Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-23T03:17:15.821Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The University of Texas 7.6-m Telescope

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

Robert G. Tull
Robert G. Tull*
Affiliation:
McDonald Observatory, The University of Texas, Austin, Texas 78712

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In late 1979 a plan to build a very large telescope was presented to University of Texas President Peter Flawn. A small startup budget was subsequently granted by the University administration, and we asked Aden and Marjorie Meinel to carry out a design concept study, which they completed in early 1980. Following their report, a study contract was awarded to the Western Development Laboratories Division of Ford Aerospace & Communications Corp., for a preliminary design and cost estimate.

It is generally agreed that construction of monolithic mirrors up to 8-10 meters aperture is within current technology. The major concern that has prevented construction of telescopes larger than the Palomar 5-m telescope outside the Soviet Union has been cost; it has been shown (Meinel and Meinel, 1980a) that the single most important item in determining the cost of a large telescope is the weight of its primary mirror. We chose a monolithic, lightweight 7.6-m (300-inch) mirror as representing a significant advance from presently existing telescope apertures while also being well within the current state-of-the-art. Because a lightweight mirror cannot support its figure against gravity and other disturbances as well as can a conventional thick mirror, we have investigated methods of active control of the mirror's figure. The now maturing technology of adaptive optics (Hardy 1980, 1981, 1982) has been drawn upon extensively in planning this telescope. Results of finite element analyses of an ultra-lightweight monolithic 7.6-m mirror blank have been published (Ray et.al., 1982, 1983). A description of the proposed mirror figure monitoring system has been given (Tull and Young, 1983).

Type
VI. Very Large Telescope Projects
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 79: Very Large Telescopes, their Instrumentation and Programs , 1984 , pp. 789 - 816
Copyright
Copyright © ESO 1984

References

Aerospace Corp., “University of Texas 300 Inch Active Meniscus Mirror Concept –– An Independent Assessment” (May, 1983).Google Scholar
Beckers, J., Highlights of the conf. “Workshop on Large Mirrors,” Sec. B: Image Quality Specs for Large Telescopes (Steward Obs., Tucson, 1983).Google Scholar
Beckers, J.M., and Williams, J.T., Proc. SPIE, 332, 16, 1982.Google Scholar
Bowen, I.S., Ann. Rev. Astron. and Astrophys., 5, 45, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, F., Proc. SPIE, 332, 185, 1982.Google Scholar
Gascoigne, S.C.B., Appl. Opt., 12, 1419, 1973.Google Scholar
Gillingham, P.R., Proc. SPIE, 444, 165, 1983.Google Scholar
Harding, G.A., Mack, B., Smith, F.G., and Stokoe, J.R., MNRAS, vol. 188, 241, 1979.Google Scholar
Hardy, J.W., Proc. KPNO Conf., Optical and Infrared Telescopes for the 1990s, Tucson, 7–12 Jan. 1980, p. 535.Google Scholar
Hardy, J.W., Proc. ESO Conf. on Scientific Importance of High Angular Resolution at Infrared and Optical Wavelengths, Garching, March 1981, 25.Google Scholar
Hardy, J.W., Proc. SPIE, 332, 252, 1982.Google Scholar
Hill, J.M., Angel, J.R.P., and Richardson, E.H., Proc. SPIE, 445, 85, 1983.Google Scholar
Itek Optical Systems, Feasibility Study for the University of Texas 300-Inch Telescope –– Final Report (May 9, 1983).Google Scholar
Lockheed Report, “Feasibility Assessment: Active Mirror Control Subsystem,” 1983.Google Scholar
Lowne, C. M., MNRAS, 188, 249, 1979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacFarlane, M.J., “Possible Configurations for a High Performance Imaging Camera for a 7.6 Meter Telescope” (Preliminary Report: Dec, 1981; Final Report: May, 1982; Additional Cases, Apr., Aug., and Oct., 1982).Google Scholar
Mackay, C.D., Proc. Spie, 331, 146, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGraw, J.T., Stockman, H.S., and Angel, J.R.P., Proc. Spie, 331, 137, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meinel, A.B., and Meinel, M.P., Proc. KPNO Conf., Optical and Infrared Telescopes for the 1990s, Tucson, 7–12 Jan. 1980a, p. 1027.Google Scholar
Meinel, A.B., and Meinel, M.P., “UT 7-Meter Texas Monolith Telescope (TMT),” Feb. 1980b.Google Scholar
Meinel, A.B., and Meinel, M.P., “Design Definition Study for the UT 300-Inch Telescope – The Optical System,” 1981.Google Scholar
Meinel, A.B., and Meinel, M.P., Proc. SPIE 332, 178, 1982.Google Scholar
Meinel, A.B., and Meinel, M.P., “The zero coma condition for decentered and tilted secondary mirror in Cassegrain/Nasmyth configuration,” internal UT report, 1983a.Google Scholar
Meinel, A.B., and Meinel, M.P., “Deflections of Telescope Truss Designs,” internal UT report, 1983b.Google Scholar
Meinel, A.B., and Meinel, M.P., Proc. IAU Colloq. 79, Garching, 1984.Google Scholar
Ray, F.B., and Perroni, A., Proc. SPIE, 332, 206, 1982.Google Scholar
Ray, F.B., Chung, Y.T., and Mani, B.S., Proc. SPIE, 444, 1983.Google Scholar
Richardson, E.H., Harmer, C.F.W., and Grundmann, W., “Bigger but Better Prime Focus Corrector Lenses for Ritchey-Chretien Telescopes,” 1983.Google Scholar
Rosin, S., Appl. Opt., 7, 1483, 1968.Google Scholar
Smith, H.J., and Barnes, T. G. III (eds.), Report, Optical Conf. on the 7.6-m Telescope, Austin, March 1982; Pubs, in Astronomy No. 22, 1984.Google Scholar
Tull, R.G., in The NNTT Technology Development Program Report No. 3, 23, 1982.Google Scholar
Tull, R.G., and Young, B.W., Proc. SPIE, 444, 241, 1983.Google Scholar
Wong, W.-Y., Proc. SPIE, 444, 211, 1983.Google Scholar
Woolf, N., Pub. Astron. Soc. Pacific, 91, 523, 1979.Google Scholar
Woolf, N.J., Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., 20, 367, 1982.Google Scholar
Wynne, C., Appl. Opt., 4, 1185, 1965.Google Scholar