M. Bersanelli et al.: <strong>Planck</strong> pre-launch status: Design and description of the Low Frequency Instrumentaverage noise per pixel at the end of the mission, and W lthe window function, which for LFI can be approximated byW 2 l = exp [ −l(l + 1)σ 2 B]with σB = θ FWHM / √ 8ln2 = 1.235 ×10 −4 θ FWHM ,andθ FWHM is the full width half maximum (FWHM)of the beam, assumed Gaussian, in arcmin. For a given missionlifetime, the noise per pixel in thermodynamic temperature isgiven byσ pix =∆T√nrad τ pix, (2)where ∆T is the sensitivity of each radiometer of an array withn rad elements, andτ pix = τ missionN pix= τ mission4π/θ 2 FWHMis the integration time per resolution element in the sky.2.2.1. Angular resolutionThe basic scientific requirement for the <strong>Planck</strong> angular resolutionis to provide approximately 10 ′ beams in the minimumforeground window and to achieve up to 5 ′ in the highest frequencychannels. This led to a telescope in the 1.5 m apertureclass to ensure the desired resolution with an adequate rejectionof straylight contamination (Mandolesi et al. 2000a; Villa et al.2002). In general, a trade-off occurs between main-beam resolution(half-power beam width, HPBW) and the illuminationby the feeds of the edges of both the primary and sub-reflector(edge taper), which in turn drives the stray-light contaminationeffect. An edge taper >30 dB at an angle of 22 ◦ and an angularresolution of 14 ′ at 70 GHz were set as design specificationsfor LFI. Detailed calculations taking into account the locationof the feeds in the focal plane and the telescope optical performance(Sandri et al. 2010) showedthatangularresolutionsof ∼13 ′ are achieved for the 70 GHz channels, while at lowerfrequencies we expect 24 ′ −28 ′ at 44 GHz (depending on feed)and ∼33 ′ at 30 GHz (see also Sect. 7).2.2.2. SensitivityTo specify the noise per frequency channel, we adopted the generalcriterion of uniform sensitivity per equivalent pixel. In theearly design phases, based on extrapolation of previous technologicalprogress, we set a noise specification ∆T 30 /T = 3 × 10 −6(or ∆T 30 = 8 µK, thermodynamic temperature) for a referencepixel ∆θ 30 ≡ 30 ′ at all frequencies. We also considered “goal”sensitivities of ∆T 30 = 6 µK perreferencepixel,i.e.,lowerby 25%.With an array of n rad,ν radiometers at frequency ν askypixelwill be observed, on average, for an integration timeτ tot,ν = n rad,νθFWHM,ν2 τ mission . (4)4πAssuming a 15 month survey, for ∆T 30 = 8 µK thesensitivityper pixel for a 1-s integration time is given by δT 1s ≃ 120 µK ×√nrad,ν .Wechosen rad,ν to compensate for the higher noise temperaturesat higher frequencies, while ensuring an acceptableheat load in the <strong>Planck</strong> focal plane unit (see Sect. 2.3.2) andallocate4 radiometers at 30 GHz, 6 at 44 GHz, and 12 at 70 GHz.As we describe in detail in Sect. 3,theLFIreceiversarecoupledin pairs to each feed horn (n rad = 2 n feeds )throughanorthomodetransducer. Thus the LFI design is such that all channels(3)Table 1. LFI specifications for sensitivity a and angular resolution.30 GHz 44 GHz 70 GHz∆T 30 [µK] b ............ 8 8 8∆T 30 /T ............... 3× 10 −6 3 × 10 −6 3 × 10 −6Angular resolution [ ′ ] ... 33 24 14∆T/T per pixel . . . . . . . . 2.6 × 10 −6 3.6 × 10 −6 6.2 × 10 −6N feeds ................. 2 3 6N radiometers ............. 4 6 12δT A 1s [µKs1/2 ] c ......... 234 278 365∆ν eff [GHz] . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 8.8 14T sys [K] d .............. 10.7 16.6 29.2Notes. (a) Sensitivities per pixel are specified for a nominal mission surveytime of 15 months; (b) ∆T 30 indicates the noise per 30 ′ referencepixel; (c) antenna temperature; (d) thermodynamic temperature.are inherently sensitive to polarisation. The sensitivity to Q andU Stokes parameters is lower than the sensitivity to total intensityI by a factor √ 2sincethenumberofchannelsperpolarisationis only half as great. To optimise the LFI sensitivity to polarisation,the location and orientation of the LFI radiometers inthe focal plan follows well-defined constraints that are describedin Sect. 4. InTable1 we summarise the main requirements forLFI sensitivity, angular resolution, and the nominal LFI designcharacteristics.2.3. Sensitivity budgetFor an array of coherent receivers, each with typical bandwidth∆ν and noise temperature T sys ,observingaskyantennatemperature T A,Sky ,theaveragewhitenoiseperpixel(inantennatemperature) will beδT pix,A = k RT sys + T A,Sky√∆νeff · τ tot, (5)where k R = √ 2 for the LFI pseudo-correlation receivers.Therefore, for a required δT pix,A ,the1-ssensitivity(inantennatemperature) of each radiometer must beδT 1s,A (µK √ √τ missions)
A&A 520, A4 (2010)Table 2. Sensitivity budget for LFI units.Symbol Name 30 GHz 44 GHz 70 GHzL Feed L OMT [dB] Feed + OMT insertion loss . . . . . . . −0.25 −0.25 −0.25T FE [K] FEM noise temperature . . . . . . . . . . 8.6 14.1 25.7T Feed + T OMT + T FE [K] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4 16.2 28.5G FE [dB] FEM gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . >30 >30 >30L WG [dB] Waveguide insertion loss . . . . . . . . . −2.5 −3 −5T BE [K] BEM noise temperature . . . . . . . . . . 350 350 450T WB + T BE [K] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3 0.4 0.7T sys [K] System temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.7 16.6 29.22.3.2. Active coolingThese very ambitious noise temperatures can only be achievedwith cryogenically cooled low-noise amplifiers. Typically, thenoise temperature of current state-of-the-art cryogenic transistoramplifiers exhibit a factor of 4−5 reductiongoingfrom300Kto 100 K operating temperature, and another factor 2−2.5from 100 K to 20 K. We implement active cooling to 20 K ofthe LFI front-end (including feeds, OMTs and first-stage amplification)to gain in sensitivity and to optimise the LFI-HFIthermo-mechanical coupling in the focal plane.Because the cooling power of the 20 K cooler (see Sect. 5)isnot compatible with the full radiometers operating at cryogenictemperature, each radiometer has been split into a 20 K frontendmodule and a 300 K back-end module, each carrying abouthalf of the needed amplification (∼70 dB overall). This solutionalso avoids the serious technical difficulty of introducing a detectoroperating in cryogenic conditions. A set of waveguidesconnect the front and back-end modules; these were designedto provide sufficient thermal decoupling between the cold andwarm sections of the instrument. Furthermore, low power dissipationcomponents are required in the front-end. This is ensuredby the new generation of cryogenic indium phosphide (InP) highelectron mobility transistor (HEMT) devices, which yield worldrecordlow-noise performance with very low power dissipation.2.3.3. Breakdown allocationsWhile the system noise temperature, T sys ,isdominatedbytheperformance of front-end amplifiers, additional contributionscome from front-end losses and from back-end noise, whichneed to be minimised. For each LFI radiometer we can expressthe system temperature asT sys = T Feed+OMT + T FE + T WGs + T BE , (8)where the terms on the righthand side represent the contributionsfrom the feed-horn/OMT, front-end module, waveguides,and back-end module. These terms can be expressed asT Feed+OMT = (L Feed L OMT − 1) T 0T FE = L Feed L OMT T noiseFET WGs = L FeedL OMT (L WGs − 1) T effG FET BE = L FeedL OMT L WGs TBEnoise,G FEwhere T 0 is the physical temperature of the front end; T eff ∼200 K is an effective temperature of the waveguide whose exactvalue depends on the thermal design of the payload and radiometerinterfaces; TFEnoise and G FE are the noise temperaturePage 4 of 21and gain of the front-end module; TBEnoise is the back-end modulenoise temperature; L Feed , L OMT and L WGs are the ohmiclosses from the feed, OMT and waveguides, respectively, definedas L X = 10 −LX,dB/10 (for low-loss components L X> ∼ 1andL X,dB< ∼ 0).In Table 2, wesummarisethemainLFIdesignallocationsto the various elements contributing to the system temperature;these were established by taking state-of-the-art technologyinto account. The contribution from front-end losses, T Feed+OMT ,is reduced to ∼15% by cooling the feeds and OMTs to 20 Kand by using state-of-the-art low-loss waveguide components.Also, by requiring 30 dB of gain in the radiometer front-end,noise temperatures for the back-end module of < ∼ 500 K (leadingto T BE< ∼ 0.5 K)canbeacceptable,whichallowstheuseof standard GaAs HEMT technology for the ambient temperatureamplification. More detailed designspecificationsforeachcomponent are given in Sect. 4 as we describe the instrument inmore detail.2.4. StabilityConsidering perturbations to ideal radiometer stability, the minimumdetectable temperature variation of a coherent receiver isgiven by√[ ] 21 δGT ( f )δT( f ) = k R T sys + , (9)τ · ∆ν eff G Twhere δG T ( f )/G T represents the contribution from amplifiergain and noise temperature fluctuations at post-detection samplingfrequency f .HEMTamplifiersareknowntoexhibitsignificant1/ f noise, caused by the presence of traps in the semiconductor(Jarosik 1996), which would spoil the measurementif not suppressed. Amplifier fluctuations show a characteristicpower spectral density P( f ) ∝ 1/ f α with α ≈ 1, so that the noisepower spectral density is given by( ) α ]P( f ) ≈ σ[1 2 fk+ , (10)fwhere σ 2 represents the white noise limit and the kneefrequency,f k ,isthefrequencyatwhichthewhitenoiseand1/ f components give equal contributions to the power spectrum(see Meinhold et al. 2009, foradetaileddiscussionoftheLFI noise properties).The 1/ f noise component not only degrades the sensitivitybut also introduces spurious correlations in the time-ordered dataand sky maps. The reference frequency used to set a requirementon the knee frequency for LFI is the spacecraft spin frequency,1 rpm, or 17 mHz. However, detailed analyses (Mainoet al. 2002; Keihänen et al. 2004)haveshownthat,forthe<strong>Planck</strong>
- 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: A&A 520, A4 (2010)In addition, all
- 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 126 and 127:
A&A 520, A7 (2010)Fig. 8. Footprint
- 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