From: "Pete Newman"
Subject: RE: Mirror temperature excursions [was RE: 2.5m obslog 20031024 (MJD 52937)]
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 23:16:48 -0600
Those are satisfyingly similar shapes to the eye from blinking in ghostview.
But wait, I just realised (doh!) the plot of tpm_TM_M1_Denv for MJD 52937
shows the primary 10C warmer than the enclosure?  Surely that's not possible.
I think there must be a zero-point error somewhere :-(  If you shift that
down to the same zero point as 52758, the variation would stay in bounds.
So, the M1 problem smells like a red herring to me.
The M2 front-back plots are worrying on both dates.  Foil and aluminum look
equally effective, but we may still have a problem with that step change on
opening.  (Maybe we should paint the front of the M2 black to get it to
radiate better? ;-)
And we really MUST learn not to warm the enclosure by ventilating too soon:
the afternoon blip in ambient on MJD 52758 is almost identical to 52957.
--Pete
> http://astro.nmsu.edu/~peregrin/TPM/t52758.ps
>
> The M1 thermometry was bogus due to the broken sensor(s), so don't
> bother with the first four plots.
...
> - Peregrine