Exceptional Seeing At Dome C in Antarctica

Michael Ashley writes "A paper published in Nature today reports on the exceptional astronomical seeing conditions at Dome C (Coral link) in Antarctica. Obtaining the data posed some significant technological challenges, given that Dome C is uninhabited over winter. The experiment was controlled by a PC/104 computer system that had to survive temperatures down to -85C, and supervise the generation of its own electricity using a jet-fuel powered stirling engine. The computer, running Linux, communicated with the outside world using an Iridium phone. The results are also covered in New Scientist, and the Sydney Morning Herald. Disclaimer: I'm a co-author."

Comments

Surviving temps down to -85???

[grape jelly]

The experiment was controlled by a PC/104 computer system that had to survive temperatures down to -85C...

Wait a sec! =-P Computing equipment *loves* cold, as long as you don't have to worry about condensation. =-P In other words, it's not hard to design a system that can survive -85C. Just do a google search for Liquid nitrogen cooling. Yay for overclocking fiends who make it so you don't even need to mention computing hardware. ;-)

btw, there's a tom's hardware link on the results page. Check it out. There's a pic of a CPU mount covered in frost. That *can't* be good! =-P

Re:Surviving temps down to -85???

[Homology]

Large fluctations in temperature can be quite bad for hardware : it will contract and expand, and thus inducing stresses on the computer. And relability is a big factor : You can't just fly down there to replace broken parts.

Re:Surviving temps down to -85???

[strikethree]

Actually, semi-conductors are only semi-conductors at near room temperatures. If it gets too hot or too cold, your semi-conducting material becomes an insulator.

strike

Re:Screen shot of web page on mobile phone

[Speare]

Nevermind that the others have pointed out the "C" in the image. At -40, the scales equate. That is, -40C == -40F. So it almost doesn't matter which scale we're discussing.

google: -40 fahrenheit in celsius

Re:Someone has to ask ...

[DiS[EnDeR]]

http://www.diamondsystems.com/
Heres our PC/104 supplier. We also use a GPIB card from National instruments connected to an Agilent Data logger. Add a Modem Card, Video Card, and two DMM32 Data Aquisition cards. Plus the DMM16 thats already on-board.

The new Athena Processors have video on-board, and faster CPU's.

I believe Intel sued over teh Mach86 processor and they had to switch.

Re:Mostly off topic

[moofdaddy]

But I've applied for a job down there (no reply so out for this year); anyone work down there and have any advice for getting a foot in the door?

First thing i would do is refrain from asking job advise on slashdot.

Re:Iridium? Didn't they go bust?

[Phat_Tony]

Iridium was the dumbest investment opportunity since a 3,000 Guilder Tulip bulb in 1624. The constellation cost $5 billion to construct. It was immediately obvious from the very outset to anyone who spent a little while playing around with the math that there would never be any way to make money from this. You could estimate any reasonable supply/demand curve and come up with a loss- from 1 phone at $5 billion apiece to 5 billion phones (about 1 per person on earth who can ho,d a phone) at $2,001 apiece (the phones cost about $2,000 to produce), there was no number in between where they could conceivably ever make money. In fact, there was no way they could do anything but lose billions.

So they went bankrupt, and no one would buy the system. It was a textbook case of a colossal business failure, and no one would touch it with a 10-ft pole. The judge hated to rule that a $5 billion infrastructure system burn up in the atmosphere, and luckily, at the last minute, Dan Colussy stepped in with a $25 million bid- less than half a cent on the dollar of initial construction costs, and swept it up.

Then what? The new Iridium Satellite LLC started cleanning up, which it's still doing. Very profitable. It turns out that, while it's impossible to recoup a $5 billion investment on a satellite phone system is impossible, recouping an investment 1/200 that size isn't so bad.