Radio Telescopes
The radio band is too wide (five
decades in wavelength) to be covered
effectively by a single telescope design. The surface
brightnesses and angular sizes of radio sources span an even wider
range,
so a combination of single telescopes and aperture-synthesis
interferometers are needed to detect and image them. It is
not practical to build a single radio telescope that is even close to
optimum for all
of radio astronomy.
The ideal radio telescope should have a large collecting area to detect
faint sources. The
effective collecting
area $A_{\rm e}(\theta, \phi)$ of any antenna averaged over all
directions $(\theta, \phi)$ is
$$\langle A_{\rm e} \rangle=
{\lambda^2 \over 4
\pi}~.$$ Large peak collecting areas imply extremely directive antennas. Only at long wavelengths ($\lambda
> 1$ m) is it feasible to
construct reasonably sensitive antennas from reasonable numbers of
small, nearly
isotropic elements such as dipoles.

The
20.5
MHz
Bruce
Array
used
by
Karl
Jansky.
Image
credit
Jansky's $\lambda \approx 15$ m
"wire" antenna is an array of phased dipoles. It produces a wide
fan beam near the horizon but has a large collecting area
because $\lambda^2$ is so large. Directive aperture antennas are
needed for adequate sensitivity at
higher frequencies.
The simplest aperture antenna is a waveguide horn.
Radiation
incident
on
the
opening
is
guided
by a tapered waveguide. At
the narrow end of the tapered horn is a waveguide with parallel walls,
and inside this waveguide is a quarter-wave ground-plane vertical
antenna that converts the electromagnetic wave into an electrical
current that is sent to the receiver via a cable.
Horn antennas pick up very little ground radiation because, unlike most
paraboloidal dishes, their apertures are not partially blocked by
external feeds
and feed-support structures, which scatter ground radiation into the
receiver. This freedom from ground pickup allowed Penzias
&
Wilson (1965, ApJ, 142, 419) to show that the zenith antenna
temperature of the Bell Labs horn was 3.5 K higher at $\nu \approx 4$
GHz than expected—the first detection of the cosmic microwave
background radiation.

The horn
antenna at Bell Labs, Holmdel, NJ that Penzias and Wilson used to
discover the 3 K cosmic
microwave background radiation in 1965.
Image
credit
Because the aperture of a waveguide horn is not blocked by any
feed-support structure, it is also easier to calculate the gain of a
horn
antenna from first principles than to calculate the gain of a partially
blocked aperture. Thus small horn
antennas
have been used by radio astronomers to measure the absolute
flux
densities of very strong sources such as Cas A.
Radio
astronomers observing with large dishes typically do not measure the
absolute flux densities of sources, only their relative flux densities by
comparison with calibration sources whose absolute flux densities are
known in advance. The process of measuring the absolute flux
densities of Cas A and comparing them with the flux densities of weaker
point sources suitable for calibrating observations made with large
radio telescopes was described in detail by Baars et al. (1977,
A&A, 61, 99).
Small waveguide horns are frequently used as feed antennas for
paraboloidal radio
telescopes.
Most radio telescopes use circular paraboloidal reflectors to obtain
large collecting areas and high angular resolution over a wide
frequency range.
Because the feed is on the reflector axis, the feed and legs supporting
it partially block the path of radiation falling onto the
reflector. This aperture
blockage has a number of undesirable consequencies:
- The effective collecting area is
reduced because some of the incoming radiation is blocked.
- The beam pattern is degraded by
increased sidelobe levels.
- Radiation from the ground
that is scattered off the feed and its support structure increases the
system noise.

The first
paraboloidal radio antenna,
built in 1937 by Grote Reber. Notice how the cylindrical housing at the
prime focus and
the feed-support legs cast shadows on the reflector. The tower in
front of the telescope allows access to the receiver and feed located
at the prime focus. Image
credit
Radio telescopes are so large that
paraboloids with high $f/D$ ratios are impractical; typically $f/D
\approx 0.4$. Thus radio "dishes" are relatively deep, as shown
in the photo below. Another consequence of a low $f/D$ ratio is a
tiny field of view at the prime focus. The instantaneous imaging
capability of a large single dish is severely limited by the small
number of feeds can fit into the tiny focal
ellipsoid, the ellipsoidal region surrounding the prime focus in
which a simple feed yields a beam with minimal gain loss and low
sidelobes.

The 250 foot
Lovell Telescope
in Jodrell Bank, England was the first truly large
steerable dish, completed in 1957 and famous for detecting Sputnik.
The length of the central tower that supports the feed at the
prime focus is only
about 30% of the reflector diameter. Image credit
Nearly all radio telescopes have
alt-az
mounts consisting of a horizontal azimuth track on which the
telescope turns in azimuth
(the angle measured clockwise from north in the horizontal plane) and a
horizontal elevation axle about which the telescope tips in elevation
(the angle above the horizon) or zenith
angle (the angle below the
vertical). The 140-foot telescope in Green
Bank is unique among large radio telescopes in having a polar
mount. The advantage of a polar
mount is tracking simplicity—the declination axis is fixed and the
hour-angle axis turns at a constant rate while tracking a distant
celestial source. In contrast, both the altitude and the azimuth
of a celestial source change nonlinearly with time. When the
140-foot telescope was being
designed, the ability of computers to perform the real-time
calculations needed
for an alt-az telescope to track a source accurately was in
doubt. The disadvantage of a polar mount is mechanical—the sloped
hour angle yoke and polar axis with its huge support bearing are very
difficult to build and
support.

The 140 foot
telescope in Green Bank, WV is the largest telescope with
a polar mount. Image
credit
The photo above clearly shows the
Cassegrain optical system of the 140 foot telescope. Radiation
reflected from the main dish is reflected
a second time from the convex Cassegrain
subreflector located just below the focal point down
to feed horns and receivers near the vertex of the paraboloid.
Some advantages
of
a subreflector system over prime-focus system are:
- The magnifying subreflector can multiply the effective $f/D$
ratio; values of $f/D \sim 2$ are typical. This greatly increases
the size of the focal ellipsoid. Multiple feeds can be located
within the focal ellipsoid to produce multiple simultaneous beams for
faster imaging.
- The subreflector is many wavelengths in diameter so it can be
used to tailor the illumination taper to
optimize the tradeoff between high aperture efficiency and low
sidelobes.
- Receivers are located near the vertex, not the focal point, where
they are easier to access.
- Feed spillover radiation is directed toward the cold sky instead
of the warm ground, lowering overall system temperatures.
- The subreflector can by nutated
rapidly to switch the beam between two adjacent positions on
the sky. Such differential observations can be used to remove
receiver baseline drift and large-scale fluctuations in atmospheric
noise.
- The subreflector can be tilted to select one of several feeds at
the secondary focus, so that the observing frequency band can be
changed rapidly.
Some disadvantages of a
subreflector
system are:
- Relatively large feeds are required
to
produce the narrow beams needed to illuminate the subreflector, which
typically subtends only a small angle as viewed from the vertex.
- Standing waves in the leaky
cavity formed by the reflector and
subreflector cause sinusoidal ripples in the observed spectra of strong
radio sources.
The geometry of a symmetrical radio
telescope with a Cassegrain subreflector is shown below. The
paraboloidal shape of the primary reflector was determined by the
requirement that all incoming rays parallel to the $z$ axis travel the
same distance to
reach the prime focus at $f_1$. Likewise, the secondary reflector
shape is determined by the requirement that these rays
travel the same distance to reach the secondary focus at $f_2$.
For a subreflector located below the prime focus, the required shape is
a hyperboloid whose major axis coincides with the major axis of the
paraboloid. The equation
$${z^2 \over a^2} - {r^2 \over b^2} = 1$$ with $a > b$ defines such
a hyperboloid. From any point on the
hyperboloid, the difference between the distance to $f_2$ and the
distance to $f_1$ is $2a$. The distance between the foci is
$2(a^2 + b^2)^{1/2}$. The two free parameters $a$ and $b$ can be
adjusted to set both (1) the diameter of the subreflector as needed to
intercept rays from the edge of the primary and (2) the location of the
secondary focus on the $z$ axis. The magnification
provided by
the subreflector is $$M = {\tan (\theta_1 /2) \over \tan (\theta_2 /
2)}~,$$ where $\theta_1$ is the half angle subtended by the primary
viewed from
$f_1$ and $\theta _2$ is the half angle subtended by the secondary
viewed from $f_2$. A small subreflector is light, easy to tilt,
and reduces standing waves, but it subtends a small angle $2\theta_2$
at $f_2$ so a feed horn several wavelengths in diameter is required to
illuminate it properly.