[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ATM] Luri-Houghton prescriptions.
Hi Bob,
You can't just set focal plane at the tube edge, you may add focuser and
camera between them, so I assume you will have 100mm extend from the tube
surface to the focal plane.
I helped you work out 2 sets, 1 is for equal solution, 1 is for different
solution.
equal:
*LENS DATA
No name
SRF RADIUS THICKNESS APERTURE RADIUS GLASS SPE NOTE
OBJ -- 1.0000e+20 1.0472e+18 AIR
AST 2.3741e+03 V 20.000000 159.000000 ASX BK7 C
2 -6.4096e+03 V 3.500000 159.000000 P AIR
3 -2.3741e+03 P 15.000000 159.000000 P BK7 P
4 6.4096e+03 P 1.2800e+03 159.000000 P AIR
5 -2.9250e+03 -1.2000e+03 P 171.789079 S REFL_HATCH
6 -- 159.000000 43.267935 S REFL_HATCH
7 -- 101.335351 S 26.238883 S AIR
8 -- -- 15.385770 S AIR
IMS -- -- 15.385770 S
2.different:
*LENS DATA
No name
SRF RADIUS THICKNESS APERTURE RADIUS GLASS SPE NOTE
OBJ -- 1.0000e+20 1.0472e+18 AIR
AST 2.2221e+03 V 20.000000 159.000000 ASX BK7 C
2 3.1562e+03 V 3.500000 159.000000 P AIR
3 -1.2628e+03 V 15.000000 159.000000 P BK7 P
4 -1.5291e+03 V 1.2800e+03 159.000000 P AIR
5 -2.9250e+03 -1.2000e+03 P 172.805418 S REFL_HATCH
6 -- 159.000000 43.691612 S REFL_HATCH
7 -- 104.718850 S 26.584033 S AIR
8 -- -- 15.316826 S AIR
IMS -- -- 15.316826 S
They both optimized for 400-656nm wave length photograph with 0.6 degreex2
field illumination.
Any question please let me know, thanks!
>From: "Bob May" <bobmay@nethere.com>
>To: <atm@atmlist.net>
>Subject: Re: [ATM] Luri-Houghton prescriptions.
>Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 10:45:23 -0700
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Ukyo Chen <ukyochen888@hotmail.com>
>To: <atm@atmlist.net>
>Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 10:53 PM
>Subject: Re: [ATM] Luri-Houghton prescriptions.
>
>
> > Bob,
> >
> > Why not tell us your requirement and we can use software to
>help you design.
> > I use OSLO and Zemax which are all professional optical
>softwares. OSLO is functional better than Zemax.
> > What's the Diameter? A:12.5"
>12.5: aperture with a 13.75" primary mirror
> > What's the F ratio?
>F4.6 Focal length is 119"
> > What's the diameter obstrution rate you want?
>He's planning on a 3.1" secondary and that will be the
>obstruction
> > What's the extend volume you want from the tub surface to the
>focal plane,
> > for example you need around 50mm for a camera, or 100mm for a
>float focuser,
> > or totally 50+100 for them all.
>Extend volume is a term that I don't understand but from the
>following example you provided, I assume that it is a translation
>problem from what Zemax asks for but the focuser will be a 2"
>focuser and an unvignetted FOV is what is desired.
> > ......
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Ukyo Chen
> >
>The thing here is that I've got a prescription that has been
>scaled up from the previously built 9.8" scopes that is in the
>first posting on this thread and a prescription that I have
>generated from TRACE also in that post. The original
>prescription produces a fair bit of negative coma as well as not
>being as controlled at the edge for astigmatism as the second
>prescription is.
>The question is whether I'm close to optimum for mimimal spot
>size with the second prescription or is there something else that
>can put things closer than what I've gotten. I'll note that
>there is a whole range of approximately similar curves that gets
>to about the same level of spot size. It appears from the work
>that I've done is that the null for spot size can be done with a
>whole range of curves near what I've done but the bendings of the
>lenses does tend to be about the same overall.
>Bob May
>bobmay at nethere.com
>http: slash /nav.to slash bobmay
>http: slash /bobmay dot astronomy.net
>Addresses have been munged up to keep spammers from bothering me.
>replace the obvious words with the proper character.
>Thank you for your understanding!
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/
_______________________________________________
ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/