U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-25-2018, 08:51 AM
 
122 posts, read 44,965 times
Reputation: 73

Advertisements

I am currently getting used to the Ray Transfer Matrix for paraxial rays, and I was wondering if I have done the correct work on these problems, which I have kept as simple as possible:

http://www.image-share.com/upload/3903/99.jpg

http://www.image-share.com/upload/3903/100.jpg

In the first picture I have checked if I get a ray that ends up 3 unit lengths about the bottom of the rectangle (which has the same refractive index as air) and has the same angle as the original ray;
it does have the same angle, but it only has almost the same length, even though my graphical prediction clearly indicates that it should have a final height of 3.
What's going on there?

In the second picture I have tried out a very simple refraction scenario, where a ray in air enters a piece of glass with refractive index 1.5;
I get the expected height (which is unchanged), but the angle is very slightly different from the expected angle.

I have made sure to use exact values as far as possible, so this has nothing to do with error propagation.

Should I perhaps expect these errors, since I am dealing with paraxial rays?
I am very new to all of this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Today, 05:30 AM
 
Location: Westwood, MA
3,607 posts, read 4,458,909 times
Reputation: 4626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus86 View Post
I am currently getting used to the Ray Transfer Matrix for paraxial rays, and I was wondering if I have done the correct work on these problems, which I have kept as simple as possible:

http://www.image-share.com/upload/3903/99.jpg

http://www.image-share.com/upload/3903/100.jpg

In the first picture I have checked if I get a ray that ends up 3 unit lengths about the bottom of the rectangle (which has the same refractive index as air) and has the same angle as the original ray;
it does have the same angle, but it only has almost the same length, even though my graphical prediction clearly indicates that it should have a final height of 3.
What's going on there?

In the second picture I have tried out a very simple refraction scenario, where a ray in air enters a piece of glass with refractive index 1.5;
I get the expected height (which is unchanged), but the angle is very slightly different from the expected angle.

I have made sure to use exact values as far as possible, so this has nothing to do with error propagation.

Should I perhaps expect these errors, since I am dealing with paraxial rays?
I am very new to all of this.
The small errors you’re seeing are from the paraxial approximation, which makes the approximation sin(theta) = theta and cos(theta) = 1

In example 1, for instance, the exact expression is d tan(theta) not d * theta. As you can the difference is small but not zero.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top