Transcript 2nd International Workshop on Verification and Testing of Space Systems Session 7 Special test Cryo-optical test of the PLANCK reflectors Author(s): S.

2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
Session 7
Special test
Cryo-optical test of the PLANCK reflectors
Author(s): S. Roose, A. Cucchiaro
(Centre Spatial de Liège)
Speaker: Stéphane Roose (e-mail :[email protected])
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
Summary
•
•
•
•
1.Project Historical Background
2.Overall Description
3.Test results
4.Lessons learned
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
2
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
1. Project Historical Background
•
•
PLANCK reflectors: 2 CFRP off -axis ellipsoids (Primary and secondary reflector)
Measure relative SFE difference (293K and 50K) measurement method with a resolution of
about 1 m (small deformations) on a SFE characterised by high SFE slopes at cryo-genic
temperature (1 mrad) with INFRARED INTERFEROMETRY
WFE reconstruction simulation of the
Primary reflector,
through the CSL IR interferometer,
based on expected deformation at 50 K,
512 by 512 pixels detector
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
3
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
2.1. Overall Description: Secondary reflector (Single pass interferometer)
Illumination optics
Planck SR
Thermal shroud
Interferometer cavity bench
Optical bench
M2
O
Vacuum flange with
ZnSe windows
M2C
O
F
Collecting optics
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
Reflector support
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
4
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
2.2. Overall Description: Primary reflector (Double pass interferometer)
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
5
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
6
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
3.1. Test results Secondary reflector QM: Full aperture test
Reflector not measurable in CRYO with this set-up: fringe density (slopes) too high! How Much?
Interferogram: 293 K
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
Interferogram: 50 K
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
WFE: 50 K
7
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
3.2. Test results: Secondary reflector QM and FM reduced field test
PLANCK SECONDARY MIRROR - FLIGHT MODEL - REDUCED PUPIL TEST - FM 1
n ame_ ref  "SRFM_ 1 _ 1 _ 2 9 3 K_ 0 8 DEC0 4 _ ZOOM1 x _ MOYENNE_ REM9 _ co rrig e facteu r 2 .TXT"
n ame  "SRFM_ 1 _ 1 _ 5 0 K_ 1 7 DEC0 4 _ ZOOM1 x _ MOYENNE_ REM9 _ co rrig e facteu r 2 .TXT"
eti( d iff)  5 .0 2 3
max( d iff)  1 5 .0 1
d i  2
dj  1
min( d iff)  1 8 .8 6 4
µm W FE
 increased resolution
 derive new estimate for the slopes = 2 mrad
0
50
100
150
200
k
250
300
WFE difference between 293 K -50 K
Secondary reflector FM on central aperture
350
400
450
tab  min( tab )
max( tab )  min( tab )
12
10
8
6
4
2
diffligne  k 0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1210 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 1012
diff k  colonne
2 5 5
lig n e 2 1 0
co lo n n e 2 4 5
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
k
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
8
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
3.3. Test results Secondary reflector FM: New optical design
• Test results Secondary Reflector
FM: New optical design
Increased slope collection: larger optics
(4 inch diameter)
Increased resolution: stitching to form
composite image of the SFE
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
9
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
3.4. Test results: Secondary reflector FM
Stitched aperture validation-compare interferometry with 3D data
PLANC K SEC ON DAR Y MI RR OR - FLIGH T MODEL
ASED measurements projected through al l opti cal system
et i( R)  1 0.2 61
max( R)  6 2.5 36
mi n( R)  5 3.9 34
µm W FE
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
k
350
k
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
l ig ne 3 42
50
co lo nn e 2 72
25
Rlig n e k
Ilig n e k
0
25
50
0
50
50
25
0
25
50
R k  co lo n n e I k  co lo n n e
fi g( t abR)
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
k
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
550
600
650
700
 0 .07 2
 0 .04 9
 0 .09 7 
 0 

ZeR 
  0 .89 5
1 0.6
 0 .42 4 


 0 .02 
 0 .41 3
 1 .26 3


Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
10
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
PLANCK SECONDARY M IRROR - FLIGHT M ODEL - te st 2
PLANCK SECONDARY M IRROR - FLIGHT M ODEL - te st 2 - data integrity at 50K
n ame_ref  "SRFM_2 _ 1_ 29 5K _2 6 JU N0 5_ 3 STIT.mca"
n ame_ref  "SRFM_2 _ 1_ 50 K_ 30 JUN 05 _1 STIT.mca"
n ame  "SRFM_2 _ 1_ 50 K_ 30 JUN 05 _1 STIT.mca"
n ame  "SRFM_2 _ 1_ 50 K_ 30 JUN 05 _2 STIT.mca"
3.5. Test results: Secondary reflector FM at 50 K
n ame_ref  n ame
n ame_ref  n ame
et i( D)  8 .47 2
max( D)  5 0.3 22
mi n( D)  5 9.9 09
et i( D)  0 .17
µm WFE
k
50
100
100
150
150
200
200
250
250
300
300
k
350
400
450
450
500
500
550
550
600
600
650
650
700
30
15
0
15
30
l ig ne 3 42
2
co lo nn e 2 72
1
d i1  1 64
Dligne k
d j1  4 29
d i2  4 11
1
d j2  1 46
2
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
0
l ig ne 3 38
co lo nn e 9 7
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
k
WFE difference between 293 K -50 K
1
D k  colonne
k
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
1
0
0
0
2
fi g( D 0)
15
30
350
400
fi g( t ab)
Dligne k
w ave s WFE
50
D k  colonne
15
mi n( D)  3 .10 8
0
700
30
max( D)  2 .97 2
0
Measurement repeatability RMS WFE
1.7 micron (SFE 0.9 micron)
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
11
2
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
3.8. Test results: Primary reflector FM
P LANCK P RIMARY RE FLE CTOR FLIGHT MODE L PUP IL 1
DIFFE RE NCE : NAME - NAME _R
n ame  "PR FM_ 1 _ 2 _ 1 7 0K_ 8 MAY0 5 _ ZOOM2 x _ p u p 1 _ OPD_ 1 "
n ame_ r  "PR FM_ 1 _ 1 _ 2 9 8K_ 2 MAY0 5 _ ZOOM2 x _ 0 1 "
20
10
difflig  k
0
10
20
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
k
0
127.75
k
255.5
383.25
511
Td i  min( d iff)
max( d iff)  min( d iff)
20
10
0
diff k  col
2 5 5
10
20
fi g( sp he)
max( sp he)  6 .87 1
mi n( sp he)  4 .73 8
maximum of DBL P ATH W FE in µm
ma_ d iff  2 0 .0 7 7
minimum of DBL P ATH W FE in µm
mi_ d iff 2 0 .3 5 5
standard dev iation of DBL P ATH W FE in µm
std ev _ d iff 5 .5 5 2
limit for the plot =/- µm
limit 2 0
Primary reflector Central aperture:
WFE difference between 293 K - 170 K
line
lig  2 2 0
column
co l  1 9 5
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
Contribution of the spherical aluminium mirror
RMS WFE = 0.5 μm
mo y( sp he)  0
et( sp he)  0 .47 7
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
12
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
PLANCK PRIMARY REFLECTOR FLIGHT MODEL FULL PUP IL - STITCHING
DIFFERE NCE : NAME - NAME_R
name  "Coma175\PRFM_1_1_170K_11MAY05_ZOOM2x_1STIT"
name_r  "Coma175\PRFM_1_1_298K_2MAY05_ZOOM 2x_3STIT"
30
15
diff lig  k
0
15
30
200
100
0
300
400
500
700
600
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
k
0
100
200
300
Primary reflector
Stitched full aperture:
170 K - 298 K
400
500
600
k
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
30
15
0
15
30
diff k  col
Tdi  min ( diff )
max( diff )  min ( diff )
 255
maximum of DBL PATH WFE in µm
ma_diff  45.396
Reliable measurement down to 170 K (halve of the temperature excursion)
Slopes ( estimated 2 mrad) are to high for the optics (based 1 mrad)
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
minimum of DBL PATH WFE in µm
mi_diff  48.51
standard deviation of DBL P ATH WFE in µm
stdev_diff  8.162
limit for the plot =/- µm
limit  50
line
lig  695
column
col  604
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
13
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
4. Lessons Learned
Are the Planck reflector tests a generic case for the future optical testing cases?
More and more for microwave to sub-mm reflectors: require testing!
-Slopes (non optical surfaces)
-1-10 micron metrology resolution
-high spatial sampling rate < 5 mm
-non-contact measurement at very high (> 330 K) or very low T<90 K)
Commercial of the shelf measurement methods do not meet all requirements! (no market for it)
-3D machine
-videogrammetry
-infrared interferometry
-holography
-lasertracker
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
(drawbacks:
(drawbacks:
(drawbacks:
(drawbacks:
(drawbacks:
non vacuum, stable T, low sampling rate)
sampling rate , intrusive targets)
no global shape, slopes)
still under development)
non vacuum, contact)
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
14
2nd International Workshop on
Verification and Testing of Space Systems
Reflector development needs to consider testing problem very early in the project!
Why?
-thermal-elastic models do not tell the absolute truth: over-sizing the metrology tool
might be necessary (increase test complexity). (PLANCK reflectors: wrong starting
hypotheses in the assessment of commercial IR interferometry feasibility)
-allow to iterate with small scale test and metrology which addresses the hard-points.
(PLANCK reflectors reduced field test)
-accept the non-universality of a method: divide and conquer, develop several simple test
(PLANCK reflectors: SFE with interferometry (CSL) and global shape with
videogrammetry (AAS-Cannes))
-early adaptation of method to the thermal vacuum test to allow technology
developments. (Planck reflectors: Videogrammetry targets at low temperature (ESTEC),
High resolution IR interferometer, Holography (CSL))
Speaker: S. Roose (CSL)
Torino 20/21/22 March 2006
15