MAXIM Periscope ISAL Study Highlights ISAL Study beginning

MAXIM Periscope ISAL Study Highlights ISAL Study beginning 14 April 2003

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

How to implement the simple Xray Interferometer Pre FY 02 Baseline Mirror Grouping MAXIM Pathfinder • “Easy” Formation Flying (mm control) Improved Mirror Grouping Group and package Primary and Secondary Mirrors as “Periscope” Pairs • Optics in 1 s/c act like a thin lens Full MAXIM- the black hole imager • Nanometer formation flying • Primaries must point to milliarcseconds • “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. A scalable MAXIM concept.

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

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 module’s 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.

A Pair of MAXIM Periscopes 2 3 Detector 1 4 X Periscope Module Z 6

h and OPD – Key Requirements 3 4 2 h 2 OPD < x-ray/10 = 1 h 1 1

Periscope Assembly Assy. Kinematic Mounts (3) Entrance Aperture (Thermal Collimator) Shutter Mechanism (one for each aperture)

Optical Bench & Mirrors Translate Mirror #1 Mirror #2 Pitch Entrance Aperture Mirror #3 Exit Aperture Mirror #4 Roll 1 DOF Mechanism Main Optical Bench 3 DOF Mechanism Mirrors (300 mm x 200 mm x 50 mm)

Launch Configuration Layout Delta IV ø 5 m x L 14. 3 m 24 Free Flyer Satellites (4 Apertures ea. ) 1 Hub Satellite (12 Apertures) 1 Detector Satellite Ø 4. 75 m ~1000 cm 2 of Collecting Area

Total Costs for Optical Assemblies: ~< $60 M This includes savings from mass production, prototyping, flight spares, and contingency. 1000 cm 2 of effective area- full MAXIM. Still need satellite infrastructure.

The Collecting Area of Chandra for 1/10 The Cost • Chandra has 0. 5 arc sec resolution and its mirrors cost $400 M • 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

PRICE Cost Summary st 1 “Periscope-Pair” Engineering Project Management Cost Element (Summary Report Available for each cost element) Year Dollars ($03) Production Manufacturing Development Schedule Mass Total Cost Estimate $23. 9 M

PRICE Cost Estimate Summary nd Incremental Cost of 2 Unit (T 2) T 1 Total Cost (incremental cost for T 2 is $2. 24 M) T 1 + T 2

Learning Curves