Quick Start Guide to WFPC2 Imaging for ACS Proposers
General Remarks and Limitations:
This document is meant to provide a quick overview of the primary differences
between ACS and WFPC2. Much more detailed and accurate information
can be found in the Instrument Handbook.
Observations designed for ACS can often be migrated to WFPC2 or NICMOS, provided
one can accept some loss of sensitivity, resolution, or field-of-view. Exposure times
and numbers of images can be increased to recover these losses, though whether the
increase is too high, or whether the science is too gravely impacted are issues
for consideration.
Some observations will be very difficult or impossible to perform on WFPC2.
Among these are imaging very faint targets (V>28), very high precision photometry
(better than 2%), grisms, or coronography.
Field-of-View:
The WFPC2 field-of-view is approximated by a 150" x 150" square with one
quadrant absent (L-shape defined by WF2, WF3, and WF4). The ACS WFC field is approximately
202" x 202" and the HRC is 27" x 27". The fields are illustrated in the
figure below. The field of view of the WFPC2 PC1 CCD is 32" x 32".
Those wishing to image a large target or field may need to
mosaic or "tile"
multiple WFPC2 pointings. The most efficient method is to place WF3 into
the missing quadrant of the prior exposure, though this produces an irregular
shaped mosaic. A less efficient alternative is to use WF2 & WF3 in multiple
pointings to build-up a rectangular mosaic. NB: for phase 1 proposals it is
NOT necessary to give the RA and Dec for each mosaic pointing; it is sufficient
to specify the region center and the total number of exposures in the mosaic.
Pixel Sizes and Resolution:
The WFPC2 WFC pixels are twice as large as those on the ACS WFC, hence the
Point Spread Function (PSF) sampling is poorer, and the effective resolution is lower.
Some information on finer scales can be recovered by sub-pixel dithering, but the
full ACS sampling cannot be recovered. The ACS HRC pixels were significantly
smaller than any on WFPC2, though again some fine-scale information can be
recovered by sub-pixel dithering. See the WFPC2
Dither/Drizzle
page for more details.
ACS: WFC = 0.05" HRC = 0.027"
WFPC2: WF2,WF3,WF4 = 0.10" PC1 = 0.046"
Filters:
Nearly all broadband filters on ACS have close counterparts on WFPC2.
There are also numerous medium and narrow band filters on WFPC2 covering important
bands and spectral lines. Ramp filters and polarizers are also available.
Both ACS and WFPC2 have ramp filters which can be used when no standard filter
is available at a desired wavelength. In some cases an observation planned
for an ACS ramp filter might be performed on a WFPC2 standard narrow band filter;
there are 21 narrow band filters available on WFPC2. The ACS ramp filter fields of view
vary in size, but 70" x 20" is typical. Most WFPC2 narrow band filters cover the
entire WFPC2 field of view (some so-called "quad" filters are smaller);
this large field of view can be a significant advantage when imaging large targets
or regions vs. using the smaller ACS ramp filters. In other cases,
it may be necessary to move an ACS observation to a WFPC2 ramp filter; proposers
should be aware that the WFPC2 ramp filters have an unvignetted field of view of
only ~10" x ~10".
Exposure Time Calculations:
ACS utilized a red-optimized CCDs in the WFC, and a blue optimized CCD in the HRC.
In comparison WFPC2 has a single type of CCD with generally lower QE than those in ACS.
WFPC2 has no health & safety issues for observing bright targets.
The table below gives a few comparative exposure times required to reach the SNR=10
for a G0V star. At middle wavelengths WFPC2 exposures tend to be a factor ~4
longer, but at short and long wavelengths, and for sky-limited cases the ratio becomes much larger.
(Aperture diameter 0.2" for ACS, but 0.3" for WFPC2 to allow for re-sampling the larger WF pixels.
WF CCDs assumed for WFPC2. Sky V=22.7. Nominal CR-SPLITS assumed.
For the two emission line calculations, RAMP/F375N and F658N/F656N,
we assume 10-15 erg cm-2 s-1.)
CTE effects are ignored in this table, and can be very important in
situations with faint targets and/or low background counts. See CTE
discussion below.
Filter V Mag Exposure time to reach SNR=10
ACS/WFPC2 ----- -----------------------------
----------- ACS WFPC2 RATIO
------- ------- -----
F220W/F218W 18 665s 22000s 33
F250W/F255W 19 221s 8000s 36
F330W/F300W 20 76s 400s 5.3
RAMP/F375N -- 618s 15000s 24
F435W/F450W 24 169s 600s 3.6
26 1480s 6400s 4.3
28 29000s 180000s 6
F606W 24 47s 180s 3.8
26 370s 1800s 4.9
28 6500s 52000s 8
F658N/F656N -- 73s 260s 3.6
F814W 24 69s 360s 5.2
26 560s 5100s 9
28 11300s 165000s 15
F850LP 24 235s 1800s 8
26 2066s 32000s 16
28 60000s --- --
We give one example for an extended target with V=23 per square arc second
using F606W and SNR=10 per 0.1" square -- the ACS exposure time is 1400s and
that for WFPC2 is 4600s.
Exposure time estimates depend on many variables. We recommend running the WFPC2 Exposure Time Calculator
to obtain the best estimates for your observation.
Note: as of 2/1/2007 14:00 EST the WFPC2 ETC will default to a circular
aperture, to make it more similar to the ACS ETC. There are still some
differences however: the ACS ETC defaults to a 0.2" radius aperture,
whereas WFPC2 defaults to 2 pixel radius. The previous WFPC2 default of
Optimal PSF Weighting can still be manually selected in the ETC, if desired.
CTE:
WFPC2 suffers significant Charge Transfer Efficiency problems from on-orbit
radiation damage. These effects will be smallest for long exposures
in broadband filters such as F606W, F625W, F785LP, F814W, where the sky background
serves to "preflash" the CCD. For example, stellar images near the center
of the CCD in a 600 second F606W exposure will suffer roughly the CTE losses
shown in the table below. Correction equations available, and these can be applied
provided the target is well-detected. After correction the photometry will be
accurate to a few percent, though of course, the signal-to-noise ratio is
degraded by loss of counts.
However, the problem becomes more severe for narrow and UV filters where
there is little or no sky background. For example, in a 600 second F656N
exposure, the CTE losses at the CCD center for stellar targets are roughly:
Star total CTE loss CTE loss
counts F606W F656N
1000 DN 8% 13%
100 DN 20% 32%
10 DN 30% 51%
Observers who require very accurate photometry or detection of faint
objects are urged to estimate the CTE effects for their observation.
Several tools for estimating CTE effects on stellar targets
are available.
Of the three tools, CTE tool #1
contains the most recent results. It will require the following inputs: MJD -- use 54500 for mid-Cycle 16;
the source counts -- use the value of "object_counts" near the bottom of the ETC
output page; the CCD X and Y positions -- use (400, 400) for the CCD center, or (800, 800) if you
need the worst case for an object anywhere in the field-of-view; the
background counts -- use the value of "sky_counts" again from the bottom of
the ETC output page; and finally the stellar magnitude of the target -- this only
need be very approximate. It will then output XCTE and YCTE, which are the
magnitude changes due to two types of CTE loss, or equivalently the fraction
of counts lost to CTE. For example, XCTE=0.01 and YCTE=0.17 imply 0.18
magnitudes loss or ~18% loss in counts.
One can use this estimated CTE value in several ways.
In this example an observer might want to
expose 18% longer to ensure the desired signal-to-noise ratio. Those requiring
accurate photometry should be aware that this 18% effect will need correction
during data analyses, and that the corrections are likely imperfect. The
accuracy of the CTE corrections is not well established, but an uncertainty
of 10% to 20% is likely. Hence the photometric uncertainty due to
CTE (even after correction) would be in the range 2% to 4% for this example.
For extended targets the effects are expected to be much less, as the
leading edge of the image effectively preflashes the CCD during readout.
For small targets (few arcseconds in size), CTE losses can be greatly reduced
by placing the target in the CCD corner nearest the readout amplifier. In this way CTE losses
can be reduce by a factor of ~4 from the values given above.
Pre-flashing is another way of reducing CTE losses in WFPC2, though it
will add noise to the images, and increase overhead times by about
3 minutes per exposure.
Dynamic Range:
The WFPC2 CCDs saturate around 53000 electrons, whereas the ACS/HRC CCD
saturates near 140000 electrons. This will make simultaneous observation
of very bright and very faint objects more difficult with WFPC2.
WFPC2 WF4 CCD Anomaly:
The WF4 CCD, one of the 3 wide field camera CCDs, suffers an
anomaly in the readout electronics whereby the CCD amplifier gain and bias levels
are unstable.
This results in altered photometry and faint horizontal stripes (<1 DN) in the background.
The error is fairly well characterized and the photometry can be corrected to a
few percent accuracy during post-processing. The stripes are easily removed by
spatial filtering in fields with few objects; however, in
crowded fields or in the presence of extended objects filtering will be difficult.
Details are available in the WFPC2 Instrument Handbook and in
WFPC2 ISR_2005-02.
Overhead Times:
WFPC2 observations tend to have larger overhead
times than ACS. A WFPC2 exposure requires a minimum of 2 minutes regardless
of the exposure time, and an additional 1 minute if a filter change is needed
before the exposure. This limits the maximum number of WFPC2 exposures per 53m orbit to ~20.
NICMOS:
There are some special circumstances where a proposer may wish to consider
a change to NICMOS instead of WFPC2. These could include coronagraphy,
polarimetry and photometry in the far-red optical/NIR region. The NICMOS
Instrument Handbook provides details of these observing modes.
Version 1.3 2/5/2007 JB
|