Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User
michalh
member
Reged: 11/30/09
Loc: Midwest, USA
|
Re: Uncoated Newtonian lunar scope
[Re: Pinbout]
#5637833 - 01/22/13 09:43 PM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Yeah, sweet in its elegant simplicity. Got a couple years before that solar eclipse...may be enough time...
|
careysub
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 02/18/11
Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
Re: Uncoated Newtonian lunar scope
[Re: Pinbout]
#5637888 - 01/22/13 10:27 PM
|
Edit
|
Reply
|
Quote |
Quick Reply
|
|
|
Quote:
from groski's white light newtonian page
Quote:
For safe viewing, the image of the Sun needs to be reduced by 100,000to 1 in brightness across the full spectrum. This is an Optical Density of 5 ( LOG(100000) = 5). Bare glass reflects about 5% of the light striking it. Thistranslates into an OD of about 2. The two reflections in a Newtonian would results in an OD of 3.5. Still too bright for comfortable viewing so a third reflections is needed. I used a homemade Herschel wedge to achieve this. I also took advantage of the fact that when light is reflected off of bare glass at an angle it becomes polarized. The closer the angle of reflections gets to the Brewsterangle of 57 degrees, the more complete the polarization. With both the diagonal mirror and Herschel Wedge placed at 45 degrees the light becomes crossed polarized and the image brightness can be farther reduced.
so can you use a ND filter and a polarizer to get from 3.5 to 5 OD instead of a wedge?
100,000* reduction is the number you are looking for, but a transmittance of 0.05 is an optical density of 1.3, and two reflections is 2.6, leaving you 2.4 or so short. He probably did need the polarization trick to bring the brightness down with just three reflections as a light reduction mechanism.
Shade 7 (0.27% transmittance) or greater welding filters would provide enough reduction.
*I find a range of 30,000 (minimum for safety) to 300,000 (depending on how bright you find optimum for comfortable observation) cited. 100,000 is right in the middle.
|
|
17 registered and 18 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: ausastronomer, richard7
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 1100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|