You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It was mentioned on the call today that thing that would be useful to know is the rate at which bright pixels move across the camera. This issue is to discuss this in detail.
For this, I propose the following variables:
Astri Site with full camera fov, but low min gaia magnitude (best to use probably ~8). Healpix level will need to be 11.
A very bright star, I personally like Vela. Set RA and DEC to be a couple of degrees off centre.
Repeated runs of NSB at 10 minute intervals over a couple of hours.
Then analyse how far bright star has moved.
Edit:The runs `results/EtaCarinae_12degfov180 and results/EtaCarinae_delta20mins180 may also be useful as they're the same field 20 minutes apart.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I ran nsb fields, pointing at the zenith under half moonlit conditions, at very short (3 minute) time intervals for the purpose of understanding how stars move through the field on short timescales.
Despite the PSF not being well modelled, it appears that bright stars move to adjacent pixels over a roughly 15 minute timespan, with light being partially 'split' between multiple pixels and the ratio changing over time.
It was mentioned on the call today that thing that would be useful to know is the rate at which bright pixels move across the camera. This issue is to discuss this in detail.
For this, I propose the following variables:
Astri Site with full camera fov, but low min gaia magnitude (best to use probably ~8). Healpix level will need to be 11.
A very bright star, I personally like Vela. Set RA and DEC to be a couple of degrees off centre.
Repeated runs of NSB at 10 minute intervals over a couple of hours.
Then analyse how far bright star has moved.
Edit:The runs `results/EtaCarinae_12degfov180 and results/EtaCarinae_delta20mins180 may also be useful as they're the same field 20 minutes apart.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: