You are on page 1of 6

2012 International Conference on Convergence Information Technology

Lecture Notes in Information Technology, Vol.19

Optimization and Analysis of the Primary Mirror Mounting Position for


Cass grain Telescope

Yu Chuan Lin1, a, Shenq Tsong Chang1,b, Long Jeng Lee1,c,Ting Ming Huang1,d
1
Instrument Technology Research Center, National Applied Research Laboratories,
300 Hsinchu, Taiwan
a
yclin@itrc.narl.org.tw, stc@itrc.narl.org.tw, cljlee@itrc.narl.org.tw, dtmw@itrc.narl.org.tw
b

Keywords: Optomechanical Analysis, Finite Element Analysis, Wavefront Aberration.

Abstract. The paper presents an optomechanical design and analysis of the mirror mount integrated
for Cassegrain telescope. The finite element method and Zernike polynomials calculation are applied
to evaluate the optical surface distortion. The deformation due to a gravity load from each of the
different mirror mounting position is predicted. The optimization of mirror mounting position and the
minimum of optical wave front error are discussed in this paper.

1. Introduction
The large mirrors and lenses have been extensively adopted in various applications such as telescope
and laser optical systems. The large mirrors are more difficult to mount or support than lenses
because the mirrors are significantly more sensitive to distortion than lenses. The mirror has a single
optical surface will exhibit the doubles error as light is reflected. The large optical system requires
applicable and compact support structures that mitigate and isolate the optical parts from mechanical
and thermal loads. In the aspect of mechanical loads are gravity, vibration and residual stress that
might distort optical surface and induce deformation. The surface deformation plays an important
role in large diameter optics system with lightweight mirror. The mirror deformation produces almost
entirely aberrations of astigmatism, coma and trefoil due to inapplicable supports and mounts.
Therefore, the coma and trefoil effect can be readily corrected by adjust or active optics. But it is very
difficult to correct the astigmatism caused by gravity load and inapplicable mounting. The
kinematical support and iso-static mount are popular types of design for large mirror mount in the
Cassegrain telescopes such that they constrain three orthogonal axes without redundant degree of
freedom [1-4].
This paper presents the development of applicable and stable mirror mount as well as the
application to a primary mirror with outer diameter of 296 mm and inner diameter of 112 mm large
mirror for the Cassegrain telescope as shown in Fig. 1. The mirror is light-weighted with hexagonal in
shape with inscribed circle diameter of 40 mm and cell-rib thickness of 5 mm as shown in Fig. 2. The
mirror is mounted to the main plate by the mean of three bipods at near the center of gravity to prevent
from bending moment at the fixed bipods as show in Fig. 3. The integrated optomechanical analysis
of single light-weighted mirror and that the mirror was mounted onto the main plate by three bipods
have been discussed in the previous studies [5-6]. The integrated optomechanical design and analysis
for the support structure of primary mirror are developed in this paper, which includes the
optimization of the mirror mounting position and minimum wavefront error.

978-1-61275-018-7/10/$25.00 2012 IERI ICCIT2012


53
Fig. 1. The configuration of Cassegrain telescope

Fig. 2. Light-weight design of the primary mirror Fig. 3. Mount design of the primary mirror

2. Design and Analysis Process


The present Cassegrain optical system was used in the configuration with a primary mirror (M1), a
secondary mirror (M2) and four-element correction lenses (L1-L4) that collect the images from
ground target to the focal plane as shown in Fig. 4. The telescope is a pathfinder for a space telescope
program. The space telescope contains a high precision optomechanical structure that requires high
stability and accuracy for optical performance. Since the space telescope would experiences ground
test, launch and space orbit operation, each stage of the impact of various environmental loads must
be considered in the design phases. The mirror mount design is one of the critical issues for obtaining
better image quality. Therefore the mirror requires appropriate support and mount to protect and
isolate from environmental loads. Specially, the positions of three bipods relative to the center of
gravity of primary mirror must be carefully considered to prevent from bending moments. Otherwise,
the primary mirror might be distorted and deformation on optical surface such as astigmatism
aberration is induced.
The optimization of mirror mounting position and the minimum of optical wavefront error are
discussed in this paper. The structure behavior of mechanical is tabulated to obtain displacement
value for the different mounting position by using finite element analysis (FEA). The optical
deformation is observed with Zernike polynomials for qualitative FEA. The verification of finite
element model for single light-weighted mirror and mirror mounted onto the main plate by
experimental modal testing were discussed in the previous studies [5-6]. The results reveal that the
FEA models were in good agreement with experimental modal testing (EMT) for the resonance
frequency in fixed-mode condition. The veracity of simulation was confirmed by the comparison

54
with EMT result with the difference about 0.55% and 3.30 %. This reliable model further
demonstrates that the static behavior and combined with optomechanical analysis.

Fig. 4. The configuration of Cassegrain optical system

3. Results and Discussion


As in Fig. 3, the mounting position along optical axis (Z value) can be defined as the distance between
the center of gravity of mirror and bipods. The optimal Z value can be calculated or found by several
time consuming optical alignments, otherwise improper Z value will induce poor optical performance
as the astigmatism aberration occurs in the mirror due to the bending moments by the gravity effect.
The mechanical finite element analysis coupled with optical analysis of Zernike polynomial fitting
has been applied during the optimization of lightweight mirror as described in our studies [7-8], and
here we use this technique to approach the optimal Z value for the smallest of root-mean-square
(R.M.S) and peak-to-valley (P-V) wavefront errors and the lowest aberration of astigmatism. Fig. 5
shows the result of primary mirror deformation caused by the gravity load acting perpendicular to the
optical axis analyzed by FEA approach, where the mounting position locates at Z = 18.5 mm. It
shows the predicted maximum deformation is 1.02 m. Under the same gravity condition, Fig. 6
shows the predicted maximum deformation is 0.53 m at the mounting position of Z = 6.95 mm. The
optical performance of Zernike polynomial fitting of the mirror surface deformation calculated from
the finite element analysis at the different mounting position Z value can be derived as in Table 1.
Comparing Fig. 5 with Fig. 6, the optical performance in Fig. 6 is better than that in Fig. 5, and one
can find the lowest of R.M.S and P-V values in Table 1.
The result description of optical performance from Zernike polynomial fitting is discussed in the
followings. The relation between wavefront aberration and its optical metrology was well discussed
[9]. Fig. 7 and Fig. 8 show the results of Zernike polynomials calculation of primary mirror and give
the wavefront error of R.M.S and P-V values caused by the different mounting positions. From the
mode shape of Fig. 7 and 8, the wavefront of astigmatism aberration seems to be dominated according
to the coefficients of Zernike polynomial fitting and its patterns. The comparison of optical surface
deformation and astigmatism results represented by Zernike polynomials caused by different
mounting positions are also listed Table 1. It is found that the optimal mounting position is located at
Z = 6.95 mm that the magnitude and contour map of the Zernike polynomials calculation give the
R.M.S value of 0.00995, P-V value of 0.052 and primary astigmatism value of 0.0185 as shown in
Fig. 8. It is expected that if the mirror is mounted at the optimal position, one can obtain least wave
front error and influence under gravity

55
(a) Mounting position (b) FEA deformation

Fig. 5. The static analysis of primary mirror mounting position at located Z = 18.5 mm

(a) Mounting position (b) FEA deformation

Fig. 6. The static analysis of primary mirror mounting position at located Z = 6.95 mm

Table 1. Optical surface deformation and astigmatism represented by Zernike polynomials

ISM (1) ISM (2) ISM (3) ISM (4) ISM (5) ISM (6) ISM (7) ISM (8) ISM (9)

Z (mm) -4.75 0.25 5.25 6.95 7.75 11 13.5 16 18.5

R.M.S () 0.177 0.0985 0.0184 0.00995 0.0355 0.0786 0.116 0.149 0.183

P-V () 0.723 0.401 0.0759 0.052 0.176 0.387 0.533 0.701 0.864

Astig. () 0.3591 0.19966 0.03703 0.018509 0.0816 0.177 0.260 0.342 0.421

= 632 nm

56
Fig.7. Optical surface deformation represented by Zernike polynomials at located Z = 18.5 mm

Fig.8. Optical surface deformation represented by Zernike polynomials at located Z = 6.95 mm

4. Summary
The optimization of mirror mounting position and the minimum of optical wavefront error are
discussed in this paper. The result shows that the optimal mounting position is located at Z = 6.95 mm
in the present primary mirror design. The magnitude of the Zernike polynomials calculation gives the
wavefront error of R.M.S value of 0.00995, P.V value of 0.052 and primary astigmatism value of
0.0185. An integrated optomechanical analysis using FEA combined with Zernike polynomials is
successfully to optimum of mirror mounting design in the Cassegrain telescope.

References
[1] P. R. Yoder, Techniques for Mounting Prisms, Mounting Optics in Optical Instruments,
Washington: SPIE Press, pp.193-208, 2002.
[2] P. R. Yoder, Design Considerations for Mirrors with Large Diameter to Thickness Ratios,
Optomechanical Design, San Diego: SPIE Press, pp.207-231, 1993.
[3] B. J. Thompson, Mounting Small Mirror and Prisms, Optomechanical System Design, New York:
Marcel Dekker, pp.271-320, 1993.
[4] D. Chin, Optical Mirror-Mount Design and Philosophy, Applied Optics, Vol.3, No.7, pp.895-901,
1964.

57
[5] Y. C. Lin, L. J. Lee, S. T. Chang, Y. C. Cheng and T. M. Huang: Numerical and Experimental
Analysis of Light-weighted Primary Mirror for Cassegrain Telescope, Applied Mechanics and
Materials, Vol.52-54, pp59-64, 2011.
[6] Y. C. Lin, L. J. Lee, P. H. Huang, C. Y. Chan,, Y. C. Cheng and T. M. Huang: Finite Element
Model Verification for Light-weighted Mirror Mounted onto Main-Plate by Experimental Modal
Testing, Information Engineering Letters, Vol.1, No.1, pp.49-54, 2011.
[7] Y. C. Lin, L. J. Lee, S.T. Chang, T. M. Huang and C. H. Hwang: Design and Simulation of
Lightweight Mirror for Space Application, Proceedings of Design, Test, Integration and
Packaging of MEMS/MOEMS, pp.334-337, 2009.
[8] Y. C. Lin, L. J. Lee, S.T. Chang, T. M. Huang and C. H. Hwang: Integrated Optomechanical
Analysis of Large Optical Mirror for Space-based Telescope System, Proceedings of
International Conference on Manufacturing and Engineering System, pp.624-627, 2009.
[9] J. C. Wyant and K. Creath: Basic Wavefront Aberration Theory for Optical Metrology, Applied
Optics and Optical Engineering, Vol. XI, Chapter 1, Academic Press, pp.1-39, 1992.

58