Calibration was then transferred to a secondary standard, NGC6543, and internal stimulators were used for short-term maintenance of the point source calibration. Details of this process are found in Chapter VI of the Main Supplement. A model was used to track the point source responsivity of the detectors between internal stimulators. A number of improvements to this model were made and are detailed in §III.A.2.
|
Figure II.B.1(a) Measurements of the response
vs. dwell time to measure
frequency dependence of the detectors at 12 (top panel) and 25
(bottom panel) µm. The measurements were made either by
crossing a source at scan rates less than the survey rates or by
viewing long flashes of the internal reference source.
The upper horizontal scale has translated the dwell time of the lower
scale to spatial frequency using the IRAS survey scan rate of
3.85' s-1. larger largest |
Longer exposure to point sources revealed a difference between the
short term (AC) and long term (DC) responsivity of the detectors,
suggesting that a correction to the point source calibration was needed
for extended source photometry. This correction was obtained by
measuring detector response as a function of dwell
time during the IRAS mission in an attempt to define the frequency
response of the IRAS detectors. Point sources were scanned
across the detectors at 1/2, 1/4, 1/8
and 1/16 of the survey scan rate. Measurements were extended
to longer periods, with flashes of the internal stimulators lasting
tens of seconds for
12 and 25 µm and by extended stares at point sources for 60 and
100 µm.
Some of these measurements are shown in Figures II.B.1(a)-(c),
which is reproduced
from Figure IV.A.4 of the Main Supplement. The temporal response shown
in Figures II.B.1(a)-(c) is translated into a spatial
frequency response using the
IRAS survey scan rate of 3.85' s-1.
|
Figure II.B.1(b) Measurements of the response vs. dwell time to measure
frequency dependence of the detectors at
60 µm. The measurements were made either by
crossing a source at scan rates less than the survey rates or by
viewing long flashes of the internal reference source.
The upper horizontal
scale has translated the dwell time of the lower scale to spatial
frequency using the IRAS survey scan rate of
3.85' s-1. larger largest |
No attempt was made to perform a true frequency response correction
for the ISSA data.
Instead, the point source calibration was multiplied
by a single factor
in each band in order to best represent the surface brightness at
large spatial scales (>2° at 12 and 25 µm and >5°
at 60 and 100 µm). The factors were
0.78, 0.82, 0.92 and 1.00 at 12, 25, 60 and 100 µm, respectively.
ISSA and the ZOHF products are therefore DC calibrated.
To recover the correct brightness on the smallest spatial scales
(point sources), the inverse of these factors should be applied
to the total flux measured.
The correction factors for intermediate spatial scales can be determined
for 12 and 25 µm from Figure II.B.1(a). Suggested corrections for
12 and 25 µm
are found in Table II.B.1.
|
Figure II.B.1(c) Measurements of the response vs. dwell time to measure
frequency dependence of the detectors at
100 µm. The measurements were made either by
crossing a source at scan rates less than the survey rates or by
viewing long flashes of the internal reference source.
The upper horizontal
scale has translated the dwell time of the lower scale to spatial
frequency using the IRAS survey scan rate of
3.85' s-1. larger largest |
Spatial Scale (deg) | Multiplication Factors* | |
---|---|---|
12 µm | 25 µm | |
0.1 | 1.15 | 1.10 |
0.2 | 1.18 | 1.13 |
0.5 | 1.25 | 1.18 |
1.0 | 1.28 | 1.20 |
1.5 | 1.28 | 1.23 |
2.0 | 1.28 | 1.23 |
While the frequency response of the detectors at 12 and 25 µm
was clear, no consistent measurement was obtained for 60 and 100 µm.
Figures II.B.1(b) and II.B.1(c)
suggest a nonlinearity which makes the frequency response at 60 and
100 µm dependent on brightness.
The uncertainty in the overall linearity of the
photometric scale at the long wavelengths
results in photometric uncertainties of about 30% and 60% for
extended sources at 60 µm and 100 µm,
respectively.
The TFPR model was derived based on a TFPR position of
= 89.2° and
= 94.6° where
and
represent ecliptic latitude and ecliptic
longitude, respectively.
However, due to the method by which the CS-15
calibration observations were executed,
the actual position observed as the TFPR
varied slightly throughout the mission.
The observed position
of the TFPR varied between
= 88.8°,
= 268.9°
and
= 89.2°,
= 95.0°
depending on the scan direction past NGC6543 at
= 89.8°,
= 150.3°.
NGC6543 was used in the point source calibration as a
secondary transfer standard
(Main Supplement §VI.B).
Although this caused discrepancies in the derived
offsets, it is not considered a major source of error.
The variation in flux among the TFPR locations is roughly
0.03%, 0.5%, 0.2% and 1.9% at 12, 25, 60 and 100 µm, respectively,
of the absolute zero point as assumed by the TFPR model,
§III.A.2.b.
As discussed in §II.B.2, the IRAS scan data were not corrected for all spatial frequencies. Features in the ISSA with spatial scales less than 2° at 12 and 25 µm and less than 5° at 60 and 100 µm appear too faint. The correction factors for point sources are given in §II.B.2. Suggested correction factors for intermediate spatial scales are found in Table II.B.1. Large uncertainties, 30% and 60% at 60 and 100 µm, respectively, exist in the factors for spatial scale corrections. This uncertainty in the frequency response of IRAS at long wavelengths is the major source of uncertainties in the absolute calibration of ISSA. The user is directed to a careful reading of §II.B.2 and examination of Figures II.B.1(b) and (c) before attempting to perform photometric corrections for spatial scales at 60 and 100 µm.