230 likes | 419 Views
Outline. BackgroundDesignFunctional requirementsStrategyConstraintsConceptsSelectionAnalysisError budgetHardware AssemblyTesting results. . Background Information. Monolithic design is limited by:Cost: manufacturing, materialsMassLaunch vehicle fairing. Thin, segmented foil optics for future missions.
E N D
1. MIT 2.75 PMD ProjectX-Ray Optics Assembly Truss Matthew Spenko
Yanxia Sun
Craig R. Forest
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
December 12, 2001
2. Outline Background
Design
Functional requirements
Strategy
Constraints
Concepts
Selection
Analysis
Error budget
Hardware
Assembly
Testing results Error budget throught fea and analytical methodsError budget throught fea and analytical methods
3. Background Information
4. Functional Requirements Align foils ¦ to within 2 µm of ideal (single flight module)
Foils fixed into place
Lightweight flight module ($$$)
Permit x-ray entrance/exit
Endure launch (mechanical, acoustic vibrations)
Endure space (thermal cycling)
5. Detail Design Constraints
6. Concepts, Error Budget FM not shown for clarity
Preliminary error budget---not including all the details
Air bearing does not have bearings drawn inFM not shown for clarity
Preliminary error budget---not including all the details
Air bearing does not have bearings drawn in
7. Justification for Stack Error budgeting
Cost/Performance curves
Pugh charts
Time to manufacture
Casting carriages, part lead-time greater for Air Bearing
Existing bearing way not big advantage
Magnetic preload
Huge carriages
Way weighs 500lbs.
Air bearing complexity
Pulleys for counterbalance (cancel m*g of carriage)
Moment balance requires more mass, symmetry
8. Concept Highlights Ref flat specs 0.1 um flat polished, plated
Assembly idea
Ref flat specs 0.1 um flat polished, plated
Assembly idea
9. Comb Actuation Need to move combs until they touch the reference flat
Hertz contact stresses detectable
0.1µm actuation capability
No hysteresis motion
10. Flight Module
Dummy flight module
Demonstrate integrability with assembly truss
Demonstrate glue-able foils, slots
11. Error Analysis Finite Element Analysis
+
Kinematic coupling spreadsheet
+
MIT Central Machine Shop tolerances
+
MEMS manufacturing tolerances
+
Polishing tolerances
12. Hardware Assembly
13. Flexures, Microcombs
14. Force Sensors
15. Comb Damage Test Concept
Study contact process with comb and corner block
16. Damage Test Results
18. Reference Flat Contact
19. Optic Foil Alignment
Experimental setup
Autocollimator measures pitch, yaw with 0.1µrad resolution
Two tests
Accuracy
Repeatability
20. Optic Foil Alignment Accuracy Test
Same Flight Module – Different Position
Measure foil at Location 1
Move the same foil to Location 2
Measure foil at Location 2 Repeatability Test
Same Position – Different Flight Module
Measure foil at Location 1
Retract comb; remove foil, lid
Replace lid, foil; realign comb
Measure foil at Location 1
21. Optic Foil Alignment Comparison to error budget
Foil to reference flat placement accuracy
22. Future Work
New microcombs to eliminate Abbe error
Flat foil research
Flight module development
Spring comb force sensing study
Friction/deformation issues
23. Error Analysis Results
24. Sensor Calibration