1. MAXIM Periscope ISAL Study Highlights ISAL Study beginning 14 April 2003

2. Science Team Webster Cash - University of Colorado –303-492-4056 Ann Shipley -University of Colorado –303-492-1875 Keith Gendreau - NASA/GSFC Code 662 –6-6188

3. How to implement the simple X-ray Interferometer MAXIM Pathfinder “Easy” Formation Flying (mm control) Optics in 1 s/c act like a thin lens Full MAXIM- the black hole imager Nanometer formation flying Primaries must point to milliarcseconds Pre FY02 Baseline Mirror Grouping Improved Mirror Grouping Group and package Primary and Secondary Mirrors as “Periscope” Pairs “Easy” Formation Flying (microns) All s/c act like thin lenses- Higher Robustness Possibility to introduce phase control within one space craft- an x-ray delay line- More Flexibility Offers more optimal UV-Plane coverage- Less dependence on Detector Energy Resolution Each Module, self contained- Lower Risk. A scalable MAXIM concept.

4. The Periscope Module- the subject of this ISAL study The Periscope module is a convenient place to break out two radically different tolerance levels –Nm and ~mas relative positioning and pointing within the modules –Micron and arcsecond module to module alignment Some further study makes our Periscope mirror “pairs” into mirror “quads” –4 bounce optical situation required to maintain coarse module to module alignment

5. Goals for this Study How do you make these light weight mirrors so they are flat to better than /300? How do you hold these mirrors with actuators to move them by ~nm over microns of range? Which Actuators and controlling electronics? Do you put actuators on all the mirrors? How does the structure provide an environment suitable to maintain the mirror figure and stability? Do we need internal metrology? How to implement? How do we register one module’s mirror surfaces to another modules mirror surfaces at the micron level? How to mass produce these? By how much does this save costs? What would the alignment procedures be? Trade Studies- three different mirror module sizes,.. We need the usual IMDC cost/mass/power inputs. Drawings.

6. 6 A Pair of MAXIM Periscopes Detector Periscope Module X Z 1 2 3 4

7.  h and OPD – Key Requirements h2h2 h1h1 1 2 3 4  = 1  OPD < x-ray /10

8. Periscope Assembly Entrance Aperture (Thermal Collimator) Shutter Mechanism (one for each aperture) Assy. Kinematic Mounts (3)

9. Optical Bench & Mirrors Pitch Roll Translate Mirror #1 Mirror #2 Mirror #3 Mirror #4 3 DOF Mechanism 1 DOF Mechanism Main Optical Bench Mirrors (300mm x 200mm x 50mm) Entrance Aperture Exit Aperture

10. Launch Configuration Layout Delta IV ø5m x L14.3m 24 Free Flyer Satellites (4 Apertures ea.) 1 Hub Satellite (12 Apertures) 1 Detector Satellite Ø4.75m ~1000 cm 2 of Collecting Area

11. Total Costs for Optical Assemblies: ~< $60M This includes savings from mass production, prototyping, flight spares, and contingency. 1000 cm 2 of effective area- full MAXIM. Still need satellite infrastructure.

12. The Collecting Area of Chandra for 1/10 The Cost Chandra has 0.5 arc sec resolution and its mirrors cost $400M This study has shown that it is possible to build a microarcsec imaging telescope with the same collecting area as the current Chandra for 1/10 its cost The study has also shown how the engineering can be done to allow X-ray imaging and spectroscopy in formation flying

13. PRICE Cost Summary 1 st “Periscope-Pair” Engineering Manufacturing Cost Element (Summary Report Available for each cost element) Year Dollars ($03) Total Cost Estimate $23.9M Production Development Schedule Project Management Mass

14. PRICE Cost Estimate Summary Incremental Cost of 2 nd Unit (T2) T1T1 + T2 Total Cost (incremental cost for T2 is $2.24M)

15. Learning Curves