A Spherical aberration in Biconvex lens

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on understanding the mathematical derivation of the relationship between focal length, radius of curvature, and refractive index in biconvex lenses. The initial inquiry highlights a successful experimental verification of a significant relation involving height from the principal axis and focal length. Participants emphasize the use of Snell's law to derive expressions for the focal point of incident rays and suggest that ray tracing software is more efficient for aberration analysis than relying on complex formulas. A step-by-step approach is provided to apply Snell's law and trace ray paths through the lens. Overall, the conversation underscores the importance of both theoretical understanding and practical application in optical design.
VVS2000
Messages
150
Reaction score
17
I was recently looking for proven relations between focal length, radius of curvature, refractive index etc of a convex lens as I was working on an experiment, I did Find a relation, between Height from principal axis and focal length, and it was a huge relation!I did the experiment to verify it, and it holds good. But I still don't know how to even derive such a huge relation. the image is attached.
If anyone know How to solve it, please help
Thanks In advance!
 

Attachments

  • convex lens spherical aberration.png
    convex lens spherical aberration.png
    33.5 KB · Views: 206
Science news on Phys.org
What is your goal here? To get some intuition? To get an idea of where it comes from in the math? To get actual predictions or improve an optical design? It's a broad question.
 
Twigg said:
What is your goal here? To get some intuition? To get an idea of where it comes from in the math? To get actual predictions or improve an optical design? It's a broad question.
to get an idea of where it comes in from the math. Like whether it's a geometric derived result or some kind of solution obtained out of brute force numerical method
 
VVS2000 said:
to get an idea of where it comes in from the math. Like whether it's a geometric derived result or some kind of solution obtained out of brute force numerical method
Numerical meethods are very unlikely to come up with explicit expressions like in the sheet you posted (source?)
 
The short version is that you get this expression when you use Snell's law and solving for the focal point of an incident ray where ##\theta## is the angle between the incident ray and the normal axis to the biconvex lens at the point at distance h off the optical axis. Naturally, you have to use Snell's again where the ray exits the lens on the second convex surface.

In practice, virtually no one uses this formula. You can get the Taylor coefficients by using some neat ray tracing tricks, so we tend to use ray tracing software to do aberration analysis. It's far more computationally efficient and general. My point is: don't feel like you need to know the above expression.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes VVS2000, vanhees71, BvU and 1 other person
BvU said:
Numerical meethods are very unlikely to come up with explicit expressions like in the sheet you posted (source?)
thomas k gaylord, georgia tech optical engineering notes
 
Twigg said:
The short version is that you get this expression when you use Snell's law and solving for the focal point of an incident ray where ##\theta## is the angle between the incident ray and the normal axis to the biconvex lens at the point at distance h off the optical axis. Naturally, you have to use Snell's again where the ray exits the lens on the second convex surface.

In practice, virtually no one uses this formula. You can get the Taylor coefficients by using some neat ray tracing tricks, so we tend to use ray tracing software to do aberration analysis. It's far more computationally efficient and general. My point is: don't feel like you need to know the above expression.
That's the thing, How would one apply snell's law and get such a result, if you have any hint to get me started on the right direction I can make an attempt to solve it. I just want to know the math behind it all, like how one would approach such a complex situation
 
Sorry for the slow reply. Here's a quick outline of steps that would get you started.

1) Consider a collimated ray (##\theta## = 0) incident on the first spherical surface of the lens at a displacement ##h## off the optical axis. (See the image you attached in the OP for reference.)

2) Calculate the surface normal vector ##\hat{n}_1## to the first spherical surface at displacement ##h##. Now calculate the angle ##\theta_{inc,1}## between the incident ray and ##\hat{n}_1##. Use Snell's law to find the new orientation of the ray inside the lens.

3) Trace the path of the ray inside the lens to see where it intersects the second spherical surface of the lens, and apply Snell's law once more.

4) Trace the path of the ray in free space (on the image side), and see where the ray focuses (i.e. where it intersects the optical axis). This focal length should be given by the formula you first quoted.
 
  • #10
Alternatively, maybe just use geometry and trig instead for your mechanical drawings. A lot easier.
 
Back
Top