- •Lens Design Fundamentals
- •Contents
- •Preface to the Second Edition
- •Preface to the First Edition
- •A Special Tribute to Rudolf Kingslake
- •1.1. Relations Between Designer and Factory
- •1.1.1 Spherical versus Aspheric Surfaces
- •1.1.2 Establishment of Thicknesses
- •1.1.3 Antireflection Coatings
- •1.1.4 Cementing
- •1.1.5 Establishing Tolerances
- •1.1.6 Design Tradeoffs
- •1.2. The Design Procedure
- •1.2.1 Sources of a Likely Starting System
- •1.2.2 Lens Evaluation
- •1.2.3 Lens Appraisal
- •1.2.4 System Changes
- •1.3. Optical Materials
- •1.3.1 Optical Glass
- •1.3.2 Infrared Materials
- •1.3.3 Ultraviolet Materials
- •1.3.4 Optical Plastics
- •1.4. Interpolation of Refractive Indices
- •1.4.1 Interpolation of Dispersion Values
- •1.4.2 Temperature Coefficient of Refractive Index
- •1.5. Lens Types to be Considered
- •2.1. Introduction
- •2.1.1 Object and Image
- •2.1.2 The Law of Refraction
- •2.1.3 The Meridional Plane
- •2.1.4 Types of Rays
- •2.1.5 Notation and Sign Conventions
- •2.2. Graphical Ray Tracing
- •2.3. Trigonometrical Ray Tracing at a Spherical Surface
- •2.3.1 Program for a Computer
- •2.4. Some Useful Relations
- •2.4.1 The Spherometer Formula
- •2.4.2 Some Useful Formulas
- •2.4.3 The Intersection Height of Two Spheres
- •2.4.4 The Volume of a Lens
- •2.5. Cemented Doublet Objective
- •2.6. Ray Tracing at a Tilted Surface
- •2.6.1 The Ray Tracing Equations
- •2.6.2 Example of Ray Tracing through a Tilted Surface
- •2.7. Ray Tracing at an Aspheric Surface
- •3.1. Tracing a Paraxial Ray
- •3.1.1 The Standard Paraxial Ray Trace
- •3.1.2 The (y – nu) Method
- •3.1.3 Inverse Procedure
- •3.1.4 Angle Solve and Height Solve Methods
- •3.1.6 Paraxial Ray with All Angles
- •3.1.7 A Paraxial Ray at an Aspheric Surface
- •3.1.9 Matrix Approach to Paraxial Rays
- •3.2. Magnification and the Lagrange Theorem
- •3.2.1 Transverse Magnification
- •3.2.2 Longitudinal Magnification
- •3.3. The Gaussian Optics of a Lens System
- •3.3.1 The Relation between the Principal Planes
- •3.3.2 The Relation between the Two Focal Lengths
- •3.3.3 Lens Power
- •3.3.4 Calculation of Focal Length
- •3.3.5 Conjugate Distance Relationships
- •3.3.6 Nodal Points
- •3.3.7 Optical Center of Lens
- •3.3.8 The Scheimpflug Condition
- •3.4. First-Order Layout of an Optical System
- •3.4.1 A Single Thick Lens
- •3.4.2 A Single Thin Lens
- •3.4.3 A Monocentric Lens
- •3.4.4 Image Shift Caused by a Parallel Plate
- •3.4.5 Lens Bending
- •3.4.6 A Series of Separated Thin Elements
- •3.4.7 Insertion of Thicknesses
- •3.4.8 Two-Lens Systems
- •3.5. Thin-Lens Layout of Zoom Systems
- •3.5.1 Mechanically Compensated Zoom Lenses
- •3.5.2 A Three-Lens Zoom
- •3.5.4 A Four-Lens Optically Compensated Zoom System
- •3.5.5 An Optically Compensated Zoom Enlarger or Printer
- •Endnotes
- •4.1. Introduction
- •4.2. Symmetrical Optical Systems
- •4.3. Aberration Determination Using Ray Trace Data
- •4.3.1 Defocus
- •4.3.2 Spherical Aberration
- •4.3.3 Tangential and Sagittal Astigmatism
- •4.3.4 Tangential and Sagittal Coma
- •4.3.5 Distortion
- •4.3.6 Selection of Rays for Aberration Computation
- •4.3.7 Zonal Aberrations
- •4.3.8 Tangential and Sagittal Zonal Astigmatism
- •4.3.9 Tangential and Sagittal Zonal Coma
- •4.3.10 Higher-Order Contributions
- •4.4. Calculation of Seidel Aberration Coefficients
- •Endnotes
- •5.1. Introduction
- •5.2. Spherochromatism of a Cemented Doublet
- •5.2.4 Secondary Spectrum
- •5.2.5 Spherochromatism
- •5.3. Contribution of a Single Surface to the Primary Chromatic Aberration
- •5.4. Contribution of a Thin Element in a System to the Paraxial Chromatic Aberration
- •5.5. Paraxial Secondary Spectrum
- •5.7.1 Secondary Spectrum of a Dialyte
- •5.7.2 A One-Glass Achromat
- •5.8. Chromatic Aberration Tolerances
- •5.8.1 A Single Lens
- •5.8.2 An Achromat
- •5.9. Chromatic Aberration at Finite Aperture
- •5.9.1 Conrady’s D – d Method of Achromatization
- •5.9.3 Tolerance for the D – d Sum
- •5.9.5 Paraxial D – d for a Thin Element
- •Endnotes
- •6.1. Surface Contribution Formulas
- •6.1.1 The Three Cases of Zero Aberration at a Surface
- •6.1.2 An Aplanatic Single Element
- •6.1.3 Effect of Object Distance on the Spherical Aberration Arising at a Surface
- •6.1.4 Effect of Lens Bending
- •6.1.6 A Two-Lens Minimum Aberration System
- •6.1.7 A Four-Lens Monochromat Objective
- •6.2. Zonal Spherical Aberration
- •6.3. Primary Spherical Aberration
- •6.3.1 At a Single Surface
- •6.3.2 Primary Spherical Aberration of a Thin Lens
- •6.4. The Image Displacement Caused by a Planoparallel Plate
- •6.5. Spherical Aberration Tolerances
- •6.5.1 Primary Aberration
- •6.5.2 Zonal Aberration
- •Endnotes
- •7.1. The Four-Ray Method
- •7.2. A Thin-Lens Predesign
- •7.2.1 Insertion of Thickness
- •7.2.2 Flint-in-Front Solutions
- •7.3. Correction of Zonal Spherical Aberration
- •7.4. Design Of an Apochromatic Objective
- •7.4.1 A Cemented Doublet
- •7.4.2 A Triplet Apochromat
- •7.4.3 Apochromatic Objective with an Air Lens
- •Endnotes
- •8.1. Passage of an Oblique Beam through a Spherical Surface
- •8.1.1 Coma and Astigmatism
- •8.1.2 Principal Ray, Stops, and Pupils
- •8.1.3 Vignetting
- •8.2. Tracing Oblique Meridional Rays
- •8.2.1 The Meridional Ray Plot
- •8.3. Tracing a Skew Ray
- •8.3.1 Transfer Formulas
- •8.3.2 The Angles of Incidence
- •8.3.3 Refraction Equations
- •8.3.4 Transfer to the Next Surface
- •8.3.5 Opening Equations
- •8.3.6 Closing Equations
- •8.3.7 Diapoint Location
- •8.3.8 Example of a Skew-Ray Trace
- •8.4. Graphical Representation of Skew-Ray Aberrations
- •8.4.1 The Sagittal Ray Plot
- •8.4.2 A Spot Diagram
- •8.4.3 Encircled Energy Plot
- •8.4.4 Modulation Transfer Function
- •8.5. Ray Distribution from a Single Zone of a Lens
- •Endnotes
- •9.1. The Optical Sine Theorem
- •9.2. The Abbe Sine Condition
- •9.2.1 Coma for the Three Cases of Zero Spherical Aberration
- •9.3. Offense Against the Sine Condition
- •9.3.1 Solution for Stop Position for a Given OSC
- •9.3.2 Surface Contribution to the OSC
- •9.3.3 Orders of Coma
- •9.3.4 The Coma G Sum
- •9.3.5 Spherical Aberration and OSC
- •9.4. Illustration of Comatic Error
- •Endnotes
- •10.1. Broken-Contact Type
- •10.2. Parallel Air-Space Type
- •10.3. An Aplanatic Cemented Doublet
- •10.4. A Triple Cemented Aplanat
- •10.5. An Aplanat with A Buried Achromatizing Surface
- •10.6. The Matching Principle
- •Endnotes
- •11.1. Astigmatism and the Coddington Equations
- •11.1.1 The Tangential Image
- •11.1.2 The Sagittal Image
- •11.1.3 Astigmatic Calculation
- •11.1.5 Astigmatism for the Three Cases of Zero Spherical Aberration
- •11.1.6 Astigmatism at a Tilted Surface
- •11.2. The Petzval Theorem
- •11.2.1 Relation Between the Petzval Sum and Astigmatism
- •11.2.2 Methods for Reducing the Petzval Sum
- •11.3. Illustration of Astigmatic Error
- •11.4. Distortion
- •11.4.1 Measuring Distortion
- •11.4.2 Distortion Contribution Formulas
- •11.4.3 Distortion When the Image Surface Is Curved
- •11.5. Lateral Color
- •11.5.1 Primary Lateral Color
- •11.6. The Symmetrical Principle
- •11.7. Computation of the Seidel Aberrations
- •11.7.1 Surface Contributions
- •11.7.2 Thin-Lens Contributions
- •11.7.3 Aspheric Surface Corrections
- •11.7.4 A Thin Lens in the Plane of an Image
- •Endnotes
- •12.1.1 Distortion
- •12.1.2 Tangential Field Curvature
- •12.1.3 Coma
- •12.1.4 Spherical Aberration
- •12.2. Simple Landscape Lenses
- •12.2.1 Simple Rear Landscape Lenses
- •12.2.2 A Simple Front Landscape Lens
- •12.3. A Periscopic Lens
- •12.4. Achromatic Landscape Lenses
- •12.4.1 The Chevalier Type
- •12.4.2 The Grubb Type
- •12.5. Achromatic Double Lenses
- •12.5.1 The Rapid Rectilinear
- •12.5.3 Long Telescopic Relay Lenses
- •12.5.4 The Ross “Concentric” Lens
- •Endnotes
- •13.1. The Design of a Dagor Lens
- •13.2. The Design of an Air-Spaced Dialyte Lens
- •13.4. Double-Gauss Lens with Cemented Triplets
- •13.5. Double-Gauss Lens with Air-spaced Negative Doublets
- •Endnotes
- •14.1. The Petzval Portrait Lens
- •14.1.1 The Petzval Design
- •14.1.2 The Dallmeyer Design
- •14.2. The Design of a Telephoto Lens
- •14.3. Lenses to Change Magnification
- •14.3.1 Barlow Lens
- •14.3.2 Bravais Lens
- •14.4. The Protar Lens
- •14.5. Design of a Tessar Lens
- •14.5.1 Choice of Glass
- •14.5.2 Available Degrees of Freedom
- •14.5.3 Chromatic Correction
- •14.5.4 Spherical Correction
- •14.5.5 Correction of Coma and Field
- •14.5.6 Final Steps
- •14.6. The Cooke Triplet Lens
- •14.6.2 The Thin-Lens Predesign of the Bendings
- •14.6.3 Calculation of Real Aberrations
- •14.6.4 Triplet Lens Improvements
- •Endnotes
- •15.1. Comparison of Mirrors and Lenses
- •15.2. Ray Tracing a Mirror System
- •15.3. Single-Mirror Systems
- •15.3.1 A Spherical Mirror
- •15.3.2 A Parabolic Mirror
- •15.3.3 An Elliptical Mirror
- •15.3.4 A Hyperbolic Mirror
- •15.4. Single-Mirror Catadioptric Systems
- •15.4.1 A Flat-Field Ross Corrector
- •15.4.2 An Aplanatic Parabola Corrector
- •15.4.3 The Mangin Mirror
- •15.4.4 The Bouwers–Maksutov System
- •15.4.5 The Gabor Lens
- •15.4.6 The Schmidt Camera
- •15.4.7 Variable Focal-Range Infrared Telescope
- •15.4.8 Broad-Spectrum Afocal Catadioptric Telescope
- •15.4.9 Self-Corrected Unit-Magnification Systems
- •15.5. Two-Mirror Systems
- •15.5.1 Two-Mirror Systems with Aspheric Surfaces
- •15.5.2 A Maksutov Cassegrain System
- •15.5.3 A Schwarzschild Microscope Objective
- •15.5.4 Three-Mirror System
- •15.6. Multiple-Mirror Zoom Systems
- •15.6.2 All-Reflective Zoom Optical Systems
- •15.7. Summary
- •Endnotes
- •16.1. Design of a Military-Type Eyepiece
- •16.1.1 The Objective Lens
- •16.1.2 Eyepiece Layout
- •16.2. Design of an Erfle Eyepiece
- •16.3. Design of a Galilean Viewfinder
- •Endnotes
- •17.1. Finding a Lens Design Solution
- •17.1.1 The Case of as Many Aberrations as There Are Degrees of Freedom
- •17.1.2 The Case of More Aberrations Than Free Variables
- •17.1.3 What Is an Aberration?
- •17.1.4 Solution of the Equations
- •17.2. Optimization Principles
- •17.3. Weights and Balancing Aberrations
- •17.4. Control of Boundary Conditions
- •17.5. Tolerances
- •17.6. Program Limitations
- •17.7. Lens Design Computing Development
- •17.8. Programs and Books Useful for Automatic Lens Design
- •17.8.1 Automatic Lens Design Programs
- •17.8.2 Lens Design Books
- •Endnotes
- •Index
186 |
Spherical Aberration |
Figure 6.11 An f/1 silicon lens.
|
|
|
Spherical aberration |
|
|
c |
d |
n |
contribution |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.02790 |
0.25 |
3.4 |
–0.006017 |
f 0 |
¼ 10.283 |
|
|
|
¼ 9.717 |
||
0.01572 |
0.05 |
(air) |
–0.006004 |
l 0 |
|
|
þ0.012009 |
aperture ¼ 10 ( f/1) |
|||
0.12632 |
0.50 |
3.4 |
|||
|
|
|
|
||
0.10291 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
Focal length of front component, 33.99; of rear component, 14.88
6.1.7 A Four-Lens Monochromat Objective
As was stated in Section 6.1.2, a single aplanatic lens element for use in parallel light is nothing but a planoparallel plate and not a lens at all. However, by making use of the small overcorrection that can be obtained from a convex surface slightly weaker than a true aplanat, it is possible to construct an aplanatic system for use with a distant object by placing a minimum-aberration lens first, and following this by a series of overcorrected menisci in the converging beam produced by the first lens.
As an example we may take the single minimum-aberration f/4 lens in Section 6.1.5, and follow it with three menisci, the front face of each being chosen to give the maximum of overcorrection, while the rear faces are perpendicular to the marginal ray. Nothing is gained by departing from the strict perpendicular condition for the rear surfaces of the menisci because, being dispersive surfaces, any departure from perpendicularity in either direction would yield spherical undercorrection, which is just what we are trying to avoid.
After several trials to obtain the greatest possible amount of overcorrection, and finally scaling to f 0 ¼ 10.0 with an aperture of f/2, we obtain the following system:
6.1 Surface Contribution Formulas |
|
|
|
187 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
Spherical aberration |
|||
|
c |
d |
n |
contribution at f/2 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.066014a |
|
|
–0.020622 |
) |
|
|
–0.0103636a |
0.3 |
1.523 |
–0.020610 |
–0.041232 |
|||
|
|
0.05 |
(air) |
þ0.002463 |
|
|
|
0.082192 |
0.3 |
1.523 |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
0.055672 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.05 |
(air) |
þ0.005962 |
|
|
|
0.113932 |
0.3 |
1.523 |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
0.077543 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.05 |
(air) |
þ0.014476 |
|
|
|
0.158867 |
0.3 |
1.523 |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
0.109134 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
–0.018331 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
aCrossed lens in parallel light (see Section 6.3.2).
The focal length of the first lens alone is now 24.969. It is clear that even with three menisci it is not possible to compensate for the undercorrection of the first lens.
However, we can do much better by starting with the two-lens minimum aberration form given in Section 6.1.6, and following this with only two menisci. By this procedure we can design a four-lens spherically corrected system for use in parallel light with an aperture as high as f/2. Scaled to f 0 ¼ 10 this becomes
|
|
|
Spherical aberration |
c |
d |
n |
contribution at f/2 |
|
|
|
|
0.041520 |
|
|
–0.005090 |
|
0.3 |
1.523 |
|
–0.006726 |
|
|
–0.005098 |
|
0.05 |
|
|
0.084883 |
|
|
–0.005106 |
|
0.3 |
1.523 |
|
0.029164 |
|
|
–0.005098 |
|
0.05 |
|
þ0.005966 |
0.113764 |
0.3 |
1.523 |
|
|
|
||
0.077891 |
|
|
0 |
|
0.05 |
|
þ0.014387 |
0.159353 |
0.3 |
1.523 |
|
|
|
||
0.109941 |
|
|
–0.000016 |
|
|
Total |
–0.000068 |
|
|
|
|
188 |
Spherical Aberration |
Figure 6.12 A four-lens f/2 aplanatic objective.
This lens is shown in Figure 6.12. The focal length of the first two lenses is now 18.380. This system has been used in monochromat microscope objectives made of quartz for use at a single wavelength in the ultraviolet. The design has been discussed by Fulcher.3
6.1.8An Aspheric Planoconvex Lens Free from Spherical Aberration
Two cases arise, the first when the curved aspheric surface faces the distant object, and the other when the plane surface faces the object. In 1637, Descartes described and explained the general properties of utilizing concave and convex lenses, both singularly and in combination. He was the first to create a mathematical formulation to explain spherical aberration. Descartes also made a detailed study of elliptical and hyperbolic surfaces, particularly the planohyperbolic lens. Descartes and his colleagues spent substantial money and effort trying to fabricate such a lens since it would be free of spherical aberration.
For all their efforts, not one lens could be fabricated with the tools and methods then available. Fortunately, technology has advanced to allow fabrication of both elliptical and hyperbolic surfaces of high quality. The topic of perfect imaging from one point to another point was first addressed by utilizing Fermat’s principle, which states that perfect conjugate imaging occurs when all the rays passing through the conjugate points have the same optical path length. Using Fermat’s principle, Luneburg4 showed in 1944 that the surface can be represented by a fourth-order curve, which is also known as the Cartesian Oval after Rene´ Descartes.
Convex to the Front
The left side of the ellipse shown in Figure 6.13a is the portion of the ellipse used as the surface contour for the ellipsoid-plano lens with the image being formed at the rear surface of the lens, which is planar. This lens has no spherical
6.1 Surface Contribution Formulas |
189 |
Z |
Y |
Y |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(n) |
B |
|
|
Z |
B |
|
|
|
||
|
|
(n) |
|
|
|
|
(a) (b)
Figure 6.13 Aspheric single lenses corrected for spherical aberration.
aberration at the design wavelength for collimated light input and does suffer from spherochromatism. The coordinate system used for ray tracing has the coordinate system origin located at the left surface vertex of the ellipsoid. The z-axis is the major axis of ellipsoid and the x-axis and y-axis define the vertex tangent plane. The sag or z-coordinate displacement from the tangent plane at the vertex of the surface can be determined from a commonly used mathematical representation of conical surfaces given by
z ¼
y2c
p
1 þ 1 ð1 þ kÞc2y2
where y is the coordinate of the ray intercept on the surface, c is the radius of curvature (reciprocal of the radius) at the surface vertex, and k is the conic constant (see Eq. (2-7)). This equation form is typically used in optical design programs with c (or r) and k as an input description of the surface.
Figure 6.14 presents the basic parameters describing an ellipse.5 These include the lengths of its major and minor axes, and foci. The distance d can
|
y |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0,b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
b |
|
|
a |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(−a,0) |
|
c |
|
|
(a,0) |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
x |
|
|
(−c,0) |
|
|
(c,0) |
|||
|
t |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0,−b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 6.14 Geometrical parameters of an ellipse.
190 |
Spherical Aberration |
be considered the focal length of the elliptical lens and is the sum of the major axis semi-length a and the foci distance c from the ellipse center.
A conic section can also be represented by
x d n0 þ n1 |
2 |
|
|
z2 |
1 |
|||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
n1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
þ |
|
|
¼ |
|
d2 |
|
n1 |
|
2 |
d2 |
n1 n0 |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
n0 þ n1 |
|
||||
n0 þ n1 |
|
|
|
|||||||
and is an ellipse if n1 > n0 and a hyperbola if n0 > n1: This surface is called a rotationally symmetric surface. Examination of this equation indicates that the major a and minor b axes’ semi-lengths can be computed from
|
|
a2 ¼ d2 n0 |
|
2 |
|
|||||||
|
|
þ n1 |
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
n1 |
|
||||
and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
b2 ¼ d2 |
n1 n0 |
: |
|
|||||||
|
|
n n |
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 þ 1 |
|
|||||
By basic geometry, the foci distances are computed by |
||||||||||||
|
|
c2 ¼ a2 b2 |
|
|||||||||
and by substituting in the terms for a2 |
|
and b2, we obtain |
||||||||||
|
|
c2 ¼ d2 n0 |
|
2 |
|
|||||||
|
|
þ n1 : |
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
n0 |
|
||||
|
eccentricity |
|
|
c |
|
|
|
|
|
|||
From geometry, the |
e ¼ a |
which is determined by using the pre- |
||||||||||
n0 |
|
|
||||||||||
ceding equations to be e ¼ n1 |
. The conic constant k is defined as |
|||||||||||
|
|
k ¼ e |
2 |
¼ |
|
n02 |
: |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
n12 |
|
|||||||
Again from geometry (semi-latus rectum), the vertex radius r is given by |
||||||||||||
|
r |
b2 |
|
d |
|
n1 n0 |
: |
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
¼ a ¼ |
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
n1 |
|
||||||
It should be evident that the same relationship between r, t, n0, and n1 can be determined using paraxial optics and a purely spherical surface. This result
6.1 Surface Contribution Formulas |
191 |
should be expected when the aperture is very small. The inclusion of the conic constant to transform the surface into an ellipsoid does not change the firstorder properties of this lens, but does mitigate the inherent spherical aberration of a spherical surface.
Consider an example where n0 ¼ 1 and n1 ¼ 1:5, and d ¼ 20 mm. It follows that
|
|
k ¼ |
n02 |
¼ |
1 |
¼ |
0:44444 |
||||||
|
¼ |
n12 |
1:52 |
||||||||||
|
|
¼ |
|
||||||||||
|
|
n1 |
|
¼ |
|
|
1:5 |
|
|||||
r |
|
d |
n1 |
n0 |
|
|
20 |
0:5 |
|
6:66666 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
A surface of this kind has long been used on highway reflector “buttons.”6 The same surface profile can be used to form a cylindrical lens, which has various applications. An array of such lenses can be created to form a lenticular array commonly used in the printing industry to make prints providing 3D photographic projections or the display of different images as the print is tilted.7
Consider a situation when an ellipsoid-plano lens is bonded to one or more materials. An example would be a detector array affixed to the plano side of the lens using an optical glue which can have different refractive index from the lens. The lens thickness would need to be reduced to account for the thickness of the glue. From basic aberration theory, the different refractive indices of the lens and substrate materials can introduce additional spherical aberration since the light beam is converging (see Section 6.4).
To compensate for the different refractive indices, the equation relating r, n, and d can be modified as presented in the following equation to determine the radius r of the lens when the composite optical element comprises two or more different materials.
r¼ ðn1 1Þ d1=n1 þ d2=n2 þ . . . dn=nn
This equation is readily derived using paraxial ray tracing. Note that the substrates are each assumed to be planar. The summation shown in the parentheses is the effective optical thickness of the assemblage. If the substrate thicknesses are small compared to the lens thickness d1, then the conic constant can be estimated to be given by n1 2.
In the event that the substrate thicknesses are a significant fraction of the lens thickness, the conic constant estimation is somewhat more complex in that an estimate of the effective refractive index is required. Consider that a paraxial ray having n0u0 ¼ 0 is incident on the refracting surface at a height y1 where u0 is the angle the ray makes with the optical axis. As this ray propagates through the assemblage, it intercepts the substrates at heights y2, y3, . . . , yn.
192 |
Spherical Aberration |
The effective refractive index neff can then be expressed, following the mean value theorem of integral calculus, as
n
P
yitini
¼ i¼1
neff n
P
yiti
i¼1
and the corresponding conic constant is neff2.
Figure 6.15 illustrates a lens system comprising a spherical refracting surface and two substrates while Figure 6.16 shows the same lens system with the effective conic constant. The prescriptions of these lens systems are provided in Table 6.2 where the only difference between them is the conic constant. As it is evident by examining Figure 6.15, the lens system with spherical refracting surface suffers from significant spherical aberration. The inclusion of the effective conic constant effectively mitigates the spherical aberration illustrated in Figure 6.16.
Figure 6.15 Lens system with multiple substrates and spherical refractive surface.
Figure 6.16 Lens system with multiple substrates and elliptical refractive surface.
6.1 Surface Contribution Formulas |
|
|
193 |
||
|
|
|
Table 6.2 |
|
|
|
Prescription of Lens System Depicted in Figures 6.15 and 6.16 |
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marginal ray |
|
Surface |
Radius |
Thickness |
Refractive index |
height |
Conic constant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Object |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
1 |
10 |
10 |
1.8 |
6 |
–0.34542 |
2 |
1 |
5 |
1.4 |
3.33333 |
|
3 |
1 |
5.396825 |
1.6 |
1.61905 |
|
Image |
1 |
|
|
0 |
|
A solid-optics (containing no air gaps) lens system for making an afocal telescope can be designed by using the foregoing information. Two ellipsoid-plano lenses would be placed with their plano sides facing one another and some optical bonding material of finite thickness placed between them after having accounted for the several thicknesses so that the focal point of the two lenses coincide. The lenses can be of different materials and radii, and the angular magnification is simply the ratio of their effective focal lengths.
Plane Surface in Front
Equating optical paths in the air behind the lens shown in Figure 6.13b gives
|
|
B þ nZ ¼ ½Y2 þ ðB þ ZÞ2&1=2 |
|
||||||
where |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fZ þ ½B=ðn þ 1Þ&g2 |
|
Y2 |
|
1 |
||||
|
B2ðn 1Þ=ðn þ 1Þ ¼ |
||||||||
½ |
Bn= n |
1 |
Þ& |
2 |
|
||||
ð þ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
There is a clear resemblance between these two cases. The plane-in-front lens has a hyperbolic surface with semimajor axis equal to B/(n þ 1), and semiminor axis equal to B[(n – 1)/(n þ 1)]1/2 as before (Figure 6.13b), the eccentricity now being equal to the refractive index n and the conic constant being k ¼ n2.
Using a y-nu ray trace, it is trivial to show that the focal length of a planohyperboloid lens is n r1 which is shown as B in Figure 6.13b. To create a solid optical element for use at finite magnification, a hyperbolic surface can be applied on both faces of a biconvex lens with the ratio of focal lengths being the ratio of the radii. The light is of course collimated between the faces so there is no fundamental restriction of the lens thickness. The axial image is free of spherical aberration for up to as high an aperture as required; however, the field of this lens is restricted by coma.
