The New Initiatives Office

- a partnership between Gemini, NOAO and our Communities

AURA’s road map to future 30m - 100m groundbased observatories - entering the “

era of the Giants

” in partnership

DRAFT – first thoughts (12/18/00) abbreviated version DRAFT (12/18/00)

AURA’s “New Initiative Office” -

a New Initiative for Groundbased Astronomy

• Global context • Science Drivers (highly abbreviated in this version) • Organizing for success in partnership • Focusing on Innovation

DRAFT (12/18/00)

Global context

2000 2010

Keck I&II Keck-Inter.

ESO-VLTI UT1,UT2,UT3,UT4 Gemini N&S HET LBT

NGST

ALMA SIM VLA-upgrade

LSST?

CELT and maybe GSMT…

NIO timeline

2000

Phase A: of what?

2008

The decade of adaptive optics

2010 OWL 2015

The era of the “giants”

DRAFT (12/18/00)

How we will be competitive from the ground • • • •

The “

Next Generation

” Space Telescope (NGST) will probably launch 2006 - 2010

–

an 6m - 8m telescope in space NGST will be extremely competitive for:

– –

deep infrared imaging, spectroscopy at wavelengths longer than 3 microns Groundbased telescopes can still compete in the optical and near-infrared

–

moderate to high resolution spectroscopy Groundbased facilities can also exploit large baselines

–

high angular resolution observations DRAFT (12/18/00)

“Deconstructing High z Galaxies”

Integral field observations of a z = 1.355 irregular HDF galaxy (Ellis et al) “Starformation histories

of physically distinct components apparently vary - dynamical data is essential” -- this is very hard on 8m – 10m telescopes

DRAFT (12/18/00)

Going beyond Gemini

Solar System @ 10 pc Jupiter

x 30

500 mas Gilmozzi et al (1998)

Gemini 10

s,

t = 10,000s R = 1800

l (m

m) Models for 1 M J Planets at 10 pc from Burrows et al 1997 DRAFT (12/18/00)

Going beyond 0.1 arcsecond astronomy requires resolution

and sensitivity

Flux 1 R Observations at z = 2 - 5 1 AU 100 AU 0.1 pc 1 - 10 milli arcseconds 10 pc 100 pc Accretion Disks Protoplanetary Disks Planets Spectroscopy

  

10 AU Imaging Galactic observations out to 1kpc at 10 mas resolution Molecular Cloud Cores Jets/HH AGN Stellar Clusters GMC DRAFT (12/18/00)

New Frontiers: Galaxies

Dense sampling over large fields of view: Depth: to reach z=0.5-10 for dense sampling Capabilities Large aperture Telescope Large FOV (>20’) O/IR MOS at R~5000

DRAFT (12/18/00)

Why a wide field

Sensitivity + FOV* Large Scale Structure 100Mpc (5 O x5 O ), 27AB mag (L* z=9), dense sampling NBT 1.5 yr Gemini NGST 50 yr 140 yr * uniqueness cf. ESO 100m OWL

DRAFT (12/18/00)

The NIO – organizing for success in partnership

External resources

Resources AURA Steering Committee: Pres. AURA Dir. Gemini Dir. NOAO Another (S.Strom)

NIO Advisory Committee

Resources

Gemini

NIO Office

PM: J. Oschmann PS: (TBD) NIO staff (allocated FTE’s) NOAO Working Groups Study Contracts

DRAFT (12/18/00)

Baseline Approach ambitious at the outset

• •

Diffraction limited telescope D ~ 30m - 100m Operating wavelengths

Tech. challenge 0.9

m m - 3.8

m m Science challenge •

Corrected Field of View

• Science challenge 1 arcmin - 3 arcmin Tech. challenge Tech. challenge

Uncorrected FOV 10 - 20 arcmins

• •

Minimize risk -- if at all possible Focus on technologies that have the potential to produce the most innovative results

•

Multi-conjugate AO

• • • •

Smart structures Optical materials and support approaches Analytical analysis of wind-buffeting “Cheap” enclosures DRAFT (12/18/00)

New Initiative’s Office, a partnership between Gemini, NOAO and our Communities

• Working Groups

– – – – –

Science Systems Adaptive Optics Optics Structures and Controls

– – –

Sites Instrumentation Management

• Issues

– – –

Corrected vs. uncorrected FOV Error Budget, Complexity Strehl ratio vs. FOV vs. No. lasers

– –

Cost of aspheric vs. spherical M1 Wind buffeting analysis, the role of smart structures

– – –

Mauna Kea vs. Chajnantor Narrow vs. Wide field, detectors National vs. International support DRAFT (12/18/00)

Possible Concept

• A “radio telescope” married to active and adaptive optics

Mirror-to-cell actuators Integrated mirror/cell segment Large stroke actuators Mirror support truss with smart structure elements/active damping as needed

Three levels of figure control:

•

Each mirror segment

•

is controlled within an individual cell Each cell is then controlled with respect to the primary mirror support structure

•

The support structure may have to use “smart structure” technology to maintain sufficient shape and/or damping for slewing/tracking DRAFT (12/18/00)

A proposed approach to achieving the image quality science goals

Deformable M2 : First stage MCAO, wide field seeing improvement and M1 shape control LGSs provide full S.C. Active primary (0.1Hz)?

10-20’ Field at 0.2-0.3” seeing • Wide and narrow field science multiplexing • M2: rather slow, large stroke DM to compensate ground layer and telescope figure, or to use as single DM at act) l >3 m m. (~20000 • Dedicated, small field (1-2’) MCAO system (~4-6DMs).

1-2’ field fed to the MCAO module

Focal plane

DRAFT (12/18/00)

How do we cost a 30 - 100m?

Risk assessment examples 1 of 3

• Adaptive Optics – multiple-conjugate AO needs to be demonstrated – requires a laser solution – deformable mirror technology needs to expanded for 50m ( x 10 - 20 more actuators • How do we make “light-weight”, 2 - 4m aspheric segment mounted in its own active cell and can we afford hundreds of them?

• How much dynamic range do we need to control cell segment to cell-segment alignment ?

 Will “smart”, and/or active damping systems have to be used telescope   evaluate by analysis and test.

Composites or Steel?

DRAFT (12/18/00)

An Enclosure for 50m -- “

how big

?” Risk assessment examples 2 of 3

75m 150m 75m

30 degrees

150m

• Restrict observing range to airmasses < 2.0

• “Astro-dome” approach • Heretical proposition #1 - excavate – significantly lowers enclosure cost – further shields telescope from wind – reliant on AO to correct boundary layer • Heretical proposition #2 - perhaps the wind characteristics of a site are now more important than the seeing characteristics

DRAFT (12/18/00)

Risk assessment examples 3 of 3

  Telescope Structure and wind loading  We need to characterize this loading in a way that is relatively easy to use in finite element analysis. This is easy, but mathematically intensive. Basically for each node that gets a wind force, a full vector of force cross spectra is generated, therefore the force matrix is a full matrix with an order equal to the number of forces (10’s of thousands).

Enclosure concept (do we need one)?

 What concept can we afford both in terms of dollars/euros and environmental impact (note Heretical Proposition #2) 

PROBABLE CONCLUSION: WE NEED A TECHNOLOGY TEST-BED

 

a 20m - 30m “new technology telescope” this is probably to only way to establish a credible cost for a 50m - 100m diffraction limited optical/IR groundbased telescope

DRAFT (12/18/00)

New Initiative’s Office, a partnership between Gemini, NOAO and our Communities

• Working Groups

– – – – – – – –

Science Systems Adaptive Optics Optics Structures and Controls Sites Instrumentation Management

Preliminary reports in draft form, community meetings and first design studies underway -

Strategy Document by June 2001 DRAFT (12/18/00)

DRAFT (12/18/00)