Orr readiness
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 33

ORR Readiness PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 72 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

ORR Readiness. Mark Colavita & Peter Wizinowich KISWG Pasadena 10/29/2003. Question to Address (2/3/2003 pre-ORR presentation). At the ORR Will the instrument be capable of achieving the requirements in the PLRA at the start of routine science operations? (V 2 mode)

Download Presentation

ORR Readiness

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Orr readiness

ORR Readiness

Mark Colavita & Peter Wizinowich

KISWG

Pasadena 10/29/2003

KISWG 10/29/2003


Question to address 2 3 2003 pre orr presentation

Question to Address (2/3/2003 pre-ORR presentation)

  • At the ORR

    • Will the instrument be capable of achieving the requirements in the PLRA at the start of routine science operations? (V2 mode)

    • What are the relevant performance metrics and current performance? (V2 mode)

  • Today

    • What are the specific performance requirements, and how do they relate to the PLRA?

    • How will compliance be demonstrated?

    • Are they technically achievable?

    • What is the current performance?

    • What is the plan to get from current performance to ORR? Is the plan realistic?

    • What are the risks for routine science operation? How will they be mitigated? Are there additional risks not yet identified that need to be addressed?

KISWG 10/29/2003


Specific performance requirements 2 3 2003 pre orr presentation

Specific Performance Requirements (2/3/2003 pre-ORR presentation)

  • PLRA* requirements for V2

    • System Performance Goals

      • Provide 5% rms accuracy V2 amplitude measurements for targets as faint as K=9 using the two Keck telescopes

      • Provide at least 90% uptime for the interferometer and 90% uptime for the two 10m telescopes and their AO systems

    • System Performance Requirement

      • Provide at least 90% uptime for the interferometer and 80% uptime for the two 10m telescopes and their AO systems

*Program Level Requirements Appendix to Navigator Program Plan

KISWG 10/29/2003


Pre orr testing from oct observing run

Pre-ORR Testing from Oct Observing Run

  • Targets included measurements of well-characterized PTI binary

    • Used neutral density filters to attenuate this bright star to simulate K=9 ORR requirements

      • Data accuracy still being assessed

      • Observation

        • K=9 spec will need to be qualified with a V or R magnitude, as stars faint to AO are less well corrected, and provide less flux into fringe tracker

          • (Fringe tracker measures flux * Strehl)

        • Plan to provide this for ORR

    • Also tests of fringe tracker low-V2 tracking limit

KISWG 10/29/2003


Oct data most processing still in progress

Oct Data(Most processing still in-progress)

KISWG 10/29/2003


Prior may jan accuracy tests

Prior (May, Jan) accuracy tests

KISWG 10/29/2003


Other tests

Other tests

KISWG 10/29/2003


Orr readiness

Provide at least 90% uptime for the interferometer and 90% uptime for the two 10m telescopes and their AO systems (2/3/2003 pre-ORR presentation)

  • Quoted directly from the PLRA

    • NB: not a measure of “open shutter time” or efficiency, which is actually quite low for any instrument, like IF, that is calibration-limited

    • A measure equal to 100% minus the downtime required to fix IF hardware or software problems during scheduled science observing

  • Telescopes/AO addressed in a few slides

  • Demonstrating compliance

    • Mostly proper bookkeeping

      • Identify a timekeeper to track system state vs. time

      • Demonstrate compliance on two runs prior to ORR with good weather and median or better seeing

KISWG 10/29/2003


System uptime scans per hour

System uptime & scans per hour

KISWG 10/29/2003


Uptime summary

Uptime summary

  • Interferometer uptime  90% 2/5 runs

  • Facility uptime  90% 1/5 runs;  80% 3/5 runs

  • October run problem areas

    • Major

      • Telescope control system crashes

        • K2 continued to have problems after the IF run supporting DEIMOS

        • Problem may be resolved – need to test

    • Minor – most in process of being addressed

      • Facility

        • AO offload problem (possible interaction from IF angle tracker)

        • K2 AO Wavefront controller crashes

      • Interferometer

        • Sequencer crashes

        • Aligner crate reboots

        • Telemetry server memory growth – solved

  • Goal is to achieve ORR metric performance on next two runs

KISWG 10/29/2003


Performance functionality efficiency goals 2 3 2003 pre orr presentation

Performance, functionality, efficiency goals (2/3/2003 pre-ORR presentation)

  • These follow from the desire to maximize the science achievable at the specified performance level

KISWG 10/29/2003


Performance functionality efficiency goals 1 2 3 2003 pre orr presentation

Performance, functionality, efficiency goals, 1(2/3/2003 pre-ORR presentation)

KISWG 10/29/2003


System uptime scans per hour1

System uptime & scans per hour

KISWG 10/29/2003


Scans per hour

Scans per hour

  • 86 science plus engineering scans in 22.5 clear hours

  • Peak scans on each of 4 nights:

    • 2, 3, 6, 8

  • Sustained high throughput impacted by

    • System faults

    • Ease of observing target

      • Faint targets, requiring optimization of AO, KAT, FATCAT, or which end up not being trackable, count against scans per hour

      • Weather (light to moderate cirrus, which doesn’t count against weather loss)

    • May need to qualify our 6 scan/hr goal to apply to sources not pushing system limits

Night 3 of Oct run

Peak scans/hr

for this night

KISWG 10/29/2003


Performance functionality efficiency goals 1 updates to 2 3 2003 pre orr presentation

Performance, functionality, efficiency goals, 1updates to 2/3/2003 pre-ORR presentation

KISWG 10/29/2003


Performance functionality efficiency goals 2

Performance, functionality, efficiency goals, 2

KISWG 10/29/2003


Performance functionality efficiency goals 3

Performance, functionality, efficiency goals, 3

KISWG 10/29/2003


Procedural requirements for the orr

Procedural Requirements for the ORR

  • From the PLRA:

    • “Provide an operational infrastructure including trained staff, facilities, hardware and software, so that the Keck Interferometer will operate as a facility for use by the community scientists.”

KISWG 10/29/2003


Procedural requirements for the orr1

Procedural Requirements for the ORR

  • From LaPiana: “Need (A) requirements which you can track against your progress to actually achieve the metric performances, and the (B) ability to do it routinely and having an organization in place that is well trained to do so with robust and stable software(at WMKO & MSC).”

  • Questions to address at the ORR from LaPiana:

    • Will the ground data system (at WMKO and at MSC) implementation and testing be complete prior to the start of routine science operations?

    • Will the required operations plans and procedures, including those for anomaly responses, be completed and tested prior to start of routine science operations?

    • Are the operations organization, staff and facilities in place (WMKO and MSC)?

    • Will the necessary training activities be completed prior to start of routine science operations?

    • Are the necessary set of commands and sequences ready to support nominal operations? Will all action items, liens, etc., be satisfactorily dispositioned?

    • Are the risks well understood and acceptable for routine science operations?

KISWG 10/29/2003


1 ground data system completion

1. Ground Data System Completion

  • Will the ground data system (at WMKO and at MSC) implementation and testing be complete prior to the start of routine science operations?

  • At the pre-ORR: The primary demonstration will be successful CARA operation of the interferometer for V2 science.

    • We will track this performance over the next ~ 7 runs.

    • The last 3-runs prior to the ORR will be performed at the full ORR requirement level.

  • CARA personnel have successfully operated the interferometer for most of these runs. We have tracked performance during these runs. Many, but not all, of performance numbers demonstrated in Oct. run.

    • At most can demonstrate full ORR-level compliance during only 2 runs (Nov. & Jan.) prior to ORR.

KISWG 10/29/2003


2 operations plans procedures

2. Operations Plans & Procedures

  • Will the required operations plans and procedures, including those for anomaly responses, be completed and tested prior to start of routine science operations?

  • Operations procedures for daytime checkout & night-time operation are in place.

  • Anomaly responses need completion

    • Including spares & troubleshooting training

  • Configuration management (software, opto-mechanical & electronics) need to be defined & agreed upon

    • Especially important during ongoing development

      • Major software upgrade will happen with RTC 2.1

    • Also need upgrade plan (plan to implement upgrades without compromising operational system).

    • Would be easier if some subsystems had already been handed over to CARA

  • Need to approve/implement plan for maintaining cleanliness of optics/basement

KISWG 10/29/2003


2 operations plans procedures1

2. Operations Plans & Procedures

  • Current operations procedures:

    • Punchlist with new priorities distributed after each run. Reviewed bi-weekly.

    • Schedule for summit activities maintained. Reviewed weekly. Incorporated in Observatory scheduling.

    • Daytime summit activities entered into IFDEV & Observatory daylog.

    • Observing support personnel (daytime, nighttime & on-call) list distributed prior to run.

    • Setup & observing procedures available on-line (next slide).

    • Afternoon pre-observing checklist/procedure performed.

    • Plan for night’s observing distributed.

    • Observing log maintained & published to telescope nightlog.

    • Post-run summary distributed, including priorities for next run.

    • Punchlist with old priorities closed out.

    • Post-run review held with Observatory/Project management.

KISWG 10/29/2003


Orr readiness

OperationsProcedures

KISWG 10/29/2003


3 4 operations organization training

3&4. Operations Organization & Training

  • Are the operations organization, staff and facilities in place (WMKO and MSC)?

  • Will the necessary training activities be completed prior to start of routine science operations?

  • Organization

    • John Gathright has assumed Operations Coordinator role

      • Responsible for coordinating/scheduling/staffing activities in support of observing runs, observing prep & daytime experiments

      • 2 (of 3) technicians report directly to him

KISWG 10/29/2003


3 4 operations organization training1

3&4. Operations Organization & Training

  • Facilities

    • Control rooms set up at headquarters & summit

    • Control rooms routinely used for interferometer operation

    • Instrument performance capabilities need to be made available to the community for observing planning

KISWG 10/29/2003


3 4 operations organization training2

3&4. Operations Organization & Training

  • Staff

    • 3 Interferometer specialists trained in operation of Interferometer for daytime alignments, checkouts & tests, & night-time operations

    • 2 technicians trained in daytime alignments & checkouts

    • Plan to hire an interferometer operator & an interferometer specialist to relieve operational load on above personnel

    • Software engineers (2) able to support day & night-time troubleshooting.

    • Electronics engineer able to support daytime troubleshooting.

    • Mechanical engineer gaining some instrument familiarity.

KISWG 10/29/2003


3 4 operations organization training3

3&4. Operations Organization & Training

  • Staff

    • Currently 1 JPL & 1 MSC person participates in each run. Can we fill their roles after the ORR?

      • JPL person really helps with troubleshooting

        • We are gaining more familiarity with instrument & resolving problems (JPL still on-call)

      • MSC person really understands science priorities

        • We need more insight &/or MSC on-call

KISWG 10/29/2003


5 commands sequences

5. Commands & Sequences

  • Are the necessary set of commands and sequences ready to support nominal operations? Will all action items, liens, etc., be satisfactorily dispositioned?

  • Alignment

    • Procedures exist and are used.

    • All mirrors and shutters needed are remotely controlled.

  • Pre-Observing checklist

    • Checklist exists and routinely used by CARA personnel.

  • Observing procedure/checklist

    • CARA personnel routinely operate.

  • MSC tools procedures

    • CARA personnel recently operating.

  • Post-Observing

    • Tapes written and shipped.

KISWG 10/29/2003


5 commands sequences1

5. Commands & Sequences

  • Target acquisition (Manual & Automated steps)

    • Interferometer Sequencer (IS) operator selects target from list

      • IS loads parameters & initiates Telescope Sequencer (TS)

      • IS configures FDLs for observation

    • TS initiates the following (can change for repeat observation):

      • Telescope control system slews, then tracks, the telescopes

      • Auto-acquisition tool positions brightest target on acquisition camera for AO system

      • AO auto-setting tool optimizes AO parameters on target

      • AO operator reports AO loops locked to IS operator

    • AO system offloads tip/tilt and focus to the telescope

    • IS operator closes Angle Tracker (KAT) loop:

      • KAT loop automatically offloads IF tip/tilt mirror to AO wavefront sensor offsets

      • AO operator unloads offsets to field steering mirrors if > threshold

    • IS operator initiates IS to acquire fringes

      • IS scans to peak signal on fringe tracker

      • IS searches for fringes

KISWG 10/29/2003


5 commands sequences2

5. Commands & Sequences

  • Remaining issues:

    • Automated night-time LDL repositioning (manual & too slow)

      • This is currently a high priority

    • Automated daytime alignment (labor & telescope intensive)

      • Likely a lien at the ORR

    • User interface is complex & distributed (can make mistakes)

      • Plan to implement a simpler quick-look

      • Better version will come after RTC 2.1 upgrade

    • Observing sequence automation should be improved to achieve scans/hour with reduced human interaction

      • Selectable level of telescope sequencer operation

      • Offloading wavefront sensor centroids to FSMs

      • Reuse of AO parameters

    • Remote configuration

      • A few remaining hands-on operations

KISWG 10/29/2003


6 risks

6. Risks

  • Are the risks well understood and acceptable for routine science operations?

  • Risks identified at ORR requirements review:

  • Weather, wind shake and seeing

    • There are nights when IF observing simply cannot be done productively or when only bright targets can be used.

    • Best choice in some conditions would be to switch to another instrument program that can succeed with poor seeing.

  • Hardware failures

    • Mitigation: List of critical spares and backup approaches to be identified & implemented prior to ORR.

KISWG 10/29/2003


6 risks1

6. Risks

  • Development during operations

    • Mitigation: Configuration control.

      • Observatory-wide software configuration plan currently being approved. Will apply to Interferometer & AO ops.

      • Inteng & tag of intdev nearly in place to protect software.

      • ECR process in place for AO opto-mechanics.

    • Mitigation: Careful coordination of development & operations activities (using current operations procedures).

  • Number of shared risk & TAC allocated V2 science nights

    • Too many nights could result in inadequate CARA involvement in development &/or inadequate access to interferometer for development.

    • Possible mitigation:

      • Limit the number of science nights.

      • Additional operations staff.

  • New: Load on CARA staff if system requires lots of hand-holding

KISWG 10/29/2003


Orr readiness summary

ORR readiness summary

  • Will probably be OK on V2 accuracy spec – need to complete analysis of Oct data

  • Uptime still problematic

    • Working on major (and minor) problems from Oct

    • With satisfactory resolution of major, and several of the minor problems, should be possible to achieve in November & Jan.

  • Scans per hour still low, although brief good peak performance

    • Some issues with brightness of target – will not apply if target requires extensive optimization

    • Improvements to system uptime and user interface should improve performance

  • OK on most other areas, except for LDL automation, which is a current focus

KISWG 10/29/2003


  • Login