fgs status report partners workshop may 2009 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
FGS Status Report Partners workshop May 2009 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
FGS Status Report Partners workshop May 2009

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 40

FGS Status Report Partners workshop May 2009 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 114 Views
  • Uploaded on

JWST-PRES-012903. FGS Status Report Partners workshop May 2009. Presentation by: TF PI – René Doyon (U de Mtl) Project Manager – Karl Saad (CSA). Presentation Overview. Achievements since Last Partner’s Workshop 2. Project risks - Top 5 risks and mitigation plan Project Issues

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

FGS Status Report Partners workshop May 2009


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
fgs status report partners workshop may 2009

JWST-PRES-012903

FGS Status ReportPartners workshopMay 2009

Presentation by:

TF PI – René Doyon (U de Mtl)

Project Manager – Karl Saad (CSA)

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide2

Presentation Overview

  • Achievements since Last Partner’s Workshop
  • 2. Project risks
  • - Top 5 risks and mitigation plan
  • Project Issues
  • Schedule status
  • - Schedule overview
  • - critical path
  • - Contingency
  • Science portion
    • TFI
    • Guider
  • 5. Conclusion/summary

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide3

Achievements since last Partner’s Workshop

  • Start of ETU integration activities
  • ETU Guider ETU – TFI Mass Dummies

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide4

Achievements since last Partner’s Workshop

  • Start of ETU integration activities (continued)
  • ETU Hardware – procurement
    • Optical Assembly harnesses from IMP received at COM DEV
    • Some transitional harnesses from NASA received

Trial fit of TFI baffles

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide5

Achievements since last Partner’s Workshop

  • 1st iteration of Cryo Pupil Alignment test
    • Encountered safety issues with the test set-up – these were corrected.
    • Results over temperature were not sufficiently accurate to definitively determine pupil shear.
    • Thermal strap stiffness identified as significant source of fixture distortion during temperature excursion to cryo.

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide6

Achievements since last Partner’s Workshop

  • Mechanisms – Fine Focus
  • Design was reviewed & changed to address negative stress margin in flexible coupling (connecting link)
    • Confirmed by testing
  • Initial Characterization complete
    • Included cryogenic testing and low level random vibration testing in both park and no-park positions.
  • Parking preload removed from design.
    • Mirror twist induced by parking preload was relatively high (>1 arc min). Mirror shall now be parked at nominal focus.

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide7

Achievements since last Partner’s Workshop

  • Flight Software Development
    • Provided ID and ACQ mode interim build (aka Build 3 interim);
    • Successful prototyping of Etalon Control characterization algorithm with EM ECE and P0 Etalon;
    • Held successful Build 3 Final Design Review, covering:
        • TFI Functionality and interface with ISIM FSW;
        • Guider fault management and updates.
    • Completed coding of Build 3 and started HW/SW integration testing
  • ETU – Electronics
    • Started Detector & ASIC sub-assembly integration & testing
      • Captured electrical baseline measurements
  • Etalon CDR
    • All RIDs(RFAs) closed.

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide8

Achievements since last Partner’s Workshop

  • PFM Activities
    • MRR #1 held January 29, 2009
      • KMs and Bench assembly
    • KMs and Bench received from LHM
      • KMs successfully proof-load tested
      • Optical bench at COM DEV

PFM KM proof loading test

PFM Optical bench at UCC for cleaning

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide9

Achievements since last Partner’s Workshop

  • PFM Activities (continued)
  • PFM Pick-Off Mirror (POM) design is unchanged from ETU POM.
    • Delivered to specification from Corning Netoptics
    • Cryo WFE test scheduled for June, 2009
  • PFM Guider TMA in performance testing:
    • PFM acceptance vibration test
      • Passed, WFE shift was less than 10nm over each field

PFM Pick-Off Mirrior

PFM Guider TMA under test

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide10

Achievements since last Partner’s Workshop

  • PFM Activities (continued)
  • Dual Filter Wheel (DW) Mechanism
    • Life Test Unit (LTU) Geared motor testing at cryo completed.
    • Wheel assembly tests successfully performed under ambient
  • Coarse Focus Mechanism – LTU
    • Assembly and integration on-going
  • PFM Detector selection
    • All testing of SCA level FGS detectors has been completed.
    • FGS is left with 4 units to meet its need of 3 detectors (2 guider & 1 TFI) plus one spare.
    • A Flight Model FPA manufacturing readiness review was at Teledyne.
    • Go ahead has been given to proceed with F016 as Detector PFM

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide11

Achievements since last Partner’s Workshop

  • Ground Support Equipment
    • HITIF (Horizontal Integration Tool Interface Frame)
      • Contract award end April and MRR held 13 May 09
    • OGSE received and post delivery checks and alignment performed

As designed HITIF concept

Removal of OGSE from its shipping container

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide12

Achievements since last Partner’s Workshop

  • Ground Support Equipment
    • FGS Electronics Simulator
      • FGSES Sim #1 and #2 delivered to ISIM cert lab
    • COM DEV cryovac facilities – procured one additional chamber for schedule risk mitigation

FGSES

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide13

Project Risks

Consequence

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide14

Project Risks - Top 5 - Mitigation

  • Flight ASIC performance vs interim ASICs
    • Risk description
      • Potential differences between flight and interim ASICs
      • Knowledge of integration techniques
      • Lack of documentation / ITAR issues / IRCD definition
    • Looking at building more robustness into FGS electronics design
    • Getting quantitative agreement on the key ASIC interfaces.
    • Monitor closely evolution of flight ASIC versus F2 ASIC / Direct support from ISIM
    • Risk timeframe: May 2009 to Mar 2010
  • Overall project schedule contingency
    • Risk Description:
      • ASIC & Detector deliveries late
      • Early into the ETU I&T phase – technical risks
    • Aggressive stands on critical path activities
    • Risk timeframe: May 2009 to Nov 2010

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide15

Project Risks - Top 5 - Mitigation

  • Integration & Testing of Detector subassembly (characterization)
    • Risk description:
      • Directly linked to flight ASIC risk above
      • Detector potential difference between ETU and Flight unit
    • use F2 ASICs to test ASIC/Detector combination to characterize system sensitivity to ASIC dependence.
    • Risk timeframe: Sep 2009 to Jan 2010
  • Detector fail to meet specifications
    • Risk description – as per title
    • Implemented more QA oversight
    • Considering additional lot
    • Support from ISIM in reviewing test data from Teledyne
    • Risk timeframe: May 2009 to Jan 2010

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide16

Project Risks - Top 5 - Mitigation

  • Flight Detector Delivery to FGS
    • Risk description
      • Deliver from Teledyne – continuous delays from Teledyne on delivery dates
    • Monitor Teledyne closely
    • Evaluating the procurement of additional lot (to mitigate low yield)
    • Risk timeframe: May 2009 to Jan 2010

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide17

Project Issues under investigation

  • SIDECAR Control Electronics
    • Problem of noise in the Detector/ASIC & SCE sub-system
    • Difficulties with ASIC integration
    • Recent breakthroughs in noise reduction:
      • noise significantly reduced in data analysis by including the reference pixels;
      • stiffening up SCE Vref and VDDA supplies; and
      • ASIC Bias tuning by Teledyne
  • Dual Wheel – bearing
    • Torque levels at cryo are not consistent
    • Analysis and test results indicate a retainer needs to be redesign

Dual Wheel

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide18

Project Issues under investigation

  • PFM Guider TMA has been through two unsuccessful cryo WFE test cycles:
    • 1) Unacceptable change in WFE in first cryo run due to settling.
    • 2)Full test as per procedure was not completed due to GSE issue
      • Translation stage motor (bearing) failure
      • However, preliminary WFE data indicated that the change was much less than test 1
    • Plan is to fix the translation stage and retest.

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide19

Project Schedule

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide20

Project Schedule – Critical Path & Contingency

  • For ETU: (January 12, 2010)
  • Detector Assembly
  • FFM – 1 week from critical path
  • EU and repeat of the Cryo Pupil Alignment – 2 weeks from critical path
  • For PFM (September 29, 2010)
  • No overlap of ETU & PFM activities at test facilities
  • DW – 5 weeks from critical path
  • Flat Field and Wave Cal Optics – 6 week from critical path

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide21

Project Schedule – Critical Path & Contingency

  • Schedule Contingency
    • ETU
      • ETU PSR date: 12 Jan 2010
      • 5 week (PSR + Shipment* – 26 Feb 2010 NASA Need date)
    • PFM
      • PFM PSR date: 29 Sep 2010
      • 6 weeks (PSR + Shipment* – 30 Nov 2010 NASA Need date)
      • (assuming 7 days delivery delay)

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide22

Science Portion

Science

Guider & TFI

By Rene Doyon

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

fpa selection status
FPA selection status
  • One device (F16) was chosen as flight spare.
  • Three remaining detector candidates: F21, F22 & F27
  • F22 has a lot of hot pixels (high dark current) but may be suitable for the guider. Evaluation is underway.
  • F27 is our best detector (good QE, low read noise & dark current). Would be the natural choice for TFI but its very good blue response makes it very attractive for the guider too.

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

predicted flight coating performance
Predicted Flight coating performance

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

predicted transmittance
Predicted Transmittance
  • 25

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

maximum wavelength shift vs phase
Maximum Wavelength Shift vs Phase

Requirement

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

performance at 1 50 m
Performance at 1.50 µm

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

barr filter prototypes
BARR Filter prototypes
  • 4 prototype filters have been successfully manufactured: F157, F226, F245, F481)
  • The roll-off (slope) within spec: <0.025 for F481,

< 0.02 for others

  • Peak transmission within spec: Absolute T≥85% within 80% of the bandwidth at the 90% relative to peak points.
  • Out-of-band blocking: : well below 10-4
  • Ready to proceed to the flight production

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

barr filter prototype short
BARR Filter prototype – short λ

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

barr filter long
Barr filter – long λ

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

out of band blocking 0 01
Out-of-band Blocking < 0.01%

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

psf movie 1 55 1 75 m obtained with a short wavelength etalon prototype
PSF movie (1.55-1.75m) obtained with a short wavelength etalon prototype

FT 

ghost

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

contrast curve before and after speckle suppression
Contrast curve before and after speckle suppression

Speckle noise is reduced by more than a factor 10. Still preliminary but very encouraging results.

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

laboratory psf subtraction performance
Laboratory PSF subtraction performance

Raw PSF

After subtraction

Subtraction from two adjacent wavelengths

fake Companion 10000 fainter

added

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

slide35

Slope is: 0.012 mas / nm

NEA = 3.02 + (WFE-105)*0.012

For WFE = 225 nm, NEA = 4.5 mas

Guider: NEA changes with OTE WFE

Nominal (5x5 px) centroiding precision and read noise.

By John Hutchings

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

guider nea vs signal from lab data

Model

Guider:NEA vs signal from lab data

By John Hutchings

Heavy line is model for similar centroid window and noise, flight centroid algorithm

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

guider cnl measured from lab data systematic centroid offsets from pixel sampled data

Signal 900e, 1.5 microns Signal 5000e, 3.2 microns

Guider: CNL measured from lab dataSystematic centroid offsets from pixel-sampled data

X-direction cuts through different places within detector pixel

This will be corrected for in reporting guider centroids

2 mas

Verification of modelled performance, plus pixel-to-pixel non-uniformities, ongoing

By John Hutchings

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

guider signal depends on the detector selected
Guider signal depends on the detector selected

Guide star signal mostly at short wavelengths

Estimates for the presently-considered PFM and flight detectors

By John Hutchings

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

guiding on primary segment images during primary mirror alignment

Image with 8x8 and 16x16

centroid boxes superposed

~15 mag

Guiding on primary segment images during primary mirror alignment

These are results for PSFs from individual primary mirror segments in the early stages of focus and alignment.

Little difference between G0 and M5 guide star types.

NEA 8-20 mas required for this stage of the process.

Will require an isolated guide star of 15 mag or brighter. Some images will be very non-circular.

By John Hutchings

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009

conclusion
Conclusion

Main challenges

  • ASIC-Detector integration
  • Detector Delivery to FGS
  • ASIC delivery to FGS
  • Teledyne cost overruns
  • Mechanism – Dual Wheel bearing issues
  • Overall schedule contingency
  • The project is in ETU phase, having started subassembly testing
    • This is the phase under which we will encounter most of our technical risks
    • Aggressive risk and scope management will be key for project success.
  • The way forward will necessitate mutual support between FGS and NASA on the ASIC and detector front – which is occurring already

Partners workshop Ottawa 19 May 2009