• Image from a mirror not flat at the relevant wavelength

    From Thomas Womack@21:1/5 to All on Fri Mar 27 10:38:57 2020
    Suppose you have a telescope designed for the thermal infra-red, so
    surfaces machined to about 2.5um accuracy.

    If you use a dichroic mirror rather than a long-pass filter at the IR
    detector, it's clearly possible to direct the visible light to a focus
    on a second detector. Do you get any form of image at that point
    given that the mirror accuracy is 5-lambda?

    And, if so, assuming that everything is rigid and correctly aligned
    for perfect images on the IR detector, is the _centroid_ of the image
    at the visible detector going to be reasonably well-defined? Can this
    be used at least to help out the orientation-determination system?

    Thanks in advance for any help you can offer

    Tom (wishing he had checked that the university had Zemax licenses
    before taking on an MSc project involving optic design ...)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Hobbs@21:1/5 to Thomas Womack on Fri Mar 27 12:44:25 2020
    On 2020-03-27 06:38, Thomas Womack wrote:
    Suppose you have a telescope designed for the thermal infra-red, so
    surfaces machined to about 2.5um accuracy.

    If you use a dichroic mirror rather than a long-pass filter at the IR detector, it's clearly possible to direct the visible light to a focus
    on a second detector. Do you get any form of image at that point
    given that the mirror accuracy is 5-lambda?

    And, if so, assuming that everything is rigid and correctly aligned
    for perfect images on the IR detector, is the _centroid_ of the image
    at the visible detector going to be reasonably well-defined? Can this
    be used at least to help out the orientation-determination system?

    Thanks in advance for any help you can offer

    Tom (wishing he had checked that the university had Zemax licenses
    before taking on an MSc project involving optic design ...)


    Depends sensitively on the details. If the surface is pretty smooth on
    a 100-nm length scale, but not shaped too accurately, you'll get some
    sort of visible image, as you do with a magnifying glass or a
    searchlight mirror, which are similarly inaccurate but smooth.

    If the surface errors come from coarse diamond turning, you'll get all
    sorts of diffraction effects, and there may not be much of an optical
    image at all. The surface will consist of a series of concentric
    grooves that don't tilt as you go further out from the axis, so in the short-wavelength limit (ray optics) it's probably not a focusing surface.

    If it's random surface roughness, the reflection will be diffuse, so you
    won't get a visible image at all.

    (BTW Zemax has a student version.)

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    --
    Dr Philip C D Hobbs
    Principal Consultant
    ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
    Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
    Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

    http://electrooptical.net
    http://hobbs-eo.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas Womack@21:1/5 to pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical. on Sat Mar 28 13:47:15 2020
    In article <b74f924b-7df0-ee11-26cd-eb2597eeb734@electrooptical.net>,
    Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
    On 2020-03-27 06:38, Thomas Womack wrote:
    Suppose you have a telescope designed for the thermal infra-red, so
    surfaces machined to about 2.5um accuracy.

    If you use a dichroic mirror rather than a long-pass filter at the IR
    detector, it's clearly possible to direct the visible light to a focus
    on a second detector. Do you get any form of image at that point
    given that the mirror accuracy is 5-lambda?

    And, if so, assuming that everything is rigid and correctly aligned
    for perfect images on the IR detector, is the _centroid_ of the image
    at the visible detector going to be reasonably well-defined? Can this
    be used at least to help out the orientation-determination system?

    Thanks in advance for any help you can offer

    Tom (wishing he had checked that the university had Zemax licenses
    before taking on an MSc project involving optic design ...)


    Depends sensitively on the details. If the surface is pretty smooth on
    a 100-nm length scale, but not shaped too accurately, you'll get some
    sort of visible image, as you do with a magnifying glass or a
    searchlight mirror, which are similarly inaccurate but smooth.

    If the surface errors come from coarse diamond turning, you'll get all
    sorts of diffraction effects, and there may not be much of an optical
    image at all. The surface will consist of a series of concentric
    grooves that don't tilt as you go further out from the axis, so in the >short-wavelength limit (ray optics) it's probably not a focusing surface.

    If it's random surface roughness, the reflection will be diffuse, so you >won't get a visible image at all.

    Thank you, that's extremely useful and clarifies things I wasn't even
    aware I didn't know. There's an unreasonably tight hypothetical
    budget and I was hoping that 2.5um surface accuracy for working in the
    thermal IR meant the optical surfaces could just be diamond-turned; I
    hadn't thought about the tilting of the grooves.

    I will tell the AOCS people that they still need a high resolution
    star tracker ...

    (BTW Zemax has a student version.)

    Unfortunately only available to explicitly participating institutions
    of which Cranfield isn't one :(

    Tom

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phil Hobbs@21:1/5 to Thomas Womack on Sat Mar 28 11:22:12 2020
    On 2020-03-28 09:47, Thomas Womack wrote:
    In article <b74f924b-7df0-ee11-26cd-eb2597eeb734@electrooptical.net>,
    Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
    On 2020-03-27 06:38, Thomas Womack wrote:
    Suppose you have a telescope designed for the thermal infra-red, so
    surfaces machined to about 2.5um accuracy.

    If you use a dichroic mirror rather than a long-pass filter at the IR
    detector, it's clearly possible to direct the visible light to a focus
    on a second detector. Do you get any form of image at that point
    given that the mirror accuracy is 5-lambda?

    And, if so, assuming that everything is rigid and correctly aligned
    for perfect images on the IR detector, is the _centroid_ of the image
    at the visible detector going to be reasonably well-defined? Can this
    be used at least to help out the orientation-determination system?

    Thanks in advance for any help you can offer

    Tom (wishing he had checked that the university had Zemax licenses
    before taking on an MSc project involving optic design ...)


    Depends sensitively on the details. If the surface is pretty smooth on
    a 100-nm length scale, but not shaped too accurately, you'll get some
    sort of visible image, as you do with a magnifying glass or a
    searchlight mirror, which are similarly inaccurate but smooth.

    If the surface errors come from coarse diamond turning, you'll get all
    sorts of diffraction effects, and there may not be much of an optical
    image at all. The surface will consist of a series of concentric
    grooves that don't tilt as you go further out from the axis, so in the
    short-wavelength limit (ray optics) it's probably not a focusing surface.

    If it's random surface roughness, the reflection will be diffuse, so you
    won't get a visible image at all.

    Thank you, that's extremely useful and clarifies things I wasn't even
    aware I didn't know. There's an unreasonably tight hypothetical
    budget and I was hoping that 2.5um surface accuracy for working in the thermal IR meant the optical surfaces could just be diamond-turned; I
    hadn't thought about the tilting of the grooves.

    Folks often do a quick polish of a diamond-turned surface to reduce the
    scatter and other artifacts. If that's been done, the surface will
    focus visible light at some level.

    I will tell the AOCS people that they still need a high resolution
    star tracker ...

    (BTW Zemax has a student version.)

    Unfortunately only available to explicitly participating institutions
    of which Cranfield isn't one :(

    Tom


    There are also some very decent free packages. Beam Four is now free at <https://www.stellarsoftware.com>, and our erstwhile regular poster Jim
    Klein has a pretty powerful lens design program KDP-2, which you can get
    at <http://www.ecalculations.com> (password is avon1). He worked on it
    for a good 20 years, and it can apparently do just about anything.

    KDP2 is actually open source, but (a) it's in Fortran, and (b) it relies
    on some proprietary graphics framework whose name I forget.

    Cheers

    Phil Hobbs

    --
    Dr Philip C D Hobbs
    Principal Consultant
    ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
    Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
    Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

    http://electrooptical.net
    http://hobbs-eo.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)