Author Affiliations
School of Electronic and Optical Engineering, Nanjing University of Science & Technology, Nanjing 210094, Jiangsu, Chinashow less
Fig. 1. Schematic of FFOCT system
Fig. 2. Schematic of the optical path of the system when the mirror M3, beam splitter BS2, and plane mirror M2 have orientation deviation
Fig. 3. Schematic of orientation deviation analysis of Michelson interferometer part
Fig. 4. Schematic of orientation deviation analysis from the second beam splitter to the mirror
Fig. 5. Schematic of partial orientation deviation analysis between sample and mirror
Fig. 6. Schematic of system light path when only the mirror M3 has an orientation deviation
Fig. 7. Influence of the orientation deviation of the mirror M3. (a) Change of system visibility with the increase of imaging depth under different orientation deviations; (b) change of system visibility with the increase of mirror orientation deviation at different imaging depths
Fig. 8. Relationship between the compensation range and the orientation deviation at different imaging depths. (a) ∆d=1 μm; (b) ∆d=5 μm; (c) ∆d=10 μm
Fig. 9. Imaging of onions. (a) Microscopic image of onion surface; (b)-(d) en face images of onion at depths of 0, 10, 15 µm, respectively
α /(°) | Relative error of Δxmax /% | Relative error of Δxmin /% |
---|
Δd=1 μm | Δd=5 μm | Δd=10 μm | Δd=1 μm | Δd=5 μm | Δd=10 μm |
---|
1 | 0.037977837 | 0.054375047 | 0.057477065 | 0.154315007 | 0.069345197 | 0.064879646 | 2 | 0.152143177 | 0.217832114 | 0.230259123 | 0.618202025 | 0.277804095 | 0.259914635 | 3 | 0.343194977 | 0.491371934 | 0.519403996 | 1.394501108 | 0.626652944 | 0.586299029 | 4 | 0.612309793 | 0.876679053 | 0.926692332 | 2.487992957 | 1.118040066 | 1.046042808 | 5 | 0.961159586 | 1.376147311 | 1.454654536 | 3.905471229 | 1.755018356 | 1.642002273 | 6 | 1.391937326 | 1.992916511 | 2.106609532 | 5.655846605 | 2.541592046 | 2.377923799 | 7 | 1.907391170 | 2.730921345 | 2.886716481 | 7.750285640 | 3.482779099 | 3.258502212 | 8 | 2.510868189 | 3.594954009 | 3.800040966 | 10.20238847 | 4.584691063 | 4.289455502 | 9 | 3.206368997 | 4.590742409 | 4.852637662 | 13.02841074 | 5.854632811 | 5.477618138 | 10 | 3.998614964 | 5.725046402 | 6.051652067 | 16.24753675 | 7.301225275 | 6.831055899 |
|
Table 1. Relation between the orientation deviation and relative error that between the maximum and minimum value of the compensation range caused by the orientation deviation and the standard value at different imaging depths