Gemini Observatory Report to the AURA Board 6 th February 2002
description
Transcript of Gemini Observatory Report to the AURA Board 6 th February 2002
Gemini ObservatoryReport to the AURA Board6th February 2002
• Highlights• The AURA Review and the Gemini observing system• Actions for AURA
……GG TauGG TauDan Potter, U of H Dan Potter, U of H
• Gemini/Hokupa’a in K band
• Tidally truncated circumbinary disk• Keplerian disk extent
~ 180-260 AU• Resolved imaging
polarimetry of system• Nature of
irregularities?
Two ultracool companions to Two ultracool companions to the young star HD130948the young star HD130948Potter et al. 2001, ApJ submittedPotter et al. 2001, ApJ submitted
• Pair has same proper motion as primary
• Gravitationally bound pair
• Very low mass ultracool objects• Pair separation =
0.134+/-0.002”
• Binary = 1.13 Msun total• Semi-major axis = 2.4
AU• period ~ 10 yr
• Primary < 1 Gyr
H=8 at 5 min
……two ultracool two ultracool companions: companions:
KECK/NIRSPEC KECK/NIRSPEC spectroscopyspectroscopy• NIRSPEC fed by AO
• KI, FeH, H2O bandheads
• Both objects are dL2• Contracting BDs
• MB=0.075 Msun MC=0.065 Msun
• First two BDs imaged around a G-type star
Binary Brown Dwarf: Binary Brown Dwarf: 2M14262M1426
Close et al. (ApJL 2001 in press)Close et al. (ApJL 2001 in press)
• Hokupa’a on Gemini first ever to lock on a Brown Dwarf
• 2M1426 is a very tight binary (3 AU) with a ~12 yr period
… … binary brown dwarfbinary brown dwarf
• 2M1426 system• M8.5 primary• L1 secondary
• DUSTY models leads to a primary of 0.074 Msun and a secondary of 0.055 Msun
• Fairly low mass companion for a BD
Crossing the BD desert in Crossing the BD desert in 15 Sge15 Sge
Liu et al. 2002, ApJ, in pressLiu et al. 2002, ApJ, in press
0.06 Msun (48 Mjup) L dwarf companion HR 7672; 14 AU from starGemini/Hokupa’a. BD can exist that close to the main star.
Wolf-Rayet exports dust to Wolf-Rayet exports dust to the ISMthe ISM
Tony Moffat et al. (U of Montreal)Tony Moffat et al. (U of Montreal)• Some Pop I WR stars are
prolific dust producers• WC : T = 2.5 – 6 x 104 K• Dust shells to R ~ 103-4 R*
• First imaging of WR dust envelopes in the mid IR
• Extended dust envelope formed in wind-wind collision zone of P~25 yr WR+O binary.
• Dust production is ~10-6 Msun yr-1.• 20% of “large grain” dust can
escape from very hot stars into the ISM
NIRI StatusNIRI Status
• Science Verification data acquired in 2001 distributed to various teams• NIRI data processing IRAF
package about to be distributed
• Supernova Satie• Z=1.05• J~24 mag• 2.5 hrs int. time (out of 8
hours total)• f/6 camera• 0.5 arcsec image quality
• Awaiting acceptance…
Supernova “Satie”
Gemini Observatory NIRI SV Team
Gemini Multi-Object Spectrograph – 5.5’ x 5.5’
FWHM0.50”
g’, r’, i’
1868 galaxiesin the 5.5’x5.5’field
RXJO142+2131; z = 0.28
GMOS: object selection GMOS: object selection and examples of and examples of
spectraspectra
Gemini South Gemini South
AURA Dedication of Gemini South a great success – thank you AURA!
Gemini South Gemini South DedicationDedication
Gemini’s AD’s at work….
A big “thank you” to Marylu Evans!- for herding, then re-herding the cats
Gemini South ‘comes Gemini South ‘comes on line”on line”
NGC 6357 Star-forming Region in Scorpius NS14 Bipolar Nebula
Gemini South + Flamingos Image Quality DistributionOctober 2001
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0.05 0.15 0.25 0.35 0.45 0.55 0.65 0.75 0.85
FWHM arcsec
nu
mb
er o
f fr
ames
J H K
Recent (last night) Phoenix run was reporting 0.22 – 0.35” (K)
NGC 253An edge-on starburst
galaxy
Active nucleus observed at 4m
The Galactic Center at Br-The Galactic Center at Br-
the power of IR optimizationthe power of IR optimization
•Gemini South + ABU + fast tip/tilt•Brackett •FWHM ~ 0.35”•1 minute integration
•Simons & Becklin 1992•IRTF - L’ - Protocam•16,000 images shift/add•An entire night….
Recommendations of AURA’s Recommendations of AURA’s Gemini Commissioning Gemini Commissioning
Review Review • R1 — Establish, measure, publicize and use clear metrics and milestones whereby
commissioning progress can be quantified both for the benefit of the Gemini team and that of the broader Gemini community.
• R2 — The schedule of telescope use on both Mauna Kea and Cerro Pachon must preserve,
at all times, the flexibility to immediately attend to the repairs of unexpected system faults. This strategy must be maintained until the facility is "fully operational", i.e. the values of the metrics show all the performance goals to have been met.
• R3 — Scheduling of instruments must primarily be guided at this time by their suitability and readiness to explore and test system's performance. Visitor instruments must be scheduled only when required for the commissioning of future, similar, facility instruments.
• R4 — All science scheduling of the telescope must be in the queue mode or, for visitor
instruments, in service observing mode. The intent here is to maintain the flexibility to revert to engineering work when required and to minimize the impact of visiting observers on the staff.
Metrics - How do we quantify the Metrics - How do we quantify the scientific success or impact of an scientific success or impact of an
Observatory? Observatory? The elements of this system under direct Gemini Control
Strategic planning and executionof instrumentation & development programs
Queuescheduling
Classicalscheduling
Projects transformed to sequence of observations
Telescopereliability
Over subscription rate
Observingefficiency
Processing pipelines & quality assessment
Data archive or data mortuary
Number of publications
Number of citations
Instrumentsensitivity
Quantifiable Scientific Impact
Number of large projects
“Abingdon” workshops, new GSC (SWG’s), and Gemini Board
Observatory gaining experience in both classical and queue scheduling, repeat rate in queue < 3%
Conceptual design for Gemini Science Archive complete by CADC, Victoria
This is the Observatory’s operational challenge, improving performance, reliability and efficiency of the observing process
Gemini Board has funded IDF & FDF programs. Good project management applied across IDF & FDF + incentives (guaranteed time)
National Time Allocation Process & ITAC
Scientific outreach and Call for Proposals
Metrics – target clear weather Metrics – target clear weather reliabilityreliability
(telescope + instruments)(telescope + instruments)
2002A 2002B 2003A 2003B 2004A
20
100%
Science availability40
60
80
Gemini South
Gemini North
98%requirement
goal
Clear w
eather
reliability
Gemini North (telescope only)
Instrument commissioning
Telescope engineering/maintenance
Metrics – target observing efficiency Metrics – target observing efficiency [shutter open]/[elapsed time][shutter open]/[elapsed time]OperationalOperational facility instrumentsfacility instruments
2002A 2002B 2003A 2003B 2004A
20
100%
Science availability40
60
8085%goal
requirement
Observing eff iciency
Telescope engineering/maintenance
Instrument commissioning
Total clear weather Total clear weather efficiency target and efficiency target and
observing effectiveness observing effectiveness • Define requirement as a fraction (percentage) of total clear weather
time available, excluding the time used for instrument commissioning 0.9 x 0.98 x 0.85 = 0.75 (if engineering, reliability and efficiency
targets are met) 75% of all available clear time should be used collecting
‘science photons’ • Define “observing effectiveness” of queue observing: The probability
that the Observatory can complete highly ranked projects by matching observations to required atmospheric conditions
Queue simulations show that projects in ranking band 1, 95% of programs completed, band 2 (80%), and band 3 (50%) when scheduled as queued observations compared to 40% probability under classical scheduling (subject to random weather/atmospheric conditions) Predicted observing effectiveness of Band 1 queued scheduled
projects ~ 0.71 Predicted observing effectiveness of classically scheduled projects
~ 0.75 x 0.4 = 0.3
Benefits of Queue observing arise for Benefits of Queue observing arise for three reasons:three reasons:
The Gemini instruments – like those of all new generation telescopes -- are complex machines and require training (and re-training). Gemini staff astronomers (and frequent visitors) can achieve and maintain a thorough level of understanding to operate the facility instruments at optimum efficiency. In the Classical mode, astronomers execute one program (or perhaps a backup program). In the Queue mode, each night is planned with between 6 to 9 programs; of these, parts of 2 up to 6 programs are executed in any given night. The key is that the queue allows for an optimal match between the science requirements of TAC approved programs, sky conditions and Right Ascensions.
In rapidly evolving conditions, the Gemini astronomers can interact with the PIs to explore a possible relaxation of the required conditions and are able to propose slight modifications in the way programs are executed. This again increases the probability of obtaining data matching the basic requirements of the PIs.
Initial GMOS Queue Initial GMOS Queue ResultsResults
• Observing efficiency in sequenced GMOS observations in imaging and MOS mode ~ 80%-85%• MOS acquisition < 10 mins. (required offsets ~ +/- 0.3”)
• First GMOS Queue Run: “I have been observing on many ground-based telescopes for more than 32 years. I confess that from being a doubter of queue programming, I have swiftly become a full convert to the extraordinary advantages of queue observing. I am convinced that the Queue mode observing does double the amount of useful data coming from the new generations telescopes as compared to their use in a classical mode with visiting observers.”
Dr. Jean-Rene Roy
In this globally competitive In this globally competitive environment AURA Board should environment AURA Board should
conclude:conclude:
1. Gemini is beginning to produce world-class results Both Keck and ESO are exploring “time swaps” with Gemini
North 2002-2003 will be critical years for the Observatory, we will
be ramping up the Gemini science operations and the Gemini science production “machine”.
• This success will in large part rely on a continued commitment by the largest partner, the US, both in terms of supporting this new way of doing facility based international astronomy, and through a continued partnership with the USGO and US instrument groups.
In this globally competitive In this globally competitive environment AURA Board should environment AURA Board should
conclude:conclude:
2. Gemini does represent a “non-traditional” approach to groundbased observational O/IR astronomy.
• However providing the broad US Community access to “an astronomy machine” and a fully supported groundbased archive (vis a vie ESO-VLT) is an essential element within the “diversity” of the US System
• Gemini complements not competes with Keck, Magellan, HET, LBT etc.
In this globally competitive In this globally competitive environment AURA Board should environment AURA Board should
conclude:conclude:3. Continued competitiveness will rely on:
• Groups (national/international consortia) focused on producing 8m class facility instruments
Traditional groundbased models are failing Infrastructure requirements alone are beyond many
University groups, many groups are only “one deep”
Action: AURA should examine and encourage more cooperative models for building “world-class” 8m-10m scale instruments and find ways to develop the next generation of instrumentalists
• The US community must become more fully enrolled in the opportunities, techniques and technologies for Adaptive Optics required to deliver forefront science in this new groundbased era.
Current funding models (PI grants) produces diverse but sub-critical results
Action: AURA should support and promote a coherent AO Road Map within the US