|
DFM Engineering, Inc.
1035 Delaware Ave. Unit D
Longmont, CO 80501
Phone: 303-678-8143
Fax: 303-772-9411
|
|
|
|
"Internet Telescope" Performance
Requirements
by
Dr. Frank Melsheimer, DFM Engineering, Inc. Longmont, Colorado,
USA
click here for pdf
file of this article
|
| |
| |
|
ABSTRACT
Efficient operation of an astronomical telescope
over the internet by a remote user requires a high level
of performance from the telescope, instruments, support
facilities and the control system. The needed performance
is partially determined by the focal length of the telescope,
the site properties, and the remote user requirements.
In this paper we develop the basic pointing, tracking,
and focus requirements and discuss how they interact
with the remote users of the system.
1. INTRODUCTION
An "Internet Telescope" allows a remote user
to take command of the observatory and perform observations.
Typically we are discussing real time direct imaging
rather than photometry or spectroscopy, although most
of the performance requirements are similar for the
various other instruments. We are not discussing a "batch
processing" mode of operation where a set of observations
are submitted well in advance of when the observations
are performed. In the batch mode, a scheduler establishes
when the observations are performed and afterwards,
the data is sent to the user.
|
|
In the real
time mode, the next scheduled remote user is recognized
by the scheduler at the beginning of their time slot
and is allowed remote access to the telescope. The user
then specifies the coordinates of the first object of
interest and the telescope slews to those coordinates.
This object location may be specified by entering coordinates
or by using a GUI (graphical user interface).
The user then specifies how the imaging is to be performed
by specifying the exposure time (integration time),
the desired filter, and other camera parameters. The
image is acquired and transmitted to the remote user
and the next observation is performed. This sequence
continues until the user's allocated time slot is completed
and the next scheduled user is granted access to the
observatory.
|
|
 |
 
|
The control sequence becomes:
|
| |
1.
|
Recognizing the next remote user
|
| |
2.
|
Accepting the user's commands
|
| |
3.
|
Slewing the telescope to the object and tracking the
object
|
| |
4.
|
Selecting the desired filter
|
| |
5.
|
Setting up the camera and controlling the integration
|
| |
6.
|
Transmitting the image data to the remote user
|
| |
7.
|
Begin the sequence again at step 2 until the allocated
time expires
|
| |
8.
|
Go on to next remote user
|
|
The above sequence is sufficient to acquire images
for relatively short integrations if the telescope points
accurately enough to place the desired object near the
center of the field of view of the camera, the focus
is correct, and the tracking is good enough. If the
object isn't centered well enough and or the focus isn't
correct, then additional integrations would be required
to properly adjust the telescope pointing and tracking,
and adjust the imaging system. These corrections could
use a considerable fraction of the observing time. To
make the sequence efficient, user friendly, and reliable,
the complete imaging system needs to be "transparent"
to the remote user - a point and click operation.
The telescope functions are no different for the "Internet
Telescope" than they are for any telescope, but
the performance requirements are more stringent. The
telescope needs to point open loop (without feedback
from the image) to a fraction of the field of view,
the focus needs to be stable with temperature and accommodate
any focus changes needed by different filters, and the
telescope needs to track sufficiently well open loop
to meet the imaging requirements.
2. POINTING
When a telescope is operated locally, if the object
is not in the field of view or not well centered in
the field of view, the operator can move the telescope
using the hand paddle to center the object. The remote
user may have this motion capability, but it is awkward
and time consuming to perform these motions at the end
of a relatively slow data transmission line. It is far
more efficient if the telescope goes to coordinates
and places the object near the center of the field of
view.
Telescope
pointing is usually characterized by specifying
the RMS (Root Mean Square) value for the pointing error
on the sky. An RMS pointing error of about 1/4 of the
field of view of the camera will usually place the object
within the central 1/2 of the field of view. This value
should be considered to be the absolute minimum pointing
performance as some objects will fall at the edge or
outside of the field of view. An object falling outside
of the field of view for a remote user should be considered
to be an unacceptable error. A remotely operated telescope
should probably point 2 or 3 times better or about 1/10
of the field of view to avoid this problem.
Typical Pointing Performance:
The field of view is a function of the size of the detector
and the focal length of the telescope. To image a large
field of view, one wants a large detector and a short
focal length. Unfortunately, large CCD detectors are
very expensive, and short focal length, moderate to
large aperture telescopes, are also expensive. Some
practical examples follow using a commercially available
CCD camera with a 10 mm X 10 mm CCD chip and our 1/10
of the field of view rule:
|
|
Typical Pointing Performance Required
|
|
Aperture
|
|
Focal Length
|
|
Plate scale
|
|
Field size
|
|
Pointing
|
|
inches
|
inches
|
mm
|
arc sec/mm
|
arc min
|
arc sec
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
|
F/11
|
154
|
3910
|
53
|
8.8
|
53
|
|
16
|
F/10
|
160
|
4000
|
52
|
8.6
|
53
|
|
16
|
F/8
|
128
|
3250
|
64
|
10.6
|
64
|
|
20
|
F/10
|
200
|
5080
|
41
|
6.8
|
41
|
|
20
|
F/8
|
160
|
4000
|
52
|
8.6
|
52
|
|
24
|
F/10
|
240
|
6100
|
34
|
5.6
|
34
|
|
24
|
F/8
|
192
|
4880
|
43
|
7.1
|
43
|
|
32
|
F/10
|
320
|
8130
|
25
|
4.2
|
25
|
|
32
|
F/8
|
256
|
6500
|
32
|
5.3
|
32
|
|
From the table, you can see that the recommended pointing
performance is 30 to 60 arc seconds RMS (1/2 to 1 arc
minute). The larger the telescope, the better the pointing
performance needs to be. These values are "open
loop" pointing, that is, with no optical feedback
from the image.
With optical feedback, the required pointing becomes
a function of the field of view for acquiring the image
which may be smaller than the science imager field.
There are some additional complications which are discussed
later.
3. INITIALIZATION
Reasonably good time keeping and initialization hardware
and software need to be part of the "Internet Telescope"
control system to allow an auto-initialization procedure
accurate enough to automatically find the first star.
The time keeping should be good to one second. The initialization
hardware (home sensors for example) needs to be good
to about 15 arc seconds.
4. FOCUS STABILITY
Efficient use of the "Internet Telescope"
requires that the telescope focus remains within an
acceptable tolerance during the entire night's operation
over temperature changes and at different zenith distances.
The temperature compensation may be accomplished passively,
for example, by using Invar spacers, or by an active
control. If an active focus temperature compensation
is used, it probably should only adjust the focus when
the telescope is not integrating. Any image motion due
to focus movement should be very small - a few arc seconds
at most.
The focus mechanism needs to have sufficient motion
resolution so that the smallest change in focus motion
does not increase the image size significantly compared
to the seeing disk. Also, the focus motion needs to
be encoded at a resolution equal to or finer than the
minimum focus motion. This is especially true when using
a CCD camera, because the readout (and data transmission)
may require considerable time. Time spent focusing the
telescope reduces the efficiency of the system.
Each filter has an optimum focus position. It is advantageous
to have a focus drive system that can automatically
set the telescope focus position for each filter when
the filters are selected.
If the remote user is allowed to change the focus
position, then there needs to be an automatic return
to the nominal focus position for each new user. This
will prevent the last user from leaving the telescope
in an unknown focus position.
The following table shows some examples of the optical
spacing change to produce a 0.2 arc second image enlargement
due to defocus:
|
|
Optical Spacing Change for 0.2 Arc Second Defocus
|
|
Telescope Size
|
|
Allowable
Spacing Change
of Optics
|
|
Allowable
Temperature Change
of Aluminum Structure
|
|
aperture
|
|
design
|
microns
|
F. degrees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14-inch
|
F/2-F/11
|
1.4
|
0.20
|
|
16-inch
|
F/2-F/10
|
1.6
|
0.20
|
|
16-inch
|
F/3-F/8
|
3.2
|
0.32
|
|
20-inch
|
F/3-F/8
|
4.0
|
0.34
|
|
24-inch
|
F/3-F/8
|
4.8
|
0.36
|
|
The first two optical systems show a defocus effect
that is very sensitive to the change in optical spacing
due to the large amplification by the secondary mirror.
The temperature change that produces 0.2 arc second
image enlargement in an uncompensated aluminum structure
is shown in the fourth column.
All of the above optical systems are very sensitive
to temperature changes when fabricated from an uncompensated
aluminum structure. A steel structure will be about
1/2 as sensitive. Some form of temperature compensation
should be employed. A passive system using Invar spacers
will be about 100 times less sensitive than the uncompensated
aluminum structure. An active system will require frequent
focus adjustments-perhaps as often as once every few
seconds. If there is any image motion due to the focus
motion, it will require a guiding system fast enough
to remove the image motion. This will limit the ability
of the autoguider to integrate to see faint guide stars.
Using an Invar spaced temperature compensated structure
at a less than ideal site should allow the use of a
F/3-F/8 telescope over a temperature range of about
50 F degrees without actively correcting the focus for
temperature. It is possible to improve on the Invar
spaced metering system using additional temperature
compensating elements. Another approach is to use a
carbon fiber reinforced composite structure. Such a
structure can be made with a zero temperature coefficient
at great effort and expense. Commercially available
carbon fiber composite tubes are typically not as good
as Invar spaced structures.
5. TRACKING PERFORMANCE
The ideal "Internet Telescope" would track
for the entire imaging integration with an error too
small to be seen in the image. Depending upon the site
seeing, this may mean tracking to a fraction of an arc
second. Even a "perfect" telescope can't track
to a fraction of an arc second for more than a few seconds.
The earth's atmospheric refraction at a modest zenith
distance can easily change the Right Ascension tracking
rate by 0.01 arc seconds per second and introduce a
Declination tracking rate of 0.01 arc seconds per second.
A 20 second integration will see a motion of more than
0.2 arc seconds which is noticeable. The seeing will
also introduce image motions of a similar or larger
amount.
Examples of the change in tracking rates due to the
earth's atmospheric refraction at DEC = 0 and 35 degrees
latitude:
|
|
Tracking Rates for Refraction Correction
|
|
Hour Angle
|
|
Right Ascension
|
|
Declination Rate
|
|
rate change
|
arc sec/second
|
|
|
|
|
|
-3.5 hours
|
-.007
|
-.006
|
|
-4.0 hours
|
-.011
|
-.011
|
|
-4.5 hours
|
-.023
|
-.023
|
|
-5.0 hours
|
-.068
|
-.069
|
|
-5.5 hours
|
-.182
|
-.184
|
|
From this data, you can see that without correcting
the tracking rates (R.A. and DEC.) at 4.5 hours you
cannot track for more than about 50 seconds with a tracking
error of 1 arc second without guiding even with a perfect
telescope.
|
|
The best
tracking telescope we have experience with is the US
Naval Observatory 1.3 meter F/2.2-F/4 telescope
at Flagstaff, Arizona. This telescope will keep a star
image within a 1 arc second box for more than 20 minutes
open loop (no optical feedback). This telescope also
has a fully temperature compensated optical tube assembly
(OTA) structure so there is no optical spacing change
due to temperature changes.
At less than ideal sites, a telescope that tracks very
well may be satisfactory for short integrations of perhaps
up to 1 minute in duration. However, in good seeing
conditions, some form of autoguiding is necessary. This
is one area where the technology has not been well developed
for remote internet observing.
The telescope should be able to track open loop for
many seconds with a tracking error of less than 1 arc
second. The tracking should also be very smooth so guiding
corrections need to be applied only occasionally.
|
|

US Naval Observatory 1.3M, Flagstaff, AZ
|
|
6. TRACKING RATES
The "Internet Telescope" and control system
should allow the remote user to input tracking rates
in RA and Declination of up to a few arc minutes per
second. These rates would allow satellite tracking,
for example. When a new remote user is granted access
to the telescope, the tracking rates need to be reset
to sidereal.
7. GUIDING
Optical feedback from the "Internet Telescope"
is needed to correct the telescope tracking when the
integration time becomes more than a few seconds under
good seeing conditions. With less than ideal conditions,
a telescope that is well corrected may track open loop
for tens or perhaps hundreds of seconds. Spectrographic
or photometric instruments require a reduced level of
tracking accuracy. Direct imaging requires tracking
to a fraction of the seeing disk. In good seeing conditions
this can mean guiding to 0.25 arc second or better.
Direct imaging with high precision or long integration
times really needs to be guided. The challenge is finding
a suitable off axis guide star and positioning the guide
probe and detector on the star. Once the guide star
is located, the actual mechanism to determine the centroid
of the guide star's image and provide guide corrections
to the telescope control system is fairly straight forward.
The classical approach is to center the target object
in the field of view of the imaging camera and then
offset the guide probe to the coordinates of a previously
selected guide star or to move the guide probe in a
search pattern until a suitable guide star is found.
Often suitable guide stars are selected prior to the
observing session for each field to be imaged. The offsets
are calculated and the guide probe is driven to the
proper offset to acquire the guide star. With prior
knowledge of where to look for the guide star, this
approach is fairly efficient. Without prior knowledge,
searching for a suitable guide star can consume considerable
observing time - especially if the guide detector has
a relatively small field of view, has to integrate for
many seconds, or reads out the image slowly.
8. AUTO GUIDING
An "Internet Telescope" needs to be simple
to use. This implies that locating and using a guide
star is totally automatic. We cannot expect the remote
user to input the coordinates of the guide star with
every desired field to be imaged. The selection of the
guide star needs to be performed by the telescope or
autoguider control system. Locating the guide star is
another pointing problem. Typically, the field of view
of the guide detector is considerably smaller than the
main imager further increasing the need for accurate
telescope pointing.
Under reasonable seeing conditions, the autoguider
should be able to find a star with sufficient brightness
to allow guiding with less than a few seconds integration.
The telescope response to the auto guider should be
sufficient to allow the telescope to track to a fraction
of an arc second.
DFM Engineering is developing the "Smart Autoguider".
This system will be added to our Telescope
Control System and is needed to make the "Internet
Telescope" a reality.
For additional information, please see the following
links:
Telescope
Control System
Telescope
Pointing
Filter
Wheel
US
Naval Observatory 1.3M Telescope
Retrofitting
Telescopes
|
|
|
|