hv

photonics

Article
The Optimization Design of a Lightweight 2 m SiC Mirror for
Ground-Based Telescopes
Zhichen Wang 1,2, *, Tao Chen 1 , Yuyan Cao 1 , Wenqiang Fan 1 , Honghao Wang 1,2 and Wenpan Wang 1,2

1 Changchun Institute of Optics, Fine Mechanics and Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences,
Changchun 130033, China
2 University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: The weight of the primary mirror increases as the aperture of ground-based telescopes
increases, making it more challenging to maintain the positional stability and surface accuracy of the
solid primary mirror. Consequently, a 2 m lightweight silicon carbide (SiC) mirror and an optimization
method were proposed in this study. The relationship between the gravitational deformation of the
mirror and its thickness and number of supports was derived based on force analysis of the mirror; the
thickness of the mirror and the appropriate number of supports were obtained as initial parameters
for optimization. The back structure of the mirror was designed in a lotus pattern to improve its
rigidity. Numerous structural parameters were classified into major and non-major parameters
based on the results of a sensitivity analysis. The non-major and major structural parameters were
optimized using a Latin hypercube design method and a non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm,
respectively. The optimized 2 m lightweight SiC mirror had a mass of 119 kg and an areal density
of 38.7 kg/m2 . The surface figure error root-mean-square (RMS) in the vertical state of the optical
axis and the first modal resonance of the mirror assembly calculated using finite element analysis
were 11.3 nm and 76.5 Hz, respectively. Modal tests of the mirror assembly were conducted using
the hammering method, achieving a maximum relative frequency error of 7.4% compared with the
simulation results. The optimized 2 m SiC mirror was over 50% lighter than traditional passive
Zerodur mirrors of the same size.

Keywords: lightweight mirror; ground-based telescope; silicon carbide; primary mirror

Citation: Wang, Z.; Chen, T.; Cao, Y.;
Fan, W.; Wang, H.; Wang, W. The
Optimization Design of a Lightweight
2 m SiC Mirror for Ground-Based 1. Introduction
Telescopes. Photonics 2024, 11, 581. Ground-based telescopes serve as vital tools for space exploration. Increasing the
https://doi.org/10.3390/ aperture of telescopes is an effective method for improving their imaging resolution and
photonics11060581 detection ability. However, as the aperture increases, the weight of the solid primary
Received: 2 May 2024 mirror (PM) increases roughly in proportion to the cubic power of the aperture, making it
Revised: 17 June 2024 more challenging to maintain the positional stability and surface accuracy of the PM [1].
Accepted: 17 June 2024 Moreover, an increase in the PM weight increases the overall weight of the telescope,
Published: 20 June 2024 which adversely affects the tracking of rapid targets and increases manufacturing costs.
Consequently, the optimization of a lightweight PM has always been the focus of ground-
based telescope research and development [2,3].
A PM with a diameter greater than 3 m such as the 4.2 m SOAR PM is usually made
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. lightweight by means of a thin mirror and active support technology. Compared with active
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. support technology, passive support technology has advantages such as a simple structure,
This article is an open access article
high reliability, low cost, and easy maintenance. Consequently, ground-based telescopes
distributed under the terms and
with apertures of 2 m typically adopt passive support technology. Many studies have
conditions of the Creative Commons
been conducted on lightweight mirrors that are passively supported. The 1.8 m Zerodur
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
PM of the VLT auxiliary telescope was made lightweight by drilling hexagonal holes on
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
the back, reducing the weight from 1384 to 605 kg. The areal density of the mirror was
4.0/).

Photonics 2024, 11, 581. https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics11060581 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/photonics

Photonics 2024, 11, 581 2 of 14

approximately 221 kg/m2 [4,5]. A 2 m lightweight silicon carbide (SiC) PM with an annular
pattern on the back produced by CIOMP achieved a weight of 333 kg and an areal density
of 105 kg/m2 [6]. Corning used abrasive waterjetting and other technologies to produce
lightweight cores. These were then bonded to the front and back plates to manufacture
sandwich-structure ULE mirrors. This technology was used to fabricate a 1.3 m secondary
mirror weighing 185 kg for the Subaru telescope [7,8]. Composite Mirror Applications,
Inc. (CMA) produced a 1 m carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) PM using composite
replication technology, achieving a weight of 27 kg and an areal density of 37 kg/m2 [9].
Zerodur, ULE, and SiC are commonly used materials for fabricating mirrors. In
addition to optical performance, the mechanical and thermal properties of lightweight
mirrors should be considered [10]. SiC, which has a high Young’s modulus and a low
density, is an ideal candidate for lightweight mirrors. During the early years, SiC mirrors
were expensive and used primarily for space mirrors; however, with the improvement in
production technology, the cost of SiC mirrors has decreased considerably, and they have
been used in ground-based telescopes [11,12]. SiC mirrors are produced via a reaction-
bonding process akin to casting, which enables the creation of an intricate structure that is
highly advantageous for lightweight mirrors. In light of the aforementioned advantages
of SiC, this study focuses on the structural design of a 2 m lightweight mirror using
SiC materials.
The structural design of lightweight mirrors mainly aims to eliminate mirror body
components with minimal deformation resistance contribution, thus reducing the weight
of the mirror without compromising its optical performance. Topology and parameter
optimization have been extensively utilized in the lightweight mirror design. Liu et al.
used a topology optimization technique to design a 2 m lightweight SiC primary mirror
of a space telescope [13]. Zhai et al. conducted a lightweight design for a 2.02 m SiC
mirror using parameter optimization, resulting in a model weight of 228 kg [14]. Wang
et al. employed structural and parametric optimization to develop a 2 m ultralight SiC
mirror weighing only 105 kg with an areal density of 34 kg/m2 [15]. Topology optimization
seeks to attain the most optimal structural topology, while parameter optimization aims to
determine the optimal dimensions of a given structure. This study employs a combined
approach of topology and parameter optimization to achieve the lightweight design of a
2 m SiC mirror.

2. Initial Parameters of the 2 m SiC Mirror

The mirror is designed for the PM in an Alt-Az telescope capable of observing low-
orbit space targets. Consequently, the telescope has a high tracking speed, necessitating
a lightweight mirror. The mirror, with a diameter of 2 m, has a central hole of 0.32 m in
diameter and a focal ratio of 1.5.
The thickness of the mirror and the number of axial supports are traditionally deter-
mined using the empirical formulas in Equations (1) and (2), after which the parameters
obtained can be adjusted based on the experience of the designer [16].

3ρgr4
δ= (1)
16Et2

1.5r2 ρg
r
N= (2)
t Eδ
where δ denotes the maximum deformation of the mirror; t and r denote the thickness and
radius of the mirror, respectively; ρ and E denote the density and Young’s modulus of the
material, respectively; and N denotes the number of axial supports.
The parameters adjusted by different designers can vary considerably, which signifi-
cantly affects the design of the mirror structure. Consequently, a theoretical analysis of the
mirror thickness and the number of axial supports is necessary.
 Photonics 2024, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 14

The parameters adjusted by different designers can vary considerably, which sig-
Photonics 2024, 11, 581 3 of 14
nificantly affects the design of the mirror structure. Consequently, a theoretical analysis
of the mirror thickness and the number of axial supports is necessary.
The elastic deformation of mirrors due to gravity is the primary factor influencing
The elastic deformation of mirrors due to gravity is the primary factor influencing their
their surface figure error. To minimize the gravitational deformation of mirrors, two
surface figure error. To minimize the gravitational deformation of mirrors, two methods
methods have been adopted: first, the stiffness of the mirror can be changed by selecting
have been adopted: first, the stiffness of the mirror can be changed by selecting materials
materials (such as SiC) with a high Young’s modulus or by altering the geometric di-
(such as SiC) with a high Young’s modulus or by altering the geometric dimensions of
mensions of the mirror (such as increasing the thickness of the mirror) to increase the
the mirror (such as increasing the thickness of the mirror) to increase the area moment of
area moment of inertia; second, the number of axial supports for the mirror can be in-
inertia; second, the number of axial supports for the mirror can be increased. Reducing
creased. Reducing the distance between the supports by increasing their number can
the distance between the supports by increasing their number can effectively reduce the
effectively reduce
gravitational the gravitational
deformation deformation
of the mirror (Figure 1).of the mirror (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Effect of supports on gravitational deformation of the mirror.

Figure 1. Effect of supports on gravitational deformation of the mirror.
The section of the mirror between the two supports can be regarded as a single
The section
supported of with
structure the mirror between
a uniformly the two gravitational
distributed supports can load.
be regarded as a single
Consequently, the
supported structure with a uniformly distributed
mirror deformation can be expressed as follows: gravitational load. Consequently, the
mirror deformation can be expressed as follows:

= REI
( R R M( x)
δ= dx + Ax + B
k (3)

= "
!
M ( x ) = 0 qxdx (3)

where I denotes the area moment of inertia, q denotes the uniformly distributed gravita-
whereload,
tional I denotes the area
k denotes moment between
the distance of inertia,theq denotes the uniformly
two supports, distributed
M(x) denotes gravita-
the bonding
tional load, k denotes the distance between
moment, and A and B denote integral constants. the two supports, M(x) denotes the bonding
moment, and A anddistributed
The uniformly B denote integral constants.
gravitational load and the area moment of inertia can be
The uniformly
expressed as follows:distributed gravitational load and the area moment of inertia can be
expressed as follows: q = ρbhg (4)
= #$ℎ&
Z h/2
I= 2
z bdz (4)
(5)
+/*
−h/2

' = ( )*$ )
where b and h denotes the width and thickness of the structure between the two sup-
(5)
ports, respectively. -+/*
The number of axial supports can be expressed as follows:
where b and h denotes the width and thickness of the structure between the two sup-
ports, respectively.  2  2
π D2 − π d2
The number of axial supports can be expressed as follows:
N= (6)
π./02k1 -./21
 2

= 3
./ 1
(6)
where D denotes the diameter of the mirror, and d denotes the diameter of the center hole
in the mirror.
where D denotes the diameter of the mirror, and d denotes the diameter of the center hole
From
in the Equations (3)–(6), the thickness of the mirror can be calculated as follows:
mirror.
From Equations (3)–(6), the thickness of the mirror
can be calculated as follows:
5ρg D2 − d2
r

ℎ = 32Ev
4 ∙ N
h= − · 78 -9 : (7)
* 5 ;
(7)
For the 2 m SiC mirror, 18, 36, and 54 supports were selected, and the maximum
For the 2 m SiC mirror, 18, 36, and 54 supports were selected, and the maximum
gravitational deformations of mirrors with different thicknesses could be calculated using
gravitational deformations of mirrors with different thicknesses could be calculated us-
Equation (7). The deformation curves of the mirrors shown in Figure 2 indicate that the
ing Equation (7). The deformation curves of the mirrors shown in Figure 2 indicate that
gravitational deformation of the mirror is considerably reduced by increasing the number
of supports and the mirror thickness. However, as the number of supports and mirror
thickness increase, their impact on the gravitational deformation of the mirror becomes
less evident. Consequently, indiscriminately increasing the number of supports or mirror
 sign complexity and complicates the support structure. Similarly, excessively increasing
the thickness of the mirror results in a minimal change in its gravitational deformation
but increases both its weight and manufacturing costs.
The gravitational deformation of the 36-supported ULE mirror is shown in Figure 2.
Photonics 2024, 11, 581 Even with 36 supports, the maximum deformation of the ULE mirror was slightly lower 4 of 14
than that of the SiC mirror with 18 supports, owing to the high specific stiffness (elastic
modulus/density) of SiC, which offers unparalleled advantages in lightweight mirrors.
The maximum
thickness might not be gravitational deformation
beneficial. Excessively of the 2 the
increasing m SiC mirror
number with 18 minimally
of supports axial sup-
ports is limited to 39.6 nm (λ/16, λ = 632.8 nm). The thickness of the solid mirror
affects the gravitational deformation of the mirror but increases the design complexity derived
and
complicates the support structure. Similarly, excessively increasing the thickness ofopti-
from Equation (7) is 122 mm, which serves as the initial parameter for lightweight the
mization.
mirror The in
results 18 asupports
minimalcan be arranged
change in inner and
in its gravitational outer ring configurations,
deformation withits6
but increases both
supports
weight andin manufacturing
the inner ring and 12 supports in the outer ring.
costs.

the number
Figure 2. Effect of the number of
of axial
axial supports
supportsand
andmirror
mirrorthickness
thicknesson
ondeformation
deformationofof22mmmirrors.
mirrors.

3. BackTheStructure
gravitational
of thedeformation
2 m SiC Mirrorof the 36-supported ULE mirror is shown in Figure 2.
Even with 36 supports, the maximum deformation of the ULE mirror was slightly lower
Many pa<erns can be used on the back of a lightweight mirror, the most commonly
than that of the SiC mirror with 18 supports, owing to the high specific stiffness (elastic
used being triangular, hexagonal, and annular pa<erns.
modulus/density) of SiC, which offers unparalleled advantages in lightweight mirrors.
In this
The study, agravitational
maximum triangular pa<ern with a of
deformation spacing
the 2 mofSiC
k between adjacent
mirror with ribs supports
18 axial was first
is limited to 39.6 nm (λ/16, λ = 632.8 nm). The thickness of the solid mirror derivedthe
used for the 2 m SiC mirror (Figure 3a). The location of the support should be at rib
from
intersections; consequently, the inner and outer rings are not independent but
Equation (7) is 122 mm, which serves as the initial parameter for lightweight optimization. are inter-
related
The as a function
18 supports can beofarranged
k. A finite element
in inner andmodel
outer of the
ring 2 m SiC mirror
configurations, was
with developed
6 supports in
using
the thering
inner ANSYS parametric
and 12 supports in design language
the outer ring. (APDL). The surface figure error RMS
varies with distance k under a gravitational load (Figure 3b). When the distance k is 200
mm,
3. Back theStructure
minimum of surface
the 2 m figure error RMS of the mirror is 19 nm. The deformation
SiC Mirror
cloudManymap patterns
of the mirror is shown in
can be used on the Figure
back3c.
of a lightweight mirror, the most commonly
used being triangular, hexagonal, and annular patterns.
In this study, a triangular pattern with a spacing of k between adjacent ribs was first
used for the 2 m SiC mirror (Figure 3a). The location of the support should be at the
rib intersections; consequently, the inner and outer rings are not independent but are
interrelated as a function of k. A finite element model of the 2 m SiC mirror was developed
using the ANSYS parametric design language (APDL). The surface figure error RMS varies
with distance k under a gravitational load (Figure 3b). When the distance k is 200 mm, the
minimum surface figure error RMS of the mirror is 19 nm. The deformation cloud map of
the mirror is shown in Figure 3c.
The 2 m SiC mirror was also tested using an annular pattern where the inner and outer
rings were independent of each other (Figure 4a). A finite element model of the mirror
was developed using the APDL. Different outer ring radii (rout ) were set and the inner ring
radius (rin ) was varied from 330 to 400 mm. The surface figure error RMS of the mirror was
computed under a gravitational load, with the variation curve of surface figure error RMS
indicated in Figure 4b. The minimum surface figure error RMS of the mirror is 19.5 nm
when rin and rout are 380 and 840 mm, respectively. A deformation cloud map of the mirror
is shown in Figure 4c.
 Photonics 2024, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 14
Photonics 2024, 11, 581 5 of 14

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 3. (a) The triangular pa<ern on the back of the 2 m SiC mirror. (b) The curve of surface fig-
ure error RMS versus distance k. (c) The deformation cloud map of the mirror when distance k is
200 mm.

The 2 m SiC mirror was also tested using an annular pa<ern where the inner and
outer rings were independent of each other (Figure 4a). A finite element model of the
mirror was developed using the APDL. Different outer ring radii (rout) were set and the
inner ring radius (rin) was varied from 330 to 400 mm. The surface figure error RMS of the
mirror was computed under a gravitational load, with the variation curve of surface fig-
(a) ure error RMS indicated (b) in Figure 4b. The minimum surface figure (c) error RMS of the
mirror is
Figure3.3.(a)19.5
(a)Thenm when
Thetriangular r and
triangular patternr
pa<ern on are
on the 380 and
the back 840 mm, respectively. A deformation cloud
back of
of the
the 22 m
m SiC
SiC mirror.
mirror. (b)
(b)The
Thecurve
curveofofsurface
surfacefig-
in out
Figure figure
map of the mirror is shown in Figure 4c.
ure error RMS versus distance k. (c) The deformation cloud map of the mirror when distance k is
error RMS versus distance k. (c) The deformation cloud map of the mirror when distance k is 200 mm.
200 mm.

The 2 m SiC mirror was also tested using an annular pa<ern where the inner and
outer rings were independent of each other (Figure 4a). A finite element model of the
mirror was developed using the APDL. Different outer ring radii (rout) were set and the
inner ring radius (rin) was varied from 330 to 400 mm. The surface figure error RMS of the
mirror was computed under a gravitational load, with the variation curve of surface fig-
ure error RMS indicated in Figure 4b. The minimum surface figure error RMS of the
mirror is 19.5 nm when rin and rout are 380 and 840 mm, respectively. A deformation cloud
map of the mirror is shown in Figure 4c.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure4.4.(a)
Figure (a)The
Theannular
annularpattern
pa<ernon
onthe
theback
backofofthe
the
2m2m SiC
SiC mirror.
mirror. (b)(b)
TheThe curve
curve of the
of the surface
surface figure
figure error RMS versus the inner ring radius Rin for different outer ring radii Rout. (c) The defor-
error RMS versus the inner ring radius Rin for different outer ring radii Rout . (c) The deformation
mation cloud map of the mirror when Rin and Rout are 380 and 840 mm, respectively.
cloud map of the mirror when Rin and Rout are 380 and 840 mm, respectively.
The essence of the pa<ern on the back of the mirror is to enhance the area moment of
The essence of the pattern on the back of the mirror is to enhance the area moment
inertia of the mirror to improve its bending resistance. To achieve this, a lotus pa<ern for
of inertia of the mirror to improve its bending resistance. To achieve this, a lotus pattern
the 2 m SiC mirror was implemented (Figure 5a). A finite element model of the mirror
for the 2 m SiC mirror was implemented (Figure 5a). A finite element model of the mirror
was developed using the APDL. Different outer radii (rout) were set, and the inner radius
was
(rin)developed
was varied using
from 330 the toAPDL.
400 mm.Different outer figure
The surface radii (rerror
out ) were
RMS set, and
of the the inner
mirror radius
was cal-
(a) (rculated
in ) was varied from 330
(b) to 400 mm. The surface figure error RMS
under a gravitational load, with the variation curve of the surface figure errorwas
(c) of the mirror
calculated
RMS indicated under aFigure
gravitational load, withsurface
the variationerrorcurveRMS of the surface figure error
Figure 4. (a) The in 5b. The
annular pa<ern onminimum
the back of the 2 mfigure
SiC mirror. (b) Theofcurve
the mirror is 17.7
of the surface
RMS indicated
nm when
figure inversus
and
errorrinRMS Figure 5b.
rout arethe
370 The minimum
andring
inner 830radius Rsurface figure
mm, respectively.
in for different
error
Aouter RMSradii
deformation
ring of the
Routmirror
cloud Theisof
. (c)map 17.7
the nm
defor-
when
mation
mirror rincloud
isand rout in
map
shown are 370
of Figure
the and
mirror 830 mm,
5c. when respectively.
Rin and A deformation
Rout are 380 and cloud map of the mirror
840 mm, respectively.
is shown in Figure 5c.
Comparing
The essence three
of the different
pa<ern onpatterns
the backfor themirror
of the 2 m SiCis tomirror,
enhancethethelotus
areapattern
momentmirror
of
has surface
inertia of thefigure
mirrorerror RMS ofits
to improve 17.7 nm, which
bending is superior
resistance. To achieveto those
this,of the triangular
a lotus pa<ern forand
the 2 mpatterns.
annular SiC mirror was implemented (Figure 5a). A finite element model of the mirror
wasA developed
topologyusing the APDL.
optimization Different
method wasouter radii (routto
employed ) were set, and
improve the the inner radius
lightweight of the
(r ) was varied from 330 to 400 mm. The surface figure error RMS of
2 m SiC mirror. The surface plate and support locations were designated as non-optimized
in the mirror was cal-
culated whereas
regions, under a gravitational
the remainingload, with
parts themirror
of the variation curve
were of the surface
designated figure error
as optimized regions.
The result of the topology optimization is shown in Figure 6a, with red indicatingisthe
RMS indicated in Figure 5b. The minimum surface figure error RMS of the mirror 17.7
parts
nm when r and r are 370 and 830 mm, respectively. A deformation
to be retained and blue indicating those that can be removed. Based on the optimization
in out cloud map of the
mirror the
results, is shown
heightinofFigure 5c. edge of the mirror was reduced. Considering the grinding
the outer
process, auxiliary reinforcing ribs were added to the back of the surface plate to enhance its
rigidity. To enhance the natural frequency of the mirror and position the center of gravity
behind the surface plate, semi-open back plates were designed on the back of the mirror.
The final structure of the 2 m SiC mirror is shown in Figure 6b.
 Photonics
Photonics 2024,
2024, 11,11, x FOR PEER REVIEW
(a)
581 (b) (c) 6 of 14
6 of 14

Figure 5. (a) A lotus pa<ern on the back of the 2 m SiC mirror. (b) The curve of the surface figure
error RMS versus the inner ring radius Rin for different outer ring radii Rout. (c) The deformation
cloud map of the mirror when Rin and Rout are 370 and 830 mm, respectively.

Comparing three different pa<erns for the 2 m SiC mirror, the lotus pa<ern mirror
has surface figure error RMS of 17.7 nm, which is superior to those of the triangular and
annular pa<erns.
A topology optimization method was employed to improve the lightweight of the 2
m SiC mirror. The surface plate and support locations were designated as non-optimized
regions, whereas the remaining parts of the mirror were designated as optimized re-
gions. The result of the topology optimization is shown in Figure 6a, with red indicating
the parts to be retained and blue indicating those that can be removed. Based on the op-
(a) timization results, the (b) height of the outer edge of the mirror was (c) reduced. Considering
the grinding process, auxiliary reinforcing ribs were added to the back of the surface
Figure 5. (a) A lotus pa<ern on the back of the 2 m SiC mirror. (b) The curve of the surface figure
Figure
plate to (a) A lotus
5. enhance itspattern on the
rigidity. back of the
To enhance the2m SiC mirror.
natural (b) The
frequency ofcurve of the surface
the mirror figure
and position
error RMS versus the inner ring radius Rin for different outer ring radii Rout. (c) The deformation
error
the RMS versus
center of the inner
gravity ring radius
behind the Rin forplate,
surface different outer ring
semi-open back Rout . (c)
radiiplates Thedesigned
were deformation
on
cloud map of the mirror when Rin and Rout are 370 and 830 mm, respectively.
cloud map of the mirror when
the back of the mirror. The final Rin and R are
structure
out 370 and 830 mm, respectively.
of the 2 m SiC mirror is shown in Figure 6b.
Comparing three different pa<erns for the 2 m SiC mirror, the lotus pa<ern mirror
has surface figure error RMS of 17.7 nm, which is superior to those of the triangular and
annular pa<erns.
A topology optimization method was employed to improve the lightweight of the 2
m SiC mirror. The surface plate and support locations were designated as non-optimized
regions, whereas the remaining parts of the mirror were designated as optimized re-
gions. The result of the topology optimization is shown in Figure 6a, with red indicating
the parts to be retained and blue indicating those that can be removed. Based on the op-
timization results, the height of the outer edge of the mirror was reduced. Considering
the grinding process, auxiliary reinforcing ribs were added to the back of the surface
plate to enhance its rigidity. To enhance the natural frequency of the mirror and position
the center of gravity behind the surface plate, semi-open back plates were designed on
(a) (b)
the back of the mirror. The final structure of the 2 m SiC mirror is shown in Figure 6b.
Figure6.6.(a)
Figure (a)The
Thetopology
topologyoptimization
optimizationresult
result
ofof the
the 2m2m SiC
SiC mirror.
mirror. (b)(b)
TheThe final
final structure
structure of the
of the 2 m2
m SiC mirror with a lotus pa<ern.
SiC mirror with a lotus pattern.

4.
4. Optimization
Optimization of of Mirror
Mirror Structure
StructureParameters
Parameters
Optimization
Optimizationof of the
the structural
structuralparameters
parameterscould couldbe beperformed
performedafter afterdetermining
determiningthe the
structure of the 2 m SiC mirror. A 1/6 mirror was selected for
structure of the 2 m SiC mirror. A 1/6 mirror was selected for optimization to enhance optimization to enhance
computational
computational efficiency.
efficiency. The The mirror
mirror isisan
anaxisymmetric
axisymmetric geometric
geometric body,
body,evenly
evenlydivided
divided
into six sections at 60 ◦ intervals. Each section includes three axial supports, with one on
into six sections at 60° intervals. Each section includes three axial supports, with one on
the
the inner
inner ring
ring and
and twotwoon onthetheouter
outerring.
ring. The
The radial
radial stiffness
stiffness of of the
the mirror
mirror significantly
significantly
exceeds its axial stiffness, and the radial support positions
exceeds its axial stiffness, and the radial support positions are related are related to the mirror’s center
to the mirror’s
of gravity, remaining insensitive to variations in specific structural
center of gravity, remaining insensitive to variations in specific structural parameters. parameters. Meanwhile,
the axial support (a)positions significantly impact the optimization(b) of structural parameters.
Meanwhile, the axial support positions significantly impact the optimization of structur-
Consequently,
Figure 6. (a) Thethe lightweight
topology optimization
optimization process
result of the 2 m SiCincluded
mirror. (b)axial support
The final positions
structure of the 2and
excluded radial
m SiC mirror withsupport positions. Symmetrical constraints were applied to the connecting
a lotus pa<ern.
surfaces. A flowchart for the structural parameter optimization of the 2 m SiC mirror is
4. Optimization
shown in Figure 7. of Mirror Structure Parameters
Numerous structural parameters
Optimization of the structural of the 2 mcould
parameters SiC mirror could beafter
be performed further optimized,
determining theand
changes to certain parameters may have minimal effects on the
structure of the 2 m SiC mirror. A 1/6 mirror was selected for optimization to enhancesurface figure error RMS
and mass of theefficiency.
computational mirror. Simultaneous
The mirror isoptimization
an axisymmetric of these parameters
geometric body,would
evenlysignificantly
divided
reduce
into sixcomputational
sections at 60° speed, particularly
intervals. Each sectionfor includes
structural parameters
three with minimal
axial supports, with one impacts
on
onthethe
inner ring figure
surface and two on RMS
error the outer ring. The
and mass, radial in
resulting stiffness
a wasteofofthe mirror significantly
computational resources.
exceeds itsitaxial
Therefore, was stiffness,
imperative andtothe radial support
differentiate thesepositions
parameters are related
to discern to the
themirror’s
sensitivity
ofcenter of gravity,
the surface figureremaining
error RMS insensitive
and mass to variations
to parameter in specific structural
variations. parameters.
A parametric study
Meanwhile,
method the axial support
was employed positions
to conduct significantly
a sensitivity impact
analysis on thetheeleven
optimization of structur-
structural parameters.
Each factor (parameter) independently varied from low to high across 30 specific levels
(parameter values) within the experimental space, while the other factors were constant at
their baseline values. A total of 331 analytical calculations were conducted to identify the
Photonics 2024,11,
Photonics2024, 11,581
x FOR PEER REVIEW 77 of
of1414

impact of each factor

al parameters. on the outcomes.
Consequently, The surface
the lightweight optimization RMS and
figure errorprocess mass variations
included axial sup-
with respect to the structural parameters are shown in Figure 8a and Figure 8b, respectively.
port positions and excluded radial support positions. Symmetrical constraints were ap-
The greater
plied to thethe surface figure
connecting errorARMS
surfaces. and mass
flowchart variations,
for the the
structural more sensitive
parameter they areof
optimization
tothe
changes in the structural parameters.
2 m SiC mirror is shown in Figure 7.

Figure7.7.Flowchart
Figure Flowchartfor
forthe
thestructural
structuralparameter
parameteroptimization
optimizationofofthe
the2 2mmSiC
SiCmirror.
mirror.

Figure 8a shows
Numerous that the
structural outer ringof
parameters radius
the 2 (rm2 )SiC
has mirror
the greatest
couldimpact on the
be further surface
optimized,
figure error RMS,
and changes followed
to certain by the main
parameters mayrib thickness
have minimal (tr ),effects
surface
onplate thickness
the surface (tf ), error
figure and
inner
RMS ring and radius
mass of(rthe 1 ). mirror.
Figure 8b shows that optimization
Simultaneous the main rib of thickness (tr ) has thewould
these parameters greatest sig-
impact
nificantly on the mirrorcomputational
reduce mass, followedspeed,by the particularly
surface platefor thickness
structural(tf ), back plate width
parameters with
(w b ), and mirror
minimal impacts thickness
on the (h). The remaining
surface figure errorstructural
RMS and parameters, including
mass, resulting in athe
wasteouterof
edge height
computational (h ), auxiliary rib height
o resources. Therefore, it (h ), outer edge thickness
s was imperative to differentiate (to ), auxiliary rib thickness
these parameters
(tto
s ), discern
and back theplate thickness
sensitivity (tb ),surface
of the were defined as theRMS
figure error non-major
and mass structural parameters
to parameter varia-
because
tions. Athey cause less
parametric thanmethod
study 10% variation in the surface
was employed figure error
to conduct RMS and
a sensitivity mass within
analysis on the
the
elevenexperimental
structuralspace. The Latin
parameters. Eachhypercube design (LHD)
factor (parameter) method was
independently employed
varied from low forto
non-major structural parameters, and the function can be expressed
high across 30 specific levels (parameter values) within the experimental space, while the as follows:
other factors were constant at their baseline values. A total of 331 analytical calculations
were conducted to identify the impact of each factor on the outcomes. The surface figure
error RMS and mass variations with respect to the structural parameters are shown in
Figure 8a and 8b, respectively. The greater the surface figure error RMS and mass varia-
tions, the more sensitive they are to changes in the structural parameters.
Photonics 2024, 11, 581 8 of 14




 f ind ( X ) = (to , ho , ts , hs , tb ) T



 min( RMS, mass)
S.T




3 ≤ to ≤ 6

(8)

 30 ≤ ho ≤ 70
≤ ts ≤ 6




 3



 20 ≤ hs ≤ 50
3 ≤ tb ≤ 6


The optimization objective was to minimize the surface figure error RMS and mass
of the mirror, using a sample size of 100. The level distribution of each factor is shown
in Figure 9, demonstrating that the LHD method uniformly samples the factors within
the design matrix. The responses of the surface figure error RMS and mass are shown in
Photonics 2024, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 14
Figure 10. The preferred values of non-major structural parameters are summarized in
Table 1.

(a) (b)
Figure 8.
Figure 8. (a)
(a) Curves
Curves of
of surface
surface figure
figure error
error RMS versus the
RMS versus the structural
structural parameters
parameters of
of the
the 22 m
m SiC
SiC
mirror. (b) Curves of mass versus the structural parameters of the 2 m SiC mirror.
mirror. (b) Curves of mass versus the structural parameters of the 2 m SiC mirror.

Figure
After 8a shows that
completing the outer
the design ring radiusstructural
of non-major (r2) has the greatest impact
parameters, furtheron the surface
optimization
figure error RMS, followed by the main rib thickness (t
was required for the six major structural parameters, including the outer ring radius
r), surface plate thickness (tf), (r
and2 ),
inner ring radius (r ). Figure 8b shows that the main rib thickness
main rib thickness (tr ), surface plate thickness (tf ), inner ring radius (r1 ), mirror thickness
1 (t r) has the greatest
impact
(h), and on theplate
back mirror
widthmass,(wfollowed by the surface plate thickness (tf), back plate width
b ). The mass of the 1/6 mirror was limited to 21 kg. The
(wb), and mirror
optimization thickness
function can be(h). The remaining
expressed as follows: structural parameters, including the outer
edge height (ho), auxiliary  rib height (hs), outer edge thickness (to), auxiliary rib thickness
T
(ts), and back plate thickness (tf bind
), were definedh, t f ,as
tr , the
r1 , rnon-major structural parameters be-


 ( X) = 2 , wb
cause they cause less than  10% variation in the surface figure error RMS and mass within



 min( RMS, mass)
the experimental space. The 
 Latin hypercube design (LHD) method was employed for

 S.T
non-major structural parameters, and the function can be expressed as follows:


110 ≤ hC≤ =
@AB 140DE , ℎE , DG , ℎG , DH I

mass ≤ 21


⎧



JAB K L, JMNN


⎪
(9)

⎪ 3L.≤
⎪ O tr ≤ 6

 3 ≤ t f ≤ 6

≤3r1≤≤DE400 ≤6





30r≤ ℎ ≤ 70


⎨

300

E
(8)


⎪40 ≤ 3w≤ D ≤6


760 ≤ ≤ 850


⎪
2
b ≤G 80


⎪ 20 ≤ ℎG ≤ 50




The optimization objective was ⎩ to3minimize

≤ DH ≤ 6the surface figure error RMS of the mirror
and reduce its mass. Various parameters are interrelated and jointly affect the optimization
The optimization objective was to minimize the surface figure error RMS and mass
result. The Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm-II(NSGA-II) was adopted for its
of the mirror, using a sample size of 100. The level distribution of each factor is shown in
excellent search performance.
Figure 9, demonstrating that the LHD method uniformly samples the factors within the
design matrix. The responses of the surface figure error RMS and mass are shown in
Figure 10. The preferred values of non-major structural parameters are summarized in
Table 1.
Photonics 2024, 11, 581 9 of 14

Table 1. Values of non-major structural parameters of the 2 m SiC mirror.

Structural Parameters Initial Value (mm) Optimized Value (mm) Selected Value (mm)
Outer edge thickness (to ) 4 3.4 3.5
Photonics 2024,
Outer 11, xheight
edge FOR PEER
(ho ) REVIEW 45 50.6 50 9 of 14
Auxiliary rib thickness (ts ) 4 3.0 3
Auxiliary rib height (hs ) 40 28.2 28
Back plate thickness (tb ) 5 4.2 4

Photonics 2024, 11, x FOR PEER

(a) REVIEW (b) (c) 9 of 14

(d) (e)
(d) (e)
Figure 9. Distribution of the non-major structural parameters. Red indicated infeasible (constraint
Figure 9. Distribution
Figure 9. black
Distribution of the non-major
of thefeasible
non-major structural parameters.
structuralmet),
parameters. Red indicated
Red indicated infeasible
infeasible (constraint
violations), indicated (constraint blue indicated feasible-tie (as(constraint
good as previ-
violations), black indicated feasible (constraint met), blue indicated feasible-tie (as
violations), black indicated feasible (constraint met), blue indicated feasible-tie (as good as previ-good as previous
ous best), and green indicated feasible better (best so far). (a) Outer edge height (ho). (b) Auxiliary
best),ous best),
and (h and
green green indicated feasible be<er (best so far). (a) Outer edge height (h ). (b) Auxiliary
indicated feasible better (best so far). (a) Outer edge height (ho ). (b) Auxiliary rib
o
rib height s). (c) Outer edge thickness (to). (d) Auxiliary rib thickness (ts). (e) Back plate thickness
rib height (hs). (c) Outer edge thickness (to). (d) Auxiliary rib thickness (ts). (e) Back plate thickness
height
(tb). (h s ). (c) Outer edge thickness (to ). (d) Auxiliary rib thickness (ts ). (e) Back plate thickness (tb ).
(tb).

(a) (b)
(a) Figure 10. (a) Response of the surface figure error RMS. (b) Response(b)
of the mass.
Figure 10. (a) Response of the surface figure error RMS. (b) Response of the mass.
Figure 10. (a) Response of the surface figure error RMS. (b) Response of the mass.
Table 1. Values of non-major structural parameters of the 2 m SiC mirror.
The parameters for the NSGA-II are listed in Table 2. After 241 iterations, an optimal
Structural Parameters Table 1. Values
solution Initialof
with non-major
aValue
surface structural
figure
(mm) errorparameters
RMS value
Optimized of the
Value of 211.1
(mm) m SiC
nmmirror.
and a mass
Selected Valueof 19.8 kg was
(mm)
Outer edge thickness (tobtained.
o) The optimization
4 processes for the3.4surface figure error RMS 3.5
and mass are shown
Structural Parameters Initial Value (mm) Optimized Value (mm) Selected Value (mm)
Outer edge height (hoin ) Figure 11. Histograms
45 of the major structural
50.6 parameters are shown 50 in Figure 12. The
OuterAuxiliary
edge thickness (t o)
rib thickness horizontal
(ts)
4 4
3.4
3.0
3.5
3 axis indicates the
axis represents the range of parameter values, while the vertical
OuterAuxiliary
edge height (ho) (hs)
rib height 4540 50.6
28.2 28 50
Auxiliary rib thickness (t s
Back plate thickness (tb) ) 4 5 3.0
4.2 4 3
Auxiliary rib height (hs) 40 28.2 28
Back plate thickness (tb) After completing
5 the design of non-major4.2structural parameters, further 4optimiza-
tion was required for the six major structural parameters, including the outer ring radius
 lected.
Table 3.The optimization values of the major structural parameters are summarized in
Table 3.
Table 2. Parameters for NSGA-II.
Table 2. Parameters for NSGA-II.
Photonics 2024, 11, 581 Parameters Value 10 of 14
Parameters Value
Population size 12
Population size 12
Number of generations 20
Number of generations 20
Crossover probability 0.9
number of times each value was selected during the optimization process. The convergence
Crossover probability 0.9
Crossover
of distribution
the optimization objective 10
indexis more likely the more a parameter value was selected. The
Crossover distribution index 10
optimization values of the
Mutation distribution major structural parameters are 20
index summarized in Table 3.
Mutation distribution index 20

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 11.
11. Optimizationprocess
processofof objectives. Red indicated infeasible, black indicated feasible,
Figure
Figure 11. Optimization
Optimization
blue indicated process
feasible-tie, ofobjectives.
and green
Red
objectives.
indicatedRed
indicated infeasible,
indicated
feasible
black
be<er.infeasible,
indicated
black
(a) Optimization
feasible,
indicated blue
process offeasible,
the sur-
indicated
blue feasible-tie,
indicated and
feasible-tie, green indicated feasible
and green indicated better. (a) Optimization process of the surface
face figure error RMS. (b) Optimization process feasible be<er. (a) Optimization process of the sur-
of the mass.
figure
face figure RMS.RMS.
errorerror (b) Optimization
(b) Optimizationprocess of theofmass.
process the mass.

Photonics 2024, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 14

(a) (b) (c)

(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e) (f)

Figure 12.
Figure 12. Distribution
Distribution of
of the
the major
major structural
structural parameters.
parameters. (a)
(a) Inner
Inner ring
ringradius
radius(r(r1).). (b)
(b) Outer
Outer ring
ring
1
radius (r2). (c) Surface panel thickness (tf). (d) Main rib thickness (tr). (e) Mirror thickness (h). (f)
radius (r2 ). (c) Surface panel thickness (tf ). (d) Main rib thickness (tr ). (e) Mirror thickness (h). (f) Back
Back plate width (wb).
plate width (wb ).

Table 3. Values of major structural parameters of the 2 m SiC mirror.

Structural Parameters Initial Value (mm) Optimized Value (mm) Selected Value (mm)
Inner ring radius (r1) 370 361.4 360
Outer ring radius (r2) 830 825.7 825
Surface plate thickness (tf) 4 3.0 3
Main rib thickness (tr) 4 3.4 3.5
Mirror thickness (h) 122 128.2 128
Back plate width (wb) 50 47.3 47

5. Results and Modal Test of the 2 m SiC Mirror Assembly

Photonics 2024, 11, 581 11 of 14

Table 2. Parameters for NSGA-II.

Parameters Value
Population size 12
Number of generations 20
Crossover probability 0.9
Crossover distribution index 10
Mutation distribution index 20

Table 3. Values of major structural parameters of the 2 m SiC mirror.

Structural Parameters Initial Value (mm) Optimized Value (mm) Selected Value (mm)
Inner ring radius (r1 ) 370 361.4 360
Outer ring radius (r2 ) 830 825.7 825
Surface plate thickness (tf ) 4 3.0 3
Main rib thickness (tr ) 4 3.4 3.5
Mirror thickness (h) 122 128.2 128
Back plate width (wb ) 50 47.3 47

5. Results and Modal Test of the 2 m SiC Mirror Assembly

A finite element model of the 2 m SiC mirror was developed based on the optimization
results. The mirror was supported by an axial whiffletree structure and a radial circular-
arch flexible structure. The 18 supports of the whiffletree were connected to the mirror
using flexible rods, limiting the z-axis degrees of freedom. The circular-arc flexible structure
located in the hole of the mirror was a special flexible hinge with radial degrees of freedom,
comprising 12 identical flexible curved beams symmetrical in the direction of rotation [17].
Each flexible curved beam exhibited tangential stiffness and radial flexibility, with all
12 curved beams collaboratively limiting the displacement of the mirror in both the x- and
y-directions. A gravitational load was applied to the model. The surface deformation of
the mirror when the optical axis of the mirror was vertical is shown in Figure 13a, with a
surface peak-valley (PV) value of 56 nm and a surface figure error RMS value of 11.3 nm.
The surface deformation of the mirror when the optical axis of the mirror was horizontal is
shown in Figure 13b, with an overall tilt of 0.6”. The tilt of the mirror represents a rigid
body displacement, which does not impact its surface figure error RMS. Consequently, the
surface deformation, free of tilt error, is shown in Figure 13c, with a PV value of 115 nm and
Photonics 2024, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 14
a surface figure error RMS value of 28.8 nm. The tilt of the mirror impacts the alignment of
the optical path, which is compensated by the Stewart platform of a secondary mirror.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 13.
Figure 13. Surface
Surfacedeformation
deformationofofthe
the2 2mm SiC
SiC mirror
mirror (a)(a)
TheThe optical
optical axisaxis
is inisain a vertical
vertical state.state. (b)
(b) The
The optical axis is in a horizontal state. (c) After compensating for the tilt
optical axis is in a horizontal state. (c) After compensating for the tilt of 0.6”. of 0.6”.

testswere
Modal tests wereconducted
conductedonon the
the mirror
mirror assembly
assembly using
using the the hammering
hammering method
method [18].
[18]. The mirror assembly was positioned on three identical support blocks,
The mirror assembly was positioned on three identical support blocks, and two high- and two
high-precision
precision tri-axial
tri-axial accelerometers
accelerometers were were
fixed fixed perpendicular
perpendicular one toone to another
another on theon the
outer
outer edge of the mirror. The test only achieved the eigen frequency of the mirror as-
sembly, without its mode shape, owing to the limited number of accelerometers. The fi-
nite element model and modal test of the mirror assembly are shown in Figure 14b and
Figure 14c, respectively. The simulation and test results are shown in Figure 15, indicat-
ing substantial agreement between the simulation and experimental results. The largest
 (a) (b) (c)
Figure 13. Surface deformation of the 2 m SiC mirror (a) The optical axis is in a vertical state. (b)
The optical axis is in a horizontal state. (c) After compensating for the tilt of 0.6”.

Photonics 2024, 11, 581 12 of 14

Modal tests were conducted on the mirror assembly using the hammering method
[18]. The mirror assembly was positioned on three identical support blocks, and two
high-precision tri-axial accelerometers were fixed perpendicular one to another on the
edge of
outer theofmirror.
edge The test
the mirror. Theonly
test achieved the eigen
only achieved frequency
the eigen of the of
frequency mirror assembly,
the mirror as-
without its mode shape, owing to the limited number of accelerometers.
sembly, without its mode shape, owing to the limited number of accelerometers. The fi- The finite element
model
nite and modal
element modeltestandofmodal
the mirror
test ofassembly
the mirrorare shown in
assembly areFigure
shown14b and Figure
in Figure 14c,
14b and
respectively. The simulation and test results are shown in Figure 15, indicating
Figure 14c, respectively. The simulation and test results are shown in Figure 15, indicat- substantial
agreement
ing between
substantial the simulation
agreement between the andsimulation
experimental andresults. The largest
experimental discrepancy
results. The largest is
observed between the test and simulation results for the first-order resonant
discrepancy is observed between the test and simulation results for the first-order reso- frequency.
The test
nant result for
frequency. Thethetest
first-order
result forresonant frequency
the first-order was 71.22
resonant Hz, with
frequency a damping
was 71.22 Hz, ratio
with ofa
1.12%. In contrast, the simulation result for the first-order resonant frequency
damping ratio of 1.12%. In contrast, the simulation result for the first-order resonant was 76.5 Hz,
exhibiting a relative frequency error of 7.4%. The modal test results indirectly confirm the
frequency was 76.5 Hz, exhibiting a relative frequency error of 7.4%. The modal test re-
validity of the optimization method.
sults indirectly confirm the validity of the optimization method.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure
Figure 14.
Photonics 2024, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14. (a)
(a) Axial
Axial and
and radial support structures
radial support structuresfor
forthe
the22mmSiC
SiCmirror.
mirror.(b)
(b)Finite
Finite element
element model
13
modelof of
14
of
thethe
2m2m SiC
SiC mirror
mirror assembly.
assembly. (c)(c)
TheThe modal
modal testtest
of of
thethe mirror
mirror assembly.
assembly.

Figure15.
Figure 15.Modal
Modalresult
resultcomparison:
comparison:simulation
simulationversus
versustest.
test.

6.6. Discussion
Discussion
Lightweight
Lightweightmirrors
mirrorsnot
notonly
onlyreduce their
reduce own
their weight
own weightbut but
alsoalso
reduce the weight
reduce and
the weight
cost
and of theofentire
cost system.
the entire Space-based
system. mirrors
Space-based thus offer
mirrors thusa offer
highera lightweight rate owing
higher lightweight rate
to launch weight constraints. For instance, the areal density of the 3.5 m Herschel
owing to launch weight constraints. For instance, the areal density of the 3.5 m Herschel PM is
25 kg/m² [11] and that of the 2 m ultralight space mirror is 34 kg/m² [15]. By
PM is 25 kg/m² [11] and that of the 2 m ultralight space mirror is 34 kg/m² [15]. By con- contrast, the
areal
trast,densities
the arealof the 2 m andof
densities 4 mthe
SiC2PM m produced
and 4 mbySiC CIOMP PM for ground-based
produced telescopes
by CIOMP for
are 105 kg/m² and 120 kg/m², respectively [6,12]. Compared with space
ground-based telescopes are 105 kg/m² and 120 kg/m², respectively [6,12]. Compared telescope mirrors,
the
with lightweight rate ofmirrors,
space telescope mirrorsthe forlightweight
ground-based
ratetelescopes
of mirrors needs further enhancement.
for ground-based telescopes
needs further enhancement. This study focused on the capability of using SiC in intricate
structures and proposed a 2 m SiC lightweight mirror with a lotus back structure, ideal
for ground-based telescopes. The areal density of the optimized 2 m SiC mirror is 38.7
kg/m2, which is significantly lower than that of the SiC mirrors in the aforementioned
ground-based telescopes.
Photonics 2024, 11, 581 13 of 14

This study focused on the capability of using SiC in intricate structures and proposed a 2 m
SiC lightweight mirror with a lotus back structure, ideal for ground-based telescopes. The
areal density of the optimized 2 m SiC mirror is 38.7 kg/m2 , which is significantly lower
than that of the SiC mirrors in the aforementioned ground-based telescopes.
The methods for determining the number of axial supports and mirror thickness can
be applied to mirrors of various materials in ground-based telescopes. The optimization
method can be applied to SiC mirror designs for ground-based telescopes and can also
serve as a reference for designing space-based SiC mirrors. However, the proposed design
and optimization methods for lightweight structures are subject to certain limitations for
mirrors made with other materials.

7. Conclusions
This study focused primarily on the lightweight optimization of a 2 m SiC mirror
for ground-based telescopes. The mirror thickness and number of axial supports were
preliminarily selected by analyzing the gravitational deformation of the mirror. The back
structure of the mirror was designed as a lotus pattern owing to its improved rigidity.
Numerous structural parameters were categorized into major and non-major structural
parameters via a sensitivity analysis of the surface figure error RMS and mass. The non-
major structural parameters were optimized using the LHD method, whereas the major
structural parameters were optimized using the NSGA-II model. The optimized 2 m SiC
lightweight mirror weighed 119 kg, with an areal density of 38.7 kg/m2 , which was more
than 50% lighter than traditional passive Zerodur mirrors of the same size. The proposed
structure and optimization method can serve as a reference for the design of SiC mirrors.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Z.W.; methodology, Z.W.; software, Z.W.; validation, Z.W.,
T.C., Y.C., W.F., H.W. and W.W.; formal analysis, Z.W.; investigation, Z.W.; resources, Z.W.; data
curation, Z.W.; writing—original draft preparation, Z.W.; writing—review and editing, Z.W. and Y.C.;
supervision, Z.W.; project administration, Z.W.; funding acquisition, Z.W. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (12303084)
and the Natural Science Foundation of Jilin Province (20240101309JC).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The original contributions presented in the study are included in the
article material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Acknowledgments: Authors would like to thank the National Natural Science Foundation of China
and the Natural Science Foundation of Jilin Province.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Wang, H.H.; Wang, J.L.; Chen, T.; Cao, Y.Y.; Chen, B.G. Measurement and calibration of optical axis changes caused by gravity for
ground-based large-aperture telescope. Opt. Precis. Eng. 2022, 30, 3021–3030. [CrossRef]
2. Nicholas, H.; Matthew, D. Advancing lightweight mirror design: A paradigm shift in mirror performs by utilizing design for
additive manufacturing. Appl. Opt. 2021, 60, 681–696.
3. Zhou, P.W. Research on Robust Design of a 2m Space Primary Mirror and the Key Technology of Supports. Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Changchun Institute of Optics, Fine Mechanics and Physics, Chinese Academy of
Sciences), Changchun, China, 2020.
4. Carlo, F.; Pierre, G.; Bertrand, K. The VLTI Auxiliary Telescope System A big Challenge for a Small Company. Proc. SPIE 2004,
5497, 414–426.
5. Bertrand, K.; Carlo, F. VLTI Auxiliary Telescope. Proc. SPIE 2000, 4006, 13–24.
6. Wang, F.G.; Qiao, B.; Zhang, J.X. Flexible passive support system for 2m SiC reflective mirror. Opt. Precis. Eng. 2017, 25, 2591–2598.
[CrossRef]
7. Thomas, W.H.; Mary, E.; Randy, V. Current fabrication techniques for ULE® and fused silica lightweight mirrors. Proc. SPIE 2003,
5179, 1–11.
Photonics 2024, 11, 581 14 of 14

8. Noboru, I.; Yasushi, H.; Kouki, A.; Masahiko, H. Tip-tilt and chopping mechanism for the Subaru telescope IR secondary mirror
unit. Proc. SPIE 1998, 3352, 850–857.
9. Robert, R.; Robert, M.; Bruce, T.; Paul, E. Final assembly of the ULTRA 1-m carbon fiber optical telescope. Proc. SPIE 2007, 6665,
86–95.
10. Thomas, A.S.; Victor, L.K.; Stephen, R.H. Southern Astrophysical Research (SOAR) Telescope. Proc. SPIE 2003, 4837, 71–81.
11. Emmanuel, S.; Yves, T.; Frederic, S.; Michel, D.; Pierre, D. A 3.5m diameter Sic telescope for Herschel mission. Proc. SPIE 2003,
4850, 606–618.
12. Zhang, X.J.; Hu, H.X.; Wang, X.Y.; Luo, X.; Zhang, G.; Zhao, W.X.; Wang, X.Y. Challenges and strategies in high-accuracy
manufacturing of the world’s largest SiC aspheric mirror. Light Sci. Appl. 2022, 11, 310. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
13. Liu, S.T.; Hu, R.; Li, Q.H.; Zhou, P.; Dong, Z.G.; Kang, R.K. Topology optimization-based lightweight primary mirror design of a
large-aperture space telescope. Appl. Opt. 2014, 53, 8318–8325. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
14. Zhai, Y. Rearch on Design and Support Technology of Huge Mirror for Space High Resolution Infrared Camera. Ph.D. Thesis,
Changchun University of Science and Technology, Changchun, China, 2019.
15. Wang, H.; Guo, J.; Shao, D.M.; Sun, J.M.; Tian, F.X.; Yang, X. Optimization design of an ultralight large-aperture space mirror.
Appl. Opt. 2021, 60, 10878–10884. [CrossRef]
16. Fan, L. Research on the Lightweight Design and Support of the 2m-SiC Primary Mirror for Ground-Based Telescope. Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Changchun Institute of Optics, Fine Mechanics and Physics, Chinese Academy of
Sciences), Changchun, China, 2013.
17. Cao, Y.Y.; Wang, Z.C.; Zhou, C. Modeling and optimal design of circular-arch flexible structure with radial-freedom considering
geometry and material selection. Precis. Eng. 2017, 48, 83–97. [CrossRef]
18. Cao, Y.Y.; Wang, J.L.; Fan, W.Q.; Wang, Z.C.; Wang, H.H.; Liu, Y.; Wang, F.G.; Li, H.W.; Xu, W. static and dynamic disturbance
compensation for optical misalignment of large ground-based wide field survey telescope. Appl. Opt. 2022, 61, 3566–3578.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.