Li Yuan | Xiaohui Zhang* | Xu He
OPEN ACCESS
In view of the difficulty in measuring large flat mirrors, this paper introduces a pentaprism system that measures the angle differences between points on the mirror surface with a scanning pentaprism. Based on the angle differences, many equations were established and the mirror surface was expressed through a least squares calculation. The error analysis reveals that the system accuracy was 11.6nm root-mean-square (rms) over a 1.5m flat mirror. Then, the pentaprism measurement was compared with Ritchey-Common test. The comparison shows that the difference between the two results is 10.2nm rms over a 1.5m flat mirror, which is within the error range of the pentaprism system. Thus, the proposed pentaprism system is applicable to the measurement of large flat mirrors.
pentaprism, large flat mirror, tilt angle, angle difference, least squares calculation.
This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 61675198 and 61307114).
1. S. Chen, S. Xue, Y. Dai, S. Li, Subaperture stitching test of large steep convex spheres, 2015, Optics Express, vol. 23, no. 22, pp. 29047-29058.
2. H. Chang, C. Liang, P. Lin, Y. Chen, Measurement improvement by high overlapping density subaperture stitching interferometry, 2014, Applied Optics, vol. 53, no. 29, pp. H102-H108.
3. S. Zhu, X. Zhang, Eliminating alignment error and analyzing Ritchey angle accuracy in Ritchey–Common test, 2013, Optics Communications, vol. 311, pp. 368-374.
4. B. Ji, C. Xu, B. Li, The error analyze of testing the large aperture flat by the Ritchey-Common method, 2014, Proc. SPIE, vol. 9298, pp. 92981A.
5. S. Zhu, X.H. Zhang, Application of error detaching to Ritchey-Common test for flat mirrors, 2014, Optics and Precision Engineering, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 7-12.
6. J.L. Pearson, G.W. Roberts, P.C.T. Rees, S.J. Thompson, Use of a NOM profilometer to measure large aspheric surfaces, 2015, Proc. SPIE, vol. 9628, pp. 96280W.
7. R.D. Geckeler, N.A. Artemiev, S.K. Barber, A. Just, I. Lacey, O. Kranz, B. V. Smith, V.V. Yashchuk, Aperture alignment in autocollimator-based deflectometricprofilometers, 2016, Rev. Sci. Instrum., vol. 87, pp. 051906.
8. S.K. Barber, R.D. Geckeler, V.V. Yashchuk, M.V. Gubarev, J. Buchheim, F. Siewert, T. Zeschke, Optimal alignment of mirror-based pentaprisms for scanning deflectometric devices, 2011, Optical Engineering, vol. 50, no. 7, pp. 073602.
9. S. Qian, L. Wayne, M. Idir, Nano-accuracy measurements and the surface profiler by use of Monolithic Hollow Penta-Prism for precision mirror testing, 2014, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, vol. 759, pp. 36-43.
10. S.K. Barber, G.Y. Morrison, V.V. Yashchuk, M.V. Gubarev, R.D. Geckeler, J. Buchheim, F. Siewert, T. Zeschke, Developmental long-trace profiler using optimally aligned mirror-based pentaprism, 2011, Optical Engineering, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 053601.
11. F. Siewert, T. Zeschke, T. Arnold, H. Paetzelt, V.V. Yashchuk, Linear chirped slope profile for spatial calibration in slope measuring deflectometry, 2016, Rev. Sci. Instrum., vol. 87, pp. 051907.
12. J. Qian, J. Sullivan, M. Erdmann, A. Khounsary, L. Assoufid, Performance of the APS optical slope measuring system, 2013, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A, vol. 710, pp. 48-51.
13. P.C.V. Mallik, C. Zhao, J.H. Burge, Measurement of a 2-meter flat using a pentaprism scanning system, 2007, Optical Engineering, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 023602.
14. E. Qi, H. Hu, H. Hu, G. Cole, X. Luo, V. Ford, X . Zhang, The application of pentaprism scanning technology on the manufacturing of M3MP, 2016, Proc. SPIE, vol. 9682, pp. 96821A.
15. J. Yellowhair, J.H. Burge, Analysis of a scanning pentaprism system for measurements of large flat mirrors, 2007, Applied Optics, vol. 46, no. 35, pp. 8466-8474.
16. R. Allen, P. Su, J.H. Burge, B. Cuerden, H.M. Martin, Scanning pentaprism test for the GMT 8.4 m off-axis segments, 2010, Proc. SPIE, vol. 7739, pp. 773911.
17. R.D. Geckeler, Optimal use of pentaprisms in highly accurate deflectometric scanning, 2007, Meas. Sci. Technol., vol. 18, pp. 115-125.