NGAO System Design PhaseNGAO System Design PhaseUpdateUpdate

Peter Wizinowich, Rich Dekany, Don Gavel, Claire Max, Sean AdkinsPeter Wizinowich, Rich Dekany, Don Gavel, Claire Max, Sean Adkinsfor NGAO Team for NGAO Team

SSC MeetingSSC MeetingNovember 6, 2007November 6, 2007

2

Presentation Sequence

• Management• NSF Proposals• Science & System Requirements• System Engineering• System Design• Summary

Management ReportManagement Report

SystemDesignStarted

10/1/06

SystemDesignReview

3/31/08

now

PDR

4

Project Reports

• 4th & 5th reports submitted to Directors on 9/19 & 11/2http://www.oir.caltech.edu/twiki_oir/bin/view.cgi/Keck/NGAO/SystemDesignPhasePlanning

• Emphasis during this report period has been on:– System architecture evaluation & selection (June – Aug.)– Functional requirements (Aug. – Dec.)– Subsystem design (Sept. – Dec.)– Proposals to TSIP & ATI– Plus: completion of two performance budgets, incorporation of

additional atmospheric characterization data, & summary reports for the performance budgets & trade studies

5

System Design

Milestones

# MILESTONE DATE STATUS

1 SD SEMP Approved 10/9/06 Complete

2 SD phase contracts in place 10/27/06 Complete

3 Science Requirements Summary v1.0 Release

10/27/06 Complete

4 System Requirements Document (SRD) v1.0 Release

12/8/06 Complete

5 Performance Budgets Summary v1.0 Release

6/15/07 Complete

6 SRD v2.0 Release 5/22/07 Nearly complete

7 Trade Studies Complete 6/22/07 Complete

8 SRD v3.0 Release

9/7/07 Not started

9 System Design Manual (SDM) v1.0 Release

9/21/07 Complete

10 Technical Risk Analysis V1.0 Release

9/21/07 Complete

11 Cost Review Complete 12/7/07 Some work as part of system architecture

12 SDM v2.0 Release

2/12/08

13 System Design ReviewPackage Distributed

3/4/08

14 System Design Review 3/31/08

15 SDR Report & Project Planning Presentation at SSC meeting

4/14/08

Requirements

Performance Budgets + Trade Studies

System Architecture + Functional Requirements

Subsystem Design + Functional Requirements

Management Plan(post-SDR)

4 milestones completedsince June SSC meeting

6

Schedule & BudgetSchedule: 53% of System Design Phase work complete through Oct.

Budget: 64% of System Design Phase budget ($730k) spent through Sept.– 92% of the $798k FY07 budget, excluding $20k contingency

Plan to be reviewed to ensure deliverables complete for SDR

7

NGAO Keck AO Notes20 reports document technical progress since last SSC meeting:

All KAONs at http://www.oir.caltech.edu/twiki_oir/bin/view.cgi/Keck/NGAO/NewKAONs

KAON TitleProgram

MgmtRequire-

mentsModel

ValidationPerfor-mance

AO Trade Study (TS)

Laser TS

Oper-ations TS

Instru-ment TS

System Architecture

484 Optical Design Standards for NGAO

485 Adaptive Secondary Mirror Trade Study x

487 LOWFS Architecture Trade Study x

490 Rayleigh Rejection Trade Study x x

491 Performance Budget Summary x

492 Null-mode & Quadratic Mode Tomography Error x

493 Science Instrument Reuse Trade Study x

494 NGAO System Design Phase Report #3 x

495 Summary of NGAO Trade Studies x x x x

496MK turbulence statistics from the T6 MASS/DIMM (restricted) x

497High-contrast & companion sensitivity performance budget x

499 NGAO System Architecture definition x

500 Keck AO upgrade feasibility x

501 NGAO background & transmission budgets x

502 Keck AO Upgrade engineering costs basis x

503 Mauna Kea Ridge turbulence models x

504 Performance vs technical field of view for LOWFS x

506Split relay evaluation (packaging constraints, tip/tilt stability) x

509 Uplink compensation trade study x x

510 Preliminary technical risk evaluation x x x x

511 System Design Manual x

512 NGAO System Design Phase Report #4 x

NSF ProposalsNSF Proposals

9

NSF Proposals Submitted

• NGAO preliminary design– $2M TSIP proposal submitted on Aug. 31

– Funds ~70% of preliminary design

– Detailed schedule/budget to be determined during system design

• Deployable near-IR integral field spectrograph system design– $1.1M ATI proposal submitted on Nov. 1

– Proposed to ATI program because

• Most complex NGAO instrument, with longest lead time

• Advanced nature of key components made it suitable for ATI

– System design scheduled from May/08 to Dec/09

• Proposal writing in both cases led by Adkins with support from WMKO management, NGAO EC & science community

10

Deployable IFS: Project Organization• Adkins (co-PI) : overall architecture, systems engineering, project

management• Larkin (co-PI): IFS design, instrument scientist• Science team members: Barton (UCI), Lu (UCLA), Shapley

(Princeton/UCLA), Steidel (CIT), Treu (UCSB)

• Optical design– UCSC, UCLA

• MOAO– UCSC, WMKO

• Mechanical design– Caltech, UCLA, WMKO

• Electronics and Software– UCLA, WMKO

Project requires close liaison with NGAO PD phase!

11

Deployable IFS: Science Cases

• Extragalactic Science– Galaxy Assembly and Star Formation History

– Properties of Extremely High Redshift Galaxies

– Cluster Scale Lensing

– Stellar Populations and Kinematics in High Redshift Galaxies

– Galaxy Formation and AGNs

• Galactic Science– Young Massive Star Clusters

– Physics of Star Forming Regions

• Science cases in bold face discussed in proposal

12

Deployable IFS: Observing Features

• Entire near-IR band (J, H or K) in one exposure• Rectangular IFS FOV 1" x 3" (baseline)• Nominal 50 to 70 mas spatial scale, selected to match AO

performance and give 50% EE in each spatial sample• R ~4,000• Background limited (sky+telescope) performance goal (cooled AO

enclosure)• Close packed mode:

Image credit: UCLA Galactic Center Group

14

Deployable IFS: Instrument Concept

15

Deployable IFS: Synergy with Other Projects

Significant commonality with key elements of TMT instruments:• IRIS

– Image sampling

– Near-IR tip-tilt wavefront sensing

– Spectrograph

• IRMOS– NGAO deployable IFS is a pathfinder or “prototype” instrument

– Object selection

– MOAO

• ATI Letter of support provided by TMT for “leveraging” common areas of technical problem solving and design

Science Case & System Requirements Science Case & System Requirements

17

Keck leadership in AO science

• Keck LGS science dominated last week’s Ringberg meeting on “Astronomy with LGS AO”– 12 meaty Keck science papers– Campbell’s stunning summary talk on Keck LGS experience– Hans-Walter Rix: Congratulations!

• Ambitious ESO VLT future AO plans– “Laser guide star facility” - one whole VLT telescope with two

Ground Layer AO systems (MUSE, HAWK-I)– Relatively modest narrow-field AO system in near IR

• NGAO has unique science role

• Will maintain Keck’s world leadership!

18

Science Cases

• Recall presentations at Keck Strategic Planning Meeting

– Science case overview (Max)– Astrometry (Cameron & Lu)– High redshift galaxies (Steidel & Law)– Gravitationally lensed galaxies (Marshall & Treu)

• One result of KSPM talk New volunteers to work on NGAO science cases– Eisner, Fitzgerald, Metchev, Perrin– Many others reiterated their interest

• Reminder of astronomers who have been involved in science cases & requirements subsequent to proposal:– Ammons, Barth, Cameron, Ghez, Koo, Law, Le Mignant, Liu, Lu,

Macintosh, Marchis, Marshall, Max, McGrath, Steidel, Treu

19

NGAO is complementary to NGAO is complementary to TMT IRMSTMT IRMS

• TMT IRMS: AO multi-slit, based on MOSFIRE– Slits: 0.12” and 0.16”, Field of regard: 2 arc min

– Lower backgrounds: 10% of sky + telescope

• NGAO with multiplexed deployable IFU’s– Multi-object AO better spatial resolution (0.07”) over full

field

– Backgrounds: 30% of sky + telescope

• Pros for TMT: lower backgrounds, higher sensitivity• Pros for NGAO: higher spatial resolution, 2D information,

better wide field performance, sooner than TMT

• Pros for TMT: lower backgrounds, higher sensitivity• Pros for NGAO: higher spatial resolution, 2D information,

better wide field performance, sooner than TMT

22

Progress on defining science requirements

• Release 2 of the Science Case Requirements & System Requirements Documents are well under way

– Observatory requirements further developed– Remaining tasks identified and assigned– David Le Mignant & Liz McGrath supporting this effort

23

Science Requirements SummaryNear-IR

Requirement Imager Spectrograph Imager Spectrograph Deployable IFUl ( µm) 0.7-1.0 0.7-1.0 1.0-2.4 (+Y&z) 1.0-2.4 (+Y&z) 1.0-2.4 (+Y&z)

Field of view diameter (") ≥ 3 ≥ 2 (goal ≥ 3) ≥ 15 for X4b ≥ 4 ≥ 1 x 3Field of regard diameter (") na na na na ≥ 120

Pixel size (mas) ≤ 7 (Nyquist at R) na ≤ 13 (Nyquist at J) na ≤ 35 (2 pixels/spaxel)Minimum # of IFUs na na na na 4

IFU separation na na na na > 1 IFU in 10x10"??AO Background na na ≤ 30% of total ≤ 30% of total ≤ 30% of totalSky coverage ≥ 30% for X3 ≥ 30% for X3 ≥ 30% for X1,X3,X4b ≥ 30% for X3,X4a ≥ 30% for X2

High order WFE (nm) for ≤ 5" fov ≤ 170 ≤ 170 ≤ 170 ≤ 170 derivedTip/tilt error (mas) ≤ 15 ≤ 15 ≤ 15 for sky cover; ≤ 3 for G2 ≤ 15 derived

50% Ensquared energy (mas) na ≤ 25 na ≤ 25 ≤ 70

Companion sensitivity DI ≥ 7.5 at 0.75" for S1b na

DH ≥ 5.5 at 0.5" for S1b; DJ ≥ 8.5 at 0.1" & DJ ≥ 11 at

0.2" for G1 na naPhotometry (mag) g: ≤ 0.05 relative for na ≤ 0.05 relative for S1&G1 na na

Astrometry (mas) ≤ 1.5 relative for S1b na≤ 1.5-2 for S1b&G1; ≤ 0.1

for G2a na naPolarimetry (%) na na naPSF estimation required goal required goal PSF spectrum reqd

Differential tracking required required required required goal: 1 tip/tilt sensorAcquisition accuracy (mas or %

of instrument field) ≤ 10%≤ 10% for IFU; ≤ 0.25l/D for slit ≤ 10%

≤ 10% for IFU; ≤ 0.25l/D for slit ≤ 10% (≤ 35 relative)

Dither dist (" or % of inst field) ≤ 3"? or 65% ≤ 3"? or 65% of field ≤ 5"? or 33% ≤ 3"?, or 65% ≤ 2" or 65%Dither accuracy (mas) ≤ l/D ≤ l/D ≤ l/D ≤ l/D ≤ 70

Dither time (sec) ≤ 3 ≤ 3 ≤ 3 ≤ 3 ≤ 10Micro dither distance (mas) ≤ 0.5l/D ≤ 0.5l/D ≤ 0.5l/D ≤ 0.5l/D ≤ 35Micro dither accuracy (mas) ≤ 0.25l/D ≤ 0.25l/D ≤ 0.25l/D ≤ 0.25l/D <10

Micro dither time (sec) ≤ 3 ≤ 3 ≤ 3 ≤ 3 ≤ 3Nod reacquisition time (sec) ≤ 10? ≤ 10? ≤ 10? ≤ 10? ≤ 30?Positioning knowledge (mas) ≤ 0.1l/D ≤ 0.1l/D ≤ 0.1l/D ≤ 0.1 l/D ≤ 5Science image drift (mas/hr) ≤ 5 ≤ 5 ≤ 5 ≤ 5 ≤ 5

NGS mode required required required required single IFUAO instrument switching to vis spectro to vis imager to NIR spectro (goal: vis) to NIR imager (goal: vis) not required

AO backup switching goal: to NIR instrument goal: to NIR instrument not required not required single IFUScience Cases S1b,S2,S3,X3 X3 S1,S3,S4,G1,G2a,X1,X3,X4b S4,G1,G2b,X3,X4a G2b,X2

Visible Near-IR

System Engineering:System Engineering:System ArchitectureSystem Architecture

25

• Five architectures evaluated versus technical, cost & programmatic ranking criteria– Split relay

– Adaptive secondary

– Large relay

– Keck I upgrade

– Cascaded relay

System Architecture Selected

26

Selected System Architecture

• Tomography to measure wavefronts & overcome cone effect

• AO-corrected, IR tip-tilt stars for broad sky coverage

• Closed-loop AO for 1st relay• Open-loop AO for

deployable IFUs & 2nd relay

28

Model used to ensure Low Background Wide-field mode Narrow-field mode

Filter

Total transmission

Background

(mag. arcsec-2)

Total transmission

Background

(mag. arcsec-2)

J 55.6 % 15.89 37.5 % 15.88

H 62.4 % 13.71 44.9 % 13.70

K 62.0 % 13.64 45.5 % 13.18

L' 59.6 % 3.57 46.4 % 3.14

Ms 59.6 % 0.42 46.4 % 0.02

Predicted broadband transmission (telescope + AO) and background for the Cascaded Relay candidate architecture cooled to 259.0 K.

Transmission/background model• Detailed coating model, ~10 coating types in each science camera & WFS path• Selectable spectral resolution• KAON 501

Wide Field Background (260 K)

Total AO

Telescope

Atmosphere

Used to ensure efficacy of faint IFU K-band science case

29

Technical Risk Analysis (v1) Completed

• Risks identified & ranked. – One more iteration to be performed

– Will be tracked

# TrendConse-quence

Like-lihood Description Status Mitigation

1 4 4

Inadequate PSF calibration to support precision astrometry, photometry and companion sensitivity science.

The importance of PSF calibration and approaches to this calibration are documented in KAONs 474, 480 and 497.

1) As a result of these recommendations NGAO team members wrote a two-year PSF reconstruction proposal to the CfAO that has been funded and which will begin in Nov/07. 2) NGAO resources will also be applied to this problem during the preliminary design phase. We will consider implementation of an atmospheric profiler and experiments with the existing Keck AO system in support of PSF reconstruction tests and demonstrations.

2 4 3

Astrometry performance requirement not achieved

Error budget not adequately understood. Current understanding and recommendations summarized in KAON 480.

1) We will continue to work with the UCLA Galactic Center team and CIT proper motions team to understand the limitations imposed by the existing Keck AO system and science instrument. 2) An error budget needs to be developed during the preliminary design phase.

5

4 1

3 17 6-9 4 2,3

2 18 10-16 5

1 20 191 2 3 4 5

L

ike

liho

od

Consequences

30

Functional Requirements Management Database

Organized by SEMP WBS

Short name for easier searching

Requirements document section: easier to organize final document from database

Rational and traceability (just text field for now)

NGAO System DesignNGAO System Design

32

Design Teams

• AO architecture overall + opto-mechanical (Lead - Gavel)• AO wavefront sensors (Velur)• AO operational tools (Neyman)• Laser facility (Chin)• Controls (Johansson)• Science operations (Le Mignant)

• Process: Work scope planning sheets (21) produced for all major design tasks– Define tasks, approach, inputs, products & personnel

– Ensure agreement on scope

– Some still pending EC approval

33

AO Opto-Mechanical Design

• Field of view expanded from 120” to 180” diameter in response to sky coverage analysis– Impacts on K-mirror, 2nd layer

height, deployable IFU location

• ADC concept & location determined

• Space frame structure being evaluated for optics support

• Draft opto-mechanical ICD produced

180” sideview

36

Laser Facility Design

• System Architecture Draft Document generated.– Describes pros and cons of the laser architectures.

– Describes current laser systems & their applicability to NGAO & the Keck telescopes.

– Provides criteria for down selection process.

• From system architecture, generated initial list of requirements and considerations to discuss with laser vendors.– Some of this discussion took place at CfAO laser workshop (Nov. 2)

• 1st order subsystem block diagram completed with interfaces shown.• Further updates to Functional Requirements Document 2.0.

37

Non-Real-Time Controls Update

• Draft of initial system context block diagram produced– Still needs some work to incorporate and interconnect science operations

& instruments

– Identifies the major controls modules required to implement the NGAO system

– Will be used to guide remainder of non-RTC controls design effort

• Next steps:– Block level design of

individual control modules

– Revise the functional

requirements

3838

Real-Time Controller Block Diagrams

Data Hardware Interfaces Software Flow

39

Science Operations Design

• Draft pre-observing interfaces specification & design manual produced

• System Requirements Document updated to include science operations requirements from observer & Observatory points of view

• Working on an observation timeline document to define many aspects of the operations

40

Summary• Management

– Major milestones met• Exception: science/system requirements document releases v2 & 3

– Schedule slip over last 2-3 months• EC will be reviewing schedule & deliverables to ensure SDR is held on

schedule & within budget

• NSF funding proposals for NGAO preliminary design & deployable IFS system design submitted

• Technical:– Completed phases: performance budgets v1, trade studies & system

architecture– System architecture selected– Good progress on functional requirements & database implementation to

maintain them– Subsystem design phase has begun

Team remains committed & excited about NGAO!