The capability of the technique to recover the
absolute tilt of the LGS is related to the joint probability to find
two stars, whose magnitude is equal or brighter than the limiting magnitude
defined in the second section, located at angular distances respectively
d1 and d2 from the
observed object as small as possible and forming with respect
to the latter an angle of about , in order to reduce to a
minimum the error on the tilt determination.
Projecting the problem to the Earth surface, we have the joint probability to
exploit two tracks for the small telescopes as close as possible to the
main observatory. The area in the neighbourhood of the observatory will
have different occupation frequency densities for the auxiliary
telescopes depending upon the ratio between the
main and the auxiliary telescope diameters , the Fried parameter
r0, the tolerance angle
around the nominal position of
and the coordinates of the object.
Using the values given in Sect. 2, several simulations
about the ground occupation for N
have been performed. For a density of
the mean distance of the
star nearest to the object <d1> and of the nearest second
star <d2>, within different tolerance angles (view as a cone of
aperture
centered around the
position) have been computed averaging over 5000
simulation runs.
Figure 5: Mean distance from the observed object of the nearest second
star versus the tolerance angle : the filled
circles calculated through the simulations are well fitted by
the -1/2-law of Eq. (14) and the asymptotic trend gives a
value of
The mean distance of the nearest star <d1>
depends only upon the star density n, and its value is equal to:
In our case a figure of arcmin is obtained.
The computation of the second nearest star is more complicated because
of the constraint imposed by the first nearest star.
Using the observation that the square of the
mean distance is proportional to the
available number of stars in a given sky region one can figure out the
following relationship:
where the fixed addictive term is due to take into account the finite
value of <d2> when approaches
.
Numerical simulations and fitting of the obtained data lead to an
estimation, for our case study, of
and
. The results are plotted in Fig. 5 (click here).
In order to define the tracks distribution around the observatory
we performed a MonteCarlo simulation in which we calculated the tracks
for the star and its almost perpendicular companion closest to the object
for different tolerance angles, using a star field of poissonian mean
density equal to
and objects of random zenithal distance
considering an observation time of 4 hours across the
meridian (
).
The results for the case are shown in
Fig. 6 (click here): the simulated data are rappresented with filled circles and
a poissonian fitting is superimposed. The figure shows a poissonian-like
distance distribution both for the nearest star and for its
perpendicular companion. We performed 5000 simulation runs to figure
out the described results.
Figure 6: Distribution of the tracks around the observatory: the
MonteCarlo data results are well fitted by a Poissonian curve.
The upper plot, referred to the nearest star, shows a sharper
shape with respect to the case of the perpendicular companion
(lower plot)
A simple view of the MonteCarlo simulation with only 200 tracks is shown in Fig. 7 (click here): the tracks of the perpendicular companion are marked at their ends with filled circles. The different distances of the paths for the two reference stars are evident.
Given a circular area of radius R around the observatory it is possible to
retrieve the percentage of tracks inside it, and to define the sky
coverage of the system. The results are shown in Table 1 (click here) for
different tolerance angles where the other parameters are the same used in
this section;
accepting a further degradation of the measurement error due to the
non perpendicularity of the two reference stars (29%, 48% and 73%
respectively for ,
and
),
it is possible, within
1 km, to project the LGS through the auxiliary telescopes and track them for
approximately all the reference stars found in proximity of the
observed object.
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
R = 250 m | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
R = 500 m | 12 | 21 | 29 | 37 | 40 | 48 |
R = 750 m | 30 | 51 | 65 | 76 | 81 | 86 |
R = 1000 m | 51 | 75 | 88 | 94 | 96 | 98 |
The ground tracking speed is very small. We have found mean
values of about few meters per minute: for example, in the condition
and maximum zenithal distance of
,
the mean tracking speed is
for the
star and
for its
perpendicular companion.
It is worth noting that all calculations are performed for a star density given at the North Galactic Pole and in most cases n is much more greater.
Figure 7: Example of paths of 200 stars around the observatory
(latitude N) for
, maximum
zenithal distance of
. The paths of second star
are marked at the ends with filled circles