MSL data in the PDS and the Analyst's Notebook, Working with the archived science & engineering data |
MSL data in the PDS and the Analyst's Notebook, Working with the archived science & engineering data |
Feb 27 2013, 07:22 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10229 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
"February 27, 2013. MSL Release 1, part 1, Sols 0-89.
The first release of MSL data takes place in two parts. Part 1, February 27, 2013, includes raw data products (EDRs) acquired on Sols 0 through 89, August 6 through November 5, 2012, for these instruments: APXS, ChemCam, DAN, Hazcam, Navcam, and REMS, along with SPICE data. Part 2, March 20, 2013, will include the derived data products (RDRs) for Sols 0 though 89 for the APXS, ChemCam, DAN, Hazcam, Navcam, and REMS instruments, along with both the EDRs and RDRs for the CheMin and RAD instruments, and the RDRs for the SAM instrument. Release 1 does not include data from the MAHLI, MARDI, or Mastcam instruments. These instrument teams have not yet delivered data products to PDS. Some documents in the MSL archives are awaiting clearance by JPL Document Review and/or the JPL Import/Export Control Office. They will be posted online as soon as clearance has been received, and announced on this web site." Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PDF: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
Apr 11 2013, 03:46 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2346 Joined: 7-December 12 Member No.: 6780 |
Thanks for your interest!
There are ways to go deeper into analysis. First: The emissivity values obtained thus far are most likely nonsensical. During the conference they told, that kinetic temperature should be at most three Kelvin above brightness temperature. That's exactly my opinion. And it means, that emissivities for both IR wavelength bands should be between 0.9 and 1.0, and rather similar to each other, as stated earlier. Taken this as a basis we get a contradiction to the results above. The logical consequence is, that at least one of the assumptions was wrong. One assumption was a two-color assumption instead of a two-band assumption in order to avoid calculus. An other (implicite) assumption was, that noisy temperature data are allowed to be averaged to get the actual mean temperature; this is valid only for symmetric noise distribution. Both assumptions will most likely to be replaced by more appropriate ones. Dropping the first one might lead to a spectrum combined of the spectra of the two IR sensors and the wavelength-dependent albedo/emissivity properties of the soil. Dropping the second one may lead to a function, which transforms Gaussian noise to the actual noise. The idea to get this function may be the calculation of the higher momenta of the noise distribution, and infer from this the first few Taylor coefficients of the transformation function; I'll have to check, whether it works in this case. The result may then be used to average appropriately. There will remain rover- and sun-induced effects that have to be isolated. I'll explain details based on actual data, as soon as I succeed with one step. It's far from easy, and I've other jobs as well, so it may take a little time. Everyone is invited to contribute improved solutions. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 26th September 2024 - 04:00 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |