Science Highlight




Known Issues

Known Issues affecting the Cycle 10 release of the ALMA Observing Tool

The following table lists those issues which are known to affect the Cycle 10 version of the Observing Tool. This will be updated to denote whether an issue has been fixed and whether this fix has made it into an updated release.







Leaving the OT open for days at a time can cause an error upon saving. Saving to another file, closing the OT and re-opening produces a "ZLIB input stream" error i.e. the project is unreadable. This issue is yet to be satisfactorily characterised.




Placing spectral windows that are exactly as far apart as they can possibly be can cause an error, the text of which is also misleading.




The OT's mosaicing algorithm will not allow an even number of pointings along a single row. A custom mosaic may be used instead.




The time estimate dialogue for VLBI and Phased Array Science Goals is not enforcing the three-hour minimum. However, the correct time is shown on the Cover Sheet and will be used by the Proposal Handling Team.




When setting the hour of a multiple visit using the time-constraint interface, it may not be possible to select certain values and attempting to do so may cause the OT to freeze. There is no known workaround at present.




Sources with different velocities may bring up a validation error relating to 'tuning groups'. Small changes to the source velocity may solve the problem. The first source typically seems to be the problem.




For a "simultaneous" 12-m + ACA proposal, the Cover Sheet will show TP time even if the TP Array is not required. However, TP Time will not be charged to the project.




When selecting ‚ÄúSimultaneous 12-m and ACA observations‚ÄĚ in a project where two different 12-m configurations are required (e.g., C-5 and C-2), the smaller configuration (e.g., C-2) is dropped without any warning.




Single continuum full polarization projects may trigger a validation error about exceeding the maximum allowed data rate. At times this problem can be solved by creating a spectral line setup that mimic the single continuum case (same bandwidth, same resolution).




In the Cycle 10 OT (Phase 1 Patch 1), if ‚ÄėStandalone ACA‚Äô is selected in ‚ÄėControl and Performance‚Äô, integration times can be underestimated if the Bandwidth used for Sensitivity (BufS) is set to ‚ÄėRepWindowEffectiveChannelWidth‚Äô or ‚ÄėFinestEffectiveChannelWidth‚Äô. PIs should set the BufS to ‚ÄėUser‚Äô to prevent this miscalculation. Please note that the ‚ÄėUser‚Äô choice allows you to set a value that is equivalent to either the ‚ÄėRepWindowEffectiveChannelWidth‚Äô or the ‚ÄėFinestEffectiveChannelWidth‚Äô, but the time estimate will be correct. Single continuum observations or observations requiring the 12m array are not affected by this problem.




In the correlator configuration section of the Technical Justification in the OT, the effective bandwidth is wrongly displayed as representative spectral window resolution and thus the calculation of the line width / representative spectral window resolution is not correct.




In the Technical justification of the proposal pdf, the effective bandwidth rather than the spectral resolution is displayed in the Resolution column of the Spectral Setup summary. The effective bandwidth is also wrongly used in the calculation of the resolution element per FWHM.