment activity6.1 Calibration B a. S/C #1 problem: Reason identified Low inter-S/C distance  similar field intensity. B for S/C #1 is 10% lower than for the 3 other S/C. Always true. • Reason: This difference exists already in the transfer function established on ground (before launch). • Conclusion: S/C #1 transfer function suspicious   to be corrected. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  11. 6. 1 Calibration (continued) b. In flight calibration • Up to now: verification of the calibration signal intensity stability and thus the stability of the instrument performances. • General: Calibration signal Both input and output signals are recorded. re-calculated the transfer function at 7Hz and its time evolution. • Calibration Data: have to be exploited. • Software: for detailed analyses, remains to be developed. • Goal: • To correct the 10% difference between S/C #1 and the other S/C (2, 3, 4) for STAFF-SC. • To improve STAFF-SC calibration. • To justify the discrepancy between STAFF-SC and FGM. c.Continous calibration The new STAFF-SC method remains to be developed. This will require a lot of work, especially the validation with the present one. The work will be done for the end of 2009. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  12. 6. 2 Cross-calibration • Comparisons STAFF-SC/FGM • Context Re-started since the 8th Cross-Cal. meeting. • STAFF-SC data: L2 produced with the new software version, from same L1 delivered at CAA. • FGM Data: retrieved from CAA. • FGM interpolated on STAFF time resolution. • updated and consistent CAA dataset!! • Comparison: • (i) on the DC field from the spin signal. • (ii) on the spectra to study a possible frequency effect. • (iii) on the waveforms themselves. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  13. <B/B>(%)  (B/B)(%) <B> (nT) 2001 - Cover all the mission period -2006 a. Comparisons STAFF-SC/FGM (continued) Cases study: Evolution with time • the DC field (B) • FGM - STAFF From 2001 to 2006: -Different seasons, -Different DC field intensity, -Different magnetic wave activity . Amplitude No evolution with time Attention echelle de couleur 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  14. a. Comparisons STAFF-SC/FGM (continued) Principal results and perspectives • For the DC field comparison: (FGM-STAFF) - Amplitude and direction difference are constant whatever the conditions during all the mission. - S/C #1:STAFF is 20% lower than FGM. - S/C # 2, 3 and 4: STAFF is 10% lower than FGM. - Direction: 2° difference (all S/C). • The waveform and spectra comparisons: -The study seems to lead to the same conclusions. complete study remains to be done. Some software has to be developed: - To filter the 2 databases on a common frequency range: remove high frequencies on STAFF-SC and low frequencies on FGM. - Plots on several cases, Statistics… 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  15. SA SC 6. 2 Cross-calibration (continued) b. Comparison STAFF-SA with other experiments Bx Spectra (nT2/Hz) in the Solar Wind (black) and in the magnetospheric lobes (red). • Agreement between SA & SC: 2 ways to calculate an AVERAGE: • geometrical:<Log (SC)> OR • arithmetical:Log (<SC>) • Good continuity between STAFF-SC • and STAFF/SA due to the choice of • GEOMETRICAL MEAN for STAFF-SC • for SW and LB. STAFF-SA has a logarithmic internal response. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  16. S/C #1 Ey <F>~2.8 kHz S/C #2 Ex <F>~110 Hz b. Comparison STAFF-SA with other experiments (continued) • Agreement between SA & EFW • Comparisons of the Power Spectral Densities (PSD) at higher frequency in burst mode: • - Is improving with increasing frequency. • Is better on Ey than on Ex. • Agreement between SA & Whisper Comparison between 2 and 4kHz. Good up to ~3 kHz (slope ~1), but with a constant shift. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  17. 7. Status of data delivery ¤ 30-31/12 2005, 1-2-3/01 2006 have been reprocessed to correct the leap second. ¤¤ 2006: waiting for update on the CEF transformation 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  18. 8. Data delivery plan Planning for the second phase ¤Depending on TCOR availability (For the moment until Nov 2007) 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  19. 9. Status of documentation • Calibration report and user guide: - First draft have been produced and delivered (January 2008). - Both will be updated soon. • ICD: - A version 3.0 has been produced and delivered (January 2008). - A version 4.0 will be produced when new products are delivered. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  20. 10. Open issues • STAFF-SC: S/CHK used to calculate the phase are not corrected or not by TCOR. 0.2° error of spin phase if not included but 90° near the leap second (K. Yearby Communication). - Complex Spectra (CS): Good considering the quality except for the spin frequency where important noise is observed especially on the X and Y components close to perigee. But 10% (S/C #2, 3, 4) and 20% (S/C #1) of difference with FGM in the low frequency band. At low frequency (around 0.25 Hz) CS may contain some remnant of the spin signal when this one is very strong around perigee. • STAFF SA: - PSD negative: caveat files to inform the users not to take them into account. - SM: caveat files when PSD negative used for the SM diagonal terms (average). - SM/PSD: caveats in case of eclipse without any record of SRP. - Electric components may be affected by the EFW preamplifier failure on some of the spacecraft (see table). The STAFF SA onboard despin doesn’t permit to get rid of this problem and thus the 2 despun components telemetry data are affected. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  21. The End. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  22. a. Comparisons STAFF-SC/FGM (continued) (i) on the DC field from the spin signal. • Case 1:strong DC field (Very high up to 400nT), weak magnetic wave activity. • Case 2:weak DC field (Very low ~5nT), strong magnetic wave activity.  Constant difference even with strong waves. Statistics on 1H-event: Average and STD. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  23. <>(°) |<>|(°) ()(°) <B> 2001 - Cover all the mission period -2006 Evolution with time (2) (i) the DC field (B) Direction: phase difference • |<>|: Constant despite of the conditions. Always true. • Problem on <>: Regular sign inversion. • S/C #1, 2, 3, and 4: Roughly the same results.  Correction on S/C # 1: transfer function amplitude only. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  24. SA SC b. Comparison STAFF-SA/STAFF-SC: Bx Spectra in the Solar Wind (black) and in the magnetospheric lobes (red). STAFF-SA has a logarithmic internal response. • 2 ways to calculate an AVERAGE: - geometrical mean:<Log (SSC)> - arithmetical mean:Log (<SSC>) • On the figure: Good continuity between STAFF-SC and STAFF/SA due to the choice of GEOMETRICAL MEAN for STAFF-SC for SW and LB. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  25. S/C #1 S/C #1 Ey <F>~2.8 kHz Ey <F>~2.2 kHz STAFF-SA STAFF-SA WHISPER WHISPER S/C #1 Ey <F>~3.5 kHz SA sensitivity STAFF-SA WHISPER d. Comparisons between STAFF-SA and WHISPER: Case Study: 14 Feb. 2001, 05:30 to 08:00. Comparison between 2 and 4kHz. • Agreement between SA & Whisper:Good Up to ~3 kHz (slope ~1), but with a constant shift. • STAFF-SA sensitivity: Around 10-9(mV2/m2/Hz)at high freq. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  26. 6. Experiment cross-calibration activity: c.Comparisons STAFF-SC/FGM Context: Re-started since the 8th Cross-Cal. meeting. (i) on the DC field from the spin signal. 2 Case studies: • Strong DC field (Very high up to 400nT), weak magnetic wave activity < B/B  >  B/B = 21.650.08 <  >    = 2.140.05  Constant difference • Weak DC field (Very low ~5nT), strong magnetic wave activity < B/B >  B/B= 21.661.66 <  >    = 2.492.13  Constant difference even with strong waves 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  27. (i) the DC field (B) Study performed on several cases: • From 2001 to 2006. • Different seasons. • Different conditions: - Strong fields. - Weak fields. - Within or not a high magnetic wave activity environment. • FGM interpolated on STAFF time resolution. • Statistics on 1H-event: Average and STD. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

  28. (iii) on the waveforms itselves. • Long period looks different. • STAFF fluctuations amplitude ~1 Hz: ~10-12% lower than the one of FGM. • Aim: a more precised comparison remains to be done. Some software have to be developed. • Case Study:has to be done • Select strong events between 1-4Hz. • The 2 databases should be filtered in a common frequency range.  A processing is required: - Remove high frequencies on STAFF-SC. - Remove low frequencies on FGM. 4th Operation Review of CAA, ESTEC, 19 May 2009

More Related