Metrology for Industry for use in the Manufacture of Grazing Incidence Beam Line Mirrors

Abstract

The goal of this SBIR was to determine the slope sensitivity of Specular Reflection Deflectometry (SRD) and whether shearing methods had the sensitivity to be able to separate errors in the test equipment from slope error in the unit under test (UUT), or mirror. After many variations of test parameters it does not appear that SRD yields results much better than 1 μ radian RMS independent of how much averaging is done. Of course, a single number slope sensitivity over the full range of spatial scales is not a very insightful number in the same sense as a single number phase or height RMS value in interferometry does not tell the full story. However, the 1 μ radian RMS number is meaningful when contrasted with a sensitivity goal of better than 0.1 μ radian RMS. Shearing is a time proven method of separating the errors in a measurement from the actual shape of a UUT. It is accomplished by taking multiple measurements while moving the UUT relative to the test instrument. This process makes it possible to separate the two errors sources but only to a sensitivity of about 1 μ radian RMS. Another aspect of our conclusions is thatmore » this limit probably holds largely independent of the spatial scale of the test equipment. In the proposal for this work it was suggested that a test screen the full size of the UUT could be used to determine the slopes on scales of maybe 0.01 to full scale of the UUT while smaller screens and shorter focal length lenses could be used to measure shorter, or smaller, patches of slope. What we failed to take into consideration was that as the scale of the test equipment got smaller so too did the optical lever arm on which the slope was calculated. Although we did not do a test with a shorter focal length lens over a smaller sample area it is hard to argue with the logic that the slope sensitivity will be about the same independent of the spatial scale of the measurement assuming the test equipment is similarly scaled. On a more positive note, SRD does appear to be a highly flexible, easy to implement, rather inexpensive test for free form optics that require a dynamic range that exceeds that of interferometry. These optics are quite often specified to have more relaxed slope errors, on the order of 1 μ radian RMS or greater. It would be shortsighted to not recognize the value of this test method in the bigger picture.« less