1 / 31

Bruno Altieri on behalf of the cross-calibration team

Status of the XMM- Newton Cross-calibration. EPIC-MOS. EPIC-pn. RGS. OM. Bruno Altieri on behalf of the cross-calibration team. Cross-calibration team. Leicester : Steve Sembay(MOS rmf) , Andy Read MPE : Frank Haberl (EPIC-pn rmf), Michael Freyberg

aren
Download Presentation

Bruno Altieri on behalf of the cross-calibration team

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Status of the XMM-Newton Cross-calibration EPIC-MOS EPIC-pn RGS OM Bruno Altieri on behalf of the cross-calibration team

  2. Cross-calibration team • Leicester: Steve Sembay(MOS rmf), Andy Read • MPE: Frank Haberl (EPIC-pn rmf), Michael Freyberg • ESAC: Bing Chen, Marcus Kirsch, Leo Metcalfe, Andy Pollock, Richard Saxton, Michael Smith, Martin Stuhlinger • Chandra: Herman Marshall, Paul Plucinsky, Jeremy Drake • … and many others, SRON Utrech

  3. Talk outline • Improvement from SAS-6.0 to SAS-6.1 • Cross-calibration archive and coordinated plans • Response stability at low energies • EPIC cross-calibration improvement with new rmf’s • Qualitative improvement with pn rmf tuning • Major improvement with new MOS rmf • XMM-Newton cross-calibration with RGS and OM • Chandra/Newton cross-calibration • Open / remaining (cross-)calibration problems: • Conclusions

  4. SAS6.1 improvement (last year) EPIC-pn EPIC-pn SAS 6.0 SAS 6.1 H1426+428, rev278, single MOS/OM power-law model

  5. cross-calibration archive • automated data extraction pipeline for calibration sources has been built up in the last two years at ESAC • systematic processing, reduction and modelling of calibration targets for EPIC, RGS and OM • configuration control by CAL scientists (SAS version, CCF version) zetaPup_08:03:35.05_-40:00:11.3 NGC4151_12:10:32.58_+39:24:20.6 Akn120_05:16:11.48_-00:09:00.6 Mkn421_11:04:27.3139_+38:12:31.8 MCG-6-30-15_13:35:53.94_-34:17:42.5 HZ43_13:16:21.8533_+29:05:55.440 RXJ0806_08:06:23.0_-41:22:33 H1426_14:28:32.5_+42:40:25 APM08279_08:31:41.57_+52:45:17.7 3C111_04:18:21.30_+38:01:35.0 1H0707_07:08:41.5_-49:33:06 Geminga_06:33:54.20_+17:46:13.0 PKS0548_05:50:40.8_-32:16:18 RXJ0720.4-3125_07:20:25.10_-31:25:49.0 RXJ1856.6-3754_18:56:35.40_-37:54:34.0 3C273_12:29:06.70_+02:03:08.6 PKS2155-304_21:58:53.00_-30:13:35.0 PKS0558-504_05:59:47.00_-50:26:51.0 CentaurusA_13:25:28.4_-43:01:08.5 MKN421_11:04:27.31_+38:12:31.8 E1821_18:21:57.20_+64:20:36.0 MS0737.9_07:43:59.60_+74:33:50.0 GD153_12:57:02.40_+22:01:55.0 3C120_04:33:11.10_+05:21:15.6 G21.5-09_18:33:33.00_-10:33:54.0 1ES0102.2-7219_01:04:02.40_-72:02:00.0 N132D_05:25:03.00_-69:38:33.0 Targets

  6. XCCT “blogs” • A web tool was created to allow XMM calibrators to • Upload calibration results • Keep track on calibration activities • Discuss calibration issues in an open forum type • Queryable

  7. Future cross-cal. coordinated obs. • H1426+428 (BL Lac), July 2005, 90ks • Newton, Chandra,Galex,Swift • 3C273 (AGN): July 2005, 127ks • Newton, Swift, Integral, RXTE • PKS2155-304 (BL Lac), Nov. 2005, ~60ks • Newton, Chandra, RXTE • 3C273: 80ks, Dec. 2005, ~40ks • Newton, Astro-E2 • Capella (corona), routine calibration • Newton, Chandra

  8. EPIC-pn flux stability: RXJ1856 • changes by less than 1% F. Haberl

  9. cooling Flux stability: The AGN view Sample of AGNs mostly in SW/Medium analysed in 15-40 arcsec annuli, hence excluding the “MOS patch.” S. Sembay • Low-energy problem : • MOSs & RGSs loose flux relative to pn at about the same rate : 10% since launch because of : • MOS on-axis redistribution ? • RGS : ?? No clear trend

  10. 3C273: RGS vs pn below 0.8keV 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.8 S. Sembay

  11. 1. pn rmf tuning New CCFs Old CCFs Systematic S-shaped residuals … changed to flat residuals CCFs public since 14 May 2005

  12. 2. MOS time-dependent rmf A major improvement ! • new MOS rmf’s will be available in next SAS (Aug. 2005) • Canned rmf to be made public ASAP • 9 epochs S. Sembay

  13. EPIC cross-cal. improvementwith rmf changes only SAS-6.0 “ the low-E bump” SAS-6.1 public pn CCF (14/5/2005) + upcoming MOS canned RMF SAS-6.1 “ the double-bump”

  14. Cross-calibration with RGS using latest EPIC rmf H1426+428, rev.939, broken power-law model

  15. RGS versus EPICs • At the lowest energies (< 0.8keV), RGS is returning 30-40% less flux on continuum sources. • All instruments agree rather well above 0.8 keV

  16. Full XMM cross-calibration • RGS seems inconsistent with the SED shape of BL-Lacs. • High-energy (>4 keV) slope more consistent with MOS ? but low statistics for MOS.

  17. XMM-Chandra cross-calibration • Extremely good agreement between HRC and EPIC-pn below 1 keV (but caution qwith order contamination) • Current (post rev. 500) MOS RMF used here redistribute too much flux below 350eV (as expected) • RGS lower by ~30% at 300eV M.Smith

  18. Effect of test RGS ARF • test ARF brings RGS towards EPICs, but still far off. • Chandra above EPICs at high energies M.Smith

  19. Line-rich sources • Zeta Puppis EPIC-pn spectrum compared with RGS fluxed spectrum folded with latest EPIC-pn reponse • Again discrepancy could be explained by RGS effective area problem below 0.8 keV.

  20. EPIC high-energy discrepancy • MOSs return higher fluxes than pn above 4 keV • F5-10 keV(MOS) higher than • F5-10 keV(pn) by 10-15% • MOS (MOS1) finds always • Harder spectra (AGNs) •  (pn - MOS) ~ 0.05-0.1 • Hotter temperature (galaxy clusters) • No fudge introduced so far • EPIC-pn less likely to be wrong • but difficult to see how to reconcile EPICs

  21. Conclusions • EPIC low-energy discrepancy about to be solved : • CCF for EPIC-pn already available • time- and spatial- dependent MOS redistribution requires s/w and CCF change, to be implemented in next SAS version • RGS : • Either effective area to be corrected (fudged), if we all get convinced that it should • or it should be clearly stated that the two instruments are not consistent below 0.7-0.8 keV. Open cross-calibration issues : • Decrease of flux/sensitivity of RGS vs EPIC-pn at low-energies, still to be quantified, contamination ? • MOS / pn excess at high energies, which is right ? We keep on cross-calibrating strenuously …

  22. RGS effective area fudge ?

  23. Additional material

  24. EPIC flux stability: SNR • N132D 0.4-0.8 keV band: • EPIC-pn: • pn flux is stable • pn-LW lower fluxes than pn-SW due to pile-up • MOSs : • MOS1 lower than MOS2 by 5% • Both MOSs have decreased by ~10% since launch M.P. Esquej

  25. MOS rmf change: N132D MOS1 MOS2 • Some changes at low energies (0.5-1keV) at ~5-10% level. • spatial dependent • time dependent • Rev771 vs 83: • flux decrease in 0.5-1 keV • Redistributed below 0.4 keV

  26. MOS low-energy on-axis patch

  27. But strange pn residuals at low-energy

  28. Single powerlaw residuals New CCFs Old CCFs Statistics now dominated by residual edges !

  29. Newton/Chandra cross-cal.: PKS2155 Rev 362 Rev 545 • LETG agrees very well with MOSs • pn low-energy excess higher in rev.545 Model: wabs*bknpower Best fit: MOSs

  30. Newton/Chandra cross-cal.: 3C273 (1) Rev.277

  31. Newton/Chandra cross-cal.: 3C273 (2) Rev.655 EPIC-pn excess also higher with time MOS/LETG agreement excellent.

More Related