[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ATM] Luri-Houghton prescriptions.
Hi Bob,
Sorry I forgot to extend space for different data, please refer to new data
below:
Different:
*LENS DATA
No name
SRF RADIUS THICKNESS APERTURE RADIUS GLASS SPE NOTE
OBJ -- 1.0000e+20 1.0472e+18 AIR
AST 2.2035e+03 V 20.000000 159.000000 ASX BK7 C
2 3.1078e+03 V 15.000000 159.000000 P AIR
3 -1.2563e+03 V 15.000000 159.000000 P BK7 P
4 -1.5177e+03 V 1.2800e+03 159.000000 P AIR
5 -2.9250e+03 -1.2000e+03 P 172.827007 S REFL_HATCH
6 -- 159.000000 43.720519 S REFL_HATCH
7 -- 104.887242 S 26.613909 S AIR
8 -- -- 15.329223 S AIR
IMS -- -- 15.329223 S
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
Best Regards,
Ukyo Chen
>From: "Ukyo Chen" <ukyochen888@hotmail.com>
>To: bobmay@nethere.com, atm@atmlist.net
>Subject: Re: [ATM] Luri-Houghton prescriptions.
>Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 04:00:52 +0000
>
>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/
_______________________________________________
ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/