Claire Max UC Santa Cruz January 24, 2013

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Multistage Sampling.
Advertisements

Application of adaptive optics to Free-Space Optical communications
© 2008 Pearson Addison Wesley. All rights reserved Chapter Seven Costs.
Chapter 1 The Study of Body Function Image PowerPoint
1 Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Appendix 01.
STATISTICS POINT ESTIMATION Professor Ke-Sheng Cheng Department of Bioenvironmental Systems Engineering National Taiwan University.
1. Introduction.
UNITED NATIONS Shipment Details Report – January 2006.
Today • Diffraction from periodic transparencies: gratings
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
FACTORING ax2 + bx + c Think “unfoil” Work down, Show all steps.
Year 6 mental test 10 second questions
Lecture 2 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE: AN INTRODUCTION
Environmental Remote Sensing GEOG 2021
5.1 si31_2001 SI31 Advanced Computer Graphics AGR Lecture 5 A Simple Reflection Model.
Chapter 7 Sampling and Sampling Distributions
1 00/XXXX © Crown copyright Carol Roadnight, Peter Clark Met Office, JCMM Halliwell Representing convection in convective scale NWP models : An idealised.
1 Photometric Stereo Reconstruction Dr. Maria E. Angelopoulou.
ABC Technology Project
EE369 POWER SYSTEM ANALYSIS
VOORBLAD.
Direct-Current Circuits
Microwave Engineering
Factor P 16 8(8-5ab) 4(d² + 4) 3rs(2r – s) 15cd(1 + 2cd) 8(4a² + 3b²)
Introduction Our daily lives often involve a great deal of data, or numbers in context. It is important to understand how data is found, what it means,
Quantitative Analysis (Statistics Week 8)
#1UNIT C Describes a material which allows light to pass through easily.
© 2012 National Heart Foundation of Australia. Slide 2.
Understanding Generalist Practice, 5e, Kirst-Ashman/Hull
25 seconds left…...
1 Using one or more of your senses to gather information.
Fisica Generale - Alan Giambattista, Betty McCarty Richardson Copyright © 2008 – The McGraw-Hill Companies s.r.l. 1 Chapter 23: Reflection and Refraction.
Evaluation of precision and accuracy of a measurement
1 Random Sampling - Random Samples. 2 Why do we need Random Samples? Many business applications -We will have a random variable X such that the probability.
©Brooks/Cole, 2001 Chapter 12 Derived Types-- Enumerated, Structure and Union.
Intracellular Compartments and Transport
PSSA Preparation.
Chapter 11: The t Test for Two Related Samples
Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Pearson Addison-Wesley Java Software Solutions Foundations of Program Design Sixth Edition by Lewis.
Essential Cell Biology
Fisica Generale - Alan Giambattista, Betty McCarty Richardson Copyright © 2008 – The McGraw-Hill Companies s.r.l. 1 Chapter 25: Interference and Diffraction.
Simple Linear Regression Analysis
Multiple Regression and Model Building
Adaptive Optics1 John O’Byrne School of Physics University of Sydney.
Page 1 Lecture 12 Part 1: Laser Guide Stars, continued Part 2: Control Systems Intro Claire Max Astro 289, UC Santa Cruz February 14, 2013.
An Introduction to Adaptive Optics Presented by Julian C. Christou Gemini Observatory.
Adaptive Optics in the VLT and ELT era
Page 1 AO in AO A daptive O ptics in A stronomical O bservations Diana R. Constantin ASTRONOMICAL INSTITUTE OF THE ROMANIAN ACADEMY.
Telescopes & recent observational techniques ASTR 3010 Lecture 4 Chapters 3 & 6.
Adaptive Optics1 John O’Byrne School of Physics University of Sydney.
“Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star”: An Introduction to Adaptive Optics Mt. Hamilton Visitor’s Night July 28, 2001.
Viewing the Universe through distorted lenses: Adaptive optics in astronomy Steven Beckwith Space Telescope Science Institute & JHU.
Page 1 Adaptive Optics in the VLT and ELT era François Wildi Observatoire de Genève Credit for most slides : Claire Max (UC Santa Cruz) Optics for AO.
SITE PARAMETERS RELEVANT FOR HIGH RESOLUTION IMAGING Marc Sarazin European Southern Observatory.
Behind the Buzzwords The basic physics of adaptive optics Keck Observatory OA Meeting 29 January 2004 James W. Beletic.
Atmospheric Turbulence: r 0,  0,  0 François Wildi Observatoire de Genève Credit for most slides : Claire Max (UC Santa Cruz) Adaptive Optics in the.
Page 1 Adaptive Optics in the VLT and ELT era Wavefront sensors, correctors François Wildi Observatoire de Genève.
Part 2: Phase structure function, spatial coherence and r 0.
Adaptive Optics in the VLT and ELT era Optics for AO
Parameters characterizing the Atmospheric Turbulence: r0, 0, 0
Innovations Foresight Astronomical Seeing The Astro-Imaging Channel Dr. Gaston Baudat Innovations Foresight, LLC 1(c) Innovations Foresight Dr.
Characterizing the Atmospheric Turbulence & Systems engineering François Wildi Observatoire de Genève Credit for most slides : Claire Max (UC Santa Cruz)
Page 1 Adaptive Optics in the VLT and ELT era François Wildi Observatoire de Genève Credit for most slides : Claire Max (UC Santa Cruz) Basics of AO.
Page 1 Propagation of Light Through Atmospheric Turbulence Lecture 5, ASTR 289 Claire Max UC Santa Cruz January 26, 2016.
Chapter 35-Diffraction Chapter 35 opener. Parallel coherent light from a laser, which acts as nearly a point source, illuminates these shears. Instead.
Lecture 14 AO System Optimization
Presentation transcript:

Claire Max UC Santa Cruz January 24, 2013 Propagation of Light Through Atmospheric Turbulence Lecture 6, ASTR 289 Claire Max UC Santa Cruz January 24, 2013

What is typical timescale for flow across distance r0 ? Note: previous version had math errors Time for wind to carry frozen turbulence over a subaperture of size r0 (Taylor’s frozen flow hypothesis): τ0 ~ r0 / V Typical values at a good site, for V = 20 m/sec: Wavelength (μm) r0 τ0 = r0 / V f0 = 1/τ0 = V / r0 0.5 10 cm 5 msec 200 Hz 2 53 cm 27 msec 37 Hz 10 3.6 meters 180 msec 5.6 Hz

Review of atmospheric parameters that are key to AO performance r0 (“Fried parameter”) Sets number of degrees of freedom of AO system τ0 (or “Greenwood Frequency” fG ~ 1 / τ0 ) τ0 ~ r0 / V where Sets timescale needed for AO correction θ0 (isoplanatic angle) Angle for which AO correction applies

What is “residual wavefront error” ? Science Instrument AO System Telescope Very distorted wavefront Less distorted wavefront (but still not perfect)

Credit: James Lloyd, Cornell Univ. Shape of Deformable Mirror Incident wavefront Corrected wavefront Image of point source Image of point source Credit: James Lloyd, Cornell Univ.

How to calculate residual wavefront error Optical path difference = Δz where k Δz is the phase change due to turbulence Phase variance is σ2 = <(k Δz)2 > If several independent effects cause changes in the phase, Sum up the contributions from individual physical effects independently

An error budget can describe wavefront phase or optical path difference Be careful of units (Hardy and I will both use a variety of units in error budgets): For tip-tilt residual errors: variance of tilt angle <α2> Optical path difference in meters: OPDm Optical path difference in waves: OPDλ = OPDm / λ Optical path difference in radians of phase: ϕ = 2π OPDλ = (2π/λ) OPDm = k OPDm

If the total wavefront error is Question If the total wavefront error is σtot2 = σ12 + σ22 + σ32 + ... List as many physical effects as you can think of that might contribute to the overall wavefront error σtot2

Elements of an adaptive optics system DM fitting error Not shown: tip-tilt error, anisoplanatism error temporal delay, noise propagation Non-common path errors Measurement error

What is an “error budget” ? The allocation of statistical variations and/or error rates to individual components of a system, in order to satisfy the full system's end-to-end performance specifications. The term “error budget” is a bit misleading: it doesn’t mean “error” as in “mistake” - it means performance uncertainties, and/or the imperfect, “real life” performance of each component in the system. In a new project: Start with “top down” performance requirements from the science that will be done. Allocate “errors” to each component to satisfy overall requirements. As design proceeds, replace “allocations” with real performance of each part of system. Iterate.

Hardy Figure 2.32

Wavefront errors due to time lags, τ0 Wavefront phase variance due to τ0 = fG-1 If an AO system corrects turbulence “perfectly” but with a phase lag characterized by a time τ, then The factor of 28.4 out front is significant penalty: have to run your AO system faster than τ = τ0 For στ2 < 1, τ < 0.13 τ0 In addition, closed-loop bandwidth is usually ~ 10x sampling frequency  have to run even faster Hardy Eqn 9.57

Wavefront variance due to isoplanatic angle θ0 If an AO system corrects turbulence “perfectly” but uses a guide star an angle θ away from the science target, then Typical values of θ0 are a few arc sec at λ = 0.5 μm, 15-20 arc sec at λ = 2 μm Vision Science: θ0 ~ 1 degree ! (Bedggood et al. J. Biomed. Optics 132, 024008, 2008 Hardy Eqn 3.104

Deformable mirror fitting error Accuracy with which a deformable mirror with subaperture diameter d can remove aberrations Constant μ depends on specific design of deformable mirror For segmented mirror that corrects tip, tilt, and piston (3 degrees of freedom per segment) μ = 0.14 For deformable mirror with continuous face-sheet, μ = 0.28

Error budget concept (sum of σ2 ’s) There’s not much to be gained by making any particular term much smaller than all the others: try to roughly equalize all the terms Individual terms we know so far: Anisoplanatism Temporal error Fitting error

We will discuss other wavefront error terms in coming lectures Tip-tilt errors (this lecture if there is time) Imperfect sensing and/or correcting of image wander, due to atmosphere or telescope motions (wind shake) Measurement error Wavefront sensor doesn’t make perfect measurements Finite signal to noise ratio, optical limitations, … Non-common-path errors Calibration of different optical paths between science instrument and wavefront sensor isn’t perfect

Still need to work these out Error budget so far  √ √ √ Still need to work these out Try to “balance” error terms: if one is big, no point struggling to make the others tiny

Keck AO error budget example Assumptions: NGS is very bright (no meas’t error) 10 degree zenith angle Wavefront sensor bandwidth: 670 Hz Note that uncorrectable errors in telescope itself are significant

We want to relate phase variance <σ2> to the “Strehl ratio” Two definitions of Strehl ratio (equivalent): Ratio of the maximum intensity of a point spread function to what the maximum would be without any aberrations: The “normalized volume” under the optical transfer function of an aberrated optical system

Relation between phase variance and Strehl ratio “Maréchal Approximation” where σϕ2 is the total wavefront variance Valid when Strehl > 10% or so (σϕ2 < 2.3 ) Under-estimates Strehl for larger values of σϕ2

High Strehl PSF with higher peak intensity and narrower “core” Low Strehl Medium Strehl

Characterizing image motion or tip-tilt

Image motion or “tip-tilt” also contributes to total wavefront error Turbulence both blurs an image and makes it move around on the sky (image motion). Due to overall “wavefront tilt” component of the turbulence across the telescope aperture Can “correct” this image motion using a tip-tilt mirror (driven by signals from an image motion sensor) to compensate for image motion (Hardy Eqn 3.59 - one axis)

Scaling of tip-tilt with λ and D: the good news and the bad news In absolute terms, rms image motion in radians is independent of λ, and decreases slowly as D increases: But you might want to compare image motion to diffraction limit at your wavelength: Now image motion relative to diffraction limit is almost ~ D, and becomes larger fraction of diffraction limit for smaller λ

Long exposures, no AO correction “Seeing limited”: Units are radians Seeing disk gets slightly smaller at longer wavelengths: FWHM ~ λ / λ-6/5 ~ λ-1/5 For completely uncompensated images, wavefront error σ2uncomp = 1.02 ( D / r0 )5/3

Correcting tip-tilt has relatively large effect, for seeing-limited images For completely uncompensated images σ2uncomp = 1.02 ( D / r0 )5/3 If image motion (tip-tilt) has been completely removed σ2tiltcomp = 0.134 ( D / r0 )5/3 (Tyson, Principles of AO, eqns 2.61 and 2.62) Removing image motion can (in principle) improve the wavefront variance of an uncompensated image by a factor of 10 Origin of statement that “Tip-tilt is the single largest contributor to wavefront error”

But you have to be careful if you want to apply this statement to AO correction If tip-tilt has been completely removed σ2tiltcomp = 0.134 ( D / r0 )5/3 But typical values of ( D / r0 ) are 10 - 50 in the near-IR Keck, D=10 m, r0 = 60 cm at λ=2 μm, ( D/r0 ) = 17 σ2tiltcomp = 0.134 ( 17 )5/3 ~ 15 so wavefront phase variance is >> 1 Conclusion: if ( D/r0 ) >> 1, removing tilt alone won’t give you anywhere near a diffraction limited image

Effects of turbulence depend on size of telescope Coherence length of turbulence: r0 (Fried’s parameter) For telescope diameter D < (2 - 3) x r0 : Dominant effect is "image wander" As D becomes >> r0 : Many small "speckles" develop Computer simulations by Nick Kaiser: image of a star, r0 = 40 cm D = 2 m D = 1 m D = 8 m

Effect of atmosphere on long and short exposure images of a star Hardy p. 94 Vertical axis is image size in units of λ /r0 Correcting tip-tilt only is optimum for D/r0 ~ 1 - 3 Image motion only FWHM = l/D

Summary of topics discussed today Timescale of turbulence Isoplanatic angle Deformable mirror fitting error Concept of an “error budget” Image motion or tip-tilt Goal: to calculate <σϕ2> and thus the Strehl ratio