Extremely Large Telescope Design Study

1
Extremely Large Telescope Design Study

• OPTICON BOARD MEETING
• 11-12 October 2004

2
ELT Design Study Proposal

• Objective
• Generic developments towards a European ELT
• Preparatory work for design construction
• Will give ELT Top level requirements
• Ensure Academic Industrial synergy
• Proposal
• 39 partners, 47 Work Packages
• 42 M total, 22 M requested to EC
• Timescale 2005-2008

3
Matrix structure

• Participants (39)
• WP/Task (47) A B C ... Z
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 46
• 47

WP budget
WP budget
WP budget
WP consol. tool
Part.budget
Part.budget
Part.budget
Budget prep. tool
4
Project Organization
5
Shares, in of total estimated budget
ESO
6
Work Breakdown Structure

• No Title Lead / Deputy Budget EC Request
• 01000 Management ESO / LUND 1,299 1,147
• 02000 Science requirements INAF / Oxford 227 79
• 04000 Wavefront Control ESO / Grantecan 8,652 4,48
  5
• 05000 Optical fabrication ESO / UCL 4,590 2,344
• 06000 Mechanics ESO / t.b.d. 2,918 1,741
• 07000 Control ESO / Starlink 2,138 1,105
• 08000 Enclosure infrastructure Grantecan /
  ESO 2,717 1,343
• 09000 Adaptive Optics INAF / ESO 11,513 4,816
• 10000 Observatory science ops. ESO /
  UKATC 498 249
• 11000 Instrumentation UKATC / Leiden /
  2,455 1,310 INSU / Galway
• 12000 Site characterization LUAN / IAC /
  ESO 2,521 1,410
• 13000 Integrated modelling LUND /
  ESO 2,160 2,029
• TOTAL k 41,686 22,058

7
Engineering WP - Overview

• No Title
  Topics Breadboard /
  Prototype
• 01000 Project Management includes project
  engineering
• 04000 Wavefront Control Phasing, actuators,
  metrology, APE, WEB (wind) PSF properties,
  high contrast Imaging, error budgeting
• 05000 Optical fabrication SiC mirrors, Al
  mirrors, coatings 8 x 1-m SiC segments
• 06000 Mechanics Composite materials,
  Maglev, Friction Drive BB Friction drives
• 07000 Control Support to other WP (APE, WEB)
• 08000 Infrastructure Enclosure concepts,
  renewable energies, Infrastructure, wind
  tunnel
• 09000 Adaptive Optics WFE on 100-m scale, AO
  units DM prototypes designs, large DM, novel
  concepts, algorithms, simulations
• 10000 Science Operation System operations
• 11000 Instrumentation Point designs, concepts,
  ADC
• 12000 Site Studies Site parameters,
  measurements, site testing equipment
  modeling, large scale atmosphere
• 13000 System modelling Integrated modelling tools

8
APE

• SCOPE
• Compare the performance of 3 types of wavefront
  sensors
• Curvature
• Mach-Zehnder
• Pyramid
• Test an active optics system which corrects at
  the same time segment misalignments, telescope
  misalignments, and deformations of thin meniscus
  mirrors.
• Test the control software for an active optics
  system with several different wavefront sensors.

9
WEB
WEB
10
Silicon Carbide prototypes

• 8 x 1-m class, different overcoatings
• 4 blanks already at ESO
• Explore over-coating figuring,check for
  bimetallic effects
• Huge Advantages
• Stiffer, lighter, better thermo-mechanicalpropert
  ies (than glass)
• Higher control bandwidth (position)
• Hardness
• Lighter, stiffer telescope structure
• 20 years of development, space-qualified
• potentially cost-effective if appropriate design
• BUT
• Needs qualification for segmented apertures

11
Friction drive breadboard
Mandatory Hydraulic pads / tracks not an option
!
12
Extremely Large Telescope Design Study

• PROPOSAL UPDATE

13
Cutting down

• (mandatory) Goal ? keep objectives despite
  only 8(.5) M EC funding
• Strategic thinking
• Play on complementarities with other existing
  studies
• Focus activities tightly reduce number of
  alternative approaches
• Take time pressure into account, give time to
  time
• Cost reduction on SMEs little room for maneuver
• EC matching funds by partners, not by WPs
• ? freed EC funds re-distributed within single
  partners activities
• ? or through re-organization of the distribution
  of tasks
• Incorporate new (self-financing) partners ?
• Other sources of funding ?

14
Options

• Two extreme situations
• Apply 50-50 rule ? 16 M total project cost
• Keep participants 19.6 M commitment? 19.6 8
  27.6 M total project
• 1. impossible to achieve objectives, 2. quite
  optimistic ? somewhere in between
• Baseline significant de-scoping, significant
  cuts
• Variant A assumes a new partner (e.g. AURA?) on
  a self-financing basis.
• Variant B assumes some activities are
  transferred to a separate funding scheme
  (e.g. PPARC?)

15
Other options

• Variant A
• Take-over by new partner on a self-financing
  basis
• e.g. AURA taking over SiC activities ? 529 k
• Could reduce baseline pain, but time scale
  problem
• Variant B
• Some tasks under separate funding scheme, e.g.
  PPARC/Spain, but time scale problem uncertainty
• Examples
• 04800 WEB incl. control system
• 05200 Optical finishing and edge control
• 06400 Breadboard friction drive
• 08300 Wind studies
• 11000 Instrumentation (designs, ADC)
• Require some re-organization may imply drop
  outs

16
Iteration mechanism

• Guidelines directives WP budget iteration
• Draft scope of work WP scope iteration
  (Annex I to contract)
• Compile WPs, participants / EC contrib. WP
  budget iteration
• Check impact on participants, WP scope
  iteration Check with EC WPs re-organization
  Update scope of work Update directives
• Compile 2nd iteration
• Compile participants / EC contributions WP
  budget iteration
• Get participants feedback WP scope iteration
• Final guidelines directives WPs
  re-organization
• Final update of WPs / scope of work
• Get participants approval
• Submit to EC

2 (feedback)
3
We are here
5 (feedback)
WP Managers
Project Office
6
8 (feedback)
9
Dec. 05
17
Status

• 1st Iteration feedback received from WP Managers
• Raw data after 1st iteration
• Relatively little de-scoping (t.b.c.), i.e. the
  WP managers resist (good if not always helpful)
• Relies on extra PPARC ( 1.114 M) Spain (
  1.836 M) funds? 1st not sure 2nd very
  uncertain (in-kind contribution ?)
• Total project reduced to 35 M (higher than hoped
  for)
• EC request reduced to 13.3 M (as expected from
  1st iteration)
• Requested commitments of participants increased
  by 2.7 MMajor increases IAC, ESO, UK
  participants Significant decreases INAF,
  INSU-CRAL, FOGALE (SME)
• No buffer left for more de-scoping while keeping
  objectives
• ? It will be tough

18
Overall schedule