· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article 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 You are not logged in. [Login] Entrance · Main Index · Search · New user · Who's Online FAQ · Calendar Equipment Discussions >> ATM, Optics and DIY Forum Previous   Index   Next   Threaded   Pages: 1 Sasa sage Reged: 11/03/10 Loc: Ricany, Czech Republic Melt variation on relative partial dispersion       #5563666 - 12/10/12 07:36 AM Edit   Reply   Quote Quick Reply   Hello, I would like to know what is a typical melt-to-melt variation on partial dispersion (lets say for e,C lines) for a given glass. I know that dispersion (nF-nC) could be controlled at level of +-0.00002 (and if one asks the company even on 6th digit level), and that melt-to-melt variations are even larger. But I can't find the number for relative partial dispersion. Since it is a ratio of two dispersions, the melt-to-melt variations in refractive indices probably mostly cancel out. Is it safe to assume, that the relative partial dispersion is controlled between various melts at the level of 0.0001 (the glass catalogues usually state relative partial dispersion on 4 digits)? Post Extras:       ed_turco Pooh-Bah Reged: 08/29/09 Loc: Lincoln, RI Re: Melt variation on relative partial dispersion [Re: Sasa]       #5563758 - 12/10/12 08:55 AM Edit   Reply   Quote Quick Reply   Others may disagree, but I don't think the partials change that much. Frinst: Take a peek between all the BK glasses and you'll find they all are pretty close partials to BK7. A small difference but not as much as one would hope. I did my first research on this problem by calculating the partials out of an old Schott catalog, using the one of first digital calculators, a Friden, which weighed 15 pounds and had 4 functions! WOW! Ed Post Extras:       Mike I. Jones Carpal Tunnel Reged: 07/02/06 Loc: Fort Worth TX Re: Melt variation on relative partial dispersion [Re: ed_turco]       #5563802 - 12/10/12 09:23 AM Edit   Reply   Quote Quick Reply   That's my experience as well. I've seen melt pedigrees vary as much as 0.0003 from catalog, but the variation is usually constant over the g-C band. I've never seen partials change more than 1 or 2 in the third decimal. This is not the case in the ultraviolet (like for U-BK7), where partials can and do vary more. Great question! Mike Post Extras:       Sasa sage Reged: 11/03/10 Loc: Ricany, Czech Republic Re: Melt variation on relative partial dispersion [Re: Mike I. Jones]       #5565389 - 12/11/12 04:05 AM Edit   Reply   Quote Quick Reply   Thanks, for the interesting information, this is what I was looking for. The 0.0003 variation is at the limit for what I'm trying to do (a design of long f/15 apochromat without any special ED or lanthanum glasses, the color shift is controlled by the uncertainty on relative partial dispersion and would be about f/df=3/err_theta, so with the err_theta=0.0003 I would still get respectable color performance but I would like it to keep it at this level). Do you know if one can ask the glass companies to measure it with 0.0001 precision (for reasonable price)? I know, one can ask for example OHara company to measure dispersion at +-0.000003 level, but this would still give about +-0.0004 precision on relative partial dispersion for e,C lines. But may be there is some other clever way how to measure the relative partial dispersion. Post Extras:       Mike I. Jones Carpal Tunnel Reged: 07/02/06 Loc: Fort Worth TX Re: Melt variation on relative partial dispersion [Re: Sasa]       #5565453 - 12/11/12 06:48 AM Edit   Reply   Quote Quick Reply   Give Arnie Bazinski at Schott Glass a call at 714-396-2157, and ask him about it. Tell him I said howdy. What's not clear to me is your high sensitivity to index and partials. Normally one does a "melt re-comp" on a lens based on real glass data instead of catalog values. After real glass blanks are received along with their melt pedigree, a separate glass catalog is created in the design software that exactly models the measured glass pieces. The design is then re-optimized and re-toleranced using real data, which usually restores full performance. If you're just making one lens, this is no biggie. If you're making a small production run of, say, 100 lens assemblies, you'd better already have all the glass on hand, with melt data, otherwise you'll be tweaking tooling during production, which eats up profit. Mike Post Extras:       Sasa sage Reged: 11/03/10 Loc: Ricany, Czech Republic Re: Melt variation on relative partial dispersion [Re: Mike I. Jones]       #5565487 - 12/11/12 07:55 AM Edit   Reply   Quote Quick Reply   Thanks Mike for the contact, so far the design is just for fun (an old style long oil apo triplet without special ED and lanthanum glasses) and I'm trying to understand its limitations and find some showstoppers. I could not find any except the large sensitivity to the level of control of relative partial dispersion (about 5-10x more sensitive than standard designs). Of course, one day I would like to build it (if I can find the required glasses at all). Sorry, if I was not clear enough. My original hope was that I would not need to worry about melt-to-melt differences if the relative partial dispersion stays at about +-0.0002 level from the catalogue listed numbers. Of course, once I know the relative partial dispersions, I can optimize the performance accordingly. Post Extras:       Pages: 1 Previous   Index   Next   Threaded   Extra information 12 registered and 43 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: 308 Jump to *Announcements and News* -----   Cloudy Nights Announcements   Discussion of CN Articles, Reviews, and Reports   Celestial Events*General Astronomy* -----   Beginners Forum   General Observing and Astronomy   Outreach   Light Pollution*Equipment Discussions* -----   ATM, Optics and DIY Forum   Binoculars   Binoviewers   Cats & Casses   Classic Telescopes   Equipment   Eyepieces   Mounts   Observatories   Reflectors   Refractors    Video and Electronically Assisted Astronomy*Astrophotography and Sketching* -----   Beginning and Intermediate Imaging   Film Astrophotography   DSLR & Digital Camera Astro Imaging & Processing   CCD Imaging & Processing   Solar System Imaging & Processing   Sketching   Astro Imaging/Sketching Contest *Observing* -----   NEO   Planetary and Solar System Observing   Lunar Observing   Deep Sky Observing   Double Star Observing   Solar   Variable Star Observing and Radio Astronomy*Telescope Specific Forums* -----   Celestron NexStar    NexStar GPS / CPC Telescopes   Questar Forum   Meade ACF/RCX / LX / GPS    Meade ETX*Speciality Forums* -----   Arizona Science and Astronomy Expo   NEAF (Northeast Astronomy Forum) and NEAIC (Northeast Astro Imaging Conference)   AstroArt   Astronomy Clubs and Star Parties   Astronomy Software & Computers   AstroWebsites   Science! Astronomy & Space Exploration, and Others   Space Rocks   Stellar Media*Swap and Shop* -----   Shop and Swap Audio Components*CN Feedback and Vendor Announcements* -----   Vendor and Group Announcements*International Year of Astronomy 2009 - Forums are now closed.* -----   IYA Archive Info CN Forums Home

Cloudy Nights LLC Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics