Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Optical Surface Measurements For Very Large Flat Mirrors 2008
Optical Surface Measurements For Very Large Flat Mirrors 2008
J. H. Burge, P. Su, J. Yellowhair, and C. Zhao College of Optical Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA
ABSTRACT
Flat mirrors as large as 4 meters in diameter can be manufactured to high accuracy, limited by the surface metrology. We present metrology systems that are specifically optimized for measuring very large flats to high accuracy. A large aperture vibration insensitive Fizeau interferometer combined with stitching software provides high resolution surface measurements. Low order shape errors can be measured using scanning slope measurements from precision inclinometers or an autocollimator with scanning pentaprism. Keywords: Flat mirrors, optical fabrication, optical testing, large optics
1. INTRODUCTION
High quality flat mirrors that are several meters in diameter have been proposed for use as autocollimating flats for system testing and for turning mirrors in giant new telescopes. The production of such mirrors requires new techniques for optical metrology that are inherently scalable. We have developed three different measurement methods that are not limited in size and could easily accommodate flat mirrors up to 4 meters across using existing hardware. The easiest test to implement uses only electronic inclinometers or levels.1 In this test, the levels are placed on the optical surface to measure the slope. Operating in a differential mode, these measurements can achieve 0.35 rad slope accuracy per sampled point, which allows measurement accuracy of only 32 rms power for a 4-m diameter flat. Twoaxis levels and dense sampling can be used to provide higher order surface measurements. A similar slope measurement uses an autocollimator and scanning pentaprism2 to achieve measurement accuracy of 0.2 rad, which provides < 50 nm rms power for a 4-m diameter flat mirror. This system has inherent advantages over the scanning levels because it is non-contact for the optical surface and it can be performed at any orientation. The highest accuracy measurements can be performed with a vibration insensitive 1-m aperture Fizeau phase shifting interferometer.3 This system can make measurements with ~ 2 nm accuracy. The data from multiple subapertures can be combined to give full aperture data for the large flat with < 5 nm rms accuracy. The data from the subapertures can be combined using a modal maximum likelihood method4, which provides simultaneous calibration of the reference flat with the mirror being measured. Alternatively, the subaperture data can be combined using stitching, which preserves the full resolution of the measurements.5
2. SLOPE MEASUREMENTS
The surface of a flat is uniquethe ideal flat mirror has the same slope at all points. We can use this fact for measuring departures from flatness. If we measure the slope variations accurately, then we can determine the shape errors. We use two fundamental references for measuring slope variations the earths gravitational field, and the linear propagation of light. The systems that utilize these principles are discussed below.
Advanced Optical and Mechanical Technologies in Telescopes and Instrumentation, edited by Eli Atad-Ettedgui, Dietrich Lemke, Proc. of SPIE Vol. 7018, 701817, (2008) 0277-786X/08/$18 doi: 10.1117/12.790048
2.1 Measurement of slope variation using inclinometers We use inclinometers, or electronic levels to measure surface slope variations. We modified two high precision uni-axis electronic levels (Leveltronic made by Wyler AG) to rest on three polished tungsten carbide half-spheres. We use two levels, a reference B and a scanning level A. We place the reference level B onto the surface and adjust the tilt of the flat until the absolute level is within 20 arcsec or so. Then we place the scanning level A adjacent to level B and we set the zero for both levels. The scanning level is moved sequentially across the mirror and the difference between A and B is recorded. Since the levels measure in one direction, it is important to maintain their alignment. The levels and geometry are shown in Figure 1.
S:an' ifl9
le;eI
hIfspheits
Large flat mirror
Figure 1. Electronic levels can be used for measuring surface flatness. We make a set of measurements across different diameters with the uniaxial levels. We can increase the number of scans to sample higher order errors and to reduce the noise for the lower order terms. We recognize the value in using dual-axis levels and sampling the full surface. So far, we have only used the single axis levels. The layouts for the scans are shown in Figure 2.
Single axis levels, linear scans
(a)
ann;l;:el
eas ur es Z and Z
4f
A
Scan
rr or
/1
andZl
.1.andZ11.
Figure 2. Scan layout for single axis and dual axis scans.
The accuracy of the measurements with the electronic levels is quite good. A detailed analysis is presented elsewhere1 and summarized here. The dominant error in the measurements comes from noise in the levels themselves. The effect of the noise can be reduced by averaging. The slope errors for the system at the University of Arizona are listed in Table 1. Table 1. Error analysis for flat measurement with E-levels Error source Noise in the levels and calibration Drift due to environment Axes coupling (guide rail) Levels placement and setting Software fit error (residual) Gravity Total error (root sum square) Explanation Determined from repeatability experiments This is monitored and kept to 0.10 rad by re-sampling a reference point Random variations of the scanning e-level orientation couple with the absolute tilt of the flat. Random position errors couple with the mirror slope High frequency surface errors are not fully sampled Local gravity variation Value ( rad) 0.25 0.10 0.13 0.01 0.13 0.10 0.34
A least squares fit is used to determine the low order shape errors as represented by Zernike polynomials using the slope data. A Monte Carlo simulation of three line scans, as shown in Figure 2c, with 12 measurements per scan was performed assuming 0.34 rad variation per measurement (0.48 rad for a differential measurement). The results for a 2m mirror show overall accuracy of 50 nm rms overall and only 16 nm rms power. This result would scale linearly with mirror diameter, so a 4-m mirror can be measured to 32 nm rms power. Table 2. Measurement accuracy for 2-m flat mirror from Monte Carlo simulation with 0.34 rad error per measurement Aberration Power Astigmatism Zernike Z4 = 2(x2 + y2) 1 Z5 = (x2 y2) Z6 = 2xy Coma Spherical RSS Z7 = 3(x3 + xy2) 2x Z8 = 3(x2y + y3) 2y Z9 = 6(x4 + y4) 6(x2 + y2) + 1 Gradient 4x + 4y 2x 2y 2y + 2x (9x2 + 3y2 2) + 6xy 6xy + (3x2 + 9y2 2) 12x(2x2 1) + 12y(2y2 1) Measurement accuracy (nm rms) 16 29 29 11 11 8 50
The advantage of the e-level measurement is obviously the low cost. However, this test is cumbersome to perform and it cannot be used on coated optics without risking damage to the coatings. We have pursued a more accurate, optical version of this test that uses an electronic autocollimator and pentaprisms.
2.2 Measurement of slope variation using autocollimator with scanning pentaprism The shape of the flat mirror can be sampled with a scanning pentaprism2,6 system, such as that shown in Figure 3. This technique scans the beam from an autocollimator across the pupil using a pentaprism. Slope variations are measured and integrated to give the profile along the line of the measurement. Multiple scans can be made to build up a full surface. This test has been proven at the University of Arizona where a 1.6-m diameter flat mirror was measured to 12 nm rms.2 This simple system achieves such high accuracy by taking advantage of a special property of the pentaprism the light is deviated by an angle, nominally 90, which is completely insensitive to tilt of the prism itself. Thus no additional reference is required. Data from a 1.6-m flat mirror are shown in Figure 4.
A second autocollimator (UDT) maintains angular alignment of the scanning prism through an active feedback control
Mechanical supports
Figure 3. Scanning pentaprism measurement for large flat mirrors. This test achieves very high accuracy using a high performance autocollimator and utilizing the weak sensitivity of measurement errors to systematic error in the alignment. The dominant error comes from the 0.2 rad noise that arises from air motion in the lab. The effects of alignment and geometry are limited to 0.02 rad rms, as shown in Tables 3 and 4. This accuracy is achieved even though the prisms themselves and all of the static and dynamic alignment terms are allowed to be 1000 times larger than this.
0 slope data
':
-600 f
-800
-1 00O
radius (normalized)
Figure 4. Data from University of Arizona scanning pentaprism measurement of 1.6-m flat.9 Table 3. Sources of error for UA scanning pentaprism system Parameter Description Tolerance Contribution < 0.13 mrad < 0.05 mrad rms < 0.10 mrad 2 PP PP AC PP AC PP Table 4. Effect of errors on slope measurement Line of sight deviation (nrad rms) 13 7 7 5 5 18