| Channels: | 20 x 40 MHz |
| Time bins: | 120 x 300s |
This binning scheme ensures that time- and bandwidth-smearing is kept below 10% for sources 0.5 degrees from the phase centre. To achieve the same criterion for the MeerKAT layout, the channel width must be <= 1 MHz and the time bin duration <= 10s. These smaller numbers meant that to achieve with the MeerKAT simulation runs the same total bandwidth and observation duration as for KAT7, a prohibitively large number of visibilities would have been necessary. Because of this, 3 different combinations of lesser bandwidth and duration were employed, as follows:
| Scheme A: | (1x1 MHz) x (3600x10s) |
| Scheme B: | (60x1 MHz) x (60x10s) |
| Scheme C: | (720x1 MHz) x (5x10s) |
All hour angle ranges were symmetrical about the meridian. No thermal noise was added to the visibilities, and perfect calibration was assumed.
The breakdown into radial and orthogonal components was done for the sake of computational speed, since this allows the primary beam attenuation at any place in the field to be calculated by interpolation of 3 one-dimensional functions, one of which (the radial one) only needs to be performed once per source. Because of these short cuts, the primary beam could not be an exact replica of the measured KAT7 primary beam, but it was designed to approximately preserve the principal features of same, in particular the approximate size of the first sidelobe, and the existence of extended sidelobes originating in the four feed support legs. It may be desirable to alter the software at a later stage to make use of a more exact model of the primary beam.
The primary beam was defined out to 90 degrees from the direction of point. Overspill behind the antenna was not considered. A log-scale plot of the (total-power) primary beam model is shown in the figure.

In all cases a 1x1 degree field was imaged. The KAT7 images had 512x512 pixels, the MeerKAT 2048x2048. No attempt was made to remove spherical aberration. Both natural and uniform weighting were utilized, as indicated for each figure below. In all but one case the gridding kernel was a simple single-pixel 'top-hat'. The exceptional case used an expsinc kernel (see AIPS task IMAGR). In no case has the dirty image been divided by the Fourier transform of the gridding kernel. No cleaning was done.
The sources were taken from the PKSCAT catalog. The flux densities were taken from the S1410 column, corresponding to 1410 MHz; hence only sources with a measured flux density at that frequency were used. There were 2375 of these in total. All sources were assumed to have a spectral index of zero. Sources were extinguished when below the horizon.
For some of the simulations, the subset of sources within 10 degrees of the phase centre were used. There were 13 sources which obeyed this criterion (see figure); they range in flux density from 0.5 to 5.3 Jy. Note that none of the PKSCAT sources fall within the 1x1 degree imaged field (just as well).

I plan to make the python software available after I get a sensible versioning scheme going, and the f90 stuff after I put the bloated SAS on a severe diet and install a slimline version locally.
Firstly, I ran simulations for the KAT7 array, using only the 13 inner sources. Results for uniform and natural weighting are as follows.


The fringes in the uniformly-weighted image probably result from a grid cell which has only a single visibility within it, and which happens by chance to sample the rapidly-oscillating visibility function of a bright, far-field source near its maximum value. More sophisticated gridding kernels and weighting functions would be expected to remove such effects.
Next I ran a KAT7 simulation using all the PKSCAT-1410 sources:

Clearly the inclusion of the extra sources makes very little difference. Next using a double-precision gridder:

Again no discernable difference.
The MeerKAT images are presented in a table for compactness:
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Note that the brightness scales differ from image to image.
The final check was to grid using a more sophisticated kernel. The only other which I currently implement in my software (although it hasn't been thoroughly exercised) is the expsinc kernel described in the AIPS task IMAGR, also in the 'Imaging' chapter of the NRAO interferometry summer school lectures. The result is as follows:

Comparing this to the top-hat version (middle row, left column of the table above) we see that the more sophisticated gridding kernel has erased the aliased sources but left the traces of far-field dirty beam sidelobes largely unchanged. This is to be expected from interferometry theory, since far sidelobes arise from edges in the density distribution of visibility samples. Such edge cells often contain input from few samples and so the higher spatial frequency visibility components are not as well averaged as in more densely populated areas.
| Description: | RMS (microJy): |
| KAT7, inner 13, natural | 13.91 |
| KAT7, inner 13, uniform | 11.55 |
| KAT7, all PKSCAT, natural | 13.88 |
| KAT7, all PKSCAT, uniform | 11.52 |
| MeerKAT A, natural | 1.30 |
| MeerKAT A, uniform | 0.40 |
| MeerKAT B, natural | 10.17 |
| MeerKAT B, uniform | 1.61 |
| MeerKAT C, natural | 8.61 |
| MeerKAT C, uniform | 2.77 |
| MeerKAT B, natural, expsinc | 10.32 |