Fix spin and precession periods #13
Conversation
|
@ziotom78 can you please cross-check this? |
|
Ok, the periods now look ok. I don't remember where did we take the angles for the spin axis and the precession angle, they differ slightly from the ones listed here: https://zzz.physics.umn.edu/ipsig/optimizingscanstrategy/start (30° and 65°). But i clearly remember I checked them. |
|
@ziotom78 I have no idea, in https://github.com/zonca/pico-simulations/tree/fix-scan-periods/calibration_sim we mention we used https://zzz.physics.umn.edu/ipsig/baseline, but that also has 30 and 65 and looking at wiki history I don't see it changed ever. I added this fix, at this point we should re-check everything. |
Since the 1/f knee frequency is 10 mHz and the period is therefore 100 s, I think it would be better to decrease the baseline to 10 s. It will not change the pointings, but the maps produced by Madam will be less noisy. The baseline is in seconds, as stated here: https://github.com/hpc4cmb/toast/blob/master/pipelines/toast_satellite_sim.py#L185
|
Ok, I rechecked everything, I took the advantage of this review to update the dipole parameters to Planck 2015, and to slightly reduce the sampling rate. It is still 10 times smaller than the nominal, but this helps in keeping the files small without compromising the results too much. From my point of view, this PR can now be merged. |
|
good thanks! |
closes #12