Author Affiliations
1College of Electronics and Information Engineering, Sichuan University, Chengdu , Sichuan 610065, China2College of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Sichuan University, Chengdu , Sichuan 610065, Chinashow less
Fig. 1. Optical paths of ideal imaging and actual imaging of single lens
Fig. 2. Optical paths of ideal imaging and actual imaging of reverse ray tracing
Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of the prism model
Fig. 4. Optical path diagram of the prism model. (a) Ray tracing; (b) reverse ray tracing
Fig. 5. Optical path diagram of incident parallel light
Fig. 6. Simulation results of ray tracing. (a) Apex angles of the prisms in the horizontal direction on the x-axis; (b) angular aberration of ray tracing; (c) angular aberration of reverse ray tracing; (d)
Fig. 7. Wavefront aberration obtained by ray tracing. (a) Angular aberration in the horizontal direction of ray tracing; (b) angular aberration in the vertical direction of reverse ray tracing; (c) wavefront aberration of ray tracing; (d) wavefront aberration of reverse ray tracing; (e)
Fig. 8. Top view of the experimental setup
Fig. 9. Fringe patterns in experiment. (a) Patterns with lens; (b) patterns without lens
Fig. 10. Schematic diagram of calculating δR
Fig. 11. False-color plots of the measurement results of different methods. (a) Zernike 4 terms removed; (b) Zernike 10 terms removed; (c) Zernike 11 terms removed
Parameter | W | WR | W-WR |
---|
RMS | 1.2671 | 1.2671 | 5.6281×10-8 | PV | 4.2017 | 4.2017 | 2.8507×10-7 |
|
Table 1. Comparison of wavefront aberrations
Parameter | After 4 terms removed | After 10 terms removed | After 11 terms removed |
---|
RMS | PV | RMS | PV | RMS | PV |
---|
Experiment | 0.979 | 3.824 | 0.970 | 3.377 | 0.019 | 0.167 | Interferometer | 0.912 | 3.531 | 0.909 | 3.414 | 0.042 | 0.418 |
|
Table 2. RMS and PV of measurement results of different methods