![]() |
Observing Condition Constraints
|
This out-of-date page will remain available indefinitely but is no longer maintained.
All queue-mode observations must have observing condition constraints specified by the proposer that describe the minimum (i.e. poorest) conditions under which the observation should be executed. Classical programmes generally need only specify the sky background constraint (and even then it is usually relevant only for optical observations), however the information presented here is useful as a guide of what conditions and performance visiting observers can expect. The observing condition constraints must be specified in the Phase I proposal to avoid loading the queue entirely with one type of conditions (e.g. best image quality).
The constraints are divided into five categories (if appropriate, values for Mauna Kea and Cerro Pachon are given separately):
The specific properties corresponding to these categories usually are wavelength dependent and will not be relevant for all observations. For example, the sky background at visible wavelengths is dominated by the lunar phase and moon-to-target angle, at near-IR wavelengths by telluric OH line emission and at thermal-IR wavelengths by the total column of water vapour above the observatory. For the image quality, sky transparency and background we have chosen to represent the variation in these conditions (which is deterministic in the case of visible sky brightness, statistical in the case of water vapour column, for example) by a percentile representing the frequency of occurrence of the specific property. Observing constraints are specified in terms of these percentiles (see examples below) e.g. (best) 20%-ile, 50%-ile (better than median) etc.
This page provide a translation between the frequency of occurrence and the specific value for the relevant property as well as further information and guidance on their use by observers. The emphasis is on providing observers with these constraints in meaningful units (and corresponding to those used in the integration time calculator) as well as indicating their likelihood.
Temporal constraints, e.g. for time-critical observations or periodic monitoring, and GMOS-specific constraints (such as those which affect mask cutting) are (to be) described elsewhere.
Several examples serve to illustrate how the specific scientific objectives of a program might affect the users choice of constraints:
Wavelength regime | WFS | Constraint | |||
20%-ile | 70%-ile | 85%-ile | "any" (100%-ile) | ||
V (0.5µm) | peripheral | 0.45 | 0.80 | 1.20 | 1.90 |
on-instrument | 0.45 | 0.80 | 1.10 | ||
I (0.9µm) | peripheral | 0.45 | 0.80 | 1.10 | 1.70 |
on-instrument | 0.40 | 0.75 | 1.05 | ||
J (1.2µm) | peripheral | 0.40 | 0.60 | 0.85 | 1.55 |
on-instrument | 0.35 | 0.55 | 0.80 | ||
K (2.2µm) | peripheral | 0.35 | 0.55 | 0.80 | 1.40 |
on-instrument | 0.30 | 0.50 | 0.75 | ||
L (3.4µm) | peripheral | 0.35 | 0.50 | 0.75 | 1.25 |
on-instrument | 0.30 | 0.45 | 0.70 | ||
N (10µm) | peripheral | 0.40 | 0.45 | 0.65 | 1.05 |
Note that these values
apply to the telescope pointing at zenith. The performance degradation away from
the zenith can be approximated crudely as (air mass)^0.6. The links in the table (to more
details) provides more specific information.
Explanation of table entries:
Note that the relevant parameter here is image quality and not simply seeing, that is, a wind speed distribution and the telescope performance (e.g. windshake, servo and wavefront sensor characteristics) have been incorporated into the analysis. The model was adapted by Mark Chun from original Mathematica calculations by Charles Jenkins (see also Jenkins 1998, MNRAS, 294, 69) with a subsequent correction (in August 2002) by Phil Puxley to the extant seeing distribution.
Interpretation of the table is shown in the following example. An
image at K of a target at zenith with a bright guide star in the Peripheral Wavefront
Sensor would be expected to have a 50% EED of no more than 0.35 arcsec 20% of the time and
no more than 0.55 arcsec 70% of the time.
Wavelength regime | Constraint | Comments | ||||
20%-ile | 50%-ile | 70%-ile | 90%-ile | any | ||
optical | photometric | patchy cloud | cloudy | usable | ||
near-IR (1-2.5µm) | photometric | patchy cloud | cloudy | usable | ||
near-IR (3-5µm) | photometric | patchy cloud | unusable | not usable under 90% or poorer conditions due to emissivity | ||
mid-IR (8-25µm) | low sky noise | cloudless | patchy cloud |
Explanation of table entries:
Wavelength regime | Constraint | Comments | |||
20%-ile | 50%-ile | 80%-ile | any | ||
optical | any | see note 1 | |||
near-IR (1-2.5µm) | 1.0mm | any | Precipitable H2O; affects region between J, H and K bands. See spectra. | ||
near-IR (3-5µm) | 1.0mm | 1.6mm | 3mm | any | Precipitable H2O. See spectra. |
mid-IR (8-25µm) | 1.0mm | 1.6mm | 3mm | any | Precipitable H2O. See spectra. |
Wavelength regime | Constraint | Comments | |||
20%-ile | 50%-ile | 80%-ile | any | ||
optical | any | see note 1 | |||
near-IR (1-2.5µm) | 2.3mm | any | Precipitable H2O; affects region between J, H and K bands. See spectra . | ||
near-IR (3-5µm) | 2.3mm | 4.3mm | 7.6mm | any | Precipitable H2O. See spectra. |
mid-IR (8-25µm) | 2.3mm | 4.3mm | 7.6mm | any | Precipitable H2O. See spectra. |
Explanation of table entries:
Caution:
observations at thermal IR wavelengths should use the same constraint for sky transparency
(water vapour) and for sky background, otherwise the tighter of the two constraints will
be used when scheduling.
Wavelength regime | Constraint | Comments | |||
20%-ile | 50%-ile | 80%-ile | any | ||
optical | µV > 21.3 ('darkest') |
µV > 20.7 ('dark') |
µV > 19.5 ('grey') |
µV > 18.0 ('bright') |
V-band mag/sq arcsec; sky colour is different for each bin |
near-IR (1-2.5µm) | 'nighttime' (J~16.0, H~13.9, K~13.5) |
'twilight' | mag/sq arcsec; worse in twilight because of solar excitation | ||
near-IR (3-5µm) | 1.0mm | 1.6mm | 3.0mm | any | Precipitable H2O |
mid-IR (8-25µm) | 1.0mm | 1.6mm | 3.0mm | any | Precipitable H2O |
Wavelength regime | Constraint | Comments | |||
20%-ile | 50%-ile | 80%-ile | any | ||
optical | µV > 21.3 ('darkest') |
µV > 20.7 ('dark') |
µV > 19.5 ('grey') |
µV > 18.0 ('bright') |
V-band mag/sq arcsec; sky colour is different for each bin |
near-IR (1-2.5µm) | 'nighttime' (J~16.0, H~13.9, K~13.5) |
'twilight' | mag/sq arcsec; worse in twilight because of solar excitation | ||
near-IR (3-5µm) | 2.3mm | 4.3mm | 7.6mm | any | Precipitable H2O |
mid-IR (8-25µm) | 2.3mm | 4.3mm | 7.6mm | any | Precipitable H2O |
Explanation of joint table entries:
Caution: thermal IR
observations should use the same constraint for sky transparency (water vapour) and for
sky background, otherwise the tighter of the two constraints will be applied when
scheduling.
This constraint (not used in Phase I proposals, but to be used in Phase II and in the ITCs) defines the maximum air mass [= sec(zenith distance) = 1/cos(zd)] at which the target should be observed. The air mass affects the sky transparency (e.g. the general atmospheric extinction as well as the depth and breadth of specific absorption bands due to atmospheric constituents such as water vapour and CO2), sky brightness and image quality. As a crude first approximation, the sky transparency and brightness each become poorer in proportion to the increase in air mass (e.g. sky brightness is twice as great at air mass = 2 than at air mass = 1) and the image quality degrades as (air mass)^0.6.
Last update August 28, 2002; Phil Puxley and Bernadette Rodgers