Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:56:08 -0800 From: Hal Petrie To: renu@caltech.edu Cc: Hal Petrie , Antonin Bouchez , Dan McKenna Subject: [hlp@astro.caltech.edu: Solidworks Model of LLT] Renu, Here is a copy of a message to Chris Shelton which may help with interpreting the LLT Model. I believe Chris built his Z-max model from this and got good results. Best Regards, Hal ----- Forwarded message from Hal Petrie ----- Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 17:21:35 -0700 From: Hal Petrie To: Jean.C.Shelton@jpl.nasa.gov, Anna Moore , mtroy@jpl.nasa.gov, Antonin Bouchez , Richard Dekany Cc: Hal Petrie , Andrew Pickles Subject: Solidworks Model of LLT I have recently updated the Solidworks model of the LLT. This included the Strut Spacers put in in 2004, the new Primary Mirror, the new Secondary holder and focus, the adjusted position of the Relay Lens, the position of the Q3 quad cell with the recent extender plate, and the as-measured positions of these components within their range of adjustment. From this model, I have obtained the following dimensions: Top Fold Mirror to Beamsplitter: 43.2 inches Beam Splitter to Iris 4.6 Beam Splitter to Q3 lens 2.3 Beam Splitter to Q3 2.75 Beam Splitter to FSM 6.6 FSM to Relay Lens surface near fold mirror 11.65 Relay Lens to Final Fold Mirror 1.3 Final Fold Mirror to Waveplate 2.6 Final Fold Mirror to Primary Vertex 8.9 Primary Vertex to Secondary Face vertex 34.8 Per discussions with Antonin, we are suggesting leaving the Waveplate where it is to allow access to the zone between it and the Final Fold Mirror. It could be moved at most about .5 inch closer to the fold mirror. Chris Shelton has suggested that these data would better enable calculation of the proper size for baffles/shrouds at the waveplate and relay lens and to estimate the thermal load on the waveplate. Note: during the last run, an adjustment to the height of the spiders was made to get more focus range. This adjustment left the secondary with a tilt in the NS direction of 1.7 minutes and in the EW direction of 1.4 minutes of arc compared to the setting we started with based on laser collimation in the lab. Star test collimation and collimation based on the shape of the LGS spot involved only translation of the secondary and no tilt adjustment. This is roughly equivalent to a 2 degree rotation of one of the secondary tilt screws, about as small a move as we can judge the effects of during lab collimation. Hal ----- End forwarded message -----