3.8 Proceedings Paper

Air flow turbulence orthogonality and surface error estimation in large aperture optical testing

Publisher

SPIE-INT SOC OPTICAL ENGINEERING
DOI: 10.1117/12.2617735

Keywords

Long optical path; surface error testing; air flow turbulence; scalar product; error estimation

Funding

  1. Key Research Program of Frontier Sciences, CAS [QYZDJ-SSW-JSC038]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61805243, 62005278]
  3. Youth Innovation Promotion Association of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [2019221]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

With the development of large-scale SiC materials and CCOS, MRF processing technology, optical manufacturing has entered the era of giant mirrors. Surface testing technology, as the basis of all optical processing, is facing challenges of high efficiency, high precision, and high accuracy. In this study, a method to estimate the actual surface error from individual measurements was proposed and validated through experiments.
As the large-scale SiC materials, CCOS and MRF processing technology is gradually developing, optical manufacturing quickly entered the era of giant mirror. As every basis of all optical processing, surface testing technology is facing enormous challenges with high efficiency and high precision and high accuracy. As an essential method in large aperture optical testing, we proposed a worthy attempt to estimate the actual surface error map RMS from individual measurement results. In order to overcome some actual working condition limits, it is a supplement to the state-of-the-art large sample averaging methods. This part of work is based on the orthogonality hypothesis, and proposed the real surface error estimation methods using interact scalar product. The experiment of a empty set3m aspherical mirror measurement and analysis indicates that the actual surface error RMS is 0.020 similar to 0.023 lambda, with estimation accuracy +/-lambda/700.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available