DI ITS Nav Reduced Encounter Data --------------------------------- Symbol Key o = Lien outstanding x = Lien resolved + = Comments Deep Impact General: -------------------- x In deep_impact.cat, "approach sun angle" should be "phase angle on approach". x Add note to the data set catalog descriptions for raw data regarding the large number of "UNK" values for, e.g., geometry information in the raw file labels. x In dataset.html pages, expand acronyms in the titles x See if there's some way to either document or mitigate the fact that the DI data/ directory trees from different data sets look identical in their tar files. + Renamed tar and zip files using the VOLUME directory (dihvnv_3001). Therefore when these files are expanded the user will see the directory tree we do. x In the dataset.cat files for the reduced data, verify that there is a clear statement that the data are not cleaned. + Not applicable to raw data sets. x Add note to dataset.cat and instrument catalog files about dropout of 1/3 of a line because of frame transfer. + Added to both catalog files. x Day of year directory should be determined identically in corresponding raw and reduced data sets (currently, one is day of downlink and the other is day of observation). + Only applicable for raw data sets where files were originally grouped by ground-received time instead of observation time. Reduced data were already organized by observation date. x Nick Mastrodemus' email in personnel.cat is not correct. All ITS: -------- x No specific liens DIIVNV_RAWCRU ------------- x No specific liens DIIVNV_RAWENC ------------- x No specific liens DIIVNV_ENC ---------- x No specific liens + For DI data sets reviewed in April 2007, MA requested science index tables with fewer columns. AR suggested 1) including the required PDS minimal index table with the DI flight data sets still in lien resolution and 2) consider storing the shortened science indices for all DI flight data set to the DI Documentation volume (DIDOC_0001). + document/pdsdd.ful & .idx: Added to these files as noted by Steve Adams during the April 2007 peer. Liens via Email ----------------------------------------------------------- From slarson@pirl.lpl.arizona.edu Sat Nov 25 19:51:35 2006 X-Original-To: raugh@icarus.astro.umd.edu Delivered-To: raugh@icarus.astro.umd.edu Delivered-To: raugh@astro.umd.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Steve Larson Subject: SBN PDS Fall Review - typ"?os Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 17:51:31 -0700 To: Anne Raugh X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 196972 Hi Anne- You mentioned that you wanted typos pointed out before the review. So here are a couple: x IHW NNSN Part 5 2986 should be 1986 + Not applicable x Deep Impact Mission Catalog file, mission overview: x second paragraph, line 3; " 4 July 4 2005" should be "4 July 2005". x line 4 - "The immediately..." should be "They immediately..." x Not a typo, but last sentence in para 1 of mission overview: what is "approach solar angle"? Not the same as phase angle, apparently. + Actually, it's " phase angle on approach"; Corrected text. x 9P/Post-encounter Cruise: last sentence: "There are no from..." "There are no data from..."? -Steve _____________________________________________________________________________ From wmo@wansor.jpl.nasa.gov Thu Nov 30 14:45:09 2006 X-Original-To: raugh@icarus.astro.umd.edu Delivered-To: raugh@icarus.astro.umd.edu Delivered-To: raugh@astro.umd.edu From: Bill Owen Reply-To: wmo@jpl.nasa.gov Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory To: raugh@astro.umd.edu Subject: PDS review -- typos Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 11:45:08 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 198205 Here's my list. I may yet take a closer look at the DI ITS documentation and send along more. x IHW_ASTROM aareadme.txt, line 18: change "campaing" to "campaign" + Not applicable. x DIDOC_V2 document/navigation_images_docs/nav_images_report.asc: x -- line 20, change "imact" to "impact" x -- line 79, change "Since" to "As" (yes, there's a distinction!) x -- line 80, change "all pixels in a single image were not being returned" to "not all pixels in a single image were being returned" + All of these documentation liens were implemented in version 3 of the DI Doc set that was reviewed in April 2007. x Nick Mastrodemos's correct e-mail is . The "queequeg." part of it should be removed, and "queequeg" itself is misspelled in some cases. I'll contact the other people here with the various questions which were raised during the meeting, and I'll forward their answers. It was truly a pleasure to meet you. -- Bill !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! + The items discussed in the following emails were addressed in version 3 of the DI Doc set that was reviewed in April 2007. -- 2007-05-25, SAM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! _____________________________________________________________________________ From raugh@astro.umd.edu Mon Dec 4 09:14:02 2006 X-Original-To: raugh@icarus.astro.umd.edu Delivered-To: raugh@icarus.astro.umd.edu Delivered-To: raugh@astro.umd.edu To: raugh@astro.umd.edu, wmo@jpl.nasa.gov Subject: Re: DI nav comments from Bob Werner X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 08:27:43 -0500 (EST) From: raugh@astro.umd.edu (Anne Raugh) Content-Length: 1530 > Anne -- I spoke to Bob Werner yesterday about that document of his, "Deep > Impact Autonav for Anybody." It turns out that the thing is full of detailed > spacecraft design information and is ITAR controlled. The faxed pages you > have are probably about all you're going to get. I haven't even seen the > whole thing myself. Ah. Well, that does present a problem. I don't know what you mean by "the faxed pages", though. I'll ask around here. > I did point Bob at nav_images_report.asc and I asked him for his comments. > He clarified it in two places (see attached). I must add that he uses "pel" > instead of "pixel" because the opnav group here often uses "pixel" instead > of "sample" for reasons which escape me. Feel free to s^pel^pixel^. > > Pseudo-ET was an attempt to turn SCLK time directly into ET seconds past > J2000. They'd take the SCLK count (in ticks), divide by 256 to get > seconds, subtract some offset value (nominally 64.184 sec), and if I'm > reading my old code correctly (?) that was pseudo-ET. This scheme would > have been satisfactory if SCLK had run at the correct rate, but it was off by > about 1 second per day. They updated the offset value at least twice during > cruise, but we insisted that they not monkey with it during encounter. > In any case, the important quantity is SCLK itself, which I *think* is on > the FITS headers. I'll forward to the DI people who will presumably have a much better idea of what values are where and how well documented. Thanks again! -Anne. _____________________________________________________________________________ From wmo@wansor.jpl.nasa.gov Mon Dec 4 11:28:39 2006 X-Original-To: raugh@icarus.astro.umd.edu Delivered-To: raugh@icarus.astro.umd.edu Delivered-To: raugh@astro.umd.edu From: Bill Owen Reply-To: wmo@jpl.nasa.gov Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory To: raugh@astro.umd.edu (Anne Raugh) Subject: Re: DI nav comments from Bob Werner Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 08:28:37 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Monday 04 December 2006 5:27 am, you wrote: > > Anne -- I spoke to Bob Werner yesterday about that document of his, "Deep > > Impact Autonav for Anybody." It turns out that the thing is full of > > detailed spacecraft design information and is ITAR controlled. The faxed > > pages you have are probably about all you're going to get. I haven't > > even seen the whole thing myself. > > Ah. Well, that does present a problem. I don't know what you mean by "the > faxed pages", though. I'll ask around here. Look in section 2 of nav_images_report.asc: The raw NAV data files generated from telemetry in the Advanced Multimission Mission Operations Systems (AMMOS) are in a completely different form than the raw science data. Bob Werner at JPL provided the details of the raw format in a document titled ''Deep Impact Autonav for Anybody''. No reference was available; the SDC only received a portion of the document via fax. So the fax in question was sent to Cornell, not to you. Talk to Brian? > > I did point Bob at nav_images_report.asc and I asked him for his > > comments. He clarified it in two places (see attached). I must add that > > he uses "pel" instead of "pixel" because the opnav group here often uses > > "pixel" instead of "sample" for reasons which escape me. Feel free to > > s^pel^pixel^. > > > > Pseudo-ET was an attempt to turn SCLK time directly into ET seconds past > > J2000. They'd take the SCLK count (in ticks), divide by 256 to get > > seconds, subtract some offset value (nominally 64.184 sec), and if I'm > > reading my old code correctly (?) that was pseudo-ET. This scheme would > > have been satisfactory if SCLK had run at the correct rate, but it was > > off by about 1 second per day. They updated the offset value at least > > twice during cruise, but we insisted that they not monkey with it during > > encounter. In any case, the important quantity is SCLK itself, which I > > *think* is on the FITS headers. > > I'll forward to the DI people who will presumably have a much better idea > of what values are where and how well documented. > > Thanks again! You're most welcome! (And for the other one too.....) -- Bill _____________________________________________________________________________ From wmo@wansor.jpl.nasa.gov Mon Dec 4 14:14:02 2006 X-Original-To: raugh@icarus.astro.umd.edu Delivered-To: raugh@icarus.astro.umd.edu Delivered-To: raugh@astro.umd.edu From: Bill Owen Reply-To: wmo@jpl.nasa.gov Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory To: raugh@astro.umd.edu (Anne Raugh) Subject: Re: DI nav comments from Bob Werner Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 10:43:30 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 199085 On Monday 04 December 2006 10:38 am, you wrote: > > So the fax in question was sent to Cornell, not to you. Talk to Brian? > > If I must. :) I wonder if I'll have the chance to corner him at APL later > this week. If not, between the two of us Stephanie and I should be able to > nag him into submission. > > Cheers, > > -Anne. Actually, it turns out Stef already had a copy. If you do see Brian this week, please give him my best regards. -- Bill _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________