1 Abstract¶
This is the technote for the Position Repeatability Analysis on the TMA with M1M3. We measured the mirror motion (position and rotation) before and after a slew. Analysis was done for slews reaching different elevation angles, and also for different slewing speed.
3 SITCOM - 797 : M1M3 - Slewing analysis - Positioning¶
Related notebook: SITCOM-797_ims_slewing_analysis_positioning.
For this analysis, we compare the positions and rotations reported by the IMS before and after a slew. The analysis is done using different elevation angles and speed.
The initial requirements are the following:
the mirror decentering (x and y) is less than +/- 6 micrometers
the mirror tilt is less than +/- 24e-6 degrees (0.0864 arcsec)
piston (z displacement) is less than +/- 1 micrometer
Figure 1. Histogram of position and rotation difference after - before slew. The green lines indicate the tolerance intervals
Figure 2. x, y, z position and rotation shifts as a function of the elevation angle difference. The color scale shows the elevation speed and the green lines indicate the tolerance intervals.
Figure 3. Correlations between the position / rotation shifts in x, y, z. The color scale shows the elevation angle difference during the slew and the green lines indicate the tolerance intervals.
Figure 4. Mirror position as reported by the IMS during a large (74 degrees) slow (0.5 degrees/second) elevation slew. The black dotted lines are the spec from SITCOM-797.
From these plots we conclude that the initial specifications are not met, especially for the piston (z displacement). After discussion, it was realized that the displacements are normal and correspond to the sag of the mirror cell due to gravity change and will be compensated by adjusting the M2 and camera hexapods.
4 SITCOM - 1118 : Slewing in Azimuth Analysis - Positioning¶
Related notebook: SITCOMN-084–ims_slewing_azimuth_analysis_positioning.
This analysis is very similar to the one described in the previous section but this time we select slews where the TMA is moving in azimuth only. In this case we do not expect significant forces to be applied to the M1M3 mirror cell.
Figure 5. x, y, z position and rotation shifts as a function of the azimuth angle difference. The color scale shows the elevation speed and the red lines indicate the tolerance intervals.
In this analysis we see that we are closer to the specifications that in the case where the TMA is moving in elevation, but there are still cases where the mirror displacement is out of specifications. We also observe an asymetry associated to the TMA direction of rotation.
5 SITCOM - 797 : M1M3 - Compensating mirror motion with the hexapods.¶
Related notebook: SITCOM-797_MTM1M3_Position_Stability_17Nov23.
The strategy to compensate the mirror cell displacement by adjusting the M2 and camera hexapods requires that the mirror motion be reproducible, so that a look-up table for the hexapods will be able to follow the motion to the specified tolerances. So the next step was to look at a large number of slews taken during a random walk session and look at the mirror position as a function of elevation for each of the slews. This is shown in Figure 4. The colors are the slew speed as a percentage of maximum speed. The curves seem to group themselves according to the slew speeds. However, note the speed grouping is ordered as 30-40-50-20, which is the order that the tests were run in. So it is more likely that the grouping reflects something else varying during the night. One possibility is that the variation is caused by temperature. Figure 5 shows the Z-position variation through the same group of slews. Even though the temperature change during the run was only 0.6C, compensating for temperature significantly reduces the scatter in the points. However, note that we are still a factor of 3-5 away from meeting the specification. More testing is needed to see if we can reduce the scatter to the required level.
Figure 6. Mirror position as reported by the IMS at the end of many slews during a random walk session. Detailed explanation in the text.
Figure 7. Mirror Z-position as reported by the IMS at the end of many slews during a random walk session. The temperature during the night is shown in the lower left. Compensating for temperature significantly reduces the scatter in the points, but we are still a factor of 3-5 away from meeting the specification.
6 SITCOM - 797 - Position and rotation repeatibility for a specific target elevation.¶
Related notebook: SITCOM-797_ims_slewing_analysis_positioning.
In this analysis we select large amplitude slews (elevation difference > 20 degrees) where the target elevation is 45 +/- 2 degrees and we check the posision / rotation shift with respect to the average position / rotation for this specific elevation angle. Unfortunately we find only 5 slews with such characteristics but it seems that the position / rotation shifts are closer to the specifications with respect to the case where the target elevation is not fixed to a specific value. This study would have to be repeated with a larger statistics to draw firm conclusions.
Figure 8. Mirror position / rotation shifts for target elevation equal to 45 +/- degrees. Detailed explanation in the text.
7 SITCOM - 854 : Update LVV-T235 notebook¶
Assume that the systematic offset seen in each of the Rotation panels is a calibration issue, and remove the median value from each panel to assess the scatter about the median.
Figure 9. Position errors and rotation - median
The requirement specifies that the rms repeatability of the mirror positioning is what we need. Plot the rms for each of the distributions shown in the violin plot:
Figure 10. rms repeatability
8 SITCOM - 810 : Create data analysis script/notebook for LVV-T235 - Raise/Park Repeatability¶
Related notebook: LVV-T235-SITCOM-810.
In this analysis we use the data from the LVV-T235 test case where the mirror cell is repeatedly lowered and raised. We fit a line to the final raised position as measured by the IMS in order to verify that the slope is compatible with 0 mening that the mirror cell has reached a stable position and is not moving anymore.
The following plot shows the x and y positions (shifted in order to be centered around 0) as a function of time, the vertical lines indicate the various M1M3 “detailedStates”. We see that the same pattern is repeated several times over the chosen data taking period.
Figure 11. x and y positions while lowering and raising the mirror
If we isolate one of the patterns we get the following figure where the lines show the Hard Point states
Figure 12. Zoom on a single lowering / raising cycle
We are interested in the slope of the x and y positions on the flat tops / bottoms just before reaching the state: “HP in Standby” (indicated by the dotted lines). We choose to select and analyze one second of data before “HP in standby”. During this last second the position is expected to be stable, showing a slope which is compatible with 0.
We repeat this selection for every cycle in x and y and get a set of plots like the following showing the x and y positions as a function of time in the one-second time windows.
Figure 13. x and y positions during the last second before reaching the “satnadby” state for typical cycles
The slope measurement is performed on every subset of data. Statistics are summarized in the following table
We conclude that on this dataset, the slopes of x and y positions as a function of time are all compatible with 0
9 Reference links¶
10 Acronyms¶
IMS (Independent measuring system)
HP (Hard Point)
RMS (Root Mean Square)
TMA (Telescope Mount Assembly)