Doing a research on aberrations in order to

  • Thread starter Thread starter Septim
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Research
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the complexities of optical aberrations, specifically the confusion surrounding the conventions used in different texts. The Seidel aberrations are identified as third order due to the polynomial expansion of the sine function, which includes terms up to the third order. There are seven primary third order aberrations, and resources like the MIL-HDBK 141 are recommended for further guidance. Additionally, the conversation touches on the challenge of deriving the third order spherical aberration formula for a thin lens with two refracting surfaces. Overall, the topic highlights the need for clear resources and explanations in understanding optical aberrations.
Septim
Messages
166
Reaction score
6
Hello everyone,

I am doing a research on aberrations in order to prepare a presentation. I looked at Optics, Hecht and Introduction to Optics, Pedrotti; however, I think they use different conventions for aberrations. Is there an established standard for aberrations(I heard the name Seidel)? I also wonder what the third order aberration means; is it sine expanded to include angle cubed or the aberrations are written up to 3rd order of the aperture diameter for example. I am pretty confused about this topic and in need of a good resource which will guide me and possibly derive some of the aberration formulas explaining each one in detail. Any suggestion is appreciated.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org


It is very complex topic. There is so many good books like for example Rudolf Kingslake Lens Design Fundamentals - in that book you will find detail derivation of all kinds of aberrations.
 


Thanks for your reply; I looked at that book but found it kind of confusing. If you have any other suggestions I would appreciate it.
 


Septim said:
Hello everyone,

I am doing a research on aberrations in order to prepare a presentation. I looked at Optics, Hecht and Introduction to Optics, Pedrotti; however, I think they use different conventions for aberrations. Is there an established standard for aberrations(I heard the name Seidel)? I also wonder what the third order aberration means; is it sine expanded to include angle cubed or the aberrations are written up to 3rd order of the aperture diameter for example. I am pretty confused about this topic and in need of a good resource which will guide me and possibly derive some of the aberration formulas explaining each one in detail. Any suggestion is appreciated.

Thanks

The Seidel aberrations are referred to as 'third order' because the expansion sin(q) = q + q^3/3! + q^5/5!+... has a third-order polynomial after the paraxial sin(q) ~ q approximation. There are 7 third order aberrations (piston, tilt, spherical, coma, petvzal, distortion, astigmatism), a bunch of 5th order, 7th order, etc.

Alternatively, the wavefront aberration is written in terms of Zernike polynomials- mapping a Zernike coefficient with a Seidel aberration is not possible, but there are ways to convert one to the other.

A good resource (free, etc.) is the MIL-HDBK 141 (Optical Design)

http://www.optics.arizona.edu/ot/opti502/MIL_HDBK_141.html

3rd order aberrations are in Chapter 8.
 
Last edited by a moderator:


Thanks you I will take a look at that.
 


I need to derive the third order spherical aberration formula for a thin lens which consists of two refracting surfaces how can I do so? I am attaching an image file containing the formula at the bottom of the page. Thanks for your help.

 

Attachments

  • ss.jpg
    ss.jpg
    43 KB · Views: 499
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top