From: "Aditya Munshi" 
To: 
Reply-To: "Aditya Munshi" 


Dear ATM Folks

Since I last posted my Foucault readings, I discovered major inaccuracies
in the Foucault readings, there was a major central hole and overall
overcorrection, the mirror not being better than 1/4 wave PV.

However after several sessions of figuring with a 1/4 Amplitude TOT stroke
to bring the surface back to a paraboloid, I ended up with a mild TUE
(which I plan to correct) and the central hole is fairly reduced. The
overall figure shows a 1/5 wave PV and 0.93 Strehl according to figure
XP.(this time I am sure the readings are accurate :) ). But putting the
same data into Foucault test analysis which works on the maths of Jim
Burrows shows a 1/3.9 PV and 1/17.5 RMS Surface.

Don't know what causes the discrepancy, from what I've heard; I feel figxp
should be trusted more,

What are your thoughts on this ?


Thanks


Aditya

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5