SKA Status and Capability Update

Robert Braun, Science Director

13 September 2017

!!

!"#$%&'()*+,-%.#/'0/).#')+1'2)3)4%5#6

2)3)47'89"3:/%"+,;".$)3'2)3)4%5#'<=>?@6

!"#$"3"A7,().B'8+5.A7C'D).A5'0&)35'0/.:&/:.56

!"#$%&'E)A+5/%#$,F.%A%+C'89"3:/%"+6

!.)135'"G'D%G5,H3)+5/#C'E"35&:35#C'08IJ6

I5#/%+A'25+5.)3'K53)/%9%/7,0/."+A'K5A%$5C'2.)9%/)/%"+)3'L)95#6

84M3".)/%"+'"G'/N5'O+B+"*+

./'*%(%01#)*234#*356%#27#89:%59%;#

3

SKA Science Book 2015

• 135 Chapters, 2000 pages, 8.8 kg • Plus new science directions that continue to emerge!

4

SKA Organisation: 10 countries, more to join

Australia(DoI&S)Canada(NRC-HIA)China(MOST)India(DAE)Italy(INAF)Netherlands(NWO)NewZealand(MED)SouthAfrica(DST)Sweden(Chalmers)UK(STFC)

InterestedCountries:• France• Germany• Japan• Korea• Malta• Portugal• Spain• Switzerland• USA

Contacts:• Brazil• Ireland• Russia

5

Negotiations to establish SKA Inter-Governmental Organisation.

TextofConventionandprotocolsnowagreedPlantoinitialdocumentsinOctober2017MinisterialsigningceremonyinDecember2017

Transitionplanningunderway

D

@ #%/5#X'>'/535#&"M5#'Y'RZ['F\#5.9)/".7

(5#%A+'HN)#5U'=][^_EX'`__'#&%5+/%#/#Y5+A%+55.#

HN)#5'[!"+#/.:&/%"+U'>_[ab>_[c'd >_>@

!"+#/.:&/%"+'&"#/'&)MU']`^eE',%+G3)/%"+?)1f:#/516

E55.T)/ %+/5A.)/51F\#5.9)/".7'(5953"M$5+/'H."A.)$$5

0TP'K5A%"+)3'!5+/.5# ":/'"G'#&"M5'"G'&5+/.)337?G:+151'0TPF'

!K'&52$"./4B2%52 #55&0

@

!"#=GL?MA$><$N O><$PQRSE&(2$=A$T=O<7<<<$&)%2))&($&854(($U>:B$

@

!"#=GP.*A$O><$PQR$N ;V$HQRSE&(2$=A$;<<$=>GB$*.(E2($&854(($=><$:B

!"#A$W2/2(84,2($.)$#1!$X$3!#

!"+#/.:&/%"+U'>_[ab>_[c'd >_>@X'!"#/'&)MU']`^eE

8

SKA HQ: Jodrell Bank, UKNew, €20M building, complete Q2 2018 State-of-the art facilities

F

!"#$QY

10

SKA HQViewfromLovellTelescopetower,30/08/2017

11

SKA HQ

12

SKA-BD-24-07b

Appendix 1 Paper for Approval

Design vs. Deployment Baseline June 2017 view

One of the main issues reinforced during this work was the current funding and membership of the Consortia. It is clear that the funding for future extensions to consortium agreements is under threat; in addition, some members are finding it difficult to extend due to other pressures. The paper follows the instruction to design a system that can be built within the Cost Cap, although the work indicates where further reductions could be made. However, if funds above the Cost Cap were available, either through additional funding by Members or by new Members joining, the paper includes outline plans on how we would re-implement the reductions we have chosen and thereby reinstate scientific capabilities. Recommendations The Office recommends that the Board of Directors:

(a) Approve the Design Baseline as the basis for CDR and the long-term ambition of the SKA-1 Project.

(b) Approve the Deployment Baseline as that part of the Design Baseline that can be afforded at the beginning of construction.

(c) Terminate the Cost Control Project as a separate activity.

Design Baseline

Deployment Baseline

Re-instatement ‘+’ means add to system

SKA1-Mid

No. dishes 133 130 +3 dishes at 150 km Max. Baseline 150 km 120 km + infra to 150 km Band 1 Feeds 133 130 +3 Band 1 Feeds for 3 dishes Band 2 Feeds 133 130 +3 Band 2 Feeds for 3 dishes Band 5 Feeds 133 67 +66 Band 5 feeds Pulsar Search

(PSS) 500 nodes 375 nodes +125 nodes

SKA1-Low No. stations 512 476 +36 stations (18 stns at 49 & 65 km)

Max. Baseline 65 km 40 km +infra to 65km Pulsar Search 167 nodes 125 nodes +42 nodes

Common Compute Power 260 PFLOPs 50 PFLOPs +210 PFLOPs

Design Baseline / Deployment Baseline

• Outcome of July SKA Board Meeting– Design Baseline for which CDRs will be undertaken is unchanged– Deployment Baseline is scoped for cost-capped Construction budget– Further analysis of Low BMax underway – Re-instatement of HPC and PSS already part of Operational budget– Re-instatement commitment for all items as soon as funding permits

?"

< D*%0:(:53*1#&%*72*(359%#&*2T%9':258#72*#'?%#'F2#35'%553#90388%8#E54%*#8'E41

< QE*'?%*#F2*C#'2#2&':(:8%&%*72*(359%UM $%58:':V:'1M $&%9'*30#8(22'?5%88M D203*:83':25M $C1#92V%*36%M $'3':25#722'&*:5'M >28'

< O%92((%543':25#7*2(#*%V:%F#&35%0#35':9:&3'%4#(:4P$%&'%()%*

!"#=GL4[$#)%2))&$?,%.B.(&%.4)

Performance of MWA EDA vs specs draft 22052017 - Array_Sensitivity_2135

Zenith sensitivityLast updated 2 June 2017 A. SutinjoReference: [Sys_r10] W Turner, “SKA Phase 1 System Requirements Specification,” SKA-TEL-SKO-0000008, Rev. 10, 2016-12-06

Color codeblue SKAO's numberblack oursFont codeitalics values are enterednormal values are calculatedbold important

Daniel Ung (DU) DU

Source [Sys_r10, 26.1]

Cold source measurement in the anechoic chamber of one EDA LNA connected to MWA bowtie (Date:25-05-17, performed by DU). Latest data based on the average between results obtained from measurement in anechoic chamber and measured noise parameter. The average of each measured data was taken at a bin size of 10 MHz which is consistent with obervation data provided by Marcin. 50 MHz and 350 MHz was interpolated as necessary based on the average values.

Based on FEKO simulation of the EDA over an infinite perfect electric conductor (Date:22-05-17, performed by DU). Based on X-polarization

[Sys_r10] SKA1-SYS_REQ-2135

MHz

tsky = 20.*(0.408/freqGHz)**2.75 + 2.73 + 288.*(0.005+0.1314*exp((log10(freqGHz)-log10(22.23))*8.)) MWA EDA T_RX (K) MWA EDA TRX + tsky (K)

MWA EDA Zenith Gain (dBi)

MWA EDA Zenith Aperture Area (m^2)

MWA EDA Zenith Sensitivity (m^2/K)

512*MWA EDA Zenith Sensitivity (m^2/K)

SKA1_Low array sensitivity (m^2/K)

% Difference relative to SKAO's number Comments

For reference only 60*lambda^2.55 K

50 6432.2 3358 9790.2 25.6 1040.1 0.106 54.4 68 -20.0 5786.855 4949.8 2523 7472.8 26.4 1033.5 0.138 70.8 70 1.2 4538.280 1768.1 570 2338.1 29.4 974.7 0.417 213.4 232 -8.0 1745.5

110 738.1 204 942.1 31.6 855.6 0.908 465.0 531 -12.4 774.9140 381.6 62 443.6 32.6 664.9 1.499 767.5 588 30.5 419.0160 265.2 27 292.2 32.7 464.3 1.589 813.7 610 33.4 298.1220 112.0 66 178.0 31.7 218.9 1.229 629.4 614 2.5 132.3280 59.0 74 133.0 30.6 104.9 0.788 403.6 576 -29.9 71.5340 35.8 75 110.8 29.3 52.7 0.476 243.8 522 -53.3 43.6345 34.5 71 105.5 29.1 48.9 0.464 237.5 515 -53.9 42.0350 33.2 61 94.2 29 46.4 0.493 252.4 516 -51.1 40.5

!"#$%&'()*'+,-.&-/0)1123$40)(3/311)

?#?#

!"#=GL4[$!'-G(%&%.4)$84552/&%.4)$B4*2(

< W:*'E30#8E)P8'3':258#935#)%#4%7:5%4#27#3*):'*3*1#8:X%

< $E&&2*'#72*#8'3543*4#92**%03':25#(24%8#72*#=!+@#-YA@#!,+Z@#!="Y#354#+,ZA#V:*'E30#8'3':258#

< >35#9E8'2(:8% [E@V\#83(&0:56#'2#(3'9?#5%%48

< ./'*%(%#)*:6?'5%88#8%58:':V:'1#72*#:(36:56

< ./'*%(%#8%58:':V:'1#354#CP(24%#83(&0:56#72*#.2O &2F%*#8&%9'*3

15

• Two prototypes to be ready by Sept/Oct, one in CN, other on SKA1-Mid site• Total surface RMS < 350 𝜇m, relative pointing RMS <1.3 arcsec• Good performance anticipated to ~50 GHz (cf. VLA has ~500 𝜇m RMS)

Dish Update

Design - Overview

16

• High frequency performance of SKA1-Mid site (2010 – 2015) compared to VLA site (Forkman & Conway 2017)

• Annual average P10 and P50 of two sites essentially equal

SKA1 – VLA PWV comparison

17

• New performance estimates from feed PDR documentation • Better Aeff/Tsys performance in Band 5a/b: 4.6 – 15.3 GHz• Cryostat can accommodate additional feeds (dot-dashed in plot)• Realistic Tatm and 𝞽 data for SKA1-Mid site; freqs. up to 50 GHz viable

Dish Update

18

Sensitivity Comparison

19

Sensitivity Comparison

20

Signal / Noise versus Fractional Bandwidth

• Large Δ𝝂/𝝂c useful for flat spectrum sources

• Less benefit for 𝛼 ≠ 0

• Dusty proto-planetary disks: 𝛼 = 2 – 4,

77% of s/n from 10% of Δ𝝂/𝝂c

21

Survey Speed Comparison

22

Resolution Comparison

23

Image Quality Comparison

• Single SKA1 track equivalent to VLA A+B+C+D + E+A+

• “Structural” dynamic range of ~1000:1 rather than ~3:1 per track

• Beam quality ~100 times better than VLA

!#!#

FB&@2$Y'&/.%0$+4B,&5.(4)

< 0%+A35'0TP[?E%1'#+)M?#N"/'&"$M).51'/"'&"$\%+)/%"+'"G'#+)M?#N"/#'%+'5)&N'"G'gDP'PYWY!Y('

!$!$

FB&@2$Y'&/.%0$+4B,&5.(4)

< 0%+A35'0TP[?E%1'#+)M?#N"/'&"$M).51'/"'+AgDP #+)M?#N"/'

26

Image Quality Comparison

• Beam quality ~100 times better than LOFAR

!@!@

FB&@2$Y'&/.%0$+4B,&5.(4)

< 0%+A35'0TP[?D"*'#+)M?#N"/'&"$M).51'/"'DF-PK'#+)M?#N"/

28

Critical Design Review Schedule

• Based on “frozen” requirements (L1 Revision 11)

Milestone Date (TBC)AIV CDR close December 2018

CSP CDR close July 2018

DSH CDR close (Bands 1 & 2) March 2019

DSH CDR close (Band 5) April 2019

INAU CDR close July 2018

INSA CDR close July 2018

LFAA CDR close July 2018

SaDT CDR close April 2018

SDP CDR close December 2018

TM CDR close June 2018

System CDR close December 2018

Construction Proposal submission March 2019

!F

< H."f5&/'$"$5+/:$'54&5335+/UM H.53%$%+).7'(5#%A+'K59%5*#'&"$M35/51M !.%/%&)3'(5#%A+'K59%5*#'#&N51:351M J2F'&"+95+/%"+'%+%/%)3%+A'Q'#%A+%+A'%$$%+5+/'

< 0TP'&"+#/.:&/%"+'%#'"+'/N5'N".%<"+

W.B2/.)2

!"+#/.:&/%"+'M."M"#)3,*;;/66/*-/-8)G)H035B)I4/&-4&

,*-6(3:4(/*-)IJK?