1. Extremely Large Telescope Design Study OPTICON BOARD MEETING 11-12 October 2004 OPTICON BOARD MEETING 11-12 October 2004

2. ELT Design Study Proposal  Objective: Generic developments towards a European ELT –Preparatory work for design & construction –Will give ELT Top level requirements –Ensure Academic & Industrial synergy  Proposal –39 partners, 47 Work Packages –42 M€ total, 22 M€ requested to EC –Timescale 2005-2008

3. Matrix structure Participants (39) WP/Task (47) ABC...Z 12345…4647 Participants (39) WP/Task (47) ABC...Z 12345…4647 WP budget Part. budget WP budget Budget prep. tool WP consol. tool

4. Project Organization

5. Shares, in % of total estimated budget ESO

6. Work Breakdown Structure NoTitleLead / DeputyBudgetEC Request 01000Management ESO / LUND1,2991,147 02000Science requirementsINAF / Oxford22779 04000Wavefront ControlESO / Grantecan8,6524,485 05000Optical fabricationESO / UCL4,5902,344 06000MechanicsESO / t.b.d.2,9181,741 07000ControlESO / Starlink2,1381,105 08000Enclosure & infrastructureGrantecan / ESO2,7171,343 09000Adaptive OpticsINAF / ESO11,5134,816 10000Observatory & science ops.ESO / UKATC498249 11000InstrumentationUKATC / Leiden / 2,4551,310 INSU / Galway 12000Site characterizationLUAN / IAC / ESO2,5211,410 13000 Integrated modelling LUND / ESO2,1602,029 TOTAL k€ 41,686 22,058 NoTitleLead / DeputyBudgetEC Request 01000Management ESO / LUND1,2991,147 02000Science requirementsINAF / Oxford22779 04000Wavefront ControlESO / Grantecan8,6524,485 05000Optical fabricationESO / UCL4,5902,344 06000MechanicsESO / t.b.d.2,9181,741 07000ControlESO / Starlink2,1381,105 08000Enclosure & infrastructureGrantecan / ESO2,7171,343 09000Adaptive OpticsINAF / ESO11,5134,816 10000Observatory & science ops.ESO / UKATC498249 11000InstrumentationUKATC / Leiden / 2,4551,310 INSU / Galway 12000Site characterizationLUAN / IAC / ESO2,5211,410 13000 Integrated modelling LUND / ESO2,1602,029 TOTAL k€ 41,686 22,058

7. Engineering WP - Overview N o Title Topics Breadboard / Prototype N o Title Topics Breadboard / Prototype 01000Project Management[includes project engineering] 04000Wavefront ControlPhasing, actuators, metrology, APE, WEB (wind) PSF properties, high contrast Imaging, error budgeting 05000Optical fabricationSiC mirrors, Al mirrors, coatings 8 x 1-m SiC segments 06000MechanicsComposite materials, Maglev,Friction Drive BB Friction drives 07000ControlSupport to other WP (APE, WEB) 08000 InfrastructureEnclosure concepts, renewable energies, Infrastructure, wind tunnel 09000Adaptive OpticsWFE on 100-m scale, AO units DM prototypes designs, large DM, novel concepts, algorithms, simulations 10000Science OperationSystem operations 11000InstrumentationPoint designs, concepts, ADC 12000Site Studies Site parameters, measurements,[site testing equipment] modeling, large scale atmosphere 13000System modelling Integrated modelling tools N o Title Topics Breadboard / Prototype N o Title Topics Breadboard / Prototype 01000Project Management[includes project engineering] 04000Wavefront ControlPhasing, actuators, metrology, APE, WEB (wind) PSF properties, high contrast Imaging, error budgeting 05000Optical fabricationSiC mirrors, Al mirrors, coatings 8 x 1-m SiC segments 06000MechanicsComposite materials, Maglev,Friction Drive BB Friction drives 07000ControlSupport to other WP (APE, WEB) 08000 InfrastructureEnclosure concepts, renewable energies, Infrastructure, wind tunnel 09000Adaptive OpticsWFE on 100-m scale, AO units DM prototypes designs, large DM, novel concepts, algorithms, simulations 10000Science OperationSystem operations 11000InstrumentationPoint designs, concepts, ADC 12000Site Studies Site parameters, measurements,[site testing equipment] modeling, large scale atmosphere 13000System modelling Integrated modelling tools

8. APE SCOPE :   Compare the performance of 3 types of wavefront sensors : – –Curvature – –Mach-Zehnder – –Pyramid   Test an active optics system which corrects at the same time segment misalignments, telescope misalignments, and deformations of thin meniscus mirrors.   Test the control software for an active optics system with several different wavefront sensors.

9. WEB WEB

10. Silicon Carbide prototypes  8 x 1-m class, different overcoatings  4 blanks already at ESO  Explore over-coating & figuring, check for bimetallic effects  Huge Advantages –Stiffer, lighter, better thermo-mechanical properties (than glass) –Higher control bandwidth (position) –Hardness –Lighter, stiffer telescope structure –~20 years of development, space-qualified –potentially cost-effective if appropriate design  BUT –Needs qualification for segmented apertures

11. Friction drive breadboard Mandatory – Hydraulic pads / tracks not an option !

12. Extremely Large Telescope Design Study PROPOSAL UPDATE

13. Cutting down  (mandatory) Goal:  keep objectives despite only 8(.5) M€ EC funding  Strategic thinking –Play on complementarities with other existing studies –Focus activities tightly; reduce number of alternative approaches –Take time pressure into account, give time to time …  Cost reduction on SMEs: little room for maneuver  EC matching funds by partners, not by WPs  freed EC funds re-distributed within single partner’s activities  or through re-organization of the distribution of tasks  Incorporate new (self-financing) partners ?  Other sources of funding ?

14. Options  Two extreme situations: 1.Apply 50-50 rule  16 M€ total project cost 2.Keep participants 19.6 M€ commitment  19.6 + 8 = 27.6 M€ total project 1. impossible to achieve objectives, 2. quite optimistic  somewhere in between  Baseline: significant de-scoping, significant cuts  Variant A: assumes a new partner (e.g. AURA?) on a self-financing basis.  Variant B: assumes some activities are transferred to a separate funding scheme (e.g. PPARC?)

15. Other options  Variant A: –Take-over by new partner on a self-financing basis: e.g. AURA taking over SiC activities  529 k€ e.g. AURA taking over SiC activities  529 k€ –Could reduce baseline pain, but time scale problem  Variant B: –Some tasks under separate funding scheme, e.g. PPARC/Spain, but time scale problem + uncertainty –Examples   04800 WEB incl. control system   05200 Optical finishing and edge control   06400 Breadboard friction drive   08300 Wind studies   11000 Instrumentation (designs, ADC) –Require some re-organization; may imply “drop outs”

16. Iteration mechanism 1 (top-down) 2 (feedback) 3 4 5 (feedback) 6 7 8 (feedback) 9 Guidelines & directivesWP budget iteration Draft scope of workWP scope iteration (Annex I to contract) Compile WPs, participants / EC contrib.WP budget iteration Check impact on participants,WP scope iteration Check with ECWPs re-organization Update scope of work Update directives Compile 2 nd iteration Compile participants / EC contributions WP budget iteration Get participants feedback WP scope iteration Final guidelines & directives WPs re-organization Final update of WPs / scope of work Get participants approval Submit to EC Project Office WP Managers We are here Dec. ‘05

17. Status  1 st Iteration feedback received from WP Managers  “Raw” data after 1 st iteration –Relatively little de-scoping (t.b.c.), i.e. the WP managers “resist” (good if not always helpful) –Relies on extra PPARC (+ 1.114 M€) & Spain (+ 1.836 M€) funds  1 st not sure – 2 nd very uncertain (in-kind contribution  ) –Total project reduced to 35 M€ (higher than hoped for) –EC request reduced to 13.3 M€ (as expected from 1 st iteration) –Requested commitments of participants increased by 2.7 M€ Major increases: IAC, ESO, UK participants Significant decreases: INAF, INSU-CRAL, FOGALE (SME) –No buffer left for more de-scoping while keeping objectives  It will be tough …

18. Overall schedule