Sie sind auf Seite 1von 110
INTRODUCTION TO OPTICAL SYSTEM OPTICS 1, Inc DESIGN & ENGINEERING Toptea Syston Deane by Robert E. Fischer, OPTICS 1, Inc. 11:00 - 12:00 | Introduction: What Imaging Optical Systems Are Alll About 12:30 - 1:25 Design And Analysis Of Real Systems 1:35 - 2:30 Thermal Infrared Systems And How They Differ From Visible Systems 3:00 - 3:55 Tolerancing And Producibility, Or How We Produce Real Systems 4:05 - 5:00 Design Examples Using State Of The Art Computer Optimization Programs SN ETS Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Page Of Innovators In Optical System Design Session I - 11:00 - 12:00 Introduction: What Imaging Optical Systems Are All About Pages 1 - 29 Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc., Session __ Page __—sOf PHILOSOPHY OF THIS SHORT COURSE In Optical System Design + Provide a broad and useful introduction into the design of optical systems + Concepts, along with the logical transition of these concepts into the design of real systems, will be developed + The terminology or “jargon” typically used will be covered + Mathematics and detailed derivations will not be presented - rather, the understanding of the design and engineering process will be emphasized + The short course will cover the technology from basic conceptual design and theory through producibility and testing a Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session ZJ Page /_ Of Z7 FUNDAMENTAL OPTICAL SYSTEM OPTICS 1, Inc. REQUIREMENTS ‘rope Syston Dee + Performance + Provide imagery of sufficient quality to resolve specified minimum size objects over desired field of view + Image blur must be matched to detector size + Clear aperture and transmittance must be sufficient for desired sensitivity ¢ Configuration selection + Design form must be capable of providing desired performance + Special requirements such as in scanning systems, cold stop efficiency in ir systems, etc. must be met + Producibility considerations + Minimize size / cost / weight / environmental effects Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Sess nZ Page 2 OF 2” Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. TYPICAL SPECIFICATIONS OPTICS 1, Inc, Innovators In Optical System Design Focal length f/number Clear aperture diameter Full field of view Spectral range and relative wavelength weights Packaging constraints + Length, diameter, back focal distance or clearance Environmental parameters + Temperature range + Gradients (radial, axial, diametral) Transmittance and relative illumination (vignetting) Distortion Performance TE . Focal Length—-+——-+] + RMS wavefront . . degradation yk Full Field Of View + Encircled energy — - + Other Full Field Aperture | of View Diameter 0.707 Field Session Z Page 3_ Of 27 CARDINAL POINTS OF OPTICS 1, Inc. AN OPTICAL SYSTEM omit syne Representation Of An Imaging Optical Principal System + Magnification = y'/y=s'/s > f'=f (inair) . xx'= f2 + Us' =f + 1s an Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page ¥ Of 27 IMAGE QUALITY + Imagery is never perfect + Geometrical aberrations Due entirely to mathematically predictable geometrical effects, such as the spherical abberation shown + If there were no geometrical aberrations, the image of a point source would be an “Airy disc” Other image degrading effects + Fabrication, assembly, and alignment error « Material properties + Factors external to the optics such as the detector, atmospherics, image motion and vibration, etc. aE EPEEPNED Yt eunrenersrmnrmmemrtsesemmressimamamamnmeme ee Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page S Of 27 Airy D, tS disc a ea + Physical diameter is proportional to 2 finumber : Angular Diameter : = ——244 2 __ radians —»r clear aperture diameter a os | + Angular diameter is inversely a/3 a proportional to clear aperture diameter Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 7 Of 27, IMAGERY OF A POINT OBJECT AGAINST A UNIFORM BACKGROUND tenet + For both systems, irradiance of the background on image is the same + hennsin2 @, (flux per unit area, n = source radiance) + For both systems, airy disc diameter * a=2.44 > finumber But, the flux forming the image from the larger system will be (D/d) 2 times the flux from the smaller system + This is important in astronomical and other forms of point imagery ee Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page # OFZ7 BENDING OF LIGHT AT AN OPTICAL SURFACE OPTICS 1, Inc, Innovators In Optical System Design « Refractive index = n= velocity of light in vacuum velocity of light in glass ~—-_—— 0 other material * Light bends or refracts when entering (or leaving) a material * Two ways of thinking nsinO=n' sing’ [Snell's law] * Rays in air, sin 6' = sin@/n' + Waves Air 4 f Glass |r aS SSS ne Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 0 Of ZF OPTICS GEOMETRICAL ABERRATIONS Innovators In Optical System Design Geometrical aberrations are due entirely to the failure of the optical system to produce a perfect or point image « The geometry of focusing light with spherical surfaces is mathematically imperfect Spherical surfaces are used almost exclusively due to their inherent ease of fabrication Tool Elements NN Rotation Axis + The refractive index (or bending power) of glass and other transmitting materials changes as a function of wavelength + This produces changes in the aberrations at each wavelength Se ee Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page /¥ Of ZF SPHERICAL ABERRATION tn Optical System Design Paraxial Focus (This Is Where Light Infinitely Close + Spherical aberration is an axial aberration T° The Optical Axis Focuses) + itis generally cubic with aperture + therefore a given lens with an image blur of 0.01 inches would have a 0.00125 inch blur at half of its aperture + Can be controlled by varying lens bendings note that each of the three CC _[ So differently bent lenses has the same focal length + Can j controlled by adding lenses (or splitting optical power) >_> _I> Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session J Page /S Of 27 SPHERICAL ABERRATION OF f/2 LENSES, |[oPics ACTUAL COMPUTER RAY TRACES ope Systm ag a Seemingly “Innocent” Lens With An Enormous Amount Of Spherical Aberration Same Lens Bent For Minimum Spherical Aberration aan Sn aRREP "prune enreneevumerensnsan-seroversenaaeeecimemnseeiioe asses renee Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session J Page 4 Of Z7 REDUCTION OF ABERRATION BY “SPLITTING ELEMENTS” + Consider baseline lens bent for minimum spherical aberration pens Innovators In Optical System Design ¢ Split lens into two lenses 1. Scale lens by 2 x + aberration increases by 2 x 2. Scale aperture by 0.5 x * aberration reduces to 0.125 since it is proportional to the cube of the aperture (aberration is now 0.25 of original) 3. Put two lenses together 10 + Net aberration is 0.50 of original lens os + Fora real lens the second element is bent for minimum spherical aberration with converging light incident which reduces the aberration further 0.6 04 0.2 ee oO Spherical Aberration 12345 10 Number Of Lenses Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page /7 Of 27 SPHERICAL ABERRATION VERSUS REFRACTIVE INDEX & # OF ELEMENTS OPTICS 1, Inc, —~ Innovators In Optic: lem Design nasa ‘Actual Bk7 Solution ROXIMATE Forms REGION OF DIFFRACTION y 4 LIMITED PERFORMANCE | | ~ NY CLASSICAL 2 3 ° 2 In Waves at 0.5876 um Peak-to-Valley Optical Path Difference 2 5 0.000001 & - 15 16 7 es Refractive index opyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session I Page # Of 27 OPTICS 1, Inc. Innovators In Optical System Design Chief Ray or Principal Ray — + The central or chief ray usually defines the image height + A comatic image occurs when the outer periphery of the lens produces a higher or lower magnification than dictated by the chief ray + Coma can be controlled by shifting the aperture stop and selectively adding lenses Note Reduced Coma Due to Greater Lens iii Symmetry About 4 Aperture Stop Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session I PageZo OFZ? ASTIGMATISM OPTICS 1, Inc. Innovators In Optical System Design ic 1 ZI~~ 7 pays Focus Here y4 " Off Axis Astigmat * An astigmatic image results when light in one plane (yz) is focused differently from light in another plane (xz) + Astigmatism is essentially a cylindrical departure of the wavefront from its ideal spherical shape + Astigmatism can be controlled by selectively locating and bending lenses + An interesting and potent astigmatism correcting technique + A tilted plate in a converging cone CI introduces astigmatism ischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page Z/ Of 27 Copyright 1992, R. FIELD CURVATURE In OpitestSyatem Design + In the absence of astigmatism, the image is formed on a curved surface called the “Petzval” surface + The curvature of the petzval image surface is 6 = 1radius of petzval surface) = o (1(nf) for all elements in the system + n= refractive index, f' = focal length of lens elements for a flat image, o = 0 + For a single element as shown above, the petzval radius is approximately 1.5 times the focal length + This is for a glass of 1.5 refractive index Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 23 Of 27 METHOD OF REDUCING OPTICS 1, Inc FIELD CURVATURE — rnnowslora In Optical System Design + The contribution a lens element makes to the system power is proportional to yo + Where “y” is the ray height above the optical axis and “” is the optical power of the element + The contribution a lens element makes to the petzval sum is proportional only to + Thus, negatively powered elements with small values of y can effectively reduce the petzval sum and flatten the field « For example, consider the Cooke triplet and the petzval lens shown below +* The smaller ray heights on the negatively powered lenses help to reduce the petzval sum i Lens With Field Flattener Cooke Triplet (Petzval Lens) Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page Z¥ Of 27 DISTORTION tn Optical System Design + Distortion is a change in magnification as a function of field of view . Distortion Real Chief Ray i (Positive) ana Height =(f't Chief Ray y=(f lan o) } Representative Lens System Zero Positive or Negative or Distortion Pincushion Distortion Barrel Distortion ERS SS RRR Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 27 Of 27 AXIAL CHROMATIC ABERRATIONS Blue Yellow Red + Left, Primary Axial Color + Right, Primary Axial Color is / Corrected " + Residual Of Secondary Axial | Color a Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session ZT Page ZP Of 27 OFF AXIS LATERAL COLOR In Optical System Design + Lateral color is a change or difference in focal length with color + As shown below, the red has a longer focal length than the blue,resulting in a larger red image Red Blue / en a RR Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session J Page Z7 Of Z7 Session II - 12:30 - 1:25 Design And Analysis Of Real Systems Pages 1 - 41 Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session _ Page__—saOf__ Pa THE RAYLEIGH CRITERIA In Optical System Design If OPD (Optical Path Difference) = 0.25 i, System Just Meets Rayleigh Criteria, and Imagery is Nearly Perfect + The Rayleigh criteria states that: “An optical instrument would not fall seriously short of the performance possible with an absolutely perfect system if the distance between the longest and shortest paths leading to a selected focus did not exceed one quarter of a wavelength.” + (Quotation from “Optics and optical design” by Conrady) a TE Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page /_ Of # PEAK-TO-VALLEY OPD a VERSUS RMS _ WAVEFRONT ERROR opt yaem dein Typical Peak-to-valley opd is the difference Wavefront between the longest and the shortest paths leading to a selected focus RMS wavefront error is given by: Rms = >. ¥ opp2 Summed Over The Wavefront Reference Sphere SY Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 2 Of 4 DEPTH OF FOCUS In Optical System Design SS 1/42 ¢ —|||<— 6 = Depth of Focus + The depth of focus is the amount of defocus permitted which introduces + 1/4) wavefront error + This depth of focus, 5=+4/(2n sin 6)=+22 (f/#)2 16 2 = 0.6328 um X= 4.0 um: X= 10.0 pm nS o f/number ane im 0.0001 0.001 0.01 Depth Of Focus, Inches (+) Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 3 Of H_ EXPLANATION OF RAY TRACE CURVES | Ray trace curves (or Tangential transverse aberration or Y-Z Ray Sagittal plots) are the basic Fan or X-Z Ra performance evaluation Fan y aid for the optical Ay designer Ax -1 : { +1 HM ens Exit — Pupil Z Normalized Pupil Coordinate Image Plane Actual Third Order Coma Pattern Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. " Session Z Page ¥ Of 4 FORMATION OF COMATIC IMAGE BLUR OPTICS 1, Inc, Innovators In Optical System Design Tangential ray trace curve Normalized Entrance Pupil Chief Ray Coordinate Position Axial —~—x Image Sagittal Point Lens Exit Pupil Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 5 Of 4H. FORMATION OF RAY TRACE CURVES FOR SPHERICAL ABERRATION Paraxial Image Plane Ltt ALLL | Transverse | Aberration. “Best Focus” Image Plane Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 4 Of /. TYPICAL TRANSVERSE RAY TRACE CURVES Tn Optea Systm Design tangential ray fan Sagittal ray fan tangential ray fan Sagittal ray fan defocus h [ | / + 3rd and - 5th order spherical aberration third order re a” coma \ coma plus astigmatism EE bee 3rd order spherical secondary aberration axial color Ze Zz 3rd order spherical off axis aberration & best focus S lateral color stigmatism & defocus h astigmatism \ { ) (a Copyright 1992, R. E, Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 7 Of HY a USE OF ASPHERIC SURFACES In Optical System Design « Spherical surfaces provide mathematically imperfect imagery = —oonore . (apert order spherical aberration affects the wavefront error proportional to ‘aperture + An aspheric surface departure of proper magnitude and sign proportional to the (aperture)* can correct spherical aberration Spherical + A Schmidt telescope is a good example of this principle Radius of Mirror / . . : A Add Weak Sphere (More Spherical Mirror Classical Solution Producible, Less Color) a Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page // Of HY STOPS AND PUPILS OPTICS 1, Inc. Innovators In Optical System Design Below is a Real Cooke Triplet Design With Pupil Information Exit Pupil Diameter & - Location =~" a Entrance Pupil Aperture Stop Exit Pupil Entrance Pupil Diameter Location The aperture stop is the surface or location where the ray bundles pivot about - it is the limiting aperture for all ray bundles. + The chief (principal or central) ray passes through the center of the aperture stop + The entrance pupil is where the chief ray would cross the optical axis if it were not redirected by the lens + The exit pupil is where the exiting chief ray appears to have come from Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page /2 Of _#/ ———— EOE 5 VIGNETTING In Optical System Design () + Severe ray bending off axis at positions “A” and “B” often causes large image aberrations + By selectivity reducing the clear apertures of lenses, these “bad rays” can be eliminated + This reduces the off axis through put or illumination + 30-50% vignetting is often acceptable + The resulting lens performs better, is smaller, and is reduced in cost 5 Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page /3 Of Y OPTICAL SYSTEM CONFIGURATIONS [Pe on + Proper configuration selection is often a key ingredient necessary for a successful design effort + It provides the base for the starting design + “Automatic” design programs are rarely capable of changing configurations + The program generally reaches an optimum solution for input configuration + This is known as the “local minimum” in the merit function + Configuration selection may be driven by the following: + Field of view + Performance requirement ¢ f/number + Spectral range + Other PS Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session 7” Page /¥ Of 4/ A PROGRESSION OF CONFIGURATIONS Simple lens + Landscape lens + Achromatic doublet + Cooke triplet - Zeiss Tessar OPTICS 1, Inc, Innovators In Optical System Design Poor image quality Magnifying glass quality Small field of view “Box camera” quality Fields up to + 30 degrees Chromatic aberration Color corrected Small field of view + 8 useful variables Can control 7 primary aberrations plus focal length + Fields of + 25 degrees and f/3 are feasible Superior performance over slightly wider fields of + 30 degrees | Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page /S- Of #_ A PROGRESSION OF CONFIGURATIONS, OPTICS 1, Inc, —— CONTINUED opie syst pee + Double Gauss + Wide field, + 25 degrees + Low f/number + Typical of 35mm camera lenses + Petzval Small field, +20 degrees Superior color correction + Telephoto + Long focal length in smali package + Small field of view + Wide angle + Large field of view + Distortion + Eyepiece + Remote aperture stop Lateral color + Distortion re Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z_ Page 4 OFZ —————————— EEE RELATIVE MERITS, LENS (REFRACTIVE) VERSUS MIRROR (REFLECTIVE) SYSTEMS Yo CE Refractive Reflective + Straight through, full clear aperture + Central obscuration + Affects throughput + Spherical surfaces, conventional + Degrades performance (MTF) fabrication methods + Difficult to support + Expensive materials in the IR + Requires non-spherical surfaces + Thermally sensitive in the IR + Can be light weight + Reduced thermal sensitivity + Potentially lower cost rasan EF-TU ERPFERFOEEnrreennrGHERIRTEEETERIRETIE Se ce Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page /7 Of # REFLECTIVE OPTICAL SYSTEM Pe CONFIGURATIONS iropte! system Design + Paraboloid + Limited by coma + Cassegrain + Same coma as equivalent f/number paraboloid hyperboloid ; paraboloid | + More field curvature than + Gregorian Cassegrain + Easier to test secondary ellipsoid paraboloid + Maksutov + Spherical primary + Correcting element to minimize spherical aberration CR Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z_ Page /g_ Of 4 REFLECTIVE OPTICAL SYSTEM Pe Cc ONFIGURATIONS CONTINUED In Optical system Denon + Schmidt . Schmidt Ee ” Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Ts Very large field Very low f/number Curved image Spherical aberration minimized by concentric spherical corrector Superb performance with weak asphere at stop Good performance All spherical Virtually no chromatic aberration from front zero power group Session Z Page 7 Of 4 THE SCHOTT OPTICAL GLASS MAP AND GLASS SELECTION SCHOTT GLASSES Crown Glasses Glass map from GlassView™ program from OPTICS 1, Inc. © Mass produced glasses © Frequently melted glasses ‘© Glasses melted at major intervals or rarely metted + Inquiry glasses © “Proterred” glasses Lak © Standard glasses 2e 2656.28 nm Ad = $87.88 nm ask AF = 498.13 nm Psk 90.7 76.6 62.6 48.5 eA DHE Number Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Pe In Optical System Design R e 1.849 f r a c 1.746 ¢ | Vv e 1.643 | n d e 1.540 y —+ 1.437 34.4 20.4 Session Z_ Page 20 Of 4/ THE OPTICAL DESIGN PROCESS + Present day computer technology has significantly changed the process of lens design + The essence of most lens design computer programs is as follows: + Each variable is changed a small amount, or increment + The effect to the performance is computed for each variable increment The result is a series of derivatives OP/OV1, OP/AV2, AP/OVS, ...seseeeeeeee P = Performance, V = Variables The set of simultaneous equations for each variable is solved so as to minimize the sum of the squares of the performance residuals The process is repeated until an optimum is reached SS Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 27 Of YW eee THE OPTICAL DESIGN TASK AS PERFORMED BY THE DESIGNER tn 1. Acquire and review specifications 2. Select representative starting point + Prior design * Patent « HYBRID + Original derivation 3. Establish variables and constraints + Variables are curvatures, thicknesses, air spaces, glass characteristics, etc. + Constraints can be packaging related(length, diameter, etc.), or specific parameters such as ray angles, f/number, etc. 4. Optimize performance using program 5. Evaluate performance 6. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until desired performance is met + If performance is not met, modify design by adding or splitting elements, changing glasses, etc., then return to step 4 + Alternative is to return to step 2 7. Perform tolerance analysis and generate performance error budget 2 Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS J, Inc. Session Z Page Jo Of 4. WHY IS LENS DESIGN SO DIFFICULT A TASK? + Acomplex lens system consists of a nearly infinite number of possible solutions in a multi-dimensional space + It is the job of the designer to determine the optimum solution + Computer programs iterate to a “local minimum” in the error function + The designer must apply outside influences to the process in order to leave one local minimum and reach a more optimum solution +, These interactions can range from subtle changes in weightings to intentional restructuring of the configuration Performance Error Function Solution or Parameter Space AER RSS EE Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 3/ Of WY lee SAMPLE PROBLEM AS CONDUCTED AT 1980 [oPTics 1, Inc, — INTERNATIONAL LENS DESIGN CONFERENC rontea syste nets + Starting design (left) was optimized double gauss + f/2, 30 degree full field + First problem: redesign lens to f/1,5 degree full field, 0.1% distortion + Second problem: redesign lens to f/5, 55 degree full field, 5% distortion Shown at Left c are SS —| | Starting Designs at Above New Specifications Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 22 Of 4/ REPRESENTATIVE SOLUTIONS FOR f/5 LENS Ta Optica System belgn + 25% vignetting permitted at +20 degrees, 50% at +27.5 degrees + Note extreme differences in resulting design forms Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page J Of _4/ PERFORMANCE COMPUTATION: OPTICS 1, Inc THE MODULATION TRANSFER FUNCTION ; Innovatore in Optical System Design + Imaging characteristics of an optical system are most appropriately represented by the “modulation transfer function” or MTF + This tells us how well the modulation in an object is transferred to an image by the optics fal 2 meee 2 a z 3 = s Object Image I - i . + Modulation = L(max)-T(min) 7, _ Modulation In Image (max) + | (min) Modulation In Object Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 24 Of 4/ TYPICAL MODULATION TRANSFER ee FUNCTIONS ‘moptial System Design 10 Perfect System, No Obstruction , Perfect Obscured System c g 5 Typical Real System 3 o = ° Spatial Fi patial Frequency, Cutoft Ip /mm or cy /mm Frequency Image —> Object VW VW IW =1/ (A fi#) VVV VV I Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page $F Of 4/ Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. ILLUSTRATION OF SPURIOUS OPTICS 1, Inc, — RESOLUTION ome syste cen With severe defocus, the MTF will drop below zero as shown below A negative MTF is a 180° phase reversal > This is a reversal of white and Rta black bars 2 . By defocusing the target at the . tight you will see this phase reversal, especially at the higher frequencies towards the center of the pattern This can even be seen by relaxing your eye and placing the page progressively closer to your eye 1 0 Session Z Page 36 Of 4 DIFFRACTION BASED IMAGE POINT OPTGSTU SPREAD FUNCTIONS | Ss Innovtors In Optical System Design FOR DIFFERENT CENTRAL OBSTRUCTIONS Zero Obstruction 33% Dia. Obstruction 66% Dia. Obstruction re Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z_ Page37_ Of A/ DIFFRACTION BASED IMAGE POINT OPTICS 1, Inc, SPREAD FUNCTIONS ovntors FOR DIFFERENT AMOUNTS OF SPHERICAL ABERRATION In Optical System Design Perfect 0.25 05, 1.02 7 System Spherical Spherical Spherical Aberration Aberration Aberration SSS 2 as Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 3f Of 4/_ GAUSSIAN BEAM IMAGERY 1/e2 Intensity = 13.5 % + Lasers emit radiation with a Gaussian beam intensity profile + Properties of a Gaussian beam + The beam diameter is referenced to its 1/e2 intensity points + If the energy is not truncated (vignetted or clipped), a Gaussian will image to a Gaussian (assuming perfect optics) + If the energy is truncated, the beam size and profile will be affected + For minimal change to the Gaussian profile, the physical aperture should be approximately 30% larger than the 1/e2 beam diameter SAA ESE Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page 37 Of 4/ ‘a GAUSSIAN BEAM IMAGERY AND BEAM WAIST tn Optical system Desan + Anuntruncated Gaussian beam focused with perfect optics produces a spot diameter as shown below + The Rayleigh range is the distance from the center of the beam waist to where the spot diameter increases by Vz = 1.414 Rayleigh Range (~ Depth of Focus) = 42/ (x 62) 1/e2 a / Classical Ray Beam a — Optics Diameter e a = A Soe ae eres Spot Diameter =42/ (20) + Light exiting a HeNe laser of 1 /e2 beam diameter = 0.8 mm has a divergence 0 = 4 )/ (0.8 x) = 0.001 radians SS Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS }, Inc. Session Z_ Page # Of 4 Ll... TRUNCATED GAUSSIAN BEAM IMAGERY tn Optical System Design + Aperture Changes Relative to a Constant 1/e2 Beam Diameter ° Truncated Gaussian Beam Imagery 1.0 25 P o A os n S w ; 08 ° P e 5 0 ot roe r os m L | os ; R oO 7 o4 | Overt i? t (Pure Airy) d s 03 - Gauss z ¢ s @ Asymptote e i n 02 4 0s qu Underflll . s & ; on (Pure Gauss) 00 ha 00 t 0 02 «05 075 1 325 18 «175 2 25s y Physical Aperture Diameter / (1/e2) Intensity Diameter R. Rhyins, Laser Focus, June 1974, P. 55 Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page vA ory i a eee Session IV - 3:00 - 3:55 Tolerancing And Producibility, or How We Produce Real Systems Pages 1 - 27 ee ener Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session __ Page_—sOf__—_ + Asan optical system is subjected to high or iow temperatures + Lenses expand / contract « Cells or housings expand / contract + The refractive index (bending power) of lenses increases / decreases + Effects to system + Performance may degrade (sometimes substantially) + Image defocusing is a major problem + Aberrations may degrade in addition +» Refocusing and inter-element spacing changes are often required + Strain caused by compressive stresses of cell on lenses can degrade performance + Further degradations can be caused by thermal gradients (axial, radial, and diametral) RR Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page ¥ OfZ7 MATERIAL MECHANICAL PROPERTIES Jn Optical System Design * To minimize the problem * Select glass types and cell material to minimize thermal focus shifts + Match expansion properties of glass and cell material cell material coef. of exp. mod. or elast. therm cond. (x10 invin deg. f) _(10°8 psi) (btu/ft-hr deg F) aluminum 13.3 10 128 stainless steel austenitic (316) . 28 9.4 martensitic (416) \ 29 14.4 beryllium \ 40 92 titanium, ti6a1-4v . 16 10.1 material type germanium 6.1 zns / znse 7.9/7.6 BK7 3.94 negligible SK16 3.5 negligible SF5 4.5 negligible PSK53 5.2 negligible KZFS1 2.78 . negligible Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session @ Page 2 Of 27 OPTICAL SYSTEM TOLERANCING + Assign tolerances to all optical and mechanical components + Tolerances relate to both optical comporients (lenses / mirrors) and to mechanical components which support the optics + Goals for fabricated system Meet system performance requirements Minimize component cost Minimize assembly, alignment, and testing cost Maximize yield + Establish a system performance error budget + Predict performance CE Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session JY Page # Of27_ TYPICAL TOLERANCE PROCEDURE In Optical System Design 1. Generate performance degradation sensitivities for all toleranceable parameters + Element radii, thicknesses, wedge, tilt, decenter, air spaces, refractive index 2. Scale, where necessary, degradations to production tolerance levels 3. Combine with predicted random errors (surface irregularities, and other random effects) 4. Predict system performance 5. Where possible or required, loosen insensitive parameters and tighten sensitive parameters 6. Predict system performance + Repeat steps 5 & 6 until performance requirements are met at minimum cost Copyright 1992, R. E. ischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. JIT Page _¥ Of 47. METHODS OF LOOSENING TOLERANCES + When required, an airspace within the system is adjusted during final assembly + Use of this “adjusting parameter” can reduce other tolerances throughout the system + This must be considered during the tolerance analysis + During the design phase, the sensitivity to component misalignment can be minimized thereby loosening tolerances + In some cases a complete system redesign is required Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session 77 Page _s Of 27. ADDING IMAGE DEGRADATIONS IN ORDER TO'PREDICT PERFORMANCE ayn + RSS addition - the square root of the sum of the squares of the degradations + Assumes linear independence of degradations « Yields approximately a 95% confidence level + Does not handle properly the “mix” of aberrations normally encountered in a real system + If the thickness of a penny is t + 0.01 inches, a stack of 100 pennies will be (100t) + 1 inch worst case or (100t) + 0.10 for 95% confidence (rss) + Monte Carlo - a method of simulating the performance statistics ofa lens system in a high production environment +. Assign tolerances to all toleranceable parameters « Independently perturb each parameter within the system according to a likely probability distribution « Compute performance « Repeat above process a large number of times (1000 or more) + Output is statistics relating level of performance to probability of occurrence 5 Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session JZ Page 6 OfZ7 MTF AS A FUNCTION OF RMS WAVEFRONT ERROR so--m—-ca0z 1.0 00 07 O02 O83 04 Of O86 O7 O8 O08 Normalized Spatial Frequency eNO ee Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session JZ Page _7 Of2Z7 TOLERANCE FORMS in Optical System Design + Symmetrical errors relating to fabrication, assembly, : "Nadus Wedged saat + Power fit to test plate g Centerline Element Total * Thickness x ==) Indicator + Airspace Optical —-7 | [- Runout + Refractive index Centeriine « Asymmetrical errors in optical elements + Surface irregulari ity . Inhomogeneity of refractive index ge + Element wedge (total indicated runout) u + Asymmetrical errors in assembly and alignment Element i + Element tilt decenter or roll Decenter : + Other + Environmental effects + Cosmetic effects (scratch, dig, bubbles) * Dispersion of glass + Combinations of above \n Power Fit to Testplate, [Element __] Every Time the Air Gap = | Testplate eater ree oe xvlzzizz a Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Y Page § Of 27 SURFACE IRREGULARITIES + In conventional lens production, slowly varying surface irregularities predominate + This is usually a cylindrical departure from surface sphericity + Aspheric optics, including large mirrors, can have more random irregularities and zones + Diamond turned aspheric surfaces can have very high frequency tool-generated cusps and lower frequency lead screw error effects + It is important to consider how much of the surface is used by an image forming bundle prior to specifying the irregularity + For example: if we have irregularities of cylindrical form + And if the bundle diameter on element “B” is 0.2 of its clear aperture + Then the irregularity on element “B” can theoreticaliy be 25 times looser than on element “A” such that they introduce the same error to the wavefront 5 Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session 77 Page _# Of 27_ EFFECT OF TOLERANCES ON PRODUCTION COST Innovators In Optical System Design Diameter toler. 10.05 20.025 40.0125 +0.0075 « Listed is the In millimeters: 100 103 115 150 average cost center thickness 404 40.05 40.025 20,0125 effect for various tolerance In mm 105 115 150 300 tolerances on stain charac. 1 2 3 4 typical lenses 25- of the glass 100 103 110 450 50 mm diameter # of lenses 18 "1 6 3 per block 105, 115 130 475 1a ami mi + The figure 100 eccen. toler. 5 min. min. 1 min. 30 sec, a In light dev. 403 408 115 140 represents the base cost Figure toler. 5-2 a1 2-112 2414 In A(pow.irreg.) 105 120 140 175 Dia. to thick. 15-1 20-1 30-1 40-1 ratio (figure 3-1) 120 150 200 300 Beauty defects 60-4 40-30 20-10 10-5 (MIL-C-13830A) 110 125 175 350 Raw glass cost i $5.00 $8.00 $15.00 $25.00 © $50.00 $100.00 In 1000 Ib. lots 108 115 125 135 200 Coating speciti- |. Mg.FI. 3-4 layer >4 layers cations 115 150 200-500 f, SPIE VOL. 31 P. 92 TT Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session 7ZZ_ Page Of 27, BENEFITS OF REDUCED ELEMENT THICKNESS AND CEMENTING open years + Reduced element thickness + More costly and difficult to > produce | / | + Allows elements to be closer to stop for improved performance tL, te. D 208 v= 03 \. Cementing lenses can eliminate »~ extremely sensitive tolerances Price, SPIE VOL. 237, P. 467 iE Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session 7 Page / Of 27. STANDARDS FOR ABRASION, ADHESION, HUMIDITY AND SALT SPRAY Innovators In Optical System Design MODERATE ABRASION (CHEESECLOTH) TEST (1-14 Pounds Pressure with Cheesecloth Conforming to CCC-C-440. Pad to be 4 inch Thick x 3/8 inch Wide) fee ‘Specification Test Paragraph No. of Stokes Method OF Evaluation Le 4san 50 visual acs 50 vieual 4513.3 50 Visual followed by spectral test. 6.8.3 50 visual SEVERE ABRASION (ERASER) TEST gy SpRETFTEREION weet Farageagh Woe oF steghss HEROS SP BaTRETOR 1h 20 Vieuat inspection. BL reac se ° Visual inspection: 3 titce-taeoen Fy Visual inspection. 4. MIL-C-48497 do Visual inspection. SL Micecaseae Fs vigual inspection. ADHESION TEST (type 1 tape per L-T-90) Ho__EpEST Tent TOR —Weae Paragraph Spee Se earn Wethod OF EVSTSEIE wi-c-006758 outck hiteo-1aso0e see itse-teao7 gutex niicecaneie ouiex visual on. 3k HOUR HatroarY test 120% + 42¢,"Qe"io0n Releelve Huntaiey) so apeerrreneran “nese Pavagesge nethoe ot EaTUREISE 1. witec-6750 4.6.3 Visual inspection. BL Mtcesooesp nee Visual inspection’ fottowed by 49 rub with erase then vinug! inspection again. 2. mmien3so8e | 4.4.7 Visual inspections iL Buuceciaagen ake Visual inspection. $1 Matce-teas7 83.2 Visual inspection, é) Mice-teeie need Visual Inspection and surface quality evaluation’ eqihit SPINY (eon) robe Consttions eo Specleied én Asm#eB117 aa Eo taee No. Specification Paragraph Fins Yethod of Evaluation 1. MEt-c-€75A 4.6.10 24 hours Pay eraser teat, 20 atroxen. 2iomuicecooerse 555" BE ouEs pagg Geaser Sane’ 4 Sereken! Bi mieccasoge ee pours vishal Clover, SPIE Vol. 181, P. 141 hele. FINE : aor ave Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 4, Inc. Session 2Z_ Page /4. Of 27 Visual, then moderate OF severe SDF010n re depending on contract. SAMPLE ELEMENT PRINT CENTRAL RADIUS _RAD TOL POW/IRREG C.A.DIA_ enge DIA DIATOL THICKNESS THI TOL WEDGE $1] 0.5350 CC TPF 5.0/3.0 0.8100 $2] 2.5450 CX TPE 5.0/3.0 4.2279 1.3219 +0.002| 0.1750 +0.004 0.0020 TIR Notes: G 1. All dimensions in inches Nes 2. Material: Optical glass per MIL-G-174 type BK7 s2 Schott No, 51764: | P,Cc nd = 1.5168 +0.0005 V-=64.2 +0.8% striae grade A, fine anneal 3. Surfaces marked “P” polish to power / irregularity $1 indicated P, 4. Manufacture per, mil-O-13830 3 Surface quality 40 - 20 . Surfaces marked “C” coat with high efficiency coating. with average reflectance per surface 5 0.5% from 420-680nm_ | Surface marked “G” fine grind and blacken __ . Bevel edges at 45 degrees. to 0.02 max face width Diameter to flat is 0.8863 (REF) with surface sag of 0.2353 on surface S1 oon OPTICS 1, Inés 2655 Thousand Oaks Blvd. Sto. 108 Westlake Vilage, CA 91362] CHK Phone (805) 973 9340_FAX (805) 373 8966] APPD Sample Element Print oS SSS Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Page /9 Of 27 ON EQUIPMENT [Lo See LENS ELEMENT PRODUCTI re 4 generator « Top right: lens grinding + Bottom left & tight: lens edging Wi Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Ine, . Session Z Page /Y Of 27 PRECISION LENS ELEMENT MOUNTING In Optical System Design + Lens element is being measured for surface runout prior to bonding Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page / Of Z7_ SINGLE POINT DIAMOND TURNING + Relatively new technology, perhaps better called “ultra precision machining” + Produces optical quality surfaces directly without grinding or polishing « Uses massive vibration / temperature isolated machine + Equipped with air slides, air bearings, and (as required) numerical control + Uses commercially available single crystal diamond tipped tool + Surface profiles and finishes below 10 microinches are common * Surface shapes are flat, spherical, aspheric surfaces of revolution, Cylindrical, and conical Major difficulties + Fixturing of substrate + Stress relieving-of substrate + Shown at right are two approaches to fixturing a thin mirror Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. DIAMOND TURNING MACHINE FOR ULTRA PRECISION MACHINING tment ES Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session J Page /7_ OfZ7_ MATERIALS THAT CAN BE SINGLE POINT DIAMOND TURNED ¢ Nearly all non ferrous materials ¢ aluminum + gold * brass + silver * copper « lead ¢ beryllium copper ~ platinum + nickel * machinable ceramics ¢ Infrared transmitting materials * germanium + silicon + zinc sulfide + alkalihalide + zinc selenide * Plastics + Surfaces are “sheared” at the molecular level ¢ This leaves metals “clean” to the molecular level ¢ Reflectivity is extremely high and essentially intrinsic, and surfaces generally do not tarnish * Tool pressure is extremely low (10 grams is common) TE Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page /f Of 27 LASER UNEQUAL PATH INTERFEROMETER FOR OPTICAL SURFACE TESTING Bump on Beam Surface Expander Laser Source Reference Fiat is Tilted to Produce Multiple 7% Fringes / First Transfer Interferogram Lens — Film or Final Detector _— Interferogram Location ES Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Z Page /7 Of 27 TYPICAL INTERFEROGRAMS OF SMALL, [OPTICS ins THIN, NOMINALLY FLAT MIRRORS tor Left: Interferograms of Thin Aluminum Mirror (Both Interferograms are of Same Mirror) -Interferogram of Thin Aluminum Mirror With Interferogram Of Astigmatism or Thin Beryllium Mirror “Saddle” Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session 77 Page Zo Of 27 THE HUBBLE TELESCOPE NULL LENS PROBLEM + As we all know, a 1.3 mm error in the spacing of the null optics caused a significant error in the aspheric shape of the primary mirror + The following design study is an attempt to simulate the nominal as well as the incorrect optical system + Design data was scaled from drawing in “sky & telescope” magazine as well data from “the hubble space telescope optical systems failure report” + Mirror assumed to be 2.4 m diameter near paraboloid of proper conic Nominal null to about 0.002 waves rms was achieved Despacin critical air space by 1.3 mm introduced approximately 1.5 wave to wavefroni While this is likely not precisely the design of the null test, it is highly representative of the design and the resulting situation Shown below is the basic configuration of null test (not to scale) Spherical Mirrors \ Hubble rimar' Interferometer Field Lens Exagerrated Mirror Uinder Surface Profile Test a ASSESS SS Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session [7 Page Z/ Of 27 WHAT HAPPENED? In Optical System Design . Interferometer Reflective Null * To set spacing to field lens, Diverger Lens interferometer diverger focus is 9 7 Corrector first located at center of curvature of right mirror as in ia Metering rod is then brought to Metering Rod diverger focus as in “b,” and Ot Precise ton field fens will then be precisely Length located at other end of metering rod as shown + Aperture plate located 1.3 mm from end of metering rod with hole was used as alignment aid as in “b” & "c” Hg? Diverger was inadvertantly focussed on aperture plate, causing metering rod and hence — > =— 1.3 Mm Separation field lens to be 1.3 mm too far to ight, as in “d” - 2 , —! wm Ls “g” J Metering Rod & Hence Field Lens Will Be 1.3 Mm To Far To Right arn Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session 77 Page ZZ Of Z7 HUBBLE TELESCOPE NOMINAL NULL eo LENS MODEL ToptStem Deron Seti | W.00 IN Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session & Page 23_ Of 27 POINT SPREAD FUNCTION, NOMINAL HUBBLE NULL LENS MODEL Pre $1 114,681 6.35 BK7 SURFACE 1: RDY 114.681000 ; THI > S2 -114,681 3.81 sF2 SURFACE 2: RDY -114.681000 ; THI > $3.00 AIR SURFACE 3: RDY 0.000000; THI 0.000000; > SI Surface pointer = IMG > PIM image > FRZ SA > CCY 81.30 > THC $1 0 > THC SI 0 focus > SAV DOUBSTART OPTICS 1, Inc, Innovators. In Optical System Design New lens being input Title in quotation marks Wavelengths in nm Relative wavelength weights Dimensions in mm Entrance pupil diameter Field angles in degrees Object surface (at infinity) 0,1000H+11 ; GLA AIR First lens surface 6.350000 ; GLA BK7_SCHOTT 3.810000 ; GLA SF2_scHorT GLA AIR Image surface Paraxial thickness solve to Freeze all variables vary radii 1-3 vary Ist thickness Vary defocus from paraxial Save lens on disk System saved in file DOUBSTART.LEN(1) Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session /_Page 4 Of 2f ESTABLISH VARIABLES AND ENTER OPTIMIZATION (“AUTO”) > Ls Listing of all lens data ACHROMATIC DOUBLET RDY ‘Tar RMD GLA ccy > OBI: INFINITY INFINITY AIR 100 S70: 114 .68100 6.350000 BK7_SCHOTT ° 2: -114.68100 3.820000 SF2_SCHOTT 0 3 INFINITY 287.396971 AIR ° IMG: INFINITY 9.000000 100 SPECIFICATION DATA EPD 50. 80000 DIM eo WL 656.30 587.60 435.80 REF 2 wre 1 2 1 XAN 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 YAN 0.00000 1.00000 2.00000 vox 0.00000 9.00000 0.00000 VLY 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 REFRACTIVE INDICES GLASS CODE 656.30 587.60 435.80 BK7_SCHOTT 1.514322 1.516798 1.526689 SF2_SCHOTT 1.642095 1.647685 1.672503 SOLVES PIM > AUT Enter optimization AUT optics 1 CPU clock: AUT> EFL=254 AUT> ET S1=3 AUT> GO Focal length constraint to 254 mm Initiates optimization Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Innovators In Optical System Design INFINITE CONJUGATES EFL 295.2800 BFL 287.3970 THC GLC) FFL -296. 6909 100 FNO 5.8126 0 IMG DIS 287.3970 100 OAL 10.1600 PIM PARAXIAL IMAGE 0 Er 10.3114 ANG 2.0000 ENTRANCE PUPIL DIA 50.8000 ‘THI 0.0000 EXIT PUPIL DIA 50.5584 TEI -6.4789 Additional list data above 4-FEB-90 14H 22M 415 OH 1M 20S Edge thickness constraint to 3 mm for first element Session ¥_ Page 7 Of ZF INITIAL AND FIRST OPTIMIZATION CYCLES Innovators In Optical System Design POTENTIALLY ACTIVE SPECIFIC CONSTRAINTS EFL = 254000000 RT si = 3.000000 GENERAL CONSTRAINTS MxXT 26.000000 Max thickness MT 5.000000 Minimum thickness NE 5.000000 Minimum edge NA 0.100000 Minimum axial MAE 0.002500 Maximum edge ERROR FUNCTION CONSTRUCTION WH 1 2 1 WIA 0.500000 weight on aperture DEL 0.385000 Defines # rays in grid WIX F1 1.000000 x weight, field 1 WIX F2 0.875000 X weight, field 2 WIX F3 0.500000 x weight, field 3 WIY Fl 1.000000 ¥ weight. field 1 WIY F2 0.875000 ¥ weight, field 2 WIY FZ 0.500000 ¥ weight, field 3 CONVERGENCE CONTROLS MXC 25 Max # cycles MNC 2 Min # cycles TAR 0.000000 Target for error function IMP 0.050000 Stops if less than this for 2 cycles 5 VARIABLES 5 CONSTRAINTS CAN BE ACTIVE RELATIVE TIME PER CYCLE IS 8.9 UNITS ET Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session /_ Page {_ Of 4% FINAL OPTIMIZATION CYCLE Innovators in Optical System Design CYCLE NUMBER 5: ERR. F. = 9092364522 (change = -0,00801790) x 29.33284520 19.28820710 57.80613407 x 29,33284520 22.06691965 313.95291817 RDY THI RMD GLA > oBg: INFINITY INFINITY AIR STO 155.88960 8.024797 BK7_SCHOTT -111.34468 3.810000 SF2_SCHOTT -356.31954 248.276218 AIR ‘IMG: INFINITY 0.172533 EFL REDO PIM oan. EN PUP EX PUP 253.999963 0.000000 (248.276218 11.834797 0.000000 ~7,675876 Active Constraints - target value diff cost EFL 2. 54000E+02 2.54000E+02 -3.662E-05 -6.288E-03 ET Sl = 3.00000E+00 3.00000E+00 -6.747E-07 3.237E-07 Warning ~ Frozen Thickness Violations: Mn CT S2 CYCLE NUMBER 5: ERR. F, = 90.92364522 (change = -0.00801790) x 29.33284520 19.28820710 57. 80613407 x 29.33284520 2206691965 313. 95291817 Normal AUTO Completion - System improvement less than IMP a TT Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Y Page f/_ Of ££ RESULTING ACHROMATIC DOUBLET DESIGN Innovators. In Optical System Design J > LIS INFINITE CONJUGATES ACHROMATIC DOUBLET EFL 254.0000 ~~ RDY TRI RMD GIA ccy THC BEL 248.2762 cic FFL -252.0627 > OBJ: INFINITY INFINITY AIR 100 100 FNO 5.0000 STO: 155.88960 8.024797 BK7_SCHOTT 0 0 IMG DIS 248.1037 2: -111.34468 3.810000 SF2_SCHOTT 0 100 OAL 11.8348 3: ~356.31954 248.276218 AIR 0 Pm PARAXIAL IMAGE IMG: INFINITY -0.172533 100 ° aT 8.8699 SPECIFICATION DATA ANG 2.0000 EPD 5080000 ENTRANCE PUPIL DIM MM DIA 50.8000 WL 656.30 587.60 435.80 TAI 0.0000 REF 2 EXIT PUPIL wea 1 2 1 DIA 51.1904 xAN 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 THT =7.6759 YAN 0.00000 1.00000 2.00000 > SAV DOUBSTART vor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 SAV DOUBSTART ‘VLY 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 System saved REFRACTIVE INDICES in file DOUBSTART. LEN (2) GLASS CODE 656.30 587.60 435.80 > RIM;SST .05;G0 BK7_SCHOTT 1.514322 1.516798 1.526689 RIM SF2_SCHOrT 1.642095 1.647685 1.672503 SOLVES > SPO;SSt .05;60 PIM SPO aaa Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Y_ Page /o_ Of 4f TRANSVERSE RAY ABERRATION CURVES [rns Ta In Optical System Design TRANSVERSE RAY ABERRATION CURVES TeNGENTEAL ce Larne SREITIRL aosoy Ht wee 0509 -o.ased 0800 auto auanne canny HELO HELE o.osa0 soy Fula Eton 2.0309 ACHROMATIC DOUBLET Ant ABERRRT IONS MILLIMETERS! Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Y_ Page /_ Of 2f_ SECOND EXAMPLE: DOUBLE GAUSS LENS Trptea System Design Specifications Entrance pupil diameter 25.4mm Focal length 50.8 mm (f/2) Field of view +16 degrees (35 mm camera format) Spectral range Visual Distortion 52.5% Vignetting 50% maximum at edge of field Performance TBD Packaging >25.4 mm back clearance ET Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session _Y Page (2 Of Z2S_ DERIVATION OF PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT * Goal is image blur which is barely discernible by eye on 8 x 10 inch print (203.2 x 254 mm) viewed from 10 inches (254 mm) + Eye resolves about 1 arc minute = 0.003 inches (0.076 mm) at 10 inches (254 mm) 1 Minute of Radians + Negative is 7.06 times smaller than print Image blur goal is thus 0.003 / 7.06 = 0.00042 inches 10 Inch (0.0107 mm) diameter Viewing Distance For a real photographic lens requirement, a more complex MTF specification is typical Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Arc = 0.0003 8 Inches OPTICS 1, Inc, Innovators In Optical System Design .417 Inches | Negative is 0.142 Times 8 X 10 Inch Print 24 mm = 6.945 Inches Session Y_ Page /3 Of 48_ ‘EEE LENS DRAWING, DOUBLE GAUSS EXAMPLE AS INPUT TO COMPUTER EE SESE Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Y Page /# Of 28. TRANSVERSE RAY ABERRATION CURVES In Optical System Design ‘TRANSVERSE RAY ABERRATION CURVES venta hoo nearive = SAGITTAL 1.09 ru sete 1.0080 | = a ‘onan, Futhe we cy , wa | occ FIRLO EIGN yop . Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session _¥_ Page /f Of 24. = 1 inc LENS DRAWING, INITIAL OPTIMIZATION Innovators In Optical System Design 5 rm Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session V_ Page /6 Of 4f_ TRANSVERSE RAY ABERRATION CURVES In Optical System Design TRANSVERSE RAY ABERRATION CURVES TANGENTIAL ap atuRTIve SAGITTAL, 0.050 wc cic 0500 Uae Few wetont DOUBLE GAUSS EXAMPLE AY ROERRATIONS NILLIMETERS! Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Y_Page /7_ Of Z2£ LENS DRAWING FINAL OPTIMIZATION WITH REAL “PREFERRED” GLASSES mer Convrisht 1992. R. F. Fischer / OPTICS 1. Ine. Session V Page /f Of 4f TRANSVERSE RAY ABERRATION CURVES In Optica! System Design TRANSVERSE RAY ABERRATION CURVES. TANGENTIAL oe mative RG TTAL : eros Chee o®,| see oso itis neice — fai INSERT REAL GLASSES. FINAL OPTIMIZATION Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session y_ Page /?_ OfZ5_ DIFFRACTION BASED MODULATION TRANSFER FUNCTION pas Innovators In Optical System Design INSERT REAL GLASSES. cence setae DIFFRACTION LIMIT FINAL OPTIMIZATION —_ MAVELENGTH RETGHT DIFFRACTION MTF STOTT fot FEL Cti.ooe1} 658.2. NHI 3-FE8-390] ——-----—$ 583.3.NM 2 Tf t.o revo 11.00%] uas.e ne 1 DEFOCUSING 0.00000 | 10 20 30 wo so 80 SPATIAL FREQUENCY (CYCLES/HM) Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Y Page 20 Of af ISOMETRIC POINT SPREAD FUNCTION ON AXIS = Opie! Sytem Design — DIFFRACTION JNTENSITY INSERT REAL GLASSES. SORERD FUNCT LON WAVELENGTH EIGHT FINAL OPTIMIZATION FLDI 0,00, 0.00)NAX.( 0.0, 0.0)DEG 656.2 NH 1 DEFOCUSING - 0.000000 KH 589.3 wa 2 FEB 435.8 Nn 1 REF S-FEB-80 0,.0042778 KM Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session _v_ Page 2/ Of 2f PROGRESSION OF ERROR FUNCTION a DOUBLE GAUSS LENS DESIGN EXAMPLE wm optical System Design 66,919 (Input Design From Patent) °° Run In 1981 § Initial o Run in 1986 3 Optimization, \ § ary Inner + Int c 40 Doublet | Run In 1990 6 Glasses = 30 Vary All a Glasses Insert Can We * Real Reach 10 Glasses Zero ? Final 0 Optimization Iteration. = ———- Split Front & Rear Lenses NN TL TT Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Y_ Page 2% Of 4s TOLERANCE COMPUTATION + Program computes tolerance sensitivity of all toleranceable parameters + It then performs an error budget, whereby tolerances are loosened or tightened as necessary + Manual input of specific tolerances is often used, especially in a final analysis > TOR: FRE 50;G0 OR TOR optics 1 3-PEB-90 13H 21M 55S CPU clock: 1H 38M 39 NOTE - All tolerances are listed. 79 tolerances and compensators have been used this system is symmetric, In the compensation calculations the opposite side of the field will be simulated Execution time is proportional to the product of the number of fields and number of wavelengths. You can reduce your execution time by reducing these numbers accordingly ‘3-FEB-90 POSITION 1 INVERSE SENSITIVITY POLYCHROMATIC MODULATION TRANSFER FUNCTION INSERT REAL GLASSES, FINAL OPTIMIZATION Radis are given in units of mm, For wedge and tilt, TIR is a single indicator measurement taken at the smaller of the two clear apertures. For decenter and roll, TIR is @ measurement of the induced wedge and is the maximum difference in readings between n two indicators, one for each surface, with both surfaces measured at their respective clear apertures. The Girection of maasurement is parallel to the original optical axis of the element before the Berturbation is applied, TIR is measured in nm. Decenter or roll 1s measured perpendicular to the opti As in om. pp ST Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Y_ Page 29 Of 28 DROP IN MTF DUE TO SYMMETRICAL TOLERANCES, AND REQUIRED REFOCUS FREQUENCY = 50.00 L/m DIFFRACTION LIMITED MTF = 0.929 NOMINAL MIF MANUFACTURING ERROR TPE Dur pur Dur Dur Dur pur Dur Dur pur Dur pir Dir Dur pir pir Lr pir pir pir pir DIN DIN DIN DIN DIN Dun 81 82 83 34 85 87 88 39 310 si1 st 82 83 4 35 86 87 38 39 810 si 33 se 87 88 10 CHANGE, 2.0000000v 4,00000007 2,0000000¥ 12.0000000v 2.00000007 2,00000007 12,0000000v 2.0000000~ 8.000000" 8.0000000¥ 0.0200000¥ 0.02000000 0.0200000~ 0.0200000v 0.1000000v 0.19000000 0.0200000v 0.02000007 0.0200000~ 0.0600000~ 0.00050000 0.0001000% 0.0002000~ 0.0004000~ 0.00040000 0.0005000v = 0.452 ALIMUTH CHANGES IN MIF FOR PLUS AND MINUS MANUFACTURING ERRORS -0 0 0 -0 ° -0 0 -0 -0 008 006 012 +002 013, 024 002 0. 2001 +020 007 017 .018 oes 087 003 003 +013 033 000 008 +007 1005 £008 008 1909 005 Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. 009 on6 1012 001, 013 201d 2001 007 001 :010 :016 :01a 084 oe 002 002 023 013, 000 oce 007 005 609 009 o0a 005 - ~ TANGENTIAL OPTICS 1, Inc. Innovators In Optical System Design COMPENSATING PARAMETERS biz si2 0.013459 0.025977 0.013801 0.001926 0.014431, ~0,008153 0.000203 0.004126 -0.016052 0.013202 -0,016624 -0.010601 -0.073527 ~0.074098 -0.039199 -0.039199 -0.000897 -0.000840 ~0.001583 0.018808 0.024771 -0.009205 0.017976 0.028397 -0.025547 0.011142 Refocusing For power £it in fringes For thickness changes in mm For index changes Session y__ Page 24 Of z§_ DROP IN MTF DUE TO NON-SYMMETRICAL TOLERANCES, AND REQUIRED REFOCUS innovators In Optical System Design cw si 1.0000000~ 0.005 -0.00¢ 0.002858 Pringes of cylinder at 45° cx s2 1.0000000¥ 0,004 © -0.005 0.003179 cx 83 1.0000000¥ 0,002 -0.006 0.002459 cx s¢ 300000000 0.000 0.000 0.000240 cw ss t.cagooaov 0.008 = g.aa0 9.002601 cw s7 1,0000000¥ 0,005 0.002 0.001641. cx 88 300000007 0.000 9.000 -0.000022 cxD 39 1,0000000v 0.001 -0 003 0.000798 ex si0 3.00000007 0.005 -0.003 -0.002818 cx si 3.00000000 0.001 -0.005 0.002409 crn si, 1.0000000% 0.001 0.002 0.005799 Fringes of cylinder at 90° cx 2 2,0000000¢ 0.002 -0.002 0.006307 cx 83 1,0000000¥ 0.004 © -0.004 0.005217 cxN 3¢ 3.00000000 0.000 0.000 0.000452 XN $5 2.0000000¥ 0.007 0.007 0.005542 cm s7 1,0000000¥ 0.005 0.005 0.003194 cx s8 3.00000007 0.000 0.000 0.000044 cxN so 1,0000000~ 0.006 — -0.008 0.001544 oxy S10 3.0000000¥ 0.001 0.001 005546, cm 3.0000000v 0.004 -0.004 0.004694 TRY 0.0020000v 0.000 9.060 0.000000 Total indicator runout in mn TRX 0,0020000v 0.000 9.000 0.000000 Bar $i. .2 0.0003000" 0.090 9.000 0.000009 rile én radians BIX 81.12 0.00030000 0.000 — d.000 0.000000 psy $1..2 0.0200000~ 0.006 -0,004 0.000000 DSx $1..2 0.0200000v 0.002 -0.002 9.000000 TRY 0.0020000v 0.000 0.000 9.000000 RX 0.0020000~ 0.000 0.000 0.000000 RLY 84.3 0.0200000~ 0.006 —-0.006 9.000000 Rol1 as decenter in mn RIX $4..3 0.02000000 0.001 -0.001 2.000000 BrY $3.5 0.00030000 0.000 9.000 0.000000 BIX $3.5 0.0003000~ 0.000 0, 000 0.000000 Ds¥ $3.15 0.0200000¥ 0.002 -0.002 0.000000 DSx 83..5 0.0200000v -0.001 -0.001 0.000000 RY 0.0020000v 0.000 0.000 0.000000 RK 0.0020000~ 0.000 0.000 0.000000 Copyright 1992, R. . Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Y_ Page 4 Of 2s NON SYMMETRICAL TOLERANCES. AND PREDICTED MTF DROP (ON AXIS) A amy RX Bry Brx pst psx 37 87 s8.. se. 87. 87. 87. x 39 89 810 810 810..12 $10. .12 810. .12 810,.22 0.004000 0.904000 0200000" 0.0200000% 0.00030000 0.00030007 0.0200000~ 0.0200000% 0.00800007 0.00800007 0.0100000" 0.0200000~ 0.00060000 0.00060007 0.0200000% 0.02000000 PROBABLE CHANGE IN MIF -0. -0. -0 -0. ° ° -0 ° 0. -0. -0. -0 -0 -0. 001, 001 ous 040 +000 +000 -0. -0. +001, -0. 003 002 001, 000 000 001 002, 002 +001, 184 0.001, 0.001 0.044 -0.040 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.002 0.001, 0.002 0,000 0.000 0.001 -0.001 0.002 0.001, PROBABLE CHANGE OF COMPENSATORS (+/-) Unite - linear dimensions in ma. fringes in wavelengths at 546.1 nm, o = angles in radians, OPTICS 1, Inc, Innovators In Optical System Design 000000 000000 000090 00000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 160335, ‘The probable change in MIF asaumes a uniform distribution of manufacturing errors over the range for all parameters except tilt and decentor which have a truncated Gaussian distribution in x and ¥ CuMATIVE CHANGE PROBABILITY IN MIE 50.0 Per. 0.029 84.1 Per. 0.106 97.7 pcr. -0,184 99.9 pcr. 0.262 re it tea only take on the extreme values of the toleranc! med that the errors can , the 97.7 percent probable change in MIF is -0.355 ee EEE Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Y_ Page 46 Of 2f SUMMARY OF COMPUTER GENERATED TOLERANCES & PREDICTED PERFORMANCE Innovators in Optical System Design CENTERED TOLERANCES INSERT REAL GLASSES, FINAL OPTIMIZATION RADIUS FRINGES ‘THICKNESS INDEX —_-INHOMO- suR RADIUS ToL POM/IRR THICKNESS TOL Grass ToL cenerty 1 31.22904 -0/ 1.00 4.96526 0.02000 1AF2 0.00050 2 78.97737 4.0/ 1.00 0.25000 0.02000 AIR 3 19,24186 2.0/ 1.00 6.57862 0.02000 LAF2 0.00010 4 150.44980 12.0/ 3.00 2.03000 0.02000 srs 0.00020, 5 12,65270 2.0/ 1.00 3.41182 0.10000 AIR 6 10.59374 0.10000 AIR 7 -16.87712 2.0/ 1.00 2.03000 0.02000 Fe 0.00040 8 26.6820 12.0/ 3.00 7.67083 0.02000 SSK2 0.00040 9 -24.20649 2.0/ 1.00 0.25000 0.02000 AIR 10 52.79812 8.0/ 3.00 4.73185 0.06000 LAF2 9.00050 11 ~81.60769 8.0/ 3.00 25.49534 AIR 12 0.09534 DECENTERED TOLERANCES INSERT REAL GLASSES, FINAL OPTIMIZATION ELEMENT WEDGE ELEMENT TILT EL, DEC/ROLL(R) NO. RADIUS RADIUS TIR ARC MIN TIR ARCMIN © TIR mm. 1 31.2290 75.9737 0.0020 0.3 0.0071 2.0 0.0097 0.0200 2 29.24184 150.4980 0.0020 0.3 0.0218 0.0200 (R) 2-3 19.24184 — 12,65270 0.0049 1.0 0.0021 0.0200 3 150.44980 12..65270 0.0020 0.8 4 -16.87712 26.68200 0.0040, 0.9 0.0301 0.0200 (R) es 16.8772 -24.20649 0.0045 1.0 0.0009 0.0200 5 26.68200 4.20649 0.0080 16 6 51.79811 -81.60769 0.0100, 1.3 0.0156 22 0.0165 0.0200 RT TITTIES Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session Y_ Page 27 Of 24 DOUBLE GAUSS LENS STOPPED DOWN TO f/4 In Optical System Design Copyright 1992, R. E. Fischer / OPTICS 1, Inc. Session /_ Page 2f_ Of 4f_