The compression rate of on board EIS data may vary depending on a few factors such as the observing target (QS, AR, CH, etc), slit/slot selection, exposures, etc.

The purpose of this study is trying to investigate how different compression schemes effect EIS data volume on board and work out a better estimation of compression rate for compression scheme (eg. DPCM, JPEG98, JPEG95, etc.)

The approach:

1. to get actual data volume from MDP status information: the inclined curve means data packets from EIS on MDP, the vertical curve means data packets dumped to ground station. So in general, known a raster's start and end time can calculate actual data volume, and then compare it with the designed data volume of this raster to get data compression rate.

2. to get related information from planning database/eis catalogue/fits header, for example: raster ID, compression scheme, designed data volume, SCI_OBJ, TARGET, slit/slot, exposures, etc.

3. prepare plots based on various factor combinations: compression rate vs. slit/slot, rate vs. target, rate vs. exposures

Some preliminary results (plots):

(The investigation here is for dates between 2007-Sep-15 and 2007-Dec-15, as EIS is operationally stable over this duration. The other data sets is in 2008-Mar (for JPEG85), and 2006-Dec (for JPEG75))


For target selection, in this case, uses value of SCI_OBJ keyword instead of TARGET keyword as the later is only for (study/raster) design stage, the actual targets are decided during the EIS planning.

However, there is not always having value for SCI_OBJ in EIS fits header, also the range of value of SCI_OBJ keyword is varying, (SCI_OBJ_Example), sometimes we have to throw away some EIS data as it's hard to judge the SCI_OBJ belong to QS,AR or CH, eg. LMB, or FIL.

This particular version was published on 26-Apr-2008 02:06 by JianSun.Top