| 1 | \section{Proposed Observation Strategies}
|
|---|
| 2 |
|
|---|
| 3 | \subsection{Estimation of the Required Observation Time}
|
|---|
| 4 |
|
|---|
| 5 | A rough estimate of the needed observation time for GRBs derives
|
|---|
| 6 | from the estimated number of GRB follow-up observations which can be
|
|---|
| 7 | expressed in the following formula:
|
|---|
| 8 |
|
|---|
| 9 | \begin{equation}
|
|---|
| 10 | N_{obs} = N_{alert} \cdot DC \cdot F_{overlap}
|
|---|
| 11 | \end{equation}
|
|---|
| 12 |
|
|---|
| 13 | where $N_{obs}$ is the mean number of observed bursts, $N_{alert}$ the mean
|
|---|
| 14 | number of sent alerts, $DC$ the duty cycle (including the reduction of sky coverage
|
|---|
| 15 | due to the maximum allowed zenith angle) and $F_{overlap}$ a reduction factor due to
|
|---|
| 16 | the non-overlapping sky coverage between the satellites and \ma. \\
|
|---|
| 17 |
|
|---|
| 18 | The claimed GRB observation frequency $N_{obs}(SWIFT)$ is predicted to about 150-200 GRBs/year
|
|---|
| 19 | by the \sw collaboration~\cite{SWIFT}. We estimate $DC$ from studies on the \ma duty-cycle
|
|---|
| 20 | made by Nicola Galante~\cite{NICOLA}.
|
|---|
| 21 | The duty-cycle studies are based on real weather data from the year 2002 taking the following criteria:
|
|---|
| 22 |
|
|---|
| 23 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 24 | \item maximum wind speeds of 10\,m/s
|
|---|
| 25 | \item maximum humidity of 80\%
|
|---|
| 26 | \item darkness at astronomical horizon
|
|---|
| 27 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 28 |
|
|---|
| 29 | In these duty-cycle studies also full-moon nights were considered (requiring
|
|---|
| 30 | a minimum angular distance between the GRB and the Moon of 30$^\circ$) yielding a
|
|---|
| 31 | total of 10\%.
|
|---|
| 32 |
|
|---|
| 33 | \par
|
|---|
| 34 |
|
|---|
| 35 | The duty-cycle in~\cite{NICOLA} will be increased by taking into account that \ma should also observe the
|
|---|
| 36 | afterglow emission of a burst that occurred up to 5 hours before the start of the shift.
|
|---|
| 37 | The afterglow observation is equivalent to an increase of the duty-cycle of about 6 days per month.
|
|---|
| 38 | However, taking off the full-moon time, we remain with the anticipated 10\%.\\
|
|---|
| 39 |
|
|---|
| 40 | The overlap factor $F_{overlap}$ is difficult to estimate since the \sw satellite will continuously slew
|
|---|
| 41 | to new sources or follow detected bursts. Figure~\ref{fig:orbit} shows that the satellite will pass very
|
|---|
| 42 | precisely over La Palma during the night. Taking into account that it will not look towards the Sun,
|
|---|
| 43 | we expect that $F_{overlap}(SWIFT)$ will be at least 0.5 or higher. \\
|
|---|
| 44 |
|
|---|
| 45 | In conclusion, we can calculate a worst case scenario with 150 \sw alerts per year and an overlap factor
|
|---|
| 46 | of 0.5 yielding $N_{obs}^{min} \sim 0.6$/month.
|
|---|
| 47 | An upper limit can be derived from 200 \sw alerts and a complete
|
|---|
| 48 | overlap with $F_{overlap}(SWIFT) = 1$ yielding $N_{obs}^{max} \sim 1.6$/month.
|
|---|
| 49 |
|
|---|
| 50 | \subsection{Determine the Maximum Zenith Angle}
|
|---|
| 51 |
|
|---|
| 52 | We determine the maximum zenith angle for GRB observations by requiring that the overwhelming
|
|---|
| 53 | majority of possible GRBs will have in principle an observable spectrum. Figure~\ref{fig:grh}
|
|---|
| 54 | shows the gamma-ray horizon (GRH) as computed in~\cite{KNEISKE,SALOMON}. The GRH is defined as the
|
|---|
| 55 | gamma-ray energy at which a fraction of $1/\mathrm{e}$ of a hypothetical mono-energetic flux gets absorbed after
|
|---|
| 56 | travelling a distance, expressed in redshift $z$, from the source. One can see that at typical
|
|---|
| 57 | GRB distances of $z=1$, all gamma-rays above 100\,GeV get absorbed before they can reach the Earth.
|
|---|
| 58 |
|
|---|
| 59 | \par
|
|---|
| 60 |
|
|---|
| 61 | Even the closest GRB with known redshift ever observed, GRB030329~\cite{GRB030329}, lies at a redshift
|
|---|
| 62 | of $z=0.1685$. In this case $\gamma$-rays above 200\,GeV get entirely absorbed.
|
|---|
| 63 |
|
|---|
| 64 | \begin{figure}[htp]
|
|---|
| 65 | \centering
|
|---|
| 66 | \includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{f4.eps}
|
|---|
| 67 | \caption{Gamma Ray Horizon as derived in~\cite{KNEISKE}}
|
|---|
| 68 | \label{fig:grh}
|
|---|
| 69 | \end{figure}
|
|---|
| 70 |
|
|---|
| 71 | \par
|
|---|
| 72 |
|
|---|
| 73 | We assume now a current energy threshold of 50\,GeV for \ma at a zenith angle of
|
|---|
| 74 | $\theta = 0$\footnote{As this proposal is going to be reviewed in a couple of months, improvements of the energy threshold will be taken into account then.}. According to~\cite{ecl}, the energy threshold of a Cherenkov telescope scales with zenith angle like:
|
|---|
| 75 |
|
|---|
| 76 | \begin{equation}
|
|---|
| 77 | E_{thr}(\theta) = E_{thr}(0) \cdot (\cos\theta)^{-2.7}
|
|---|
| 78 | \label{eq:ethrvszenith}
|
|---|
| 79 | \end{equation}
|
|---|
| 80 |
|
|---|
| 81 | Eq.~\ref{eq:ethrvszenith} leads to an energy threshold of about 5.6\,TeV at $\theta = 80^\circ$,
|
|---|
| 82 | 900\,GeV at $\theta = 70^\circ$ and 500\,GeV at $\theta = 65^\circ$.
|
|---|
| 83 | Inserting these results into the GRH (figure~\ref{fig:grh}), one gets a maximal observable GRB
|
|---|
| 84 | distance of $z = 0.1$ at $\theta = 70^\circ$ and $z = 0.2$ at $\theta = 65^\circ$.
|
|---|
| 85 | We think that the probability for GRBs to occur at these distances is sufficiently small in order to
|
|---|
| 86 | neglect the very difficult observations beyond these limits.
|
|---|
| 87 |
|
|---|
| 88 | \subsection{GRB Observations in Case of Moon Shine}
|
|---|
| 89 |
|
|---|
| 90 | {\it gspot} allows only GRBs with an angular distance of $> 30^\circ$ from the Moon.
|
|---|
| 91 | Telescope slewing in case of a GRB alert will be done
|
|---|
| 92 | without closing the camera lids, so that the camera could be
|
|---|
| 93 | flashed by the Moon during such movement. In principle,
|
|---|
| 94 | a fast Moon flash should not damage the PMTs, but the behaviour
|
|---|
| 95 | of the camera and the Camera Control {\it La Guagua} must
|
|---|
| 96 | be tested. On the other hand, if such tests conclude that it is not safe
|
|---|
| 97 | to get even a short flash from the Moon, the Steering System, while slewing,
|
|---|
| 98 | will have to follow a path around the Moon.
|
|---|
| 99 |
|
|---|
| 100 | \par
|
|---|
| 101 |
|
|---|
| 102 | In December 2004, the shift in La Palma observed the Crab-Nebula even during half-moon. During the observation, the nominal HV could be maintained while the currents were kept below 2\,$\mu$A. This means that only full-moon periods are not suitable for GRB-observations. We want to stress the fact that observations at moon-time increase the chances to catch GRBs by 80\%. It is therefore mandatory that the shifters keep the camera in fully operational conditions with high-voltages switched on from the beginning of a half-moon night until the end. This includes periods where no other half-moon observations are scheduled. If no other data can be taken during those periods, the telescope should be pointed to a Southern direction, close to the Zenith. This increases the probability to overlap with the FoV of \sw.
|
|---|
| 103 |
|
|---|
| 104 | \par
|
|---|
| 105 |
|
|---|
| 106 | In these conditions, because of higher background with moon-light, we suggest to decrease the maximum zenith angle from
|
|---|
| 107 | $\theta_{max} = 70^\circ$ to $\theta_{max} = 65^\circ$.
|
|---|
| 108 |
|
|---|
| 109 | \subsection{Active Mirror Control Behaviour}
|
|---|
| 110 |
|
|---|
| 111 | To reduce the time before the start of the observation, the use of the look-up tables (LUTs) is necessary.
|
|---|
| 112 | Once generated, the {\it AMC} will use the LUTs and automatically focus the panels for a given
|
|---|
| 113 | telescope position. The {\it CC} should send the burst coordinates to the {\it Drive} and the {\it AMC}
|
|---|
| 114 | software in the same time. In this way the panels could be focused already during the telescope movement.
|
|---|
| 115 |
|
|---|
| 116 | \subsection{Calibration}
|
|---|
| 117 |
|
|---|
| 118 | For ordinary source observation, the calibration is currently performed in the following way:
|
|---|
| 119 |
|
|---|
| 120 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 121 | \item At the beginning of the source observation, a dedicated pedestal run followed by a calibration run is taken.
|
|---|
| 122 | \item During the data runs, interlaced calibration events are taken at a rate of 50\,Hz.
|
|---|
| 123 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 124 |
|
|---|
| 125 | We would like to continue taking the interlaced calibration events when a GRB alert is launched, but leave out the pedestal and calibration run in order not to loose valuable time.
|
|---|
| 126 |
|
|---|
| 127 | \subsection{In case of Follow-up: Next Steps}
|
|---|
| 128 |
|
|---|
| 129 | We propose to analyze the GRB data at the following day in order to tell whether a follow-up observation during the next night is useful. We think that a limit of 3\,$\sigma$ significance should be enough to start such a follow-up observation of the same place. This follow-up observation can then be used in two ways:
|
|---|
| 130 |
|
|---|
| 131 | \begin{itemize}
|
|---|
| 132 | \item In case of a repeated outbursts for a longer time period of direct observation.
|
|---|
| 133 | \item Or else, for having off-data at exactly the same sky location.
|
|---|
| 134 | \end{itemize}
|
|---|
| 135 |
|
|---|
| 136 | %%% Local Variables:
|
|---|
| 137 | %%% mode: latex
|
|---|
| 138 | %%% TeX-master: "GRB_proposal_2005"
|
|---|
| 139 | %%% TeX-master: "GRB_proposal_2005"
|
|---|
| 140 | %%% End:
|
|---|