Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-jhrpq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-17T09:43:41.748Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Polarisation performance of offset phase antennas: A study for FARSIDE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2025

Nivedita Mahesh*
Affiliation:
Division of Physics, Mathematics, and Astronomy, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA
Judd Bowman
Affiliation:
School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA
Bharat Gehlot
Affiliation:
School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA
Daniel Jacobs
Affiliation:
School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA
*
Corresponding author: Nivedita Mahesh; Email: nmahesh@caltech.edu.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Several radio telescopes have been planned or proposed to be deployed on the Lunar farside in the coming years. These will observe the unexplored ultra-long wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum from the lunar farside’s unique radio-quiet and ionosphere-free environment. One such lunar radio array is the NASA-funded concept – the Farside Array for Radio Science Investigations of the Dark Ages and Exoplanets (FARSIDE). FARSIDE will operate over 100 kHz to 40 MHz with 128 spatially non-co-located orthogonal pairs of antenna nodes distributed over a $12\times12$ km area in a four-arm spiral configuration. Being on the lunar farside, this radio interferometer will be deployed by tele-operated rovers. The rover deployment mode could lead to a phase offset between each of the two orthogonally polarised antenna elements in the array, which are typically co-located. In this paper, we quantify the effects of such antenna phase offsets on the polarisation response and imaging performance of the lunar radio array. Modelling and analysing the FARSIDE dipole beams with and without offset, we find the latter leads to additional leakages into Stokes U and V corresponding to Muller matrix terms of $M_{2(0,1,2,3)}$ and $M_{3(0,1,2,3)}$. Using a custom simulation pipeline to incorporate all four Stokes beams of spatially co-located and non-co-located dipoles, we produce visibilities and simulated images for the GLEAM (GaLactic and Extragalactic All-sky MWA) sky model through the FARSIDE array. We find that for a pure Stokes I input sky, the output image maximum Stokes $V/I$ flux ratio for the offset case has increased to $2.5\%$ versus $0.05\%$ for the co-located case. The additional Stokes V needs to be corrected since the detection of electron cyclotron maser emissions from exoplanets requires high-fidelity Stokes V measurements.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Astronomical Society of Australia
Figure 0

Figure 1. An artist’s rendering of the four arm spiral configuration of the FARSIDE array on the lunar surface. At the centre of the array is the base station with the communication antenna, fuel tank, central processing unit with correlators and the main power supply. Each of the four spiral arms, will have 32 antenna nodes consisting of two dipoles and a receiver. Also shown are the four two-wheeled rovers that will deploy the tethers containing the antenna nodes. The inset image shows the path taken by the rover to lay out the embedded dipole antennas with the 90-degree bend at each antenna node. The phase centres of the dipoles are indicated by the red dots.

Figure 1

Figure 2. A sketch detailing the deployment configuration for a single antenna node of FARSIDE. The tether from the previous antenna node leads up to one of the dipoles (X-dipole). Then, the rover turns 90${^\circ}$ and lays out the orthogonal dipole (Y-dipole), carrying the tether over to the location of the next node.

Figure 2

Figure 3. A schematic highlighting the difference between the spatially co-located and non co-located dipoles in a 2 element interferometer. The offset between the phase centres results in an additional delay($\tau_o$) between the X and Y combinations of each antenna pair. Additional corrections are needed when cross-correlating data from different antennas.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Simulation of the dipole phase centres of the FARSIDE spiral arm array layout. Each arm has 32 pairs of dual-polarised dipoles. The green phase centres are offset from the black by 50 m in the X and Y directions. The top panel shows the top view of the complete layout spanning over 12 km in the X and Y extents. The bottom panel shows the inner $3\times3$ km of the layout and a closer look at the offsets between the X- and Y- dipoles in each antenna node.

Figure 4

Figure 5. (a,b) Snapshot uv-coverage at 2 MHz of the four arm spiral array layout for zenith pointing. (a) uv-coverage for the XX and YY baselines and (b) shows uv-sampling for the XY baselines of the antenna pairs. (c,d) Normalised 2D Point Spread Functions (PSF) of the FARSIDE spiral arm layout with and without offset. (e) Azimuthally-averaged PSF versus elevation angle for the XX/YY and XY sets of baselines of the FARSIDE spiral arm layout plotted for three characteristic frequencies within the operating bandwidth.

Figure 5

Figure 6. Simulated gain plots of a pair of co-located orthogonal 100 m dipole on regolith. Shown here is the gain vs. theta for one of the dipoles for a few frequencies in the FARSIDE operating band. The gains are shown at two cuts of azimuth ($\unicode{x03D5} =0$ deg; along the excitation axis and $\unicode{x03D5}=90$ deg, perpendicular to the excitation axis). Below 10 MHz, the beam patterns are donut-shaped with peak gain at the zenith. At higher frequencies, the beam pattern deviates from the ideal dipole-like pattern and is seen to have a multi-lobed response.

Figure 6

Figure 7. Plots of Muller matrix elements for simulated co-located [top] and non-colocated [bottom] cross dipoles on regolith at 2 MHz as a function of elevation angle ($\theta$) and azimuth angle ($\unicode{x03D5}$). The absolute values of the elements are plotted. Colour bar scales are relative to the peak of M$_{00}$ (normalised to 1 at the zenith). The elements capture the fractional leakages of the sky Stokes components [I, Q, U, V] into the instrumental Psuedo-Stokes [$\mathcal{V}_I$,$\mathcal{V}_Q$, $\mathcal{V}_U$, $\mathcal{V}_V$]. For example, the first column corresponds to the sky Stokes I coupling into the instrument’s all four Stokes components ($I \rightarrow \mathcal{V}^I, \mathcal{V}^Q,\mathcal{V}^U,\mathcal{V}^V$). See Equation (11) for a key to these matrices.

Figure 7

Figure 8. Muller matrices that are non-zero when only the non-colocated phase centre effect is considered, excluding the beam pattern contribution. These indicate that direction-dependent intermixing of only Stokes U and V sky components occurs due to the spatial offset between the phase centres of the orthogonal dipoles. The effects are shown for three frequencies: 0.6, 2, and 10 MHz.

Figure 8

Figure 9. Azimuthally averaged absolute Muller matrix values for spatially co-located[dashed curves] and non-co-located [solid curves] orthogonal dipoles versus elevation angle. This is shown for three different frequencies within the operating band of the FARSIDE array. The effect of the offset is only on the last two rows of the Muller matrix. With increasing frequency, the absolute fractional mixing due to offset decreases. At the frequency of 10 MHz, the beam pattern of the antenna is no longer in the ideal dipole regime.

Figure 9

Figure 10. Intrinsic cross polarisation values for Stokes I and V for cases of no offset and with offset. Each row corresponds to a different frequency. The offset doesn’t add to the leakage into Stokes I, but it affects the leakages into Stokes V, which increases with frequency.

Figure 10

Figure 11. Block diagram of the complete flow of the interferometer pipeline developed for FARSIDE. It shows how the sky images are pre-processed before multiplying the beam. For the beam, the flowchart indicates the Muller matrices that take into account the beam and the spatial offset effects of the dipoles of the array.

Figure 11

Figure 12. The stokes I sky model using the GLEAM point sources between 1 Jy and 1.5 kJy within 30 deg of the zenith over the assumed FARSIDE phase center (ra = dec =0$^\circ$). These sources are projected onto the same l and m grid as the beams of the FARSIDE array. This Stokes I sky model is processed following Section 6 to yield simulated observations (see Figure 13).

Figure 12

Figure 13. Simulated I, Q, U, and V images of the sources from the GLEAM catalogue through the developed pipeline that includes the beam, the snapshot PSF, and phase offset. The images are generated at the centre of the FARSIDE band, i.e. 2 MHz. The five image columns correspond to: co-located X and Y dipoles, with 50m offset between the X and Y dipoles, differences between co-located and non-colocated cases and offset corrected image.

Figure 13

Figure 14. Similar to Figure 13 but only for Stokes V and with an ideal PSF (generated with a uniform uv-coverage). The four image columns correspond to: co-located X and Y dipoles, with 50m offset between the X and Y dipoles, differences between co-located and non-colocated cases and offset corrected image.