1. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 1 NIKA (Néel IRAM KID Array) First light at the 30-m IRAM dish NIKA collaboration: - Institut Néel - Grenoble - AIG - Cardiff - SRON - Utrecht and Groningen - Max Planck Institute - Bonn - IRAM - Grenoble - La Sapienza – Roma + IRST - Trento - LPSC - Grenoble

2. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 2 Designed and fabricated in Grenoble Horizontal Dilution Cryostat T base = 60mK

3. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 3 Cryostat (on anti-vibration table) NIKA interface optics To IRAMsecondary mirror To IRAM secondary mirror … through this hole Credit: L. Swenson NIKA installed – 19/10/2009

4. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 4 Designed and fabricated in Grenoble (Néel and PTA). Polarisation sensitive Data-sheet: - 40nm Al - f R = 1.50 - 1.55 GHz - Q c  30,000 - 3dB deep resonances (large scatter) - Read-out : Grenoble FPGA electronics NIKA: 30 pixels LEKIDs array Average optical NEP (1Hz) on telescope :  10 -15 W/Hz 0.5 Real conditions, UNDER > 10pW/pixel loading.... actually better considering that we only have 1 polarisation Operating at 130-170GHz

5. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 5 NIKA 2009: Mars transits (raw data)

6. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 6 Visible already in the first scan, also on single pixels maps. Good S/N BL1418+546 (1.2 Jy)

7. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 7 Credit: F.X. Desert Extended sources : M87 More details on the NIKA run : arxiv/1004.2209 (A&A, in press)

8. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 8 Sky noise (correlated) dominates below 0.4 Hz (average sky conditions) Part of detectors noise is correlated (common mode gain variations) SKY noise (  f -2.1 ) Detectors noise (  f -0.55 ) Noise Spectrum (on-sky, during observations)

9. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 9 NIKA 2010: larger and more sensitive Best pixels in 2010 (June). Optical NEP (1 Hz)  2·10 -16 W/Hz 0.5 phase noise - Reduced the phase noise by playing with the design optical response - Improved the optical response by reducing the film thickness - Improved lithography quality larger arrays and made larger arrays - Optics is OK in lab (well separated beams) - EM cross-talk shuffling the resonances. Work in progress. Best array so far (last week). Average optical NEP  6·10 -16 W/Hz 0.5 IN OUT

10. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 10 It’s READY ! First complete test (Sky Simulator) next week with : - Néel: mechanics, cryostat, lenses (HDPE) - Cardiff: (filters, optical splitter) - 2mm (IRAM/Néel) and 1.25mm (Roma/Trento) arrays Bands : 1.25 – 2.05 mm Pixels : 144 x 2 F/1.9 Field-of-view : 1.5 arc-min NIKA 2010: dual-band too Pre-scheduled for the end of October on the 30-m telescope.

11. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 11 Cosmics: first « fast MUX » measurement For more details : L.J. Swenson et al., APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS 96, 263511 (2010) We could triangulate the interaction position (300  m error for 2.2mm pixels). X-rays 6 keV photons interacting in the substrate are seen clearly (S/N >> 10).  A REAL PROBLEM FOR SPACE/SENSITIVE APPLICATIONS

12. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 12 Status : - Demonstrated in lab up to 160 pixels multiplexed on a single line (Grenoble setup and Bonn MPI electronics). Electronics constantly in progress. under 10pW loading per pixel - Best pixels exhibit NEP  2·10 -16 W/Hz 0.5 under  10pW loading per pixel Sensitivity improvements for Bpol : directly - Reducing the background translates directly in NEP reduction - New materials (e.g. very promising TiN, see arxiv/1003.5584) - Horns or not horns ? So far filled arrays... Horns to be studied in case. - Challenging but not impossible (requires a coherent R&D FR-UK-IT) Cosmics (a real issue !) : - KIDs are Sensitive to a-thermal (Cooper pair breaking) substrate phonons ≠ bolometers - Not sensitive to thermal phonons ≠ bolometers - Rate on 2mm pixels (and > 10 -16 W sensitivity) > 0.1Hz at sea level ! Faster than bolometers - Faster than bolometers (...but not enough). High Q, long  qp  slow resonator - BIG questions are now: - a-thermal phonons mean free path in thin membranes ??? - solid membrane OK (easy) or need spider-like structures (more difficult) ?? Electronics : - Not a huge problem I think for up to 1000 pixels. Medium term goal is a MUX factor of 10 3. ADCs improvements might allow 10 4 in long term. Conclusions in view of BPol

13. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 13 THANKS

14. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 14 BONN (Max Planck Institut) FFTS (2009) – not available for NIKA 2010 Useful Bandwidth:400 MHz Max. readout rate:5 Hz FFT points:up to 32k Tones spacing: down to 12.2 kHz Max number of channels tested:160 Grenoble (LPSC and Néel) FPGA READOUT Grenoble (LPSC and Néel) FPGA READOUT (2010) Useful Bandwidth:125 MHz Max. readout rate:2 MHz Max. number of channels128 Tones spacing: down to 1Hz OPEN SOURCE READOUT OPEN SOURCE READOUT (2010) Useful Bandwidth:250 MHz Max. readout rate:> 2 MHz Max. number of channelsfor now up to 96 Tones spacing: down to 1Hz Collaboration : Collaboration : UCSB, Berkeley, Caltech-JPL, NIST, Goddard, Grenoble, UK Existing MUX Read-Outs

15. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 15 Tool to find resonances - BEFORE

16. A. Monfardini, IAP 30/07/2010 16 Tool to find resonances - AFTER