Quick and easy way to measure magnication of a concave mirror

AI Thread Summary
A practical method to measure the magnification of a concave mirror involves determining its focal length using the distance where no image appears when an object is placed at a certain distance. The focal length can be calculated using the formula 1/f = 1/do + 1/di, where do is the object distance and di is the image distance. For a spherical mirror, the focal length can also be derived from the radius of curvature using f = -R/2. Additionally, the sagitta (depth) of the mirror can be measured to find the radius of curvature, which simplifies calculations for magnification. This approach allows for accurate testing of magnification claims from suppliers without specialized equipment.
Lighting_man
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi,

We're offered shaving mirrors by suppliers and sometimes their claims to the magnification are doubtful.

I don't wish to upset any customers by giving incorrect information.

So is there a practical way in which I can test the magnification myself? i.e. measuring the distance of the bulge inward compared with the diameter of the glass?

Please be aware that I do not have a whole host of equipment (no flux capacitor etc) but have some accurate rules and a digital caliper.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Doing a quick google turns up

http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/gbssci/phys/CLass/refln/u13l3e.html
http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/gbssci/phys/class/refln/u13l3f.html

It looks like as a test, you can place an object at distance X. Move the mirror away until no image appears. This is your focal length.

With the focal length and the actual objects distance away, you can calculate the image distance by:
<br /> \frac{1}{f} = \frac{1}{d_o} + \frac{1}{d_i}
Where o indicates object, i is image, and f is the focal length. Magnification is then:
<br /> M = -\frac{d_i}{d_o}

OK, I think I've found another way. From the Wikipedia page for focal length http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_length, we have the focal length as a function of the radius of curvature:
<br /> f = -\frac{R}{2}
So, assuming you have a spherical mirror, I 'think' here's what can be done geometrically.

Measure the arc length of the mirror (l), along with the diameter (D) (as you are calling it) and the depth (t) of the mirror. The "angle" of the mirror can be found by
<br /> \theta = \arctan\frac{t}{D/2}

Nope...better yet, some more Google (God bless it) shows that this "depth" of mirror is referred to as the sagitta. It is related to the "diameter" and radius by:
<br /> t = r - \sqrt{r^2 - (D/2)^2}

Therefore, the radius of the curve is related as:
<br /> r = \frac{s^2 + (D/2)^2}{2s}

From there, divide by 2 to get focal length, then relate by approximate distance of object as mentioned to get magnification...whew.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh wow!

Okay so if the diameter of the mirror is 200mm (a 100mm radius)

and the sagitta is 10mm and the glass is parabolic.

Oh I'm pretty poor at brackets

Any chance of a more layman version?
 
You could use the same measurement system as is used by eyeglass manufacturers. A one-diopter lens will focus the Sun to a point in one meter. A four-diopter lens will focus the sun to a point in 1/4 meter, or about 10 inches. I suspect your shaving mirror will focus the Sun to a point in about 10 inches, hence four diopters.
Bob S
 
If your mirror is parabolic, the equation is even easier.
r = \frac{(D/2)^2}{2s}
So, plugging in gives you a radius of curvature:
r = \frac{100mm}{2*10mm} = 500mm

The focal length is then 250mm. If we assume that the mirror is held 200mm away from the object, then:
<br /> \frac{1}{250mm} = \frac{1}{200mm} + \frac{1}{d_i}
or:
d_i = 1000mm \rightarrow M = 5.0

...I think...
 
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
4K
Back
Top