A&A 520, A7 (2010)Fig. 8. Footprint of the LFI focalplane on the sky as seen by an observerlooking towards the satellite along its optical axis. The origin of a righthandeduv-coordinate system is at the center of the focalplane (LOS).The z-axis is along the line-of-sight and points towards the observer.Labels from 18 to 23 refer to 70 GHz horns, from 24 to 26 refer to44 GHz horns, and 27 and 28 refer to 30 GHz horns. Each beam hasits own coordinate system as shown in the figure. The focalplane scansthe sky as the satellite spins. The scanning direction is indicated by anarrow. The +uaxispointstothespinaxisofthesatellite.Thecentersofthe 30 GHz beams sweep about 1 degree from the ecliptic poles whenthe spin axis is in the ecliptic plane.two symmetrically located feed horns are at 45 degrees to eachother when observing the same direction in the sky. Polarizationorientations of the LFI horns are reported in Table 1 (ψ RDP angle),polarization orientations of the corresponding main beamsin the sky are reported in Table 2 (ψ MB angle), and the rotationangle of the polarization ellipse computed along the line of sightof each beam (i.e., in the center of the UV-grid) is reported inTable 3 (τ angle, ranges from –90 ◦ to 90 ◦ ).6. Trade-off between angular resolutionand straylightThe final trade-off between angular resolution and straylight hasbeen a long and complex process throughout the project development.For each LFI feed horn, several beams have been computedfor the radiation patterns corresponding to different geometries(i.e. inner corrugation profile) of the horn itself (Sandriet al. 2004). Then, each beam was convolved with the microwavesky (CMB and foregrounds), taking into account the<strong>Planck</strong> scanning strategy in the (nominal) fifteen months observationaltime, and the straylight noise induced by the Galaxy,which has been derived (Burigana et al. 2004). From the comparisonbetween these straylight values, and taking into accountthe beam characteristics, the optimal horn design was selectedfor the flight models. In this framework, the inadequacy of apure Gaussian feed model in realistic far beam predictions hasbeen demonstrated: relevant features in the beam are related tothe sidelobes in the feed horn pattern. Not only does the realisticpattern need to be considered, but the details of the corrugationdesign could also affect the beam characteristics. The edge-taperbeing equal, different corrugation profiles involve differences ofabout 3% in the main beam size and about 40% in the straylightsignal. It has been demonstrated that not only the spillover levelis crucial, but also how the spillover radiation is distributed inthe sky, and thus sophisticated pattern simulations are requiredto accurately quantify the beam aberrations and the straylightcontamination.Finally, while the main beam is highly polarized (greaterthan 99% linearly polarized, i.e., the cross-polar component isalways 25 dB below that of the co-polar component), the computed4π beams have shown that the co- and cross-polar componentsin the sidelobe region may have the same intensity.Therefore, the cross-polar component will contaminate the copolarcomponent of the orthogonal polarization. This is particularlyimportant at lower frequencies where the Galactic emissionis strongly polarized. In other words, the strongly polarizedGalactic emission collected through the sidelobes into the twopolarized detectors is added to the slightly polarized CMB fieldentering the feed horn from the main beam direction. However,because of the rapid spatial variability in both the sky polarizedemission and the polarized pattern, the polarized sidelobe contributionwill probably average out to a significant degree.7. LFI main beamsOnce the location and orientation of the feed horns, as well astheir inner corrugation profile, had been properly defined, wecarried out a full characterisationoftheopticalperformanceusingelectromagnetic simulations devoted to computing the LFIbeams. The beam solid angle, Ω A ,ofanantennaisgivenby∫∫ 2π ∫ πΩ A = P n (θ, φ)dΩ= P n (θ, φ)sinθ dθ dφ, (3)4π00where P n (θ, φ) isthenormalized power pattern and the fieldcomputed by GRASP is normalised to a total power of 4π watt,i.e.,∫ 2π ∫ π00P n (θ, φ)sinθ dθ dφ = 4π.For most antennas, the normalized power pattern has considerablylarger values for a certain range of both θ and φ than forthe remaining part of the sphere. This range is called the mainbeam and the remainder is called the sidelobes or back lobes.Obviously the quality of an antenna as a directional measuringdevice depends on how well the power pattern is concentratedin the main beam. The received power originating in regionoutside the main beam is called straylight, anditisoneofthe major sources of systematic effects in the <strong>Planck</strong> observationsand for CMB experiments in general. In the next section,the sidelobes of the LFI beams are presented, together with thestraylight-induced noise evaluated from these beams. The separationof the power pattern into a main beam and sidelobescan be somewhat arbitrary and is basically governed by convention.Different definitions of these regions could in principlebe used: electromagnetic definitions, science-related definitions,and simulation-related definitions. In the framework of thepresent simulations, the main beam region was defined by takingcare that not only the relevant main beam characteristics arecomputed (angular resolution, ellipticity, directivity, cross polardiscrimination factor, and so on), but also that the main beamdistortion, at a level of about –60 dB (mainly due to the off-axislocation of the LFI feed horns), can be evaluated. This involveslonger computational times but ensures a superior knowledge ofthe systematic effects related to the LFI main beams. The mainPage 6 of 12
M. Sandri et al.: <strong>Planck</strong> pre-launch status: Low Frequency Instrument opticsTable 2. Main beam frames.BEAM ν 0 θ MB φ MB ψ MB U MB V MB(GHz) ( ◦ ) ( ◦ ) ( ◦ )18 70 3.2975 –131.8147 22.3 –0.03835 –0.0428719 70 3.1750 –150.8570 22.4 –0.04837 –0.0269720 70 3.1649 –168.4438 22.4 –0.05409 –0.0110621 70 3.1649 168.4438 –22.4 –0.05409 0.0110622 70 3.1747 150.8570 –22.4 –0.04837 0.0269723 70 3.2975 131.8147 –22.3 –0.03835 0.0428724 44 4.0536 180.0000 0.0 –0.07069 0.0000025 44 5.0186 61.1350 –113.5 0.04223 0.0766126 44 5.0186 –61.1350 113.5 0.04223 –0.0766127 30 4.3466 153.6074 –22.5 –0.06789 0.0336928 30 4.3466 –153.6074 22.5 –0.06789 –0.03369Notes. θ MB , φ MB ,andψ MB angles defining the coordinate systems, with respect to the LOS frame, in which each main beams was computed. θ MBand φ MB indicate the main beam locations on the sky (U MB = sin θ MB × cos φ MB and V MB = sin θ MB × sin φ MB reported in the last two columns) andψ MB is the polarization angle.Table 3. Main beam characteristics at the central frequency.HW at −3dB HW at −10dB HW at −20dBBeam (deg) (deg) (deg) FWHM e τ D XPD d Smin max min max min max (arcmin) ( ◦ ) (dBi) (dB) (%) (%)18 and 23 X 0.0969 0.1235 0.1702 0.2212 0.2247 0.3147 13.22 1.27 –0.1 58.80 28.01 0.38 0.55Y 0.0989 0.1219 0.1725 0.2176 0.2273 0.3096 13.25 1.23 –89.8 58.83 28.54 0.40 0.5019 and 22 X 0.0969 0.1219 0.1667 0.2167 0.2229 0.3013 13.13 1.26 0.0 59.02 29.73 0.26 0.64Y 0.0969 0.1203 0.1690 0.2131 0.2247 0.2967 13.03 1.24 –90.0 59.06 30.21 0.28 0.5820 and 21 X 0.0949 0.1203 0.1643 0.2140 0.2264 0.2981 12.91 1.27 0.0 59.17 31.20 0.21 0.73Y 0.0949 0.1187 0.1655 0.2112 0.2256 0.2941 12.82 1.25 89.9 59.22 30.99 0.23 0.6924 X 0.1655 0.2176 0.2880 0.3927 0.3815 0.5539 22.99 1.31 0.0 54.14 29.98 0.31 0.14Y 0.1619 0.2229 0.2839 0.4025 0.3779 0.5654 23.09 1.38 90.0 54.09 29.97 0.29 0.1625 and 26 X 0.2229 0.2727 0.4001 0.5260 0.5370 0.7923 29.74 1.22 0.5 51.71 24.90 0.99 0.16Y 0.2112 0.2639 0.3790 0.5170 0.5211 0.7948 28.51 1.25 89.7 51.97 25.32 0.96 0.1627 and 28 X 0.2349 0.3208 0.4093 0.5706 0.5392 0.7808 33.34 1.37 0.2 50.97 28.21 0.44 0.58Y 0.2299 0.3239 0.4015 0.5757 0.5301 0.7891 33.23 1.41 89.9 51.00 28.31 0.41 0.58Notes. The half width (HW, minimumandmaximum)at−3, −10, −20 dB, the full width half maximum (FWHM), the ellipticity (e), the rotationangle of the polarization ellipse (τ), the main beam directivity (D), the cross polar discrimination factor (XPD), the main beam depolarizationparameter (d), and the spillover (S)arereported.beam simulations are performed by considering the feed as asource, and by computing the pattern scattered by both reflectorsonto the far field with GRASP8 using physical optics (PO)and physical theory of diffraction (PTD) for both reflectors. Weassumed an ideal telescope and computed main beam and sidelobeproperties for each channel, taking into account the effectsof the surrounding structures.7.1. LFI main beam characterisationFar field radiation patterns were computed on the co- andcross-polar basis according to Ludwig’s third definition in UVsphericalgrids. We computed the main beam angular resolutionof each feed model analysed, as well as all major electromagneticcharacteristics reported in Tables 2 and 3. U (sin θ × cos φ)and V (sin θ × sin φ) rangefrom–0.026to0.026(θ ≤ 1.5 ◦ )for the 30 and 44 GHz channels, and from –0.015 to 0.015(θ ≤ 0.9 ◦ )forthe70GHzchannel.Eachgridhasbeensampledwith 301 × 301 points, therefore ∆U =∆V ≃ 1.7 × 10 −4 forthe 30 and 44 GHz channels and 10 −4 for the 70 GHz channel.In Table 2,thecoordinatesystemsinwhicheachmainbeamwascomputed are reported: U MB and V MB correspond to the centreof the UV-grids shown in this section. In Table 3, relevantmainbeam characteristics computed at the central frequency are summarized,such as the full width half maximum, the cross polardiscrimination factor, and the main beam depolarization parameter.In Fig. 9, thecontourplotintheUV-planeoftheco-andcross-polar components is shown for the main beam #27 and #28(Y-polarized). The lines in the contour plots, normalized with respectto the power peak (the directivity reported in Table 3 for theco-polar plot and the directivity minus the XPD for the cross- polarplot), are at –3, –10, –20, –30, –40, –50, and –60. The colourscales goes from –90 to 0 dB. Figure 10 shows the differencesbetween the two polarization X- and Y- for the main beam #27,which are imperceptible below –40 dB. In Figs. 11 and 12, thecontour plot in the UV-plane of the co- and cross-polar componentsis shown for the main beam #24, #26, #21, #22, and #23(Y-polarized), respectively.The cross-polar response of the OMT affects the beam patternin a significant way below the –40 dB contour since theco-polar component is a linear combination of the co- and crosspolarpattern with coefficients of about 1 and 10 −4 .Adetailedstudy of the LFI polarization capability is reported in Leahy et al.(2010).Page 7 of 12
- Page 1 and 2:
A&A 520, E1 (2010)DOI: 10.1051/0004
- Page 3 and 4:
ABSTRACTThe European Space Agency
- Page 5 and 6:
A&A 520, A1 (2010)Fig. 2. An artist
- Page 7 and 8:
A&A 520, A1 (2010)Fig. 4. Planck fo
- Page 9 and 10:
A&A 520, A1 (2010)Fig. 6. The Planc
- Page 11 and 12:
A&A 520, A1 (2010)Table 4. Summary
- Page 13 and 14:
A&A 520, A1 (2010)three frequency c
- Page 15 and 16:
A&A 520, A1 (2010)Fig. 12. The left
- Page 17 and 18:
A&A 520, A1 (2010)Fig. 14. Left pan
- Page 19 and 20:
A&A 520, A1 (2010)flux limit of the
- Page 21 and 22:
A&A 520, A1 (2010)- University of C
- Page 23 and 24:
A&A 520, A1 (2010)57 Instituto de A
- Page 25 and 26:
A&A 520, A2 (2010)Fig. 1. (Left) Th
- Page 27 and 28:
A&A 520, A2 (2010)Fig. 3. (Top)Twos
- Page 29 and 30:
A&A 520, A2 (2010)Table 2. Predicte
- Page 31 and 32:
Table 3. Predicted in-flight main b
- Page 33 and 34:
A&A 520, A2 (2010)materials. Theref
- Page 35 and 36:
A&A 520, A2 (2010)Fig. 11. Comparis
- Page 37 and 38:
A&A 520, A2 (2010)Table 5. Inputs u
- Page 39 and 40:
A&A 520, A2 (2010)Fig. 16. Three cu
- Page 41 and 42:
A&A 520, A2 (2010)Table 7. Optical
- Page 43 and 44:
A&A 520, A2 (2010)Fig. A.1. Dimensi
- Page 45 and 46:
A&A 520, A2 (2010)5 Università deg
- Page 47 and 48:
A&A 520, A3 (2010)Horizon 2000 medi
- Page 49 and 50:
A&A 520, A3 (2010)Fig. 1. CMB tempe
- Page 51 and 52:
A&A 520, A3 (2010)Ω ch 2τn s0.130
- Page 53 and 54:
A&A 520, A3 (2010)Fig. 6. Integral
- Page 55 and 56:
A&A 520, A3 (2010)Table 2. LFI opti
- Page 57 and 58:
3.3.1. SpecificationsThe main requi
- Page 59 and 60:
A&A 520, A3 (2010)Fig. 11. Schemati
- Page 61 and 62:
A&A 520, A3 (2010)features of the r
- Page 63 and 64:
A&A 520, A3 (2010)Fig. 13. Level 2
- Page 65 and 66:
A&A 520, A3 (2010)Fig. 15. Level 3
- Page 67 and 68:
A&A 520, A3 (2010)GUI = graphical u
- Page 69 and 70:
A&A 520, A3 (2010)23 Centre of Math
- Page 71 and 72:
A&A 520, A4 (2010)In addition, all
- Page 73 and 74:
A&A 520, A4 (2010)Table 2. Sensitiv
- Page 75 and 76: A&A 520, A4 (2010)Fig. 2. Schematic
- Page 77 and 78: A&A 520, A4 (2010)Fig. 6. LFI recei
- Page 79 and 80: A&A 520, A4 (2010)Fig. 9. Schematic
- Page 81 and 82: A&A 520, A4 (2010)Table 4. Specific
- Page 83 and 84: A&A 520, A4 (2010)Fig. 15. DAE bias
- Page 85 and 86: A&A 520, A4 (2010)Fig. 19. Picture
- Page 87 and 88: A&A 520, A4 (2010)Table 10. Main ch
- Page 89 and 90: Table 13. Principal requirements an
- Page 91 and 92: A&A 520, A5 (2010)DOI: 10.1051/0004
- Page 93 and 94: A. Mennella et al.: LFI calibration
- Page 95 and 96: A. Mennella et al.: LFI calibration
- Page 97 and 98: A. Mennella et al.: LFI calibration
- Page 99 and 100: A. Mennella et al.: LFI calibration
- Page 101 and 102: A. Mennella et al.: LFI calibration
- Page 103 and 104: A. Mennella et al.: LFI calibration
- Page 105 and 106: D.1. Step 1-extrapolate uncalibrate
- Page 107 and 108: A&A 520, A6 (2010)DOI: 10.1051/0004
- Page 109 and 110: F. Villa et al.: Calibration of LFI
- Page 111 and 112: F. Villa et al.: Calibration of LFI
- Page 113 and 114: F. Villa et al.: Calibration of LFI
- Page 115 and 116: F. Villa et al.: Calibration of LFI
- Page 117 and 118: F. Villa et al.: Calibration of LFI
- Page 119 and 120: F. Villa et al.: Calibration of LFI
- Page 121 and 122: A&A 520, A7 (2010)DOI: 10.1051/0004
- Page 123 and 124: M. Sandri et al.: Planck pre-launch
- Page 128 and 129: -30-40-30-6-3-20A&A 520, A7 (2010)0
- Page 130 and 131: A&A 520, A7 (2010)Table 4. Galactic
- Page 132 and 133: A&A 520, A7 (2010)Fig. A.1. Polariz
- Page 134 and 135: A&A 520, A8 (2010)inflation, giving
- Page 136 and 137: A&A 520, A8 (2010)estimated from th
- Page 138 and 139: A&A 520, A8 (2010)ways the most str
- Page 140 and 141: unmodelled long-timescale thermally
- Page 142 and 143: A&A 520, A8 (2010)Fig. 5. Polarisat
- Page 144 and 145: A&A 520, A8 (2010)Table 3. Band-ave
- Page 146 and 147: A&A 520, A8 (2010)where S stands fo
- Page 148 and 149: A&A 520, A8 (2010)Fig. 11. Simulate
- Page 150 and 151: stored in the LFI instrument model,
- Page 152 and 153: A&A 520, A8 (2010)Table 5. Statisti
- Page 154 and 155: A&A 520, A8 (2010)comparable in siz
- Page 156 and 157: A&A 520, A8 (2010)Table B.1. Main b
- Page 158 and 159: A&A 520, A8 (2010)Bond, J. R., Jaff
- Page 160 and 161: A&A 520, A9 (2010)- (v) an optical
- Page 162 and 163: A&A 520, A9 (2010)Fig. 2. The Russi
- Page 164 and 165: A&A 520, A9 (2010)Table 3. Estimate
- Page 166 and 167: A&A 520, A9 (2010)Fig. 7. Picture o
- Page 168 and 169: A&A 520, A9 (2010)Fig. 9. Cosmic ra
- Page 170 and 171: A&A 520, A9 (2010)Fig. 13. Principl
- Page 172 and 173: A&A 520, A9 (2010)Fig. 16. Noise sp
- Page 174 and 175: A&A 520, A9 (2010)Table 6. Basic ch
- Page 176 and 177:
A&A 520, A9 (2010)with warm preampl
- Page 178 and 179:
A&A 520, A9 (2010)20 Laboratoire de
- Page 180 and 181:
A&A 520, A10 (2010)Table 1. HFI des
- Page 182 and 183:
A&A 520, A10 (2010)based on the the
- Page 184 and 185:
A&A 520, A10 (2010)Fig. 6. The Satu
- Page 186 and 187:
A&A 520, A10 (2010)5. Calibration a
- Page 188 and 189:
A&A 520, A10 (2010)Fig. 16. Couplin
- Page 190 and 191:
A&A 520, A10 (2010)217-5a channel:
- Page 192 and 193:
A&A 520, A10 (2010)10 -310 -495-The
- Page 194 and 195:
A&A 520, A11 (2010)DOI: 10.1051/000
- Page 196 and 197:
P. A. R. Ade et al.: Planck pre-lau
- Page 198 and 199:
P. A. R. Ade et al.: Planck pre-lau
- Page 200 and 201:
P. A. R. Ade et al.: Planck pre-lau
- Page 202 and 203:
A&A 520, A12 (2010)Table 1. Summary
- Page 204 and 205:
arrangement was also constrained by
- Page 206 and 207:
A&A 520, A12 (2010)frequency cut-of
- Page 208 and 209:
A&A 520, A12 (2010)Fig. 9. Gaussian
- Page 210 and 211:
A&A 520, A12 (2010)the horn-to-horn
- Page 212 and 213:
A&A 520, A12 (2010)Fig. 15. Composi
- Page 214 and 215:
A&A 520, A12 (2010)Fig. 19. Broad-b
- Page 216 and 217:
A&A 520, A13 (2010)DOI: 10.1051/000
- Page 218 and 219:
C. Rosset et al.: Planck-HFI: polar
- Page 220 and 221:
C. Rosset et al.: Planck-HFI: polar
- Page 222 and 223:
of frequencies and shown to have po
- Page 224 and 225:
C. Rosset et al.: Planck-HFI: polar
- Page 226 and 227:
C. Rosset et al.: Planck-HFI: polar