![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I consider designing a low-cost AO system for a small telescope. It
seems we have all necessary resources: we produce deformable mirrors and wavefront sensors, we also produce closed-loop AO systems with up to 59 channels, so integration wouldn't be too complicated as all structural parts are available. On the other hand we have little experience with astronomy and therefore any advice would help. The preliminary tech requirements: 1. To be mounted in 1.25 inch ocular socket (2" socket??). To be used with telescopes with diameter in the range 25cm to 1m. 2. Aberration free afocal mirror system, transparent in the visible and near IR and fully operational even with AO switched off. To achieve this, we'll use a system with a field of a couple of mm (in the primary focus) for a foacl ratio of 1/10. The field and F# are compromized to reduce the complexity of the optics, but the field will be limited anyway by the anisoplanatism of the AO and the F# must be small for a HR imaging 3. To have al least 19 degrees of freedom (depending on the seeing can be good to correct up to ~13 Zernike terms to about 10% of the uncorrected value). 37 degrees of freedom is also possible but I'm not sure a small scope really will collect enough light to correct that many terms in real time. 4. To operate on a natural star with magnitude of at least 4 (with a 25cm telescope), using 50% of light for running the AO and 50% for registration. 5. To be easy in setting up and running. To use single +12V power supply and three cables connecting the system with the deformable mirror controller and the dedicated control laptop PC. 6. The total weight of the optical correction unit mounted to the telescope not to exceed 1kg. Mirror controller incl power supply - also 1 kg, add some extra for cables and laptop. The system is supposed to provide a diffraction-limited imaging in a rather bad seeing conditions. It will allow stable imaging of bright objects such as stars, double stars and planets. Another advantage of using such a system is that it will correct the aberrations of the telescope, improving the quality of optics, for instance making the period of mirror cooling also available for observations. In fact, correction of the static aberrations can be done on a bright star once, and then the system can be used in static correction mode. The project is technically feasible (although quite expensive in its development stage), but I still have my doubts regarding its usefulness: 1. Small field and ability to work on only bright objects will limit the usability to very bright double stars and planets. Are (amateur) astronomers really interested in this? 2. Although we plan to have it transparent, the system will limit the field of view and reduce the amount of light available for observation. The light loss will be compensated by the resolution gain, but the effect can be limited or even negligible for a small telescope. 3. The system will require an additional laptop computer to run the AO and will add to the complexity of the telescope setup. 4. It can be quite expensive, especially in the beginning, though if there is a market, the price can be very acceptable. I would appreciate any comments on the above mentioned topics. Gleb Vdovin OKO Tech PO Box 581, 2600 AN Delft, The Netherlands http://www.okotech.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The price to the user should be less than $1500.00 for an entry level
system. West Coast Engineering "Gleb" wrote: I consider designing a low-cost AO system for a small telescope. It seems we have all necessary resources: we produce deformable mirrors and wavefront sensors, we also produce closed-loop AO systems with up to 59 channels, so integration wouldn't be too complicated as all structural parts are available. On the other hand we have little experience with astronomy and therefore any advice would help. The preliminary tech requirements: 1. To be mounted in 1.25 inch ocular socket (2" socket??). To be used with telescopes with diameter in the range 25cm to 1m. 2. Aberration free afocal mirror system, transparent in the visible and near IR and fully operational even with AO switched off. To achieve this, we'll use a system with a field of a couple of mm (in the primary focus) for a foacl ratio of 1/10. The field and F# are compromized to reduce the complexity of the optics, but the field will be limited anyway by the anisoplanatism of the AO and the F# must be small for a HR imaging 3. To have al least 19 degrees of freedom (depending on the seeing can be good to correct up to ~13 Zernike terms to about 10% of the uncorrected value). 37 degrees of freedom is also possible but I'm not sure a small scope really will collect enough light to correct that many terms in real time. 4. To operate on a natural star with magnitude of at least 4 (with a 25cm telescope), using 50% of light for running the AO and 50% for registration. 5. To be easy in setting up and running. To use single +12V power supply and three cables connecting the system with the deformable mirror controller and the dedicated control laptop PC. 6. The total weight of the optical correction unit mounted to the telescope not to exceed 1kg. Mirror controller incl power supply - also 1 kg, add some extra for cables and laptop. The system is supposed to provide a diffraction-limited imaging in a rather bad seeing conditions. It will allow stable imaging of bright objects such as stars, double stars and planets. Another advantage of using such a system is that it will correct the aberrations of the telescope, improving the quality of optics, for instance making the period of mirror cooling also available for observations. In fact, correction of the static aberrations can be done on a bright star once, and then the system can be used in static correction mode. The project is technically feasible (although quite expensive in its development stage), but I still have my doubts regarding its usefulness: 1. Small field and ability to work on only bright objects will limit the usability to very bright double stars and planets. Are (amateur) astronomers really interested in this? 2. Although we plan to have it transparent, the system will limit the field of view and reduce the amount of light available for observation. The light loss will be compensated by the resolution gain, but the effect can be limited or even negligible for a small telescope. 3. The system will require an additional laptop computer to run the AO and will add to the complexity of the telescope setup. 4. It can be quite expensive, especially in the beginning, though if there is a market, the price can be very acceptable. I would appreciate any comments on the above mentioned topics. Gleb Vdovin OKO Tech PO Box 581, 2600 AN Delft, The Netherlands http://www.okotech.com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
West Coast Engineering wrote:
The price to the user should be less than $1500.00 for an entry level system. West Coast Engineering Is it worth doing anything but tip-tilt in a small system (0.5 metre) ? Steve |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Gleb wrote: 1. Small field and ability to work on only bright objects will limit the usability to very bright double stars and planets. Are (amateur) astronomers really interested in this? I would be interested, assuming the cost ended up not much more than a good CCD camera. I do both double star measurements and planetary observing and have often thought of trying to build such a device myself, but was put off by the high cost of transducers to make the deformable mirror element. Clif Ashcraft |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 14:35:29 +0100, "Gleb" wrote:
I consider designing a low-cost AO system for a small telescope. It seems we have all necessary resources: we produce deformable mirrors and wavefront sensors, we also produce closed-loop AO systems with up to 59 channels, so integration wouldn't be too complicated as all structural parts are available On the other hand we have little experience with astronomy and therefore any advice would help. The preliminary tech requirements: 1. To be mounted in 1.25 inch ocular socket (2" socket??). To be used with telescopes with diameter in the range 25cm to 1m... Gleb- At an aperture of a meter, you can just begin to achieve true adaptive optics- and at that point, only with a few channels. Otherwise, there simply isn't enough light available for feedback to achieve the necessary correction rates. for a 25cm scope, you will at best manage a simple first order correction. You may find a market among professional astronomers with meter class scopes and research interests that focus on individual stellar objects. However, the vast majority of amateurs are either aesthetic imagers or are engaged in astrometry or photometry projects. None of these is likely to benefit from AO. _________________________________________________ Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Gleb wrote:
I consider designing a low-cost AO system for a small telescope. It seems we have all necessary resources: we produce deformable mirrors and wavefront sensors, we also produce closed-loop AO systems with up to 59 channels, so integration wouldn't be too complicated as all structural parts are available. On the other hand we have little experience with astronomy and therefore any advice would help. The preliminary tech requirements: 1. To be mounted in 1.25 inch ocular socket (2" socket??). To be used with telescopes with diameter in the range 25cm to 1m. 2. Aberration free afocal mirror system, transparent in the visible and near IR and fully operational even with AO switched off. To achieve this, we'll use a system with a field of a couple of mm (in the primary focus) for a foacl ratio of 1/10. The field and F# are compromized to reduce the complexity of the optics, but the field will be limited anyway by the anisoplanatism of the AO and the F# must be small for a HR imaging 3. To have al least 19 degrees of freedom (depending on the seeing can be good to correct up to ~13 Zernike terms to about 10% of the uncorrected value). 37 degrees of freedom is also possible but I'm not sure a small scope really will collect enough light to correct that many terms in real time. 4. To operate on a natural star with magnitude of at least 4 (with a 25cm telescope), using 50% of light for running the AO and 50% for registration. 5. To be easy in setting up and running. To use single +12V power supply and three cables connecting the system with the deformable mirror controller and the dedicated control laptop PC. 6. The total weight of the optical correction unit mounted to the telescope not to exceed 1kg. Mirror controller incl power supply - also 1 kg, add some extra for cables and laptop. The system is supposed to provide a diffraction-limited imaging in a rather bad seeing conditions. It will allow stable imaging of bright objects such as stars, double stars and planets. Another advantage of using such a system is that it will correct the aberrations of the telescope, improving the quality of optics, for instance making the period of mirror cooling also available for observations. In fact, correction of the static aberrations can be done on a bright star once, and then the system can be used in static correction mode. The project is technically feasible (although quite expensive in its development stage), but I still have my doubts regarding its usefulness: 1. Small field and ability to work on only bright objects will limit the usability to very bright double stars and planets. Are (amateur) astronomers really interested in this? 2. Although we plan to have it transparent, the system will limit the field of view and reduce the amount of light available for observation. The light loss will be compensated by the resolution gain, but the effect can be limited or even negligible for a small telescope. 3. The system will require an additional laptop computer to run the AO and will add to the complexity of the telescope setup. 4. It can be quite expensive, especially in the beginning, though if there is a market, the price can be very acceptable. I would appreciate any comments on the above mentioned topics. It might sell to some wealthy amateur astronomers for visual use but more likely to university level spectroscopists with intermediate size instruments (1-2 meter) where image size limits spectral resolution. It might also sell to target shooters (and perhaps military snipers) trying to resolve targets at kilometer ranges through sun warmed atmosphere. That has an order of magnitude more seeing distortion than looking vertically at night but plenty of light would be available. Does your software require a point source reference or can it optimize on the structure of a random field? The unit you propose would only be useful if the corrections are fast enough to keep up with typical atmospheric scintillation. Static corrections alone would probably be cheaper to correct by buying better optics. Doing both would be of advantage. Unless you give a dollar value "quite expensive" doesn't mean much. At $1k (unit and software, user supplied computer) they'd sell to the masses. (I'd buy one just to play with). At $10k some would sell. At $100k few if any who would want it would have the money. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi Gleb,
I have done DM modeling in my optical design program in several ways and could easily put in a custom DM model to model any real DM as long as ameasured influence functions (one for each actuator being activated) were available. It would be an interesting exercise. I'd be willing to put such a surface in and provide you with a free copy of the program in exchange for a set measured influence functions and some feedback as to how well the ray trace predictions eventually ended up agreeing with the hardware you built. Sincerely, Jim Klein www.westcoastengineering.com "Gleb" wrote: I consider designing a low-cost AO system for a small telescope. It seems we have all necessary resources: we produce deformable mirrors and wavefront sensors, we also produce closed-loop AO systems with up to 59 channels, so integration wouldn't be too complicated as all structural parts are available. On the other hand we have little experience with astronomy and therefore any advice would help. The preliminary tech requirements: 1. To be mounted in 1.25 inch ocular socket (2" socket??). To be used with telescopes with diameter in the range 25cm to 1m. 2. Aberration free afocal mirror system, transparent in the visible and near IR and fully operational even with AO switched off. To achieve this, we'll use a system with a field of a couple of mm (in the primary focus) for a foacl ratio of 1/10. The field and F# are compromized to reduce the complexity of the optics, but the field will be limited anyway by the anisoplanatism of the AO and the F# must be small for a HR imaging 3. To have al least 19 degrees of freedom (depending on the seeing can be good to correct up to ~13 Zernike terms to about 10% of the uncorrected value). 37 degrees of freedom is also possible but I'm not sure a small scope really will collect enough light to correct that many terms in real time. 4. To operate on a natural star with magnitude of at least 4 (with a 25cm telescope), using 50% of light for running the AO and 50% for registration. 5. To be easy in setting up and running. To use single +12V power supply and three cables connecting the system with the deformable mirror controller and the dedicated control laptop PC. 6. The total weight of the optical correction unit mounted to the telescope not to exceed 1kg. Mirror controller incl power supply - also 1 kg, add some extra for cables and laptop. The system is supposed to provide a diffraction-limited imaging in a rather bad seeing conditions. It will allow stable imaging of bright objects such as stars, double stars and planets. Another advantage of using such a system is that it will correct the aberrations of the telescope, improving the quality of optics, for instance making the period of mirror cooling also available for observations. In fact, correction of the static aberrations can be done on a bright star once, and then the system can be used in static correction mode. The project is technically feasible (although quite expensive in its development stage), but I still have my doubts regarding its usefulness: 1. Small field and ability to work on only bright objects will limit the usability to very bright double stars and planets. Are (amateur) astronomers really interested in this? 2. Although we plan to have it transparent, the system will limit the field of view and reduce the amount of light available for observation. The light loss will be compensated by the resolution gain, but the effect can be limited or even negligible for a small telescope. 3. The system will require an additional laptop computer to run the AO and will add to the complexity of the telescope setup. 4. It can be quite expensive, especially in the beginning, though if there is a market, the price can be very acceptable. I would appreciate any comments on the above mentioned topics. Gleb Vdovin OKO Tech PO Box 581, 2600 AN Delft, The Netherlands http://www.okotech.com |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "West Coast Engineering" I have done DM modeling... snip What's DM? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Gaspard de la Nuit" wrote:
"West Coast Engineering" I have done DM modeling... snip What's DM? Deformable Mirror Jim Klein |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Gleb wrote: I consider designing a low-cost AO system for a small telescope. It seems we have all necessary resources: we produce deformable mirrors and wavefront sensors, we also produce closed-loop AO systems with up to 59 channels, so integration wouldn't be too complicated as all structural parts are available. On the other hand we have little experience with astronomy and therefore any advice would help. The preliminary tech requirements: 1. To be mounted in 1.25 inch ocular socket (2" socket??). To be used with telescopes with diameter in the range 25cm to 1m. 2. Aberration free afocal mirror system, transparent in the visible and near IR and fully operational even with AO switched off. To achieve this, we'll use a system with a field of a couple of mm (in the primary focus) for a foacl ratio of 1/10. The field and F# are compromized to reduce the complexity of the optics, but the field will be limited anyway by the anisoplanatism of the AO and the F# must be small for a HR imaging 3. To have al least 19 degrees of freedom (depending on the seeing can be good to correct up to ~13 Zernike terms to about 10% of the uncorrected value). 37 degrees of freedom is also possible but I'm not sure a small scope really will collect enough light to correct that many terms in real time. 4. To operate on a natural star with magnitude of at least 4 (with a 25cm telescope), using 50% of light for running the AO and 50% for registration. 5. To be easy in setting up and running. To use single +12V power supply and three cables connecting the system with the deformable mirror controller and the dedicated control laptop PC. 6. The total weight of the optical correction unit mounted to the telescope not to exceed 1kg. Mirror controller incl power supply - also 1 kg, add some extra for cables and laptop. The system is supposed to provide a diffraction-limited imaging in a rather bad seeing conditions. It will allow stable imaging of bright objects such as stars, double stars and planets. Another advantage of using such a system is that it will correct the aberrations of the telescope, improving the quality of optics, for instance making the period of mirror cooling also available for observations. In fact, correction of the static aberrations can be done on a bright star once, and then the system can be used in static correction mode. The project is technically feasible (although quite expensive in its development stage), but I still have my doubts regarding its usefulness: 1. Small field and ability to work on only bright objects will limit the usability to very bright double stars and planets. Are (amateur) astronomers really interested in this? 2. Although we plan to have it transparent, the system will limit the field of view and reduce the amount of light available for observation. The light loss will be compensated by the resolution gain, but the effect can be limited or even negligible for a small telescope. 3. The system will require an additional laptop computer to run the AO and will add to the complexity of the telescope setup. 4. It can be quite expensive, especially in the beginning, though if there is a market, the price can be very acceptable. I would appreciate any comments on the above mentioned topics. Gleb Vdovin OKO Tech PO Box 581, 2600 AN Delft, The Netherlands http://www.okotech.com There definitely is a market for this. There are people who will spend $30 000+ for an APO imaging setup (OTA, mount, camera, etc.) and twice that for an RC. There are two pieces of advice I can offer: First, keep the final cost of the system under $10 000. Second, you should try to make it work with F8 systems because most off the shelf Ritcheys are in this range. If it only woks with F10 or longer then you will exclude most of your prime market. Best of luck Ian Anderson www.customopticalsystems.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Hubble beaten by ground based adaptive optics | [email protected] | Space Shuttle | 3 | January 30th 05 09:22 PM |
Congressional Resolutions on Hubble Space Telescope | EFLASPO | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | April 1st 04 03:26 PM |
Hubble vs. ground-based adaptive optics | Mike Ruskai | Amateur Astronomy | 16 | February 19th 04 09:37 AM |
Goodrich Delivers Telescope Optics to Chilean Mountaintop (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | Astronomy Misc | 0 | December 12th 03 03:38 AM |
World's Single Largest Telescope Mirror Moves To The LBT | Ron Baalke | Astronomy Misc | 6 | November 5th 03 09:27 PM |