Download W Unit Opto-Mechanical Acceptance Test Specifications

FLAO_03 (CAN: 687f002e)
W Unit Opto-Mechanical Acceptance Test
Specifications
A.Tozzi, E.Pinna, S.Esposito
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
Contents
Slide#
1. Cooling Line test
2. Electronic boxes test:
•
•
•
Box39, box47, Motor box functional test
Auto Power Off
Thermal test
3. WFS board internal reference source & Pupil images
optical configuration
4. W unit hardware performance test:
•
•
Main optics (Tip Tilt mirror, Pyramid, Camera Lens)
Secondary optics (Filter Wheel #1 and #2, pupil re-rotator, ADC)
5. Translation stages test:
•
•
•
Stage limit switches
Stage positioning accuracy
WFS avaible FoV
6. Flexure unit test
7. W unit sensor/acquisition CCDs test
8. Reference star acquisition sequence
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
Acceptance test report docs are
W#1: 687s001, W#2: 687s002
2
1 – cooling line
Preliminary test with air *.
Test condition: compressed air at 10 Atm:
Test result: value stable for 12 hours.
Operative glycol cooling system.
Test condition: off-axis system not attached. On axis cooling
plates attached.
Test result: flow rate of 3 liter/minute
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
* Test realized before acceptance test
3
Ref: p.9 FLAO 03 doc
2 – Electronic box test
Box39, box47, Motor box functional step/test:
• main 110Vacis powered on by telescope control
• System rele operation: ADC, Filter Wheels,
Pupil ReRotator, Fans, CCDs, XYZ stages,
• Filter Wheels correct filter selection and homing
• ADC motor moves properly and homing,
• TT signal generator working,
• WFS CCD is responding and configurable,
• Technical CCD is responding and configurable,
• BCU39 computation working for different binning modes,
• Internal Reference Source is working,
• Power on/off of the three translation stages, limit switches work.
Auto Power Off:
Test condition: cooling line is stopped, W unit working.
Test result: W unit automatically switches off when temp. threshold is reached
Thermal test:
Test condition: W unit is working for 4 hours, cooling line ΔT=-2.5°C
Test result: 1) W unit external surfaces uniformity <1°C.
2) Internal box temperature less then 50°C
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
4
Ref: p.9-11 FLAO 03 doc
3 – WFS light source &
Pupil images optical configuration
f/number test *:
Test condition: W unit working, internal ref. source on, auxiliary CCD is used
Test result: f/# = 14.5 +/- 0.15
Pupil geometry test:
Test condition: W unit working, internal ref. source on
Test result:
1) pupil diameter: 31.0 +/- 0.1 pixel
2) pupil center distance: 36.0 +/- 0.1 pixel
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
* Test realized before acceptance test
5
Ref: p.11-12 FLAO 03 doc
4 – W Unit hardware performance test
Tip Tilt test *:
Test condition: W unit working, auxiliary CCD on PSF f/45
Test result: amplitude vs freq. (50-1000 Hz) is measured
Pyramid test *:
Scratch vertex Pyr1 <10µm, scratch edges <5µm, angles error <15”
Camera lens test:
Test result: pupil shift of 4 pix in X,Y directions. Accuracy of 0.1 pix
Main optics
Secondary optics
Filter wheel #1 test *:
Test result: PSF displacement < 47mas
Filter wheel #2 test *:
Test result: Non critical (PSF position repeatability < 47mas)
Pupil Rerotator test:
Test result: 1) PSF displ. <9µm (5mas), PUP displ. <0.1pix @ 1.25° RR (10minutes)
2) PSF displ. <900µm (500mas), PUP displ. <+/-2 pix @ 0-360° RR
ADC test *:
Test condition: W unit working, ADC works for Z=(0°,70°), CCD47 used
Test result: 1) PSF FWHM matches the DL configuration
2) PSF baricenter displ. < 5 mas
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
* Test realized before acceptance test
6
Ref: p.12-15 FLAO 03 doc
5 – Translation stage test
Stage positioning:
Test condition: W unit working, TT loss = ±1/15 full range, ext. gauge
Test result: 1) after homing the X,Y accuracy has to be < ±23.4µm (39mas)
2) after homing Z accuracy has to be <100µm
Stages range (FoV):
Test condition: W unit working
Test result:
1) FoV center measured with respect the AGW within 1 mm
2) FoV >= [3.2, 2.3 arcmin]
3) FoV center coord. = [0.55, 0.15 arcmin]
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
7
Ref: p.15-16 FLAO 03 doc
6 – Flexure unit test
PSF, PUP displacement *:
Test condition: AGW on telescope simulator (AIP) / Solar tower, external
reference source working.
Test result: 1) PSF displ. <9µm (5mas), PUP displ. <0.1pix @ 1.25° RR (10min)
2) PSF displ. <2”, PUP displ. <+/-2 pix
@ 0-360°
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
* Test realized before acceptance test
8
Ref: p.17-19 FLAO 03 doc
7 – W unit sensor CCDs test
W sensor CCD test:
Test condition: W unit working, CCD39 covered
Test result:
Pixel rate
[Kpix/s]
Baseline
RON [e-]
Goal RON
[e-]
2500
10.8
8.4
890
8.0
5.8
400
5.0
4.5
150
3.5
3.5
W technical viewer CCD test:
Test condition: W unit working, CCD47 covered
Test result:
Pixel rate
Baseline
Goal RON
[Kpix/s]
RON [e-]
[e-]
2500
45
8.4
250
45
5.8
acc.test W#1: 687s001
acc.test W#2: 687s002
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
9
Ref: p.19-20 FLAO 03 doc
8 – Ref. star acquisition sequence
Acquisition sequence:
Test condition: W unit working, CCD47 operating
Test steps/result: 1) reference star is placed out from the CCD center
2) Automatic procedure is started
3) Star is centered with residual error < ±23.4µm (±39 mas)
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
10
Ref: p.20 FLAO 03 doc
conclusions
W Unit Acceptance test specifications:
In FLAO 03 (CAN 687f002e) are resumed specs for:
•
•
•
Optical setup
Mechanical setup
Electronic setup
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
11
Questions1
Questions by R. Arsenault (26 March 09):
.
Q1) Any servicing on the electronics appears cumbersome to carry out.
A) The servicing seems not to be simple. But take into account that the electronic boxes (Box39, box47)
can be removed from the AGW structure and you can test them only attaching 110 Vac and RJ45
Ethernet on a desk. For the Box47 you need a spare connection cable, too. Not only: but you can
remove the external shell (13 screws) and the electronics component can be checked during
operation on a normal desk.
The problem is related to an ancient decision: to have commercial components and to install
them into the AGW structure. It may helps telling you that, for example, I have substituted the BCU39
in less one hour having the system completely assembled…
Q2) Is a US 110 V 60 Hz being simulated in Arcetri for tests?
A) for the AGWs we have used or a little 220 to 110 transformer (50Hz) or the 110 Vac 60Hz Solar tower
supplies (The same used for the LBT672).
Q3) Differences between W1 and W2 (p10 steps C1 and C2) P10 section 4.1: steps 2, 3,4 ; is anything
being measured ? what ? Or do these tests aims simply at testing the rotation/movement of the
devices when commanded by soft.
A) Yes. In this phase of the acceptance test we looked at the functionality of the different electronics
devices and nothing else.
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
12
Questions2
Q4) For most tests listed in this section, the actual measured parameter is not always clear, and against
what will the measured value be compared. It is not very clear that after conducting all these
steps that the validation of the electronics is assured.
A)
The tests list you find in section 4.1 is a list of the items present in the W unit. The idea is to check
at their functionality. Perhaps a matrix with device/tests would be useful (We’ll prepare it).
Q5) P11 sectoin 4.2; step 1. Can the cooling fluid flow be adjusted on the telescope to insure “optimal
value for the operating conditions”
A)
Yes, you can. The only thing that is really important is the flow rate in the On axis unit, that it
means to have the correct differential pressure value between the cooling Inlet and outlet. We
have some spilling valves into the short cooling lines to adjust the single impedence.
Q6) P12 section 7: step 1 second paragraph; this alignment is provided by the tilt stage ? please confirm.
A)
Yes. The TT is used to refine the PSF position. Not only in this situation.
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
13
Questions3
Q7) p.14: 2 pyramids are used why? To increase deflection angle of the 4 pupils ?
Mainly for two reasons:
1) with two pyramids you can polish them having bigger angle values (30 deg instead of 2 deg in the single
one). This difference helps us to guarantees a smaller scratched vertex/edge and so to have a less lost light
value.
2) with two pyramids you can correct the chromatic behaviour of the single one expecially when the incoming
one is 30 deg. (see SPIE article: A. Tozzi, P.Stefanini, E. Pinna, S.Esposito,”The Double Pyramid wavefront
sensor for LBT”, Proc. of SPIE Vol. 7015, 701558, (2008)).
Q8) p.16 section 8.1; requirements for stages are clear but test procedure not defined.
A) Perhaps it is not clear. At point 1 we say that after the homing command we give to the stages, using the
GUI, a position command. After this we measure, using an external gauge (in case DIGITO12 of Mahr Inc.),
the accuracy of the position repeating the procedure many times, five normally. (see 687s001 or 687s002).
Q9) p.21 section 13. I believe the duration quoted in this chapter for individual tests but any problem, issues will
delay and they will be numerous. An estimation is 2 wks for these tests appears more reasonable.
A) It may be! For the first acceptance test we scheduled approximately 2 weeks, but there are to points to
consider:
1) some of the test presented in this doc have done “offline”, before the acceptance test, writing a report. See
ADC, RR, Filter Wheel, Tip Tilt.
2) So doing in the last W#2 acceptance test (march 2009) we have really scheduled only one week (from
Monday to Friday) and we have done all the test easily. We have cooled the whole AGW using a fridge
truck, too (see 687s002).
Thank you for your questions and comments. We’ll insert your suggestions in the following release of the document
FLAO system external review, Florence, 30/31 March 2009
14