Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-wxhwt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T13:31:19.995Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Optical space telescope structures: The state of the art and future directions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

M. J. Santer  and
K. A. Seffen
M. J. Santer
Affiliation:
m.santer@imperial.ac.uk, Department of Aeronautics, Imperial College London, London, UK
K. A. Seffen
Affiliation:
kas14@cam.ac.uk, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Future space telescopes will be required to have significantly greater aperture and lower areal density than is currently achievable. Gossamer spacecraft structures have been proposed as a means of achieving this, but the technologies are far from mature. A state-of-the-art review is timely and necessary as new structural paradigms are being considered for the next generation of space telescopes. There is, however, a knowledge gap between the structural engineering community and the additional fields involved in the complete telescope system, leading to the proposal of structures which are unlikely to be launched. It is hoped that, by providing a resource by which structural engineers are made aware of the wider issues in telescope design, this review will serve to overcome this knowledge gap to facilitate productive collaboration.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 113 , Issue 1148 , October 2009 , pp. 633 - 645
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2009 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Hubin, N. and Noethe, L., Active optics, adaptive optics, and laser guide stars, Science, 262, 1993.Google Scholar
2. Born, M. and Wolf, E., Principles of Optics: Electromagnetic theory of Interference and Diffraction of Light, Cambridge University Press, 7th (expanded) Ed, 1999 (2002 reprint).Google Scholar
3. Deschamps, N., Grant, C. and Foisy, D. et al The BRITE space telescope: Using a nanosatellite constellation to measure stellar variability in the most luminous stars, Proc International Astronautical Congress, 2006.Google Scholar
4. Angel, R., Burge, J. and Hege, K. et al Stretched membrane with electrostatic curvature (SMEC): A new technology for ultra-lightweight space telescopes, Proc SPIE, UV, Optical, and IR Space Telescopes and Instruments, 2000.Google Scholar
5. DiPirro, M., Cleveland, P. and Durand, D., Cooling technology for large space telescopes. Proc NASA Science Technology Conference, 2007.Google Scholar
6. Nakagawa, T., Astro-F survey as input catalogues for FIRST, Proc of The Promise of FIRST symposium, 2001.Google Scholar
7. Fanson, J. and Fazio, G. et al The space infrared telescope facility (SIRTF), Proc SPIE Space Telescopes and Instruments, 3356, 1998.Google Scholar
8. Gardner, J. and Mather, J. et al The James Webb Space Telescope, Space Science Reviews, 123, 2006.Google Scholar
9. Montgomery, E., Variance of ultralightweight space telescope technology development priorities with increasing total aperture goals, Proc of the ultra lightweight space optics challenge workshop, 1999.Google Scholar
10. Hedgepeth, J., Critical requirements for the design of large space structures, NASA Contractor Report 3484, 1981.Google Scholar
11. Chmielewski, A., Moore, C. and Howard, R., The gossamer initiative, Proc IEEE Aerospace Conference, 2000, 7.Google Scholar
12. Palisoc, A., Redell, F. and Andersen, G., Deployment and structural support of space membrane optics system using rigidizable conical booms, Proc of the Ninth Biennial ASCE Aerospace Division International Conference on Engineering, Construction, and Operations in Challenging Environments, 2004.Google Scholar
13. Sein, E., Toulemont, Y. and Safa, F., ET AL A Φ 3·5m SiC telescope for HERSCHEL mission, Proc of the SPIE IR Space Telescopes and Instruments, 2003, 4850.Google Scholar
14. Burge, J., Angel, J. and Cuerden, B. et al Lightweight mirror technology using a thin facesheet with active rigid support, Proc SPIE Space Telescopes and Instruments V, 1998.Google Scholar
15. Lake, M., Launching a 25-meter space telescope: Are astronauts a key to the next technologically logical step after NGST? Proc of IEEE Aerospace Conference, 2001.Google Scholar
16. Gerry, M. and Guffin, T., Accommodation study for an ultra large space telescope in the Magnum launch vehicle, NASA Ultra Lightweight Space Optics Challenge Workshop Proceedings, 1999.Google Scholar
17. Perrygo, C., Cadogan, D. and Grahne, M., Inflatable truss support structures for future large space telescopes, Proc Ultra Lightweight Space Optics Challenge Workshop, 1999.Google Scholar
18. Lay, O. and Blackwood, G., Formation flying interferometry, Proc of the SPIE Interferometry in Space, 2003, 4852.Google Scholar
19. Early, J., Hyde, R. and Baron, R., Twenty meter space telescope based on diffractive fresnel lens, Proc SPIE UV/Optical/Ir Space Telescopes: Innovative Technologies and Concepts, 2004, 5166.Google Scholar
20. Kaneda, H., Onaka, T. and Yamashiro, R., Development of SiC mirror for Astro-F, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science Report, 2000, 14.Google Scholar
21. Nella, J., Atkinson, C. and Bronowicki, A. et al James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) observatory architecture and performance, Proc of the Space 2004 Conference and Exhibit, AIAA Paper No AIAA-2004-5986, 2004.Google Scholar
22. Coulter, D., Technology development for the next generation space telescope: an overview, Proc SPIE Space Telescopes and Instruments, 1998, 3356.Google Scholar
23. Kwok, J., Garcia, M., Bonfiglio, E. and Long, S., Spitzer space telescope mission design, Proc of SPIE Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Space Telescopes, 2004, 5487.Google Scholar
24. Werner, M. and Roellig, T. ET AL The Spitzer space telescope mission, Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 2004, 154.Google Scholar
25. Fridlund, C., Darwin the infrared space interferometry mission. ESA bulletin, 2000, (103).Google Scholar
26. Ruggiero, E. and Inman, D., Gossamer spacecraft: Recent trends in design, analysis, experimentation, and control, J Spacecraft and Rockets, 2006, 46.Google Scholar
27. Lang, M., Baier, H. and Ernst, T., High precision thin shell reflectors design concepts, structural optimisation and shape adjustment techniques, Proc of the European Conference on Spacecraft Structures, Materials and Mechanical Testing, 2005.Google Scholar
28. Paradies, R. and Hertwig, M., Shape control of adaptive composite reflectors, Composites: Part B, 1999, 30.Google Scholar
29. Datashvili, L., Nathrath, N. and Lang, M. et al New concepts and reflecting materials for space borne large deployable reflector antennas, Proc 28th ESA Antenna Workshop on SpaceAntenna Systems and Technologies, 2005.Google Scholar
30. Hansen, J., Richard, R. and Shannon, R., Deformable primary mirror for a space telescope, Applied Optics, 1982, 21, (14).Google Scholar
31. Varlese, S., Ulmer, M. and Hermiller, J., Performance characterization of a shape memory composite mirror, Proc SPIE The International Society for Optical Engineering, 2005.Google Scholar
32. Tan, L. and Pellegrino, S., Thin-shell deployable reflectors with collapsible stiffeners: Part I. Approach, AIAA J, 2006, 44.Google Scholar
33. Soykasap, O., Folding design of composite structures, Composite Structures, 2007, 79.Google Scholar
34. Deblonk, B., Optical-level Structural Modelling of Membrane Mirrors for Spaceborne Telescopes, MIT PhD Thesis, 2003.Google Scholar
35. Kishimoto, N., Natori, M., Higuchi, K. and Ukegawa, K., New deployable membrane structure models inspired by morphological changes in nature, Proc of the 47th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper No AIAA-2006-1898, 2006.Google Scholar
36. Enders, J., Kas-Danouche, S. and Liao, W. et al Design of a membrane aperture deployable structure, Proc of the 44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper No AIAA-2003-1494, 2003.Google Scholar
37. Pollard, E. and Jenkins, C., Shape memory alloy deployment of membrane mirrors for spaceborne telescopes, Proc of the 46th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2005-2196, 2005.Google Scholar
38. Gorinevsky, D. and Hyde, T., Adaptive membrane for large lightweight space telescopes, Proc SPIE Astronomical Telescopes and Instrumentation, 2002.Google Scholar
39. Gorinevsky, , Dnd Hyde, T. and Cabuz, C., Distributed localized shape control of gossamer space structures, Proc of the 42nd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2001-1197, 2001.Google Scholar
40. Williams, B., Austin, E. and Inman, D., Local effects of PVDF patches on inflatable space-based structures, Proc of the 42nd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2001-1198, 2001.Google Scholar
41. Salama, M., Kuo, C., Garba, J., Wada, B. and Thomas, M., On-orbit shape correction of inflatable structures, Proc of the 35th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-1994-1771.Google Scholar
42. Ruggiero, E., Bonnema, G. and Inman, D.. Application of SISO and MIMO modal analysis techniques on a membrane mirror satellite, Proc ASME Internation Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, 2003.Google Scholar
43. Deblonk, B. and Miller, D.. Narrowing the design space of a large membrane mirror, Proc Ultra Lightweight Space Optics Challenge Workshop, 1999.Google Scholar
44. Hedgepeth, J. and Adams, L., Design concepts for large reflector antenna structures, NASA Contractor Report 3663, 1983.Google Scholar
45. Pfeiffer, E., Kaiser, C. and Schppinger, C. et al Design and construction of an active piezo-actuated tripod allowing for compensation of focal plane distortions, Proc of the European Conference on Spacecraft Structures, Materials and Mechanical Testing, 2005.Google Scholar
46. Nasser, L., Bonifant, R. and Diggs, C., ET AL Spacecraft structures and launch vehicles, Virginia Tech Report, 2004.Google Scholar
47. Wong, W. and Pellegrino, S., Wrinkled membranes, Proc International Conference on Textile Composites and Inflatable Structures, 2003.Google Scholar
48. Stamper, B., Angel, R., Burge, J. and Woolf, N., Flat membrane mirrors for space telescopes, Proc SPIE Imaging Technology and Telescopes, 2000.Google Scholar
49. Tolomeo, J., Cross, G. and Decker, T. et al Design and test of a prototype DART system, Highly Innovative Space Telescope Concepts Ed MacEwen, H. Proc SPIE, 2002.Google Scholar
50. Prechtl, E. and Hall, S., Design of a high efficiency, large stroke, electromechanical actuator. Smart Materials and Structures, 1999, 8.Google Scholar
51. Huber, J., Fleck, N. and Ashby, M., The selection of mechanical actuators based on performance indices, Proc of the Royal Society of London, A, 453, 1997.Google Scholar
52. Chirikjian, G., A binary paradigm for robotic manipulators. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 4:30633069, 1994.Google Scholar