Normalized to: Reinig, M.
[1]
oai:arXiv.org:1202.1566 [pdf] - 1116461
MEMS practice, from the lab to the telescope
Morzinski, Katie M.;
Norton, Andrew P.;
Evans, Julia Wilhelmson;
Reza, Layra;
Severson, Scott A.;
Dillon, Daren;
Reinig, Marc;
Gavel, Donald T.;
Cornelissen, Steven;
Macintosh, Bruce A.;
Max, Claire E.
Submitted: 2012-02-07
Micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) technology can provide for deformable
mirrors (DMs) with excellent performance within a favorable economy of scale.
Large MEMS-based astronomical adaptive optics (AO) systems such as the Gemini
Planet Imager are coming on-line soon. As MEMS DM end-users, we discuss our
decade of practice with the micromirrors, from inspecting and characterizing
devices to evaluating their performance in the lab. We also show MEMS wavefront
correction on-sky with the "Villages" AO system on a 1-m telescope, including
open-loop control and visible-light imaging. Our work demonstrates the maturity
of MEMS technology for astronomical adaptive optics.
[2]
oai:arXiv.org:1007.2691 [pdf] - 1033716
Performance of MEMS-based visible-light adaptive optics at Lick
Observatory: Closed- and open-loop control
Submitted: 2010-07-15
At the University of California's Lick Observatory, we have implemented an
on-sky testbed for next-generation adaptive optics (AO) technologies. The
Visible-Light Laser Guidestar Experiments instrument (ViLLaGEs) includes
visible-light AO, a micro-electro-mechanical-systems (MEMS) deformable mirror,
and open-loop control of said MEMS on the 1-meter Nickel telescope at Mt.
Hamilton. In this paper we evaluate the performance of ViLLaGEs in open- and
closed-loop control, finding that both control methods give equivalent Strehl
ratios of up to ~ 7% in I-band and similar rejection of temporal power.
Therefore, we find that open-loop control of MEMS on-sky is as effective as
closed-loop control. Furthermore, after operating the system for three years,
we find MEMS technology to function well in the observatory environment. We
construct an error budget for the system, accounting for 130 nm of wavefront
error out of 190 nm error in the science-camera PSFs. We find that the dominant
known term is internal static error, and that the known contributions to the
error budget from open-loop control (MEMS model, position repeatability,
hysteresis, and WFS linearity) are negligible.