1. Next Generation Adaptive Optics (NGAO) System Design Phase Update Peter Wizinowich, Rich Dekany, Don Gavel, Claire Max Science Case Presenters: Brian Cameron, David Law, Jessica Lu, Phil Marshall, Chuck Steidel, Tommaso Treu Technical Team: Sean Adkins, Brian Bauman, Jim Bell, Antonin Bouchez, Matthew Britton, Jason Chin, Ralf Flicker, Erik Johansson, David Le Mignant, Chris Lockwood, Liz McGrath, Anna Moore, Chris Neyman, Viswa Velur Keck Strategic Planning Meeting September 20, 2007

2. 2 Presentation Sequence 1:00 pm WMKO Strategic Plan & NGAO (Wizinowich) 1:10 pm NGAO System Design Phase Status 1:15 pm Science Cases & Requirements –Overview (Max) –Precision astrometry at the Galactic Center & in sparse fields (Cameron & Lu) –High redshift galaxies with multiple IFU’s (Steidel & Law) –Gravitationally lensed galaxies with single IFU’s (Marshall & Treu) 2:20 pm System Architecture (Dekany) 2:30 pm Discussion –Potential Topics 3:00 pm Done

3. WMKO Strategic Plan & NGAO

4. 4 Keck Strategic Plan: Twenty-year strategic goals Leadership in high angular resolution astronomy Leadership in state of the art instrumentation Highly efficient observing Complementarity with ELTs NGAO supports all of these!

5. 5 Keck AO Strategic Plan: NGAO AO strategic plan established by Keck AO Working Group in Nov/02 & reaffirmed in Sept/04: “AOWG vision is that high Strehl, single-object, AO will be the most important competitive point for Keck AO in the next decade.” Sept/05: New AOWG tasked by Observatory & SSC to develop science case for Keck NGAO. Jun/06. NGAO proposal approved. Multi-object also emphasized

6. 6 Keck AO Science Productivity Substellar binaries 126 NGS & 30 LGS

7. 7 Key new capabilities for NGAO 1.Dramatically improved near-IR performance Significantly higher Strehls (  80% at K)  improved sensitivity Lower backgrounds  improved sensitivity Improved PSF stability & knowledge  improved photometry, astrometry & companion sensitivity 2.Increased sky coverage & Multiplexing Improved tip/tilt correction  improved sky coverageImproved tip/tilt correction  improved sky coverage Multiplexing  dramatic efficiency improvementsMultiplexing  dramatic efficiency improvements  Much broader range of science programs 3.AO correction at red wavelengths Strehl of 15 - 25% at 750 nm  highest angular resolution of any existing filled aperture telescope 4.Instrumentation to facilitate the range of science programs

8. 8 Key performance metrics: Strehl vs. observing wavelength Current NGS Current LGS NGAO HH Ca Triplet

9. 9 System Architecture Tomography to measure wavefronts & overcome cone effect AO-corrected, IR tip-tilt stars for broad sky coverage Closed-loop AO for 1 st relay Open-loop AO for deployable IFUs & 2 nd relay

10. NGAO System Design Phase Status

11. 11 NGAO System Design Phase System Design Phase. Oct/07 to Apr/08. Executive Committee established to manage this phase: –Wizinowich (WMKO, chair), Dekany (Caltech), Gavel (UCSC), Max (UCSC, project scientist) Deliverables: –Science & Observatory requirements & flow down to system requirements –Performance budgets, functional requirements, system & subsystem architectures –Management plan for remaining NGAO phases

12. 12 System Design Milestones #MILESTONEDATESTATUS 1SD SEMP Approved10/9/06Complete 2SD phase contracts in place10/27/06Complete 3Science Requirements Summary v1.0 Release 10/27/06Complete 4System Requirements Document (SRD) v1.0 Release 12/8/06Complete 5Performance Budgets Summary v1.0 Release 6/15/07Complete 6SRD v2.0 Release5/22/07Nearly complete 7Trade Studies Complete6/22/07Complete 8SRD v3.0 Release 9/7/07Not started 9System Design Manual (SDM) v1.0 Release 9/21/07Complete 10Technical Risk Analysis V1.0 Release 9/21/07Nearly complete 11Cost Review Complete12/7/07Some work as part of system architecture 12SDM v2.0 Release 2/12/08 13System Design Review Package Distributed 3/4/08 14 System Design Review3/31/08 15SDR Report & Project Planning Presentation at SSC meeting 4/14/08 Requirements  Performance Budgets + Trade Studies  System Architecture + Functional Requirements  Subsystem Design + Functional Requirements  Management Plan

13. 13 System Design Products All products maintained at NGAO TWiki site (just Google NGAO) including: –Requirements documents (Science case, System & Functional) –Performance budget reports (wavefront error & encircled energy, astrometry, photometry, companion sensitivity & throughput/emissivity) –Model assumption & validation reports (total of 14) –Trade study reports (total of 23) –Management plans & reports Goal of NGAO shared-risk science in 2013

14. Science Cases & Requirements

15. 15 Outline What is complementary and scientifically unique about Keck NGAO?What is complementary and scientifically unique about Keck NGAO? –JWST, ALMA, TMT –Other ground-based observatories “Science Cases” for NGAO: what are “science requirements” that will guide the design?“Science Cases” for NGAO: what are “science requirements” that will guide the design?

16. 16 Key new capabilities for NGAO 1.Dramatically improved near-IR performance 2.Increased sky coverage & Multiplexing 3.AO correction at red wavelengths 4.Instrumentation to facilitate the range of science programs

17. 17 Complementary to JWST, ALMA JWST: 2013JWST: 2013 –Much higher sensitivity longward of K band  NGAO emphasizing wavelengths > K band –JWST: “Expect same resolution as HST below 2  m”  NGAO has clear resolution advantage –No multi-object IFU capability ALMA: 2012ALMA: 2012 –Spatial resolution as low as 0.01 to 0.1 arc sec (!) –Complementary data on dust & cold gas Our goal is to position NGAO to build on, and complement, JWST & ALMA discoveries

18. 18 Complementary to TMT TMT IRMS: AO multi-slit, based on MOSFIRE –Slits: 0.12” and 0.16”, Field of regard: 2 arc min –Lower backgrounds: 10% of sky + telescope NGAO with multiplexed deployable IFU’s –Multi-object AO  better spatial resolution (0.07”) over full field –Backgrounds:  30% of sky + telescope Pros for TMT: lower backgrounds, higher sensitivity Pros for NGAO: higher spatial resolution, 2D information, better wide field performance Pros for TMT: lower backgrounds, higher sensitivity Pros for NGAO: higher spatial resolution, 2D information, better wide field performance

19. 19 Complementary with other ground-based observatories Other ground-based observatories are largely focusing on wide fields with modest performance, or on very high contrast AOOther ground-based observatories are largely focusing on wide fields with modest performance, or on very high contrast AO “Wide” field (by AO standards):“Wide” field (by AO standards): –Gemini South: Multi-conjugate AO –VLT: Ground layer AO High Contrast:High Contrast: –Gemini Planet Imager –VLT SPHERE

20. 20 Scale of new VLT AO projects is really big Hawk-I: 2012 with AOHawk-I: 2012 with AO –K-band imager, 7.5’ x 7.5’ field MUSE visible multi-IFU: 2012MUSE visible multi-IFU: 2012 –1' field, x 2 seeing improvement MUSE visible narrow field IFU: 2012MUSE visible narrow field IFU: 2012 –7.5” field, ~5% Strehl at 750 nm NGAO must strike balance between scale/cost, risk, and science return. Lesson from these VLT projects: have courage, but be realistic too NGAO must strike balance between scale/cost, risk, and science return. Lesson from these VLT projects: have courage, but be realistic too

21. 21 Outline What is complementary and scientifically unique about Keck NGAO?What is complementary and scientifically unique about Keck NGAO? –JWST, ALMA, TMT –Other ground-based observatories “Science Cases” for NGAO: what are “science requirements” that will guide the design?“Science Cases” for NGAO: what are “science requirements” that will guide the design?

22. 22 Categorize science cases into 2 classes 1.Key Science Drivers: –These push the limits of AO system, instrument, and telescope performance. Determine the most difficult performance requirements. 2.Science Drivers: –These are less technically demanding but still place important requirements on available observing modes, instruments, and PSF knowledge.

23. 23 Key Science Drivers (in order of distance) 1.Minor planets as remnants of early Solar System 2.Planets around low-mass stars 3.General Relativity at the Galactic Center 4.Black hole masses in nearby AGNs 5.High-redshift galaxies

24. 24 1.Minor planets as remnants of early Solar System I-band AO; high contrast; astrometry 2.Planets around low-mass stars High contrast at J, H bands 3.General Relativity at the Galactic Center Precision astrometry and radial velocities 4.Black hole masses in nearby AGNs Spatially resolved spectra at Ca triplet (8500 Å) 5.High-redshift galaxies Multi-IFU spectroscopy; low backgrounds; high sky coverage Key Science Drivers (in order of distance)

25. 25 Some Science Requirements from Key Science Drivers (physical) Wavelength0.7 to 1.0 µmGalactic & Solar System science, nearby AGNs 0.9 to 2.45 µmAll Wavefront error≤ 170 nmAll Solar System, planets around low-mass stars, debris disks, nearby AGNs, QSO hosts, lensed galaxies Tip tilt error≤ 15 mas over ≥ 30% of sky ≤ 3 masGalactic Center 50% ensquared energy within 70 mas over ≥ 30% of sky High z galaxies, Galactic Center radial vel’s IFU field of view≤ 3"High-z field galaxies Imaging field of view ≥10"Galactic Center 30"Reference field of view for design study

26. 26 Some Science Requirements from Key Science Drivers (performance) Background≤ 30% over unattenuated sky+telescope background. Goal: ≤ 20% High-redshift science Astrometric precision100 µasGalactic Center 500 µasExo-planet primary mass Sky coverage fraction≥ 30% (areal average over all sky) Extragalactic science, TNOs,...

27. 27 Instrument Priorities from Key Science Drivers 1.Near-IR imager 2.Visible imager 3.Near-IR IFU (OSIRIS?) 4.Visible IFU 1. Deployable near- IR multi-object IFU Narrow field: Multi-object:

28. 28 Some Science Cases have specific observing requirements Efficient surveys: (e.g. asteroid companions and planets around low-mass stars)Efficient surveys: (e.g. asteroid companions and planets around low-mass stars) Optimizing overall science output of the ObservatoryOptimizing overall science output of the Observatory –“Seeing” and AO correction are variable –Requirements on ability to switch to NGS, and to other instruments –What kinds of “flexible observing” might be appropriate?

29. 29 Science Requirements from Science Drivers (short summary) An “eye test” here, but printed out on your handout sheets. Please send us your input!

30. 30 1.Asteroid size, shape, composition 2.Giant Planets and their moons 3.Debris disks and Young Stellar Objects 4.Astrometry in sparse fields 5.Resolved stellar populations in crowded fields 6.QSO host galaxies 7.Gravitationally lensed galaxies Requirements based on these Science Drivers are still under discussion - we need your input! Science Drivers (in order of distance)

31. 31 NGAO will allow us to tackle important, high-impact science 1.Near diffraction-limited in near-IR (Strehl >80%) Direct detection of planets around low-mass stars Astrometric tests of general relativity in the Galactic Center Structure & kinematics of subcomponents in high redshift galaxies 2.Vastly increased sky coverage and multiplexing Multi-object IFU surveys of distant galaxies 3.AO correction at red wavelengths (0.7-1.0  m) Scattered-light studies of debris disks and their planets Masses and composition of asteroids and Kuiper Belt objects Mass determinations for supermassive black holes

32. 32 Science Case Presentations today Precision astrometry at Galactic Center & in sparse fieldsPrecision astrometry at Galactic Center & in sparse fields –Brian Cameron and Jessica Lu Spectroscopy of high-redshift galaxiesSpectroscopy of high-redshift galaxies –Chuck Steidel and David Law Gravitationally lensed galaxiesGravitationally lensed galaxies –Tommaso Treu and Phil Marshall Intended to illustrate NGAO science requirements development process

33. NGAO System Design: System Architecture

34. 34 System Architecture

35. 35 NGAO Fields of Regard 5 LGS variable radius asterism 3 tip/tilt stars 202" LGS patrol range 180" FoR for tip- tilt star selection Central LGS Roving LGS Multi-object deployable IFU FoV 5 LGS on 11” radius 3 tip/tilt stars 1 st Relay / DNIRI Field of Regard 2 nd Relay / Precision AO Field of Regard 120 arcsec 30 arcsec

36. 36 System Design Progressing Visible imager Near-IR imager Near-IR IFU (OSIRIS) Telescope elevation bearing Keck I or II right Nasmyth platform LGS OSM LGS wavefront sensors on focus stages Woofer DM 589 nm Light f/45 narrow field AO relay Narrow field selection mirror IFU and tip-tilt OSM 2 channel IFU spectrograph (1 of 3) Tip-tilt sensor (1 of 3) K ‑ mirror image de-rotator f/15 AO Relay OMU Bench

37. 37 Conclusion: NGAO Capabilities 1.Dramatically improved near-IR performance Significantly higher Strehls (  80% at K)  improved sensitivity Lower backgrounds  improved sensitivity Improved PSF stability & knowledge  improved photometry, astrometry & companion sensitivity 2.Increased sky coverage & Multiplexing Improved tip/tilt correction  improved sky coverageImproved tip/tilt correction  improved sky coverage Multiplexing  dramatic efficiency improvementsMultiplexing  dramatic efficiency improvements  Much broader range of science programs 3.AO correction at red wavelengths Strehl of 15 - 25% at 750 nm  highest angular resolution of any existing filled aperture telescope 4.Instrumentation to facilitate the range of science programs Enables wide variety of new science within interests of Keck Community