MAXIM Periscope ISAL Study Highlights

1
MAXIM Periscope ISAL Study Highlights

• ISAL Study beginning 14 April 2003

2
Science Team

• Webster Cash - University of Colorado
• 303-492-4056
• Ann Shipley - University of Colorado
• 303-492-1875
• Keith Gendreau - NASA/GSFC Code 662
• 6-6188

3
How to implement the simple X-ray Interferometer
Improved Mirror Grouping
Pre FY02 Baseline Mirror Grouping
Group and package Primary and Secondary Mirrors
as Periscope Pairs

• Easy Formation Flying (microns)
• All s/c act like thin lenses- Higher Robustness
• Possibility to introduce phase control within one
  space craft- an x-ray delay line- More
  Flexibility
• Offers more optimal UV-Plane coverage- Less
  dependence on Detector Energy Resolution
• Each Module, self contained- Lower Risk.

Full MAXIM- the black hole imager

• Nanometer formation flying
• Primaries must point to milliarcseconds

A scalable MAXIM concept.
4
The Periscope Module- the subject of this ISAL
study

• The Periscope module is a convenient place to
  break out two radically different tolerance
  levels
• Nm and mas relative positioning and pointing
  within the modules
• Micron and arcsecond module to module alignment
• Some further study makes our Periscope mirror
  pairs into mirror quads
• 4 bounce optical situation required to maintain
  coarse module to module alignment

5
Goals for this Study

• How do you make these light weight mirrors so
  they are flat to better than ?/300?
• How do you hold these mirrors with actuators to
  move them by nm over microns of range? Which
  Actuators and controlling electronics? Do you
  put actuators on all the mirrors?
• How does the structure provide an environment
  suitable to maintain the mirror figure and
  stability?
• Do we need internal metrology? How to implement?
• How do we register one modules mirror surfaces
  to another modules mirror surfaces at the micron
  level?
• How to mass produce these? By how much does this
  save costs?
• What would the alignment procedures be?
• Trade Studies- three different mirror module
  sizes,..
• We need the usual IMDC cost/mass/power inputs.
  Drawings.

6
A Pair of MAXIM Periscopes
2
3
Detector
1
4
Periscope Module
7
?h and OPD Key Requirements
OPD lt lx-ray/10
8
Periscope Assembly
Assy. Kinematic Mounts (3)
Shutter Mechanism (one for each aperture)
Entrance Aperture (Thermal Collimator)
9
Optical Bench Mirrors
Translate
Translate
Entrance Aperture
Mirror 1
Mirror 2
Pitch
Mirror 3
Exit Aperture
Mirror 4
Roll
1 DOF Mechanism
Main Optical Bench
Mirrors (300mm x 200mm x 50mm)
3 DOF Mechanism
10
Launch Configuration Layout
Delta IV ø5m x L14.3m
24 Free Flyer Satellites (4 Apertures ea.) 1 Hub
Satellite (12 Apertures) 1 Detector Satellite
Ø4.75m
1000 cm2 of Collecting Area
11
Total Costs for Optical Assemblies lt 60M This
includes savings from mass production,
prototyping, flight spares, and contingency. 1000
cm2 of effective area- full MAXIM. Still need
satellite infrastructure.
12
The Collecting Area of Chandra for 1/10 The Cost

• Chandra has 0.5 arc sec resolution and its
  mirrors cost 400M
• This study has shown that it is possible to build
  a microarcsec imaging telescope with the same
  collecting area as the current Chandra for 1/10
  its cost
• The study has also shown how the engineering can
  be done to allow X-ray imaging and spectroscopy
  in formation flying

13
PRICE Cost Summary1st Periscope-Pair
Cost Element (Summary Report Available for each
cost element)
Engineering
Year Dollars (03)
Project Management
Production
Manufacturing
Development
Total Cost Estimate 23.9M
Schedule
Mass
14
PRICE Cost Estimate Summary Incremental Cost of
2nd Unit (T2)
T1
T1 T2
15
Learning Curves