Comparison of Image Scale Calibration Techniques: Known Pairs, Drift Scans and Aperture Grating
JDS.O Vol 17 No. 2 May 10, 2021 We compared several techniques for calibrating angular separation between wide (>1 arcsec) pairs. These techniques are (i) reference pair calibration using {\alpha} Cen AB orbital parameters, (ii) the video drift method, and (iii) the utilisation of an aperture dif...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | JDS.O Vol 17 No. 2 May 10, 2021 We compared several techniques for calibrating angular separation between
wide (>1 arcsec) pairs. These techniques are (i) reference pair calibration
using {\alpha} Cen AB orbital parameters, (ii) the video drift method, and
(iii) the utilisation of an aperture diffraction grating with red filters of
different passbands. Separations of 62 pairs were determined using these 3
calibration techniques and compared. It was found that {\alpha} Cen AB and
video drift methods are in good agreement.
The use of the grating and filter (by measuring fringe spacing) proved
unsatisfactory for the broad-band filters, and the use of a narrow band
H{\alpha} filter with the grating, resulted in image scales that differed from
those obtained using {\alpha} Cen AB reference pair calibration and the video
drift method by 0.024 and 0.031 pixel/arcsec (px/arcsec) respectively. A more
complete modelling of Fraunhofer diffraction of the H{\alpha} filter and
grating produced a difference in image scale of 0.009 px/arcsec.
A bias in the diffraction grating method of ~0.1% in the separation of pairs
also revealed itself and could not be accounted for. We conclude that
calibration against a known pair for which the separation and PA is known with
high precision is probably the simplest and best way to undertake image scale
calibration. |
---|---|
DOI: | 10.48550/arxiv.2005.14380 |