1 / 25

An X-ray Interferometry Technology Roadmap

An X-ray Interferometry Technology Roadmap. Keith Gendreau NASA/GSFC Webster Cash U. Colorado. MAXIM Requirements Flowdown. SEU Science Objective. MAXIM Approach. Measurement Requirement. Key Technologies. Angular Resolution: 0.3 m as Q rs ~ 2M 8 /D - 6M 8 /D

justis
Télécharger la présentation

An X-ray Interferometry Technology Roadmap

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An X-ray Interferometry Technology Roadmap Keith Gendreau NASA/GSFC Webster Cash U. Colorado

  2. MAXIM Requirements Flowdown SEU Science Objective MAXIM Approach Measurement Requirement Key Technologies • Angular Resolution: 0.3 mas • Qrs~ 2M8/D - 6M8/D • Time Resolution ~ 1 hour • 2pRs/c~10 hours • Bandpass: 0.1-10 keV • K-lines from Carbon to Iron • E/dE ~50 • ASCA, Chandra, and XMM obs • Area >1000 cm2 • ~10,000 Photons/frame • (~10 Photons/pixel/frame) • Diffraction limited optics • >l/100 Flat • long and skinny • Thermal /Mechanical Stability • CTE ~< 10-7/K • Precision Formation Flying • X-ray CCDs • Larger Arrays of ~< 10 micron pixels • Fast Readout (msec) • ~0.1 mas Line-of-Sight alignment knowledge. • 100,000 finer than HST Make a “movie” of a black hole, its accretion disk, and its jets. Understand the ultimate endpoint of matter. To explore the ultimate limits of gravity and energy in the universe. Map doppler and gravitational redshifts of important lines in the vicinity of a black hole.

  3. Basic MAXIM Design Baseline Fringes Form Here • Each Channel Consists of 2 flats • Primary mirrors determine baseline • Secondary mirrors combine channels at detector. To implement this basic design, you choose how to group the mirrors.

  4. Original MAXIM Implementations MAXIM Pathfinder • “Easy” Formation Flying • Optics in 1 s/c act like a thin lens Full MAXIM- the black hole imager • Nanometer formation flying • Primaries must point to milliarcseconds

  5. Improved MAXIM Implementation 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 • Possibility for more optimal UV-Plane coverage- Less dependence on Detector Energy Resolution • Each Module, self contained- Lower Risk.

  6. An Alternate MAXIM Approach: Normal incidence, multilayer coated, aspheric mirrors • Optics demonstrated today with 1-2 Angstrom figure • Multilayer Coatings yield narrow bandpass images in the 19-34 Angstrom range • Could be useful as elements of the prime interferometer or for alignment • Offer focusing and magnification to design • May require tighter individual element alignments and stiffer structures.

  7. Technologies: Status, Metrics, Mutual Needs

  8. Technical Components: Mirror Modules • Grazing Incidence Mirrors • Grazing Incidence loosens our surface quality and figure requirements by 1/sinq • Flatness > l/100 • “Simple” shapes like spheres and flats can be made perfect enough • At grazing angles, mirrors that are diffraction limited at UV are also diffraction limited at X-ray wavelengths • Long and Skinny • Bundled in Pairs to act as “Thin Lens” • Thermal/mechanical Stability appropriate to > l/100.

  9. What would one of these modules look like? msin(g) msin(g) m m/3 + msin(g) 3/2m+d 2(w+gap)+msin(g) By 2(w+gap)+msin(g)+m/3+actuator+encoder ASSUME: w+gap~5 cm Encoder+encoder~5cm Sin(g)~1/30 -->(10cm+m/30)x(15cm+m/3+m/30) -->m=30cm-> 13cmx26cm m/6 Gap~msin(g) Pitch Control

  10. Technical Components: Arrays of Optics • Baselines of > 100 m required for angular resolution. • Formation flying a must for distance >~20 m. • Miniaturization of ALL satellite subsystems to ease access to space. • S/C Control to 10 mm- using “periscope” configuration (metrology to better than 1 mm). • A system spanning from metrology to propulsion • Individual optic modules are thin lenses with HUGE fields of view

  11. Technical Components: The detector • In Silicon, the minimum X-ray event size is ~1 mm • Large CCD arrays possible with fast readout of small regions. • Pixel size determines the focal length of the interferometer F~s/qres • 10 mm pixels -> Focal lengths of 100s to 1000s of km. • Formation Flying Necessary • Huge Depth of focus loosens longitudinal control (meters) • Large array sizes loosen lateral control (inches). • High angular resolution requirement to resolve a black hole: The Line-Of-Sight Requirement.

  12. Technical Components: Line-of-Sight • We must know where this telescope points to 10s-100s of nanoarcseconds • Required for ALL microarcsecond imagers • The individual components need an ACS system good to only arcseconds (they are thin lenses) • We only ask for relative stability of the LOS- not absolute astrometry • This is the largest technical hurdle for MAXIM- particularly as the formation flying tolerance has been increased to microns

  13. Using a “Super Startracker” to image reference stars and a laser beacon. Super Star Tracker Sees both Reference stars and the beacon of the other space craft. It should be able to track relative drift between the reference and the beacon to 0.1 microarcseconds. • Both the optics spacecraft and the detector spacecraft can rotate to arcseconds- they are “thin lenses” • Imaging problems occur when one of these translates off the line of sight • We need to KNOW dx/F to 0.1 microarcseconds. • AND We need to know a reference direction to the same level • The CONTROL of the Line-of-Sight is driven by the detector size. o dX Beacon F d

  14. Options to Determine Line-Of-Sight • All options require beacons and beacon trackers to know where one s/c is relative to another. • OPTION 1: Track on guide stars • Use a good wavelength (radio, optical, x-ray) • Use a good telescope or an interferometer • OPTION 2: Use an inertial reference • Use a VERY good gyroscope or accelerometer • GP-B

  15. Summary of Key Technical Challenges • The mirrors and their associated thermal control are not a tremendous leap away. • “Periscope” implementation loosens formation flying tolerance from nm to mm. This makes formation flying our second most challenging requirement. • Determination of the line-of-sight alignment of multiple spacecraft with our target is the most serious challenge- and MAXIM is not alone with this.

  16. Using Stars as a Stable Reference • A diffraction limited telescope will have a PSF ~ l/D • If you get N photons, you can centroid a position to l/D / N1/2 • Nearby stars have mas and mas structure • Stars “move” so you need VERY accurate Gimbals • Parallax (stars @500 pc can move up to 40 mas in a day) • Aberration of Light (as big as 40 mas in a minute) • Stellar orbits, wobble due to planets • Other effects…

  17. An Optical Star Tracker • A “reasonable” size telescope (<1m diam.) @ optical wavelengths will require 1012 photons to centroid to 0.1 mas. • Practical limits on centroiding (1/1000) will need large F numbers • Lack of bright stars requires complicated gimbals to find guide stars • HST would barely squeak by with 15th mag stars

  18. An 100 mas X-ray Star Tracker • A 1 m diffraction limited X-ray telescope (probably an interferometer) would need only 106 photons to centroid to 0.1 mas • A 1000 cm2 telescope would get ~ 100 photons/sec from reasonable targets. • 104 second integration times needed to get enough photons • This is too big…. And even then, there are not that many targets

  19. An 10 mas X-ray Star Tracker • A 10 m baseline X-ray interferometer would need only 104 photons to centroid to 0.1 mas • A 1000 cm2 telescope would get ~ 100 photons/sec from reasonable targets. • 100 second integration times • This is too big….possibly… • And even then, there are not that many targets

  20. An Optical Interferometer • Eg. SIM • Metrology at picometers demonstrated in lab • OPD control to nanometers • Expensive?

  21. Local Inertial References • Superconducting Gyroscopes • Eg. GP-B Gyros will have drift < 1/3 mas /day • Superconducting Accelerometers • Eg. UMD accelerometer sensitive to 10-15 m/s2 • Kilometric Optical Gyroscope • Eg. Explored for “Starlight”- a BIG laser ring gyroscope • Atomic Interferometer Gyroscopes • Like a LRG, but with MUCH smaller wavelengths • Laboratory models ~10 mas/sec drifts • ESA proposed “Hyper” mission

  22. Superconducting Gyroscopes • Capitalize on GP-B technology • Of all our options, this one has had a CDR • Improve with better squids • Readout is white noise limited • Improve by requiring only hours-days of stability at a time • Make the rotor have a larger moment- easier to read, but less stable over long times • Use NGST/ConX Cryocoolers to replace cryogen • Get rid of “Lead bags” • Make lighter • No need to find stars (no Gimbals)

  23. Superconducting Accelerometers • 10-15m/s2 sensitivity exist now • Need integrators • Need higher sensitivity, unless used with other things

  24. Kilometric Optical Gyroscopes • A Laser-Ring-Gyroscope with BIG area/perimeter ratio • Resolution ~ l/(area/perimeter) • Use area bounded within space between multiple spacecraft • Proposed for Starlight- but rejected in the end • “cost” and “technical” reasons

  25. Atomic Interferometer Gyroscopes • Same principle as a LRG, but use matter waves to make l many orders of magnitude smaller • Benchtop demonstrations in lab are as good as best LRGs (10 mas/sec)- but should be much better • ESA proposed mission “Hyper” based on these to do GR physics.

More Related