1993
DOI: 10.1086/172525
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tip-tilt compensation - Resolution limits for ground-based telescopes using laser guide star adaptive optics

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
27
0
1

Year Published

1997
1997
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
2
27
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The effectiveness of such methods is severely restricted by angular and temporal limitations set by the nature of the atmospheric turbulence. In general, the scale of these parameters is inversely proportional to the altitude of the turbulent layers, and hence high-altitude turbulence is much more difficult to correct than low-altitude disturbances (see, for example, Cowie & Songaila 1988;Olivier 1993). Hence, even if the boundary-layer seeing is poor, it may be relatively easy to eliminate this component over larger areas than is possible at other sites.…”
Section: Super Deeing On the Antarctic Plateau?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The effectiveness of such methods is severely restricted by angular and temporal limitations set by the nature of the atmospheric turbulence. In general, the scale of these parameters is inversely proportional to the altitude of the turbulent layers, and hence high-altitude turbulence is much more difficult to correct than low-altitude disturbances (see, for example, Cowie & Songaila 1988;Olivier 1993). Hence, even if the boundary-layer seeing is poor, it may be relatively easy to eliminate this component over larger areas than is possible at other sites.…”
Section: Super Deeing On the Antarctic Plateau?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(1) in which the "constant" k ≈ 0.4 has different values depending on the authors, from k = 0.413 (Acton 1995) to k = 0.427 (Olivier et al 1993). D is the diameter either of the laser projector or of the observing telescope.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This value is not strictly measurement error, because it needs to be reduced by a closed loop averaging factor. 15 The averaging factor will reduce the measurement error by order of a few, producing a measurement error consistent with the measurement error calculating by wavefront differencing. Even in the case of 0.1 pixels rms the reconstructed WFE would be 20 nm rms, a relatively small error compared to the overall error budget.…”
Section: Measurement Errormentioning
confidence: 74%