Lens/Radius of Curvature Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter johnwalton84
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Curvature
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a question about the radius of curvature for a bi-convex lens made of crown glass with a refractive index of 1.51 and a focal length of +20cm. The user is confused about applying the Lens Maker's equation since both radii are the same, but clarification reveals that the sign convention allows for one radius to be positive and the other negative. Additionally, the conversation shifts to a related question about a flint glass lens designed to compensate for chromatic aberration in the crown glass lens. The concept of an achromatic doublet is introduced as a solution, which involves using two lenses with different dispersive powers to correct chromatic dispersion. Understanding these principles is essential for solving the lens-related problems presented.
johnwalton84
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
I'm working through some questions on lenses, and I'm a bit stuck on this one involving radius of curvature.

The part of the question I'm having difficulty with is

The lens is made of crown glass of refractive index n=1.51. The radii of both surfaces is the same. What is the radius of curvature of the surfaces?

The lens is bi-convex (f=+20cm). The first part of the question involves finding heights, natures and magnifications of objects which is fine, but this part doesn't make any sense. I thought about using the Lens' Maker's equation but if R_1=R_2 would the right-hand-side of this equation not equal zero?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
sign convention

johnwalton84 said:
I thought about using the Lens' Maker's equation but if R_1=R_2 would the right-hand-side of this equation not equal zero?
No. The usual form of the lens maker's equation assumes a sign convention such that if the center of curvature is on the right side of the lens surface then the radius is positive. Thus R_1 is positive, but R_2 is negative.
 
I see, thanks :cool:
 
Having said that, there's another part to that same question that I'm not sure of. It says

A flint glass lens is placed in contact with the crown glass lens. The refractive index of the flint glass is 1.632 for blue light and 1.615 for red light. What is the focal length of the flint glass lens that would compensate for the chromatic aberration of the crown glass lens?

and I'm not sure where to go with it...
 
achromatic doublet

Look up "achromatic doublet": Two lenses (of different dispersive powers) used together to correct chromatic dispersion. The basic idea is to create a composite lens that focuses the red and blue light at the same point.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top