[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
(ATM) Re: SecondaryFab/Conic Section/Bill's Compound Scope
- To: atm@efn.org
- Subject: (ATM) Re: SecondaryFab/Conic Section/Bill's Compound Scope
- From: btk@ix.netcom.com (Bill Marriott )
- Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 22:09:44 -0700
You Wrote:
>A conic section is defined by Schwartzshild's constant and paraxial
>radius of curvature ONLY. F/ratio doesn't matter.
Hey Folks,
Thanks for the many responses confirming what I should of more
confidently known,
>If you have good ray-trace program, you can "create" a certain conical
>surface, and make it either concave or convex simply by changing the
>sign of the radius. So, say you've optimized your Cassegrain with
>certain conic constant and radius. Simply "remove" the primary,
>enlarge the secondary, change the sign of the "radius" column, and
>instead of a parallel beam, shine a pencil of rays originating from a
>radius of curvature onto it. They will come back not into the point
>(like in
>case of sphere), but with certain longitudinal aberration. Pick 4
>or 5 zones on the secondary, note down the longitudinal aberrations
>needed, and you have a set of figures to work with ! Same as if you
>are striving for a parabola, but instead y*y/R for each zone, use
>ray-trace progam provided figures as desired values (they will be
>something like K*y*y/R anyway, where K is a constant).
Believe it or not, this is starting to make sense!
>After you've finished with a concave test plate, use inteference
>method to make convex (I know, it's slow but I don't know of better
>method to>get a good secondary). If your hyperbola is not too strong,
>you MIGHT>get away with a spherical test piece, and look for certain
>interference pattern (like in Texerau), but that seems a bit too
>"loose" to me.
The plan was to make a hyper concave test plate, checking newtonian
fringes as I do with flat work here in the shop, going for 'straight
bands' as we say.
>Local retouching on a 2" secondary is almost impossible to do without
>screwing up the smoothness (as all opticians at Meade and Celestron
>know very well !) :-)
>Bratislav
Once again thanks for everyone's input, this WILL be an interesting
and educational project!
Bill Marriott
Forest Knolls, Ca. USA
btk@ix.netcom.com