Register

iTelescope.Net is the world’s premier network of Internet connected telescopes, allowing members to take astronomical images of the night sky for the purposes of education, scientific research and astrophotography. (more)

iTelescope.Net is a self-funding, not for profit membership organisation; we exist to benefit our members and the astronomy community. Financial proceeds fund the expansion and growth of the network. iTelescope.Net is run by astronomers for astronomers.

The network is open to the public; anyone can join and become a member including students, amateurs and even professional astronomers.

With 20 telescopes, and observatories located in New Mexico, Australia and Spain, observers are able to follow the night sky around the globe 24x7.

iTelescope.Net puts professional telescopes within the reach of all, with systems ranging from single shot colour telescopes to 700mm (27”) research grade telescopes.

Astronomy Research

Having access to professional telescopes means that doing real science has never been easier – great value for schools, educators, universities, amateur and professional astronomers. (more)

Exo-planets, comets, supernova, quasars, asteroids, binary stars, minor planets, near earth objects and variable stars can all be studied. iTelescope.Net can also send your data directly to AAVSO VPhot server for real-time online photometric analysis.

iTelescope.Net allows you to respond quickly to real-time astronomical phenomena such as supernova and outbursts events, gaining a competitive edge for discoveries. With more than 240 asteroid discoveries iTelescope.Net is ranked within the top 50 observatories in the world by the Minor Planet Center.

Get involved: members have used the network to provide supportive data for go/no-go decisions on Hubble space telescope missions.

Education and Astronomy Schools

With science and numeracy at the forefront of the education revolution, iTelescope.Net provides the tools, along with research and education grants, to support the development of astronomy or science based curriculums in schools. Contact iTelescope.Net about a grant for your school or research project. (more)

Professional observatories use iTelescope.Net to supplement current research projects. The network provides alternate observatory sites in both southern and northern hemispheres and is a good way to continue research when seasonal poor weather hits your observatory.

Sky Tours Live Streams

We offer a variety of ways to view the night sky, including our entry level Sky Tours Live Streams. These weekly streams, hosted by Dr. Christian Sasse, are a great way to get started with Remote Astronomy, allowing you to see our telescopes in action and learn about the Night Sky from a professional Astronomer.

Astrophotography

Take stunning images of the night sky, galaxies, comets and nebula. Have access to the best equipment from the comfort of your computer and without the huge financial and time commitments. (more)

The network has everything from beginner telescopes with single shot colour CCDs to large format CCDs with Ha, SII and OII and LRGB filter sets. Check out the member image gallery – the results speak for themselves.

Depending on your own image processing skills, you can even land yourself a NASA APOD.

How?

All you need is a web browser and an Internet connection; iTelescope.Net takes care of the rest. Our web-based launchpad application provides the real-time status of each telescope on the network as well as a host of other information such as a day-night map, observatory all-sky cameras and weather details. (more)

From the launchpad you can login to any available telescope, and once connected, you’re in command. Watch in real time as the telescope slews, focuses and images your target.

The image files (in FITS format) are then transmitted to a high-speed server ready for your download. All image data taken is your data – iTelescope.Net doesn’t hold any intellectual property rights.

Reserve and schedule observing plans in advance, even have them run while you are away from iTelescope.Net and have the image data waiting for you ready for download.

New and Starting Out?

A number of telescopes are fitted with colour cameras; these systems have been designed for ease of use. It’s as simple as selecting an astronomical target from the menu, watching the telescope image your target, and have the resulting image sent to your email address as a jpeg attachment. (more)

The image file is also sent to our high-speed server and can be downloaded in its raw image format, for post image processing if you want more of a challenge.

Already a Pro?

iTelescope.Net offers a large range of telescopes, fields of view and image scales, and NABG and ABG CCD camera combinations. Select from a large range of filters including narrowband, LRGB and UBVRI, as well as control pointing, filter selection, focusing, exposure times, image counts, repeat loops etc. All data is offered in its raw FITS format calibrated and non-calibrated.

Support and Service

With remote astronomy observing plans can be interrupted from time to time, by clouds, wind gusts and even a rare equipment failure.

iTelescope.Net has you fully covered with our satisfaction guarantee; we will return your points if you are unsatisfied with your results. Help is just a click away. (more)

A dedicated team of professionals are working around the clock to keep the network operating. This includes local ground crews at each observatory, sophisticated monitoring systems and remote observatory administrators monitoring the quality of data coming off the network.

Our dedicated support website allows members to seek answers to frequently asked questions. Formal support can be requested by lodging a support ticket, which can be viewed, tracked and managed through to completion. Go to http://support.itelescope.net or simply email support@itelescope.net.

Our contact details are also available. You can phone or Skype us if you want to speak to a person directly; you can also contact us via Skype instant message, email and fax.

How much does this cost?

Rates vary based on your membership plan and the phase of the moon. Rates start as low as 17 to 100+ points per imaging hour, which is billed per minute of imaging time used; typically one point equals $1. Make sure you are subscribed to our newsletter for special offers. Please visit our pricing page for more information on telescope operating rates. (more)

Each telescope has its imaging hourly rate displayed in real time in the launchpad before you login. At the end of each session you are also sent a detailed usage receipt which includes the costs, weather data, preview jpeg images and your observing session log file.

Membership Plans

We have a range of plans catering for everyone from the amateur to the professional astronomer. Each plan provides unrestricted access to each telescope and includes the plan’s dollar value in points, which is credited to your account each time the membership renews. (more)

Membership plans set the usage rates for each telescope on the network, expressed in points per operating hour. The entry level plans provide maximum flexibility on our single shot colour systems, and the heavy usage plans focus more on the large research grade systems. Memberships start from $19.95 and range to $999.95 per 28 day period.

Additional points can be purchased at any time to supplement your account balance.

Hosting and Affiliates

iTelescope.Net offers a range of telescope hosting solutions to members with special projects, allowing you to host your own telescope at three of our four observatory locations. Conditions and approvals apply. Contact us for more information.(more)

Affiliate membership allows you to connect your own telescope to iTelescope.Net with reasonable rates of return. Limited availability exists and is subject to telescope network balance.

Please contact us for more information.


ITelescope Net

Create your badge

Visit our Google+ Page!


iTelescope Science Corner

iTelescope Members are Welcome to submit Interesting and Useful articles for the benefit of All.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tuesday
Dec042012

Discovering Asteroids at iTelescope Part 7- Discovery Astrometry Using Stacked Images

Astrometry Using Stacked Images 

The Discovery Mission - Asteroids

Go to Part  1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8

In this article I will deal with the use of the image stacking technique to detect faint asteroids. This is the technique I use when attempting to discover asteroids and I will use one of my discovery missions as an example. My previous articles dealt with telescope and target selection, the use of dithering, image reduction, position measurement and reporting results to the Minor Planet Center (MPC). All of these techniques come together in this article so you will find it helpful if you are familiar with what has gone before.

Image Stacking-Why it Works

In CCD astronomy, the image that we see is obtained by processing photoelectrons that are generated by:-
1. Photons from the object we are trying to detect.
2. Photons from sky glow / light pollution.
3. Sources other than photons (thermal and electronic).
Item 1 is termed the signal while 2 and 3 jointly can be regarded as noise. 
This image shows an enlarged portion of a single 5-minute exposure of some stars taken using T11. The enlargement is such that you can see the individual pixels that make up the image. The pixels representing the sky vary in brightness from black through various shades of grey to white. This random variation in brightness is the noise referred to above and differs from image to image. 
Here we see the effect of stacking five different 5-minute images. The stacking was carried out using Astrometrica and this software gives you the option of different modes of stacking. I followed their advice and used the Add mode.
The first thing to notice is that the pixels representing the sky are a much more uniform shade of grey than they are in the single image. If for example a given pixel was black in image 1, light grey in image 2, dark grey in image 3…..etc, the stacking process averages out these variations to give a more uniform grey colour. 
The other thing to notice is that in addition to the two stars that were visible in the single image there are some fainter stars appearing.
This image shows what happens when we stack fifteen different 5-minute images. The background sky becomes even more uniform and the faint stars become easier to see. The stars represent the signal while the sky represents the noise and what we are doing when we stack images is to increase the signal to noise ratio.
In should be noted that in order to increase the signal to noise ratio you need to stack different images. 
This image shows what happened when I made five identical copies of the single image shown above and stacked them. As you can see there is no improvement in the signal to noise ratio and the result looks virtually identical to the original single image. What this shows is that when you stack different images, the random variation in the noise is averaged out. When you stack the same image there is no random variation and hence there is no averaging out.

Selecting the Target Area

In Part 4, I described the advantages and limitations of different potential target areas. I carried out this observation on 18 January 2012 which was 9 days after the full moon. My target area was 22 days before opposition and 9 degrees North of the ecliptic.
During the 100 minute imaging session the altitude of the target area ranged from 61 to 78 degrees.

Choosing the Imaging Conditions

I chose telescope T11 because it gives both a large field of view and good sensitivity. The need to detect faint objects also prompted me to select 2 x 2 binning which is the highest level for which itelescope produce darks and flats.
The choice of exposure time for the individual images was more problematical. As we saw in the previous article, if you intend to image an object whose speed is known you can calculate the maximum exposure that will prevent the image from trailing. Obviously in this case I had no way of knowing how fast any previously undiscovered object might be moving so I had to compromise.
On possible option is to take a large number of short-exposure images. This has the advantage that fast moving objects are less likely to trail. Another point in its favour is that with a large number of images you are better placed to overcome the problem of images spoilt by stellar interference, space junk trails and the odd lump of cloud that moves through the field of view.
One obvious disadvantage of collecting large numbers of short-exposure images is the extra time involved in downloading, unzipping and checking each image for quality.
Another less obvious disadvantage is concerned with the relationship between exposure time and image noise. In general the shorter the exposure time of an image the greater the noise level. For this reason there is a school of thought that states “sub-exposures should be sky limited” In other words if you are going to stack individual images, the exposure time of the individual images should be as long as possible bearing in mind that if the sky glow becomes too bright you are no longer winning.   
Taking all these advantages and limitations into consideration, I chose to take 15 images each with a 5-minute exposure time.
The preparation of the observation plan and the evaluation and reduction of the individual images was exactly the same as described in Part 6.

Choosing the Stacking Conditions

In Part 5 of this series I described how Astrometrica allows us to displace each image in a stack so as to compensate for the movement of an asteroid. This compensation is defined in terms of the speed of the asteroid and also the direction in which it is moving.
I have chosen asteroid 15305 as an example in order to show the importance of setting the speed and angle correctly.
This image shows the effect of stacking five images each with a 5 minute exposure. The speed is set to zero and the trailed image of 15305 shows how far it has moved during the 25-minute exposure. The stars of course, being virtually motionless, appear as near-perfect circles.
Using the Object Verification and Object Identification features in Astrometrica I was able to see that the asteroid was moving at 0.49 arcseconds per minute at an angle of 303.4 degrees. This image shows the effect of entering these values and re-stacking.
Astrometrica has compensated for the motion of the asteroid and it now appears as a circular image with the stars trailed. 
In order to show the effect of getting the stacking conditions wrong, I then re-stacked the images using completely different values (0.60 arcseconds per minute at an angle of 250 degrees).
Predictably in this image both the asteroid and the stars are trailed. In the previous article I dealt with the importance of measuring asteroid positions accurately. If we have a good circular asteroid image then Astrometrica will be able to calculate the exact centre of the image with a high degree of accuracy. With a trailed image the measurement will be less accurate but fortunately there is a way around this problem.
The first step is to use Astrometrica to display the speed and direction of all the known asteroids in the immediate vicinity of out target area. We do this by clicking on a point close to the centre of the field of view and then scrolling down the list of asteroids displayed by the Object Identification window. We can then make a rough estimate of the average speed and angle of the first dozen or so asteroids displayed.
I did this for my 18 January 2012 observations and found that the average motion was roughly 0.5 arcseconds per minute at an angle of 300 degrees. I then stacked my 15 images as three sets of five using these values and began searching for undiscovered asteroids. 

How I Search

The first point to make is that what is described here is a method that works for me but I make no claim that it will suit everybody. Depending on your eyesight, your peripheral vision and your level of concentration you may well find a better / faster way of doing things. Please try variations and find the one that suits you best.
The first thing that I do is display the blinked images in negative form using the Invert Display function. I then use the magnify feature to enlarge the image to its maximum size and scroll to the top left-hand corner. 
Earlier in the day I will have updated MPCOrb to ensure that all recently discovered asteroids are included and I now use the Known Object Overlay to display them.
I then examine the portion of the image displayed (the field) for any moving objects. I find that in order to detect a moving object I need to be looking at it directly at the moment that the images blink so starting a the top left hand corner I run my eye down the field slowly enough to be sure of eyeballing each potential moving object at the moment of blinking.
I then repeat this operation systematically searching the screen in vertical strips until I have covered the entire portion of the field displayed.
The next step is to scroll horizontally to reveal the next field of view and repeat the whole exercise. Eventually I reach the right hand side of the image and when this has been searched I scroll back horizontally to my starting point, scroll down vertically to reveal a new field of view and search as before.
Using this method on my computer, a T11 image yields about 80 searchable fields and on average it takes me about a minute to search each one. 
The search as described is carried out using calibrated images without any further adjustment. Once it is complete I use the Background and Range tool in order to optimise the brightness and contrast in order to make faint objects easier to see. Normally this process renders some regions of the image (e.g. close to bright stars) too dark to search so I need to pay special attention to these regions during the initial check. I then repeat the search.
One way of checking your ability to find moving objects is to use the Select Markings option in Astrometrica to hide the Known Object Overlay and then search the image marking all the moving objects you detect. You can then switch the overlay back on and check if you missed anything.  
One important point to note is that you cannot make accurate position measurements on stacked images which have been saved, closed and then re-opened.
The reason for this is that Astrometrica calculates the Universal Time that is included in the report that we send to MPC.  The method of calculation for single images is different for that used for stacked images. If you re-open a saved stacked image and re-process it, Astrometrica treats it a single image and reports an incorrect time.
Any description of the search method would be incomplete without mention of the Moving Object Detection (MOD) option provided by Astrometrica. The method is described in one of their tutorials and I have used it to search sets of single and stacked images.
My own experience of MOD has been mixed: I find it can work quite well for bright moving objects but cannot be relied upon to detect the faint ones. There are a number of parameters you can vary in order to improve the detection limit but the problem then is that you made have to wade through large numbers of suspect objects most of which turn out to be spurious.
However the choice between manual searching versus MOD is not an either / or decision: you can do both and I suggest that you try MOD for yourself. Please note that if you search saved stacked images and find a possible new asteroid you need to record the position, speed and angle and then prepare fresh image stacks which you use for the actual measurement and reporting. 

Dealing With a Potential Discovery

If you are observing using T11 within 10° of the ecliptic and less than 30 days from opposition on a clear dark night and an altitude greater than 60° then your chances of finding one or more potential discoveries are excellent. When all the above apply, I have never failed to find something and my current personal best is six potential discoveries in the same field of view.  
My search on 18th January 2012 resulted in three potential discoveries and I will use one of these as an example of how I report and follow up these objects.
Here you see one of the unidentified moving objects that I detected. My first task was to check that it was real and not an artifact.
In Part 5, I described the way in which hot pixels and chance alignments of noise can mimic the motion of asteroids. I could see that the object was too bright to be due to random noise and a quick check of the motion of hot pixels showed that these were moving in a different direction from the object.
My next step was to measure the position of the object but before reporting it, I needed to measure the speed and angle of motion. I did this by opening the MPC Report File window, copying the three positions for the object that I had named nfxx6 and pasting them into Notepad and saving the resulting text file.
In Part 5, I described how Find_Orb can be used to measure the residuals of a set of observations. I did this for nfxx6 and found that the mean residuals were 0.08. A low value like this is added evidence that I was looking at a real object. 
Another useful feature of Find_Orb is that if you can display the speed and angle of motion of the object. I did this and found it was moving at 0.49 arcseconds per minute at an angle of 323 degrees. This is fairly close to the values I had used when stacking the images (0.5 arcseconds per minute and 300 degrees) but in order to improve the accuracy of my results I re-stacked the images to match the motion of the object.
I then re-measured the position of the object and re-named it nf384 ready for reporting to the MPC. Before reporting however, there was one final check that I carried out and this was to run the coordinates through the MPC Near Earth Object (NEO) checker.
This tool is designed to alert you to objects which the MPC regard as interesting. Most of these will be NEOs but in addition it also flags up a variety of other objects that do not appear to be main belt asteroids.
The check showed that the object was not an NEO and at this point I reported it to the MPC. 

Follow-up

This is the process where we use the measurements we have made to predict the position of an asteroid at some time in the future and then measure its new position
 In Article 4 I dealt with the advantages of obtaining a 60-day observation arc for potential new discoveries that we want to recover in a subsequent opposition. Once we have recovered the object at the second or later opposition it is quite easy to find it during the subsequent oppositions and to make the position measurements required to improve the accuracy of the orbit to a point where the asteroid is numbered.
Asteroids with only a single-night observation and those with an observation arc of only a few days are very easily lost and the trick is to make sufficient observations over the first ten days or so to be certain of being able to locate it and progressively extend the arc to about 60 days. 

The Väisälä Method

In this case I had three position measurements taken over a period of about an hour. A typical main belt asteroid takes about three to five years to complete a single orbit so a one-hour observation arc cannot realistically be expected to give a very accurate definition of the orbit.
Another point to consider is that we are using a two-dimensional computer screen to represent a three-dimensional universe. In other words although we can see an asteroid moving up and down and right and left we cannot measure the motion that corresponds to it moving out of the screen towards us or back into the VDU.
The NEO check that I described earlier might at first sight to be an odd thing to do on an object that appears to be travelling at a fairly modest speed since objects close to the Earth generally appear to be moving much faster than this. However we have to remember the third dimension and for example an object that appears to be barely moving could in fact be going like a bat of out of hell and coming directly towards us (or, less alarmingly, moving directly away from us).
 My measurements lacked two important items of information:-
1. How far the asteroid was from the Sun.
2. Its true motion in three dimensions.
In order to predict the position of an asteroid at some future date we need these two missing items of information and since it is impossible to derive them from the data that we have, we resort to what is termed the Väisälä method which is based on two assumptions.
We assume that the object is at a distance from the Sun that is typical of main belt asteroids and we assume that it is at its closest point to the Sun i.e. at its perihelion. The reason for the perihelion assumption is that at that moment in time the asteroid is maintaining a constant distance from the Sun and the two-dimensional motion displayed on our screen is a reasonable approximation to the asteroid’s three-dimensional motion.
We now have enough information to calculate an orbit and predict future positions but since neither of the assumptions is likely to be correct we will probably end up with an inaccurate orbit. However moving from no-orbit situation to an inaccurate orbit can be regarded as progress and a Väisälä orbit based an observation arc of about an hour is generally good enough for us to predict the position of an asteroid for up to about a week. 
The MPC provide a tool the New Object Ephemeris Generator. All I needed to do was to input my three observations together with the date and time when I planned to make my follow-up observation and the observatory code for Mayhill. The tool then calculates the asteroid position using the Väisälä method.
All that remained to do was to display the target area using SkyMap and to check that there were no bright stars / planets in the vicinity at the planned observation time.
I recovered the asteroid two days later and reported it to MPC as nf 391. A few days later I received the following brief but welcome email from MPC:-  nf384    K12B24F    nf391 (K12B24F  
 
This translates as “The objects you have reported as nf384 and nf 391 are in fact the same. We cannot match this object with anything in our data base and consequently we have given it the provisional designation of 2012 BF24”. 
At this point 2012 BF24 still had a Väisälä orbit but now one based on a 48-hour arc and which was good enough to predict its position for about the next 30 days. Each object with a provisional designation and a Väisälä orbit has its own unique page on the MPC Minor Planet Ephemeris Listings but this does not include any orbital data. You can use this page to calculate the position of the object at any time although the results will become increasingly inaccurate for predictions more than 30 days in the future.
Objects with Väisälä orbits also appear when using the Minor Planet Checker but this listing only lasts for about 100 days. This is consistent with the fact that by then any positions calculated will be totally meaningless. 

The First Orbit

I used the 48-hour Väisälä orbit data to find the asteroid three days later and reported the position as before. The MPC now had positions measured on three nights and an observation arc of five days and this enabled them to dispense with the Väisälä method and calculate the first true orbit. At this point the Minor Planet Ephemeris page was upgraded to include the six elements that define such an orbit. 
Although a five-day orbit is not sufficiently accurate for long-term prediction of position it does enable you to locate an asteroid fairly easily for the next few months.
Some you Win and Some You Lose
When you first find a moving object that does not correspond to any of the known objects displayed by Astrometrica it may eventually be your discovery. However there are a number of other possibilities which include:-
1. It has been observed previously on a single night within the past week. Astrometrica will not display it but the MPC will probably link it to your observation and assign the provisional designation to the other observer.
2. It has been observed previously on two linked nights and has been assigned a provisional designation and a Väisälä orbit. Astrometrica does not display objects with Väisälä orbits but if it was observed less that about 100 days previously it will be findable using the MPC Checker. If it was observed less than 30 days previously, MPC will probably link it to your observation.
3. It has been observed on two or more unlinked single nights during a previous opposition. Astrometrica will not display it and MPC will not link your single night observation. However as you extend the observation arc of your potential new discovery to 10 days or more it becomes increasingly probable that MPC will make the link.
4. It has been observed previously on three or more linked nights and consequently it has a provisional designation, a true orbit and is displayed by Astrometrica. However if for example it has a 10-day arc and was last observed 10 years ago, the point in the sky where Astrometrica displays it will be nowhere near its true position.  Once again as you extend your arc MPC will eventually make the link.
As you work towards your target of a 60-day arc you progressively link with any prior observations in the MPC data base.
My own experience is that by the time I have a 20-day arc I will have linked to any single night observations in the current opposition and most short-arc observations in previous oppositions. My current record for the arc length of an object I subsequently lost is 58 days when my observations were identified with seven previously unlinked single nights spread over three oppositions.

Extending the Arc

There are a couple of advantages in getting the first three nights observations as close together as possible. 
If you are fortunate enough to make more than one potential discovery on the first night then you may be able to adjust the field of view on the second and third nights so that the target asteroids are all included. I find that after about five days, the different speeds and directions of the asteroids causes them to separate to such a degree that you need a different field of view for each one. 
The other advantage is connected with the ability of the MPC to make the linkages that you need to obtain a provisional designation and an orbit. As we have seen above, the first two linkages are based on Väisälä orbits which have limited accuracy.
In theory I could wait five days before obtaining my second night and a further 30 days before my third night. However I would really be pushing my luck since the MPC, understandably, errs on the side of caution when linking observations mainly because it is time consuming for them break incorrect linkages and then check all the de-linked components against other observations in their database.
Now for a couple of tips regarding follow-up: the first is to remember that a follow-up session can also result in discoveries, so after you have recovered your target asteroid, search the image for potential new discoveries. A surprising number of my potential new discoveries have been made during follow-up sessions.
The other tip concerns precovery. An example of this would be where you find a new object during the second night’s observation and then predict where it would have been on the first night. If it turns out that the predicted position is within the field of view and free from stellar interference then a careful search of the region may reveal an object that you missed during your earlier search.  The New Object Ephemeris Generator can predict position in the past as well as the future and the speed and angle of motion it predicts enables you to optimise the stacking of the earlier images.
Once I have the first three nights I normally aim to get another three corresponding to an arc of 10, 30 and 60 days. In the case of 2012 BF 24, I was helped on my way by two night’s observations by one of the professional surveys and in March 2012 I ended up with a 61-day arc. By this time the asteroid was too faint and too close to the Sun for further observation but in August 2012 the MPC reported links to two isolated single night observations, one in 2004 and the other in 2008.
In the first article in this series I summarised the current discovery rules.  These two prior observations were made in different oppositions and consequently I can still regard the asteroid as a potential discovery. It is important to emphasise however that there may still be other observations on the MPC database which will be linked to the asteroid when the orbit is improved further. I plan to make additional observations when the object returns to the night sky in 2013.
For the record the other two potential discoveries I mentioned earlier survived the first opposition without being linked to earlier observations and I hope to recover both in 2013.

What Next?

Now that we can find and follow up main belt asteroids it is time consider what we do if we come across a Near Earth Object. I will deal with this in my next article.
   

 

Tuesday
Dec042012

Discovering Asteroids at itelescope.net: Part 8-Near Earth Objects

Part 8-Near Earth Objects

Go to Part  1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8

Terminology

This NASA webpage provides a good starting point for those wanting an introduction to the different types of asteroids and comets that are classed as Near Earth Objects (NEOs). 

Thanks

No article dealing with the measurement of NEOs by amateurs would be complete without mentioning the work of Peter Birtwhistle at his UK observatory:-
Over the last 10 years Peter has made over 12,000 NEO position measurements and his website provides a wealth of information on the techniques he uses.
I have also been fortunate in drawing upon the experience of Professor Jaime Nomen who represents the La Sagra Observatory and the La Sagra Sky Survey (LSSS). The LSSS is the most prolific European NEO survey of all time and their recent discovery, 2012 DA14, is predicted to make an extremely close approach to Earth in 2013.
I am grateful for the information that Peter and Jaime have provided. Any errors or omissions in what follows are however entirely down to me.

What are the Chances of Discovering an NEO?

In August 2012 of the 590,000 known asteroids approximately 9,000 were NEOs so at first sight it would appear that about 1.5% of asteroids are NEOs. However these figures are distorted by the fact that in order to become “known” an asteroid has to be observed on two or more linked nights and be given a provisional designation. The major surveys will follow up any asteroid that appears to be an NEO but will not deliberately seek to obtain a second night on non-NEO objects.
The best estimate that I have is that in the summer months in the Northern hemisphere (when the North American monsoon limits competition by the surveys) you can expect to find one potential new NEO in every 100 square degrees of sky that you image. 
You will not receive an NEO discovery credit for most of these because either they turn out not to be NEOs or they are NEOs which have been discovered previously and then lost. A very rough estimate is that 10% of the potential NEOs will your NEO discoveries.
As you can see our chances of discovering an NEO are not great but we have to balance this against the fact that they are important objects whose discovery is the prime objective of the major asteroid surveys. What I aim to do in this article, should you be lucky enough to image one, is to give you the best chance of producing measures that will enable the surveys to follow it up. 

How do I know it’s an NEO?

In my previous article I mentioned the use of the MPC NEO Checker
If when you blink your images you see an object which is moving faster than and/or in a very different direction to the other asteroids in the field of view then it is certainly worth running through the checker.
I did point out however that not all NEOs can be recognised simply by their speed and direction so I routinely check all potential new discoveries to see how the rate on the checker.
 Astrometry of NEOs
The rapid motion of NEOs means that they are challenging targets that require special techniques in order to make accurate position measurements. The techniques vary depending on whether you are measuring an NEO whose speed is known or one that you have discovered by chance. 
In order to describe the techniques I have divided NEOs into three distinct groups:-
  1. NEOs that have been observed previously. These range from numbered objects to ones that have only been observed on one or two nights.
  2. Potential new NEOs that appear as essentially circular images.
  3. Potential new NEOs where the image is non-circular.
In the case of Group 1, you can optimise the imaging conditions to cope with most NEOs. In the case of Groups 2 and 3, we will have discovered these by chance and we work with the images we have rather than the ones we would like.
 
Group 1: NEOs That Have Been Observed Previously
In April 2012 NASA announced the start of a new citizen science project called “Target Asteroids!
Amateur astronomers are invited to observe selected NEOs and to report any combination of astrometric, photometric and spectroscopic data.  In this announcement NASA acknowledge the important contribution that amateur astronomers have made to the refinement of orbits of newly discovered NEOs.
The Target Asteroids! website includes a list of NEOs and in order to support the project and to provide data for this article I chose NEO 141018 for observation.
I planned to observe 141018 on 12 June 2012 using T11 with 2 x 2 binning. A check using the MPC Ephemeris page showed that at that time the NEO was moving at 1.88 arc seconds per minute. As we saw in Part 6,  the 2 x 2 binning level gives a resolution of 1.62 arcseconds per pixel and if we want to avoid trailing we need an exposure time short enough to prevent the asteroid moving more than 1 pixel i.e. more than 1.62 arcseconds. Dividing the resolution by the speed gives us the exposure time that will result in a movement of one pixel i.e. 1.62 / 1.88 = 0.86 minutes or about 52 seconds.
iTelescope provides darks and flats calibration date for 60 second exposures so I chose this as the exposure time.
 
I aimed to observe the NEO five times over the course of an hour during which time it would move nearly two minutes of arc. Any object moving this distance is quite likely to pass in front of a star at some point. In theory it should be possible to position five exposures over an hour each of which is free from stellar interference. In practice however this depends on the orbit being known very accurately and having planetarium software that displays stars bright enough to interfere. I chose the easier option of collecting sixty 1-minute images with the aim of selecting five spaced out along the arc which were free from interference. 
This animation shows images 1, 15, 30, 45 and 60. As you can see there are two instances of potential stellar interference. Between the first and second images the NEO appears to skim past a magnitude 16 star while between the third and fourth images it passes directly in front of a magnitude 18 star. My choice of images, more by luck than judgement, avoided any interference but, had it occurred, the fact that I had 60 images to play with means that I would have no problem in selecting five that were interference-free.
This method described above gave fairly accurate position measurements for 141018 with the MPC quoting my residuals at between 0.0 and 0.4 arc seconds.
If 141018 had been fainter I would simply have produced as many 60-second images as necessary and stacked them in three sets according to its speed and direction. The method is exactly the same as described in Part 7 of this series. The fainter the asteroid the more images I would have to collect and stack. This task can best be described as tedious but possible and in this situation a large aperture scope fitted with a sensitive camera can be a real advantage.
If 141018 had been moving faster I would have been faced with three problems:-
  1. Obtaining non-trailed images.
  2. Obtaining images that were bright enough to measure sufficiently accurately.
  3. Measuring the time sufficiently accurately.
Obtaining non-trailed images is the easiest problem to solve since I would have simply used the exposure time calculated as described above. Although iTelescope does not recommend exposure shorter than 60 seconds you can go as low as 0.1 seconds provided you run whatever calibration frames are required.
 
Obtaining bright enough images is simply a matter of stacking the required number of exposures. It has to be remembered however that the shorter the exposure time the fewer photons we collect and the fainter the image becomes. Clearly there can be situations where the asteroid is so faint that the number of images required is too large to be practical.
The real problem with fast moving asteroids is that you need to measure the mid-point time of each image very accurately. CCD cameras invariably record the start time of an exposure to the nearest second and Astrometrica uses this value to calculate the mid-point time.  Although this is more than adequate for the most asteroid astrometry you need the time measured to a few tenths of a second when imaging really fast-moving NEOs.
 
Peter Birtwhistle describes the method that he uses to obtain this level of accuracy, but as far as iTelescope users are concerned we do not as yet have this option. The only advice I can give if you should wish to image a very fast moving known object is to do your best to get accurate position measurements (as described below) and hope that the time error is not excessive.
One comforting fact is that many NEOs only tend to be very fast-movers for relatively brief periods in their orbit. For example on 24 August 2012 the MPC listed 24 newly discovered NEOs with speeds ranging from 0.5 to 35 arcseconds per minute. Of these only five were moving faster than five arcseconds per minute.
Group 2: Potential New NEOs That Appear as Essentially Circular Images 
This is the easiest group to deal with. It involves a situation where, during routine imaging, we come across a potential new discovery which checks out as an NEO and which is bright enough and sufficiently slow moving for us to treat it as a normal asteroid.
In such a case the method used is as described in Part 6 or Part 7 depending on whether we are working with single or stacked images.
Group 3: Potential new NEOs Where the Image is Non-Circular
This is the most challenging group to deal with where we come across an NEO where the image is trailed.
I did not have a real example so for demonstration purposes I constructed this animation using the 141018 1-minute images to produce three sets each made up of 5 images. The stacks were not corrected for the NEO motion. When you include the download time, each stacked image is equivalent to a single image with an exposure time of about eight minutes.
Another way of looking at this is to regard each image as a 60 second exposure of an asteroid moving eight times as fast as 141018 in other words at about 15 arcseconds per minute. 
As you can see the NEO image is now elliptical rather than circular so in order to measure its position I increased the aperture radius from four to eight pixels. This larger diameter circle then contains the trailed NEO image but at the cost of some loss of accuracy.
I also held down the Control keyboard button while clicking on the NEO image. When you do this Astrometrica calculates a simple centroid. I find this method is more accurate that simply clicking on the image. 
I could have checked the accuracy of my measurements by reporting them to MPC but I did not want to clutter their 141018 orbit solution with dubious measures so I opted instead for this residual calculator developed by Dr. Jure Skvarc of the Crni Vrh Observatory, Slovenia.
This correctly identified the asteroid and gave residuals ranging from 0.15 to 1.12 which although not as good as those obtained using 60 second images would be acceptable for follow-up work and as a discovery observation.
If we were able to accelerate the asteroid we would see the image elongate progressively to a longer and longer ellipse and then to a trail. Although you can increase the aperture radius up to a maximum of 30 pixels there will obviously come a point where this method can no longer give acceptable results.
Another problem with trailed images concerns the apparent magnitude of the trail. NEO 141018 for example had an apparent magnitude of 17.2 and as you can see from the animation shown earlier it was a very easy target for T11.
The circular image is concentrated over a relatively small number of pixels but if we were able to accelerate the asteroid to a point where the circle became a trail, the same number of photons would be spread over a much larger number of pixels and each pixel would appear dimmer. As the trail becomes longer we reach a point where it is too faint to be detected.
Assuming we do come across an NEO which is both fast enough and bright enough to produce a detectable trail, a method of determining its position is described by the UK based amateur astronomer Roger Dymock in his excellent book “Asteroids and Dwarf Planets and How to Observe Them
The method involves measuring the position at the beginning of each trail. Astrometrica will automatically report the time for this position as the mid-point time of the exposure and in order to correct this to the beginning of the exposure it is necessary to subtract half the exposure time and edit the Astrometrica report accordingly before sending it to the MPC.

What Next?

Logic dictates that an article titled Near Earth Objects should be followed by one dealing with Far Earth Objects. Consequently in my next article we will travel to Jupiter and beyond and assess the discovery opportunities that await us.

 

Page 1 ... 2 3 4 5 6