Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home page

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

Equipment Discussions >> Binoculars

GlennLeDrew
professor emeritus


Reged: 06/18/08
Posts: 620
Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Re: Mirror Source
      06/20/08 07:58 PM

Ok, I'll take a *preliminary* stab at this.

For diffraction-limited performance, 1/4 lambda is generally taken as the desired maximum peak-to-valley deformation of the wavefront. But that's for 0.5mm to perhaps 1mm exit pupil diameters, where diffraction effects become visible. Let's be conservative and use 1mm, which applies to sharp-eyed observers.

Because you're using the mirror in the full-aperture configuration, wavefront error (over that large surface) is more critical than when using a mirror in a diagonal. The peak-to-valley error mus apply to an area at least as large as the instrument's aperture * 1.41 (for 45 degree tilt). Beware mirrors which specify quality PER INCH, for example. Across larger dimensions the total deformation my be rather larger!

With the comparatively low magnification (read: large exit pupil) of binoculars, the wavefront error criterion is necessarily more relaxed. By how much? Simply as the ratio of your bino's exit pupil to the diffraction-limited pupil diameter of 1mm.

So here's my off-the-cuff formula:

Max wavefront error = exit pupil / 1mm * 0.25 lambda

Example:
20x80mm bino (effective aperture at 45 degrees = 80 * 1.41 = 91mm)
Exit pupil = 4mm

Max wavefront error = exit pupil / 1mm * 0.25 lambda
= 4mm / 1mm * 0.25 lambda
= 4 * 0.25
= 1 lambda


Now, that's the wavefront error *after* reflection. But a mirror of given *surface* quality doubles the wavefront error. So the mirror's surface *surface* quality must be 1/2 the allowable delivered wavefront error.

Therefore, if surface quality is specified, in this example for a 20x80 bino, a mirror having no more than 1/2 lambda deformation over 91mm is desirable.

I've not considered the impact of mirror tilt, but I do believe it further constrains mirror quality, such that it should be 40% better than the figure derived. (Lambda * root 2)

Again, this is a "back-of-the-envelope" treatment, and I can stand to be corrected.

--------------------
Home-made 11X50 right angle bino, 8.1 deg. FOV
Modified 26X100 bino, 3.5 deg. FOV

Mediocre minds discuss people. Good minds discuss events. Great minds discuss ideas.

Post Extras Print Post   Remind Me!     Notify Moderator

Entire thread
Subject Posted by Posted on
* Mirror Source cosmic camper 06/13/08 01:48 PM
. * Re: Mirror Source EdZModerator   06/13/08 02:02 PM
. * Re: Mirror Source cosmic camper   06/14/08 12:53 PM
. * Re: Mirror Source OBERWERK   06/14/08 01:20 PM
. * Re: Mirror Source GlennLeDrew   06/18/08 08:40 PM
. * Re: Mirror Source Wes James   06/19/08 07:15 AM
. * Re: Mirror Source EdZModerator   06/19/08 09:03 AM
. * Re: Mirror Source cosmic camper   06/20/08 11:49 AM
. * Re: Mirror Source GlennLeDrew   06/20/08 07:58 PM
. * Re: Mirror Source GlennLeDrew   06/20/08 08:02 PM
. * Re: Mirror Source cosmic camper   06/21/08 01:59 PM
. * Re: Mirror Source GlennLeDrew   06/21/08 09:31 PM
. * Re: Mirror Source KennyJ   06/22/08 04:29 AM
. * Re: Mirror Source cosmic camper   06/22/08 01:11 PM
. * Re: Mirror Source GlennLeDrew   06/22/08 07:06 PM
. * Re: Mirror Source rodelaet   06/23/08 04:36 PM
. * Re: Mirror Source GlennLeDrew   06/23/08 07:23 PM

Extra information
10 registered and 20 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  EdZ 



Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Thread views: 755


Jump to

Home



Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics