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 X-ray Interferometer

How to implement the simple X-ray Interferometer

MAXIM Pathfinder•“Easy” Formation Flying (mm control)

•Optics in 1 s/c act like a thin lens

Full MAXIM- the black hole imager

•Nanometer formation flying

•Primaries must point to milliarcseconds

Pre FY02 Baseline Mirror Grouping Improved Mirror GroupingGroup 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.

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.

6

A Pair of MAXIM Periscopes

Detector

Periscope Module

X

Z

1

23

4

h and OPD – Key Requirements

h2 h1 1

23

4

= 1

mhhh μ112 ≤−=

)sin()tan( mmh ≈≥

OPD < x-ray/10

Periscope Assembly

Entrance Aperture(Thermal Collimator)

Shutter Mechanism(one for each aperture)

Assy. Kinematic Mounts (3)

Optical Bench & Mirrors

Pitch

Roll

Translate

Translate

Mirror #1Mirror #2

Mirror #3

Mirror #4

3 DOF Mechanism

1 DOF Mechanism

Main Optical BenchMirrors(300mm x 200mm x 50mm)

EntranceAperture

ExitAperture

Launch Configuration LayoutDelta 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

Total Costs for Optical Assemblies: ~< $60M

This includes savings from mass production, prototyping, flight spares, and contingency.

1000 cm2 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 $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

PRICE Cost Summary1st “Periscope-Pair”

Engineering

Manufacturing

Cost Element(Summary ReportAvailable for each

cost element)

Year Dollars($03)

Total Cost Estimate$23.9M

Production

Development

Schedule

Project Management

Mass

PRICE Cost Estimate Summary Incremental Cost of 2nd Unit (T2)

T1 T1 + T2

Total Cost(incremental cost for T2 is $2.24M)

Learning Curves

Aerospace 85%Complex machine tools 75-85%Electronics manufacturing 90-95%Machining or punch press 90-95%Repetitive electrical operations 75-85%Repetitive welding operations 90%Raw materials 93-96%Purchased parts 85-88%

NASA Cost Estimating Handbook (April 2002)Section 7.6 Learning Curves

Rules of Thumb

Learning Curve Next Unit Production Cost

$0

$500,000

$1,000,000

$1,500,000

$2,000,000

$2,500,000

$3,000,000

$3,500,000

$4,000,000

1 713 19 25 31 37 43 49 55

Production Unit

MAXIM PRICE H

90% Learning Curve

85% Learning Curve

75% Learning Curve

Learning Curve Cummulative Production Costs

$0

$20,000,000

$40,000,000

$60,000,000

$80,000,000

$100,000,000

$120,000,000

1 713 19 25 31 37 43 49 55

Production Units

MAXIM PRICE H

90% Learning Curve

85% Learning Curve

75% Learning Curve