Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
It all looks pretty clear to me reading “From the President” in the latest copy of Journal. It is obvious that it is just an electronic pin board for members to put up what they like, when they like ,no more, no less. The simple search facility is perhaps a bonus but in no way can this be considered a database of observations and clearly was never intended to be one. (That would be a very different beast, more along the lines of the VSS or the new spectroscopy databases). As the president says in the Journal concerning content posted on a member’s page:- “Don’t forget however that you should also send your observations to the appropriate section director to ensure they are properly logged”
Robin
Hi Tony,
Yes ISIS can generate a BeSS compliant fits spectrum. You can test your spectra at the BeSS website without actually submitting it to see if it passes. Submitted spectra are then examined by a human for quality before being included. Note that you have to sign up and supply details of your setup before submitting spectra.
The amateur Be star monitoring program was originally set up for high resolution observations to study the shape of the H alpha line profile. (The LHIRES III spectrograph was designed around this requirement as at the time there was no commercial instrument capable of sufficient resolution). If you are measuring targets which are too faint for high resolution or are rarely observed or if you pick up a significant change in any target (eg in EW or from absorption to emission or vice versa) even at low resolution, this would definitely be of interest and should be reported on ARAS/spectro-l forums and submitted to BeSS. The companion website ARAS BeAm details which stars currently need observations.
http://arasbeam.free.fr/?lang=en
see in particular “why we observe Be stars” in the side-bar
Cheers
Robin
Hi Jack,
Take a number of long exposure darks, at least as long as your longest exposure and with the camera at the same temperature. (I normally try to take 20, using cloudy nights)
Median combine them and subtract the master bias (offset) (ISIS for example can do all this for you) The result is the thermal contribution from the camera, which can be scaled to correct any length exposure
This page describes the master images needed for ISIS (In French but Google translates well enough)
http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/isis/guide_lhires/master/calib.htm
and this page (in English) describes how to generate generate them in ISIS
http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/isis/guide_lhires/tuto1_en.htm
see section 3 – spectral calibration
Cheers
Robin
Hi Kevin,
Here is the reference I think Andy is referring to.
https://britastro.org/node/8153
A MILES A star is used as a calibration reference and then to verify the quality of my observations and data reduction, other MILES stars were measured based on the calibration from the reference star and compared with what they should look like.
I use PHD 2 to guide both on the slit or offset using a field star. The later version had some features added compared with the original PHD to help with spectroscopy guiding, particularly the ability to guide on a specific XY position which can be saved and recalled and to nudge the guide position a fraction of a pixel at a time. It is not perfect when guiding on the hamburger shaped split star image though as it has a tendency to hunt. Others swear by AstroArt which has a special algorithm for guiding on the slit and is being improved in other areas specifically for this application.
http://www.spectro-aras.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=771
To find my targets (some of which are extremely faint when I am using the ALPY 200 – down to mag 17) I use a webcam mounted on the guidescope plus guider image to check and update if neccesary the alignment on nearby bright stars (using an EQ6 with eqmod and Cartes du Ciel) then zone in on the required field using the guider image. Astrometry. net usually solves the ALPY guider field for me if necessary but usually comparing the guider image with the projected DSS image in CdC gets me there. For me though spectroscopy was the driver that pushed me to a simple permanent setup. The setup and teardown time was just too time consuming.
http://www.threehillsobservatory.co.uk/astro/observatory/observatory.htm
Cheers
Robin
OK I now understand what ISIS is doing when it calculates the coefficients. It adds 1 to all the pixel positions before calculating the fit. You can see this in the attached trivial example where I manually entered a series of wavelengths and pixel positions where the wavelength = pixel ^2 before making a 2nd order fit. It only gave the expected coefficients when I subtracted 1 from the pixel positions.
I still have no idea why though! (For information VSpec calculates the coefficients conventionally)
Cheers
Robin
OK… The coefficients generated by ISIS using the automatic line finding calibration systems and displayed in the GO window (as used in the predefined and file calibration modes) work correctly if entered into the dispersion function accessible from the profile tab to give the correct calibration so at least ISIS is internally consistent. It is still not clear why using these coefficients in Excel for example does not produce the right results though. Perhaps the primary fit that ISIS does is connected with this. The px values in that fit do not appear to be pixel values so perhaps some resampling is done in this preliminary calibration and the final calibration coefficients are calculated relative to this generic fit? (pure speculation on my part though)
Hi David,
This anomaly does not seem to be limited to the file mode. I just checked John’s coefficients and the resulting fit posted above and they do not seem to agree either (The residuals are around 3-4 Angstrom)
I’ve no idea what is going on either but the coefficients in the GO window do not seem to be the correct ones to give a good calibration fit so presumably would not work if transferred manually to the dispersion window.
I also went back to v5.4.1 and this does not transfer the coefficients to the dispersion window automatically when using the ALPY 600 balmer line mode either
All very strange
Robin
Correction. I just tested this and ISIS (v5.7) does not appear to transfer the calibration fit coefficients to the dispersion window. Perhaps this is a bug introduced in a later version. You can still calibrate other spectra using the Balmer lines in the calibration image as explained at the end of the tutorial part 1 but if you want to use the predefined coefficients described in part 2, I think you would need to transfer them manually.
BTW the translation in some parts is not so good because Christian added some sections later which he translated
Cheers
Robin
Hi John,
If you use the “no ALPY calibration module” setting in ISIS it automatically finds and uses the first 7 Balmer lines in the star spectrum, plus the head of the telluric band at 6872A for calibration. Only the resulting calibration fit coefficients are transferred into the dispersion window so you can use them for subsequent calibration of further spectra (using the “predefined dispersion equation” option). The list of lines for manual entry shown there are just what happened to be left over from a previous manual run. If you delete them all for example before making the calibration you should see that only the coefficients are filled in after calibration.
HTH
Robin
Hi Steve,
You could use Paolo Berardi’s spreadsheet which has RA/Dec.
I think Francois Teyssiers spreadsheet which allows you to find all the close A/B stars with low extrinction also identifies the MILES stars
https://britastro.org/node/8152
If you do go back to the original MILES source make sure you chose the spectra uncorrected for extinction
Cheers
Robin
Hi Kate
I am able to obtain an acceptable calibration (RMS 1.25 A) with your files using the neon file to measure the smile. I will email you a set of output files and screenshots which hopefully will allow you to reproduce it.
Cheers
Robin
Hi Kate,
What smile settings have you used? If you do not have a calibration module, you can measure the smile using sky lines. I tried your images assuming vertical lines with no smile (by setting the Y smile to the same as the spectrum position and the radius to a large number eg 999999) and got an RMS of 1.14 A using a pixel size of 4.68um
————————————————————————–
Wavelength fit deviation
point #1 x = 704.340 lambda = 3834.491 dlambda = 0.899
point #2 x = 725.984 lambda = 3889.299 dlambda = -0.249
point #3 x = 758.121 lambda = 3970.993 dlambda = -0.913
point #4 x = 809.533 lambda = 4102.375 dlambda = -0.625
point #5 x = 901.554 lambda = 4339.253 dlambda = 1.227
point #6 x = 1102.840 lambda = 4861.706 dlambda = -0.366
point #7 x = 1771.045 lambda = 6562.745 dlambda = 0.065
point #8 x = 1898.937 lambda = 6872.037 dlambda = -0.037
————————————————————————–
Coefficient a4 : 3.006774E-11
Coefficient a3 : -2.735230E-07
Coefficient a2 : 6.837095E-04
Coefficient a1 : 1.92972
Coefficient a0 : 2221.769
————————————————————————–
RMS : 1.116470
————————————————————————–
In his ALPY tutorial, Christian Buil suggests an RMS of 2-3 A maximum is acceptable for this calibration method
Cheers
Robin
Hi Tony,
A couple of ideas:-
It looks like there is a huge hole in the spectrum from ~4500-6600 where the response should be highest. Could there be saturation in these regions ?
Alternatively could you have set the binning zone limits very narrow or offset from the middle of the spectrum so it is missing part of the spectrum in the middle wavelengths ?
Cheers
Robin
Hi Kate,
There is still something wrong I am afraid. The RMS fit should be better than 1 Angstrom. For example I have just run a Balmer line calibration on one of my recent reference stars and get the following results (ALPY 600 2xbin 4.54um pixels, pixel size set to 8.97A (3123/348) )
————————————————————————–
Wavelength fit deviation
point #1 x = 143.059 lambda = 3835.148 dlambda = 0.242
point #2 x = 154.045 lambda = 3888.984 dlambda = 0.066
point #3 x = 170.621 lambda = 3970.476 dlambda = -0.396
point #4 x = 197.253 lambda = 4101.992 dlambda = -0.242
point #5 x = 245.161 lambda = 4340.028 dlambda = 0.452
point #6 x = 349.413 lambda = 4861.473 dlambda = -0.133
point #7 x = 696.362 lambda = 6562.787 dlambda = 0.023
point #8 x = 762.564 lambda = 6872.013 dlambda = -0.013
————————————————————————–
Coefficient a4 : 3.601046E-10
Coefficient a3 : -1.409022E-06
Coefficient a2 : 1.183699E-03
Coefficient a1 : 4.63613
Coefficient a0 : 3146.763
————————————————————————–
RMS : 0.408720
————————————————————————–
If you email me your spectrum image fits file, I can see if i can get a better result if you like
EDIT: typo in pixel size corrected (4.54 not 5.45)
Cheers
Robin
Hi Kate, The pixels size is usually not too critical whe using the H alpha lines as there are no other lines nearby but it can be super critical with the calibration module where it needs to distinguish between some very closely spaced lines
I find Christian Buil’s tip here
http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/isis/guide_alpy/resume_calibration.htm
works well for calculating the pixel value to use:
“A tip for calculate the scaling factor p (or virtual pixel size). Use the formula:
p = 3123 / dx
where dx is the distance between the H alpha and H beta lines measured in pixels along the horizontal axis in a raw image. Try to find the distance to the nearest pixel (the reading of the mouse pointer is sufficient). In the example, the H alpha line is at x = 882, while the H beta line is at x = 535. So dx = 882-534 = 347, and thus the pixel size to adopt is p = 3123/347 = 9.00 pixels.”
Another trick is to keep an eye on the RMS value that ISIS generates in the running commentary on the “go” page when it is running the calibration fit. If you keep on repeatedly running varying the pixel size slightly, it should be obvious when the program locks onto the right lines as the RMS will suddenly tumble to a very low value.
Finally double check you are picking the H alpha line and not the nearby Telluric band as the reference point. (It has been known !)
Cheers
Robin
Is this for spectroscopy? If so you can’t use twilight or LEDs. You need a light source with a smooth spectrum with no features.
EDIT: you might be able to get away with LEDs in some parts of the wavelength range in higher resolution spectroscopy but I dont know of any LEDs which have a smooth enough spectrum or wide enough wavelength coverage for the ALPY for example
Cheers
Robin
Hi Nick
The defect (or cosmetic as it is called in ISIS) map is to catch the hot and warm pixels which will have unreliable values after the dark subtraction (ie the pixels will either already be saturated or will become prematurely saturated during the exposure, so the dark subtraction will not work correctly.) The same procedure is sometimes used in imaging where it prevents dark holes appearing in the image after dark subtraction where fully saturated hot pixels are for example. The cosmetic file is generated from the master dark and a threshold is set above which the pixels are considered defective. I have mine set to 500 currently which is well above the noise and generates around 100 pixels in a 10 min exposure with my ATK314
Cheers
Robin
Hi Steve,
At least the ALPY is stable enough not to have to go to the extreme of taking flats with the scope still aimed at the target like you have to do with the LHIRES if you have a camera with small scale ripples.
http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/fringes/index.html
Before I had the calibration module, I injected the light from the RELCO calibration lamp via a reversed flip mirror. Perhaps a diffused incandescent light source could also be used this way to produce a flat.
Cheers
Robin
