What Does "Opaque" Mean in Metrology?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WaltLankor
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the definition of "opaque" in metrology, specifically regarding its implications for focus detection instruments that require reflected light to function. Participants clarify that while "opaque" typically means no light transmission, it does not inherently exclude reflection, as even mirrors are considered opaque due to their reflective properties. The author of the metrology text clarified that the original statement about measuring opaque surfaces was intended to differentiate between various levels of reflectance and their impact on measurability. There is also mention of opacity being related to the mass attenuation coefficient, which includes both scattered and absorbed light. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the nuanced understanding of opacity in the context of metrology.
WaltLankor
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I'm puzzled.
In an authoritative metrology text I read.
"Focus detection instruments cannot be used to measure 'opaque' surfaces"
as they require a finite level of reflected light to function.
Non transmittance being (to my understanding) the key definition of "opaque", I looked up the meaning of opaque in various places. A significant number of references give non transmittance and reflectance as the definition of an "opaque" surface.

Any definitive comments on this would be appreciated.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I could be wrong, but I don't think that the "normal" definition of opaqueness excludes reflection at all.
For example, a good mirror is opaque, yet certainly reflects.
 
Indeed that was my understanding and I would have put the reference from the metrology test down to a misprint if I had not found several references quoting definitions for Opaque as being dependent on lack of reflectance.

Thanks for the reply.
 
When light is incident on a surface, in percentages :

Absorption + Reflection + Transmission = 100%

Opaque means that Transmission = 0%
 
Dr Lots-o'watts said:
When light is incident on a surface, in percentages :

Absorption + Reflection + Transmission = 100%

Opaque means that Transmission = 0%

Thanks
That is my understanding of the situation too.
 
Apparently Opacity can be defined as 'mass attenuation coefficient', which is the sum of scattered and absorbed light, so opacity can be a function of reflectance in effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opacity_(optics )

Anyway the author of the text in question has clarified the sentence quoted in my original post.
"Focus detection instruments cannot be used to measure 'opaque' surfaces"
Taking into account a contextual comment regarding focus detection instruments requiring a finite amount of light to be reflected into their detectors from the sample.
The intention of the queried comment was to distinguish between the measurability of opaque surfaces with differing reflectances, or perhaps differing combined levels of absorption and scattering.
So there you go.

Thanks all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I do not have a good working knowledge of physics yet. I tried to piece this together but after researching this, I couldn’t figure out the correct laws of physics to combine to develop a formula to answer this question. Ex. 1 - A moving object impacts a static object at a constant velocity. Ex. 2 - A moving object impacts a static object at the same velocity but is accelerating at the moment of impact. Assuming the mass of the objects is the same and the velocity at the moment of impact...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
6K
Replies
11
Views
11K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
679
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
479
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K