Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantIf it is a radial velocity effect, the wavelength error should be proportional to the wavelength ie the error should be greater at H alpha than at H gamma say. If as you say the error is roughly constant in wavelength and given that Demetra is in beta testing, I think I would double checking against a reduction done using ISIS for example in case Demetra is incorrectly measuring the relative positions of lamp and star spectrum for some reason.
Small absolute calibration offsets between internal lamp and the sky are not uncommon though, due to slight differences in the geometry of the light paths and we are talking a fraction of a pixel here so even if the error persists, it may not be anything connected with the star. (Are you seeing it consistently on any other stars?) Measurements of the solar spectrum (eg the daylight sky) can be used to quantify these sorts of instrumental offsets.
Another thing to check is instrument stability. I measured my ALPY to be very stable but changes in temperature and orientation can produce small shifts. Did you measure the lamp spectrum at the same time as the star with the telescope still aimed in that direction? Are lamp spectra reproduceable before and after the observation
Cheers
Robin
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantAlso the ratio of H alpha/H beta emission in nebulae for example is useful for measuring the amount of interstellar extinction eg as described here
https://web.williams.edu/Astronomy/research/PN/nebulae/exercise2.php
In fact there are a number of interesting measurements you can make based on measuring the relative intensity of various lines in planetary nebulae using just a low resolution spectrograph, as described in Francois Teyssier’s low resolution spectroscopy observers guide
http://www.astronomie-amateur.fr/Documents%20Spectro/SpectroscopieBasseResolution_En.pdf
and detailed on his website here
http://www.astronomie-amateur.fr/feuilles/Spectroscopie/NGC2392.html
Robin
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantThe H alpha emission line profile is very useful for indicating the presence of and tracking the movement of material in the neighborhood of the star such as outflowing winds, eg in P Cygni, accretion inflows eg in T Tauri, rotating discs eg in Be stars, explosions eg in novae and type II supernovae, transfer of material between stars eg in symbiotics. It is not the only useful line though. eg the narrower metal lines are better if you want to measure a star’s radial velocity and some systems don’t have hydrogen eg WR stars where the winds can be tracked using eg C III, IV lines (as in the current WR140 colliding wind campaign) or type 1a supernovae where the Si absorption line is the key one to look for. In low temperature systems you might look for low excitation lines like the 7699A K line in eps Aur which I used to track the density and velocity of the material in the cool eclipsing disc.
Robin
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantIt 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
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantHi 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
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantHi 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
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantHi 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.
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantI 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
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantOK 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
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantOK… 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)
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantHi 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
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantCorrection. 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
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantHi 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
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantThe spectrum features do look more F7 (HD222368) than G8 (HD 38751)
Robin
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantHi 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
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantHi 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
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantHi 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
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantHi 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
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantHi 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
Robin Leadbeater
ParticipantHi 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
-
AuthorPosts