All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=18cm,clip]{0111fig1.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 1: Raw strip image of ADS 755 as observed when following the proposed technique. Specklegrams are $20\times 20$ pixels in size and the exposure time is 39 ms.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=6.2cm,clip]{0111fig2.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 2: A reconstructed image of WDS 00550+2338 = ADS 755 = STF 73AB. North is down, East is to the right. Contours are drawn at -0.05, 0.05, 0.10, 0.20, 0.30, 0.40, and 0.50 of the maximum value in the array. The dotted contours indicate the value -0.05. The secondary star appears below and to the left of the primary, which is located in the center of the image. The feature in the upper part of the figure is not real and appears to be related to the mismatch between the seeing profile of the binary observation and the radially generated point source.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.4cm,clip]{0111fig3.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 3: A surface plot of the power spectrum of one of the observing runs for ADS 755. Note the fringe pattern due to binarity of the object.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{0111fig4.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 4: Power spectrum for a calculated point source following the self-calibration scheme. Compared to Fig. 3, the central peak due to seeing remains approximately the same and fringes in the speckle shoulder are not present, as expected.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.1cm,clip]{0111fig5.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 5: Comparison of cutoff frequencies of observed and simulated 1-D speckle transfer functions. The former (solid line) was generated from the ADS 2616 point source. The latter represents the diffraction limited power spectrum obtained at $641~{\rm nm}$ using a 1.5 m aperture. Three different values of the Fried parameter r₀, $5~{\rm cm}$ (dashed), $10~{\rm cm}$ (dotted), and $15~{\rm cm}$ (dash-dotted), have been considered. Note that the better the seeing, the larger r₀ and so the higher the curve on the plot.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=15cm,clip]{0111fig6.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 6: A comparison of the position angle and separation measures presented here with the work of other observers. In all plots, North is down and East is to the right. In all cases, the object has an orbit listed in the 6th Catalog of Orbits of Visual Binary Stars (Hartkopf et al. 2003), and the orbital trajectory is plotted. Observations of previous observers, compiled by Hartkopf et al. (2002), are marked with small plus symbols, with a line segment drawn from the point to the ephemeris prediction for that epoch. The observations presented here are marked with the solid dots, again with line segments joining the point to the predicted location given the orbital elements. a) WDS 00550+2338 = STF 73AB = ADS 755. The orbit plotted is that of Docobo & Costa (1990), rated as a Grade 2 orbit in the Sixth Catalog. b) WDS 03344+2428 = STF 412AB = ADS 2616. The orbit plotted is that of Scardia et al. (2002), rated as a Grade 3 orbit in the Sixth Catalog. c) WDS 05079+0830 = STT 98 = ADS 3711. The orbit plotted is that of Baize (1969), rated as a Grade 3 orbit in the Sixth Catalog. d) WDS 23340+3120 = BU 720 = ADS 16836. The orbit plotted is that of Starikova (1982), rated as a Grade 3 orbit in the Sixth Catalog.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=16cm,clip]{0111fig7.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 7: Comparison of astrometric results using different point source calibrations. Point sources generated from observations of ADS 3711 and ADS 755 were used in both cases. The plot symbols and orbital trajectories are the same as in Fig. 6. a) WDS 00550+2338 = STF 73AB = ADS 755. b) WDS 03344+2428 = STF 412AB = ADS 2616.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{0111fig8.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 8: Comparison of 1D point source power spectrum of ADS 755 on the 5th night of observation with respect to: a) ADS 16386 on 5th night; b) ADS 16386 on 6th night; c) ADS 755 on 2nd night; and d) ADS 755 on 4th night.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=18cm,clip]{0111fig1.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 1: Raw strip image of ADS 755 as observed when following the proposed technique. Specklegrams are $20\times 20$ pixels in size and the exposure time is 39 ms.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.4cm,clip]{0111fig3.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 3: A surface plot of the power spectrum of one of the observing runs for ADS 755. Note the fringe pattern due to binarity of the object.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,clip]{0111fig4.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 4: Power spectrum for a calculated point source following the self-calibration scheme. Compared to Fig. 3, the central peak due to seeing remains approximately the same and fringes in the speckle shoulder are not present, as expected.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=16cm,clip]{0111fig7.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 7: Comparison of astrometric results using different point source calibrations. Point sources generated from observations of ADS 3711 and ADS 755 were used in both cases. The plot symbols and orbital trajectories are the same as in Fig. 6. a) WDS 00550+2338 = STF 73AB = ADS 755. b) WDS 03344+2428 = STF 412AB = ADS 2616.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{0111fig8.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 8: Comparison of 1D point source power spectrum of ADS 755 on the 5th night of observation with respect to: a) ADS 16386 on 5th night; b) ADS 16386 on 6th night; c) ADS 755 on 2nd night; and d) ADS 755 on 4th night.
Open with DEXTER