Paula Sola La Serna and Jorge Sánchez-Capuchino Revuelta, "Optical glass selection for color corrected broadband instrumentation:
an overview," Appl. Opt. 61, A50-A61 (2022)
The aim of this paper is to provide a complete and helpful review of
all existing techniques for the selection of optical glasses that are
applied during the design of color corrected lens-based systems. The
paper fills a gap in the related literature, where there was no
contribution bringing all approaches together under a common notation.
This allows to identify commonalities and discrepancies, as well as to
compare their fundamentals. Special attention has been paid to its
application to optical instrumentation working in a wide spectral
range (visible and short-wave infrared). All glass selection
strategies have been implemented to the design of a broadband
lens-based camera case study, which allows establishing a comparison
among all methods and their results. A new, to the best of our
knowledge, approach is suggested to adapt the focal shift curve over a
continuous working spectral range at convenience.
Data underlying the results presented in this paper are not publicly
available at this time but may be obtained from the authors upon
reasonable request.
Cited By
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Figure files are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article tables are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Equations are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
Best Glass Combinations in Terms of for Different Numbers of
Wavelengths as Input
n
Combination
3
N-FK58/N-KZFS11/N-BK10
3.41
4
N-FK51A/N-KZFS8/N-BALF4
9.33
5
N-PK52A/SF2/N-SK2HT
8.62
6
N-PK52A/LF5HTi/N-SK2HT
9.93
Table 3.
Individual Powers Obtained through the Triangles Method
(Pistachio), Stephens’ Method (Orange), and Albuquerque et al.’s Method (Blue)a
The reference and input wavelengths and glass combinations
are the ones detailed in Table 6.
Table 4.
Individual Powers Obtained with Each Previously Applied Method
[Blue: de Albuquerque (); Gray: Herzberger; Orange:
Stephens] to the Case Study for the Sets Given in Table 7a
Total power is normalized to 1 diopter.
Table 5.
Used Wavelength Designations and Corresponding Numerical
Values
Designation
Designation
0.365015
0.587652
0.435835
0.6562779
0.486133
1.0140
Table 6.
Output Glass Combinations Sorted by for Three Glasses () and Three Input
Wavelengths () using de Albuquerque
et al.’s Methoda
, 0.83, 1.6
(µm)
No
Combination
1
N-KZFS11/N-BK10/N-FK58
3.41
1000
P-LAF37/N-FK58/N-LAK10
4.41
5000
N-LAF2/N-FK51A/N-KZFS5
6.90
7500
N-LASF43/P-BK7/N-BAK1
10.71
10,000
N-LASF41/N-SK2HT/N-LAF21
13.90
To show appreciable differences in $\sum
|{\phi _i}|$ values,
nonconsecutive sets are presented.
Table 7.
Output Glass Combinations Sorted by for Three Glasses () and Four Input
Wavelengths () Using de Albuquerque
et al.’s Method
, 0.55, 0.83, 1.6
(µm)
No
Combination
1
N-FK51A/N-KZFS8/N-BALF4
9.33
2
N-FK58/N-LAF35/LLF1HTi
7.94
3
N-PK52A/SF5/N-SK2HT
8.45
4
N-PK52A/N-LASF44/LF5HTi
8.38
5
N-PK52A/SF1/N-SK2HT
8.22
Table 8.
Output Glass Combinations Sorted by for Three Glasses () and Five Input
Wavelengths () Using de Albuquerque
et al.’s Method
, 0.55, 0.66,
0.83, 1.6 (µm)
No
Combination
1
N-PK52A/SF2/N-SK2HT
8.62
2
N-FK58/LLF1/N-BALF4
10.55
3
N-PK52A/SF4/N-SK2HT
8.084
4
N-PK52A/F2HT/N-SK2HT
9.06
5
N-FK58/N-LASF41/N-BAK1
11.30
Table 9.
Output Glass Combinations Sorted by for Three Glasses () and Six Input
Wavelengths () Using de Albuquerque
et al.’s Method
, 0.55, 0.66,
0.83, 1.2, 1.6 (µm)
No
Combinations
1
N-PK52A/LF5HTi/N-SK2HT
9.93
2
N-PK52A/LF5/N-SK2HT
9.94
3
N-PK52A/F5/N-SK2HT
9.46
4
N-FK58/N-KZFS4HT/N-BAK2
10.72
5
N-PK52A/F2HT/N-SK2HT
9.04
Table 10.
First 10 Combinations Sorted by when Sampling the Blue
End More than the Infrared Part ()
, 0.55, 0.66,
0.75, 0.83, 1.6 (µm)
No
Combinations
1
N-PK52A/P-LASF47/N-SK2HT
11.55
2
N-PK52A/SF5/N-SK2HT
8.46
3
N-PK52A/SF2/N-SK2HT
8.63
4
N-PK52A/SF1/N-SK2HT
8.23
5
N-FK58/LLF1/N-BALF4
10.55
Table 11.
First Five Combinations Sorted by when Using the Weighted
Least Squares Method ()
, 0.55, 0.66,
0.83, 1.2, 1.6 (µm)
No
Combination
1
N-PK52A/P-LASF47/N-SK2HT
11.61
2
N-PK52A/SF5/N-SK2HT
8.42
3
N-PK52A/SF1/N-SK2HT
8.18
4
N-PK52A/SF2/N-SK2HT
8.57
5
N-PK52A/SF4/N-SK2HT
8.02
Tables (11)
Table 1.
Wavelengths Provided as Input to the Algorithm
0.485
X
X
X
X
0.55
X
X
X
0.66
X
X
0.83
X
X
X
X
1.20
X
1.60
X
X
X
X
Table 2.
Best Glass Combinations in Terms of for Different Numbers of
Wavelengths as Input
n
Combination
3
N-FK58/N-KZFS11/N-BK10
3.41
4
N-FK51A/N-KZFS8/N-BALF4
9.33
5
N-PK52A/SF2/N-SK2HT
8.62
6
N-PK52A/LF5HTi/N-SK2HT
9.93
Table 3.
Individual Powers Obtained through the Triangles Method
(Pistachio), Stephens’ Method (Orange), and Albuquerque et al.’s Method (Blue)a
The reference and input wavelengths and glass combinations
are the ones detailed in Table 6.
Table 4.
Individual Powers Obtained with Each Previously Applied Method
[Blue: de Albuquerque (); Gray: Herzberger; Orange:
Stephens] to the Case Study for the Sets Given in Table 7a
Total power is normalized to 1 diopter.
Table 5.
Used Wavelength Designations and Corresponding Numerical
Values
Designation
Designation
0.365015
0.587652
0.435835
0.6562779
0.486133
1.0140
Table 6.
Output Glass Combinations Sorted by for Three Glasses () and Three Input
Wavelengths () using de Albuquerque
et al.’s Methoda
, 0.83, 1.6
(µm)
No
Combination
1
N-KZFS11/N-BK10/N-FK58
3.41
1000
P-LAF37/N-FK58/N-LAK10
4.41
5000
N-LAF2/N-FK51A/N-KZFS5
6.90
7500
N-LASF43/P-BK7/N-BAK1
10.71
10,000
N-LASF41/N-SK2HT/N-LAF21
13.90
To show appreciable differences in $\sum
|{\phi _i}|$ values,
nonconsecutive sets are presented.
Table 7.
Output Glass Combinations Sorted by for Three Glasses () and Four Input
Wavelengths () Using de Albuquerque
et al.’s Method
, 0.55, 0.83, 1.6
(µm)
No
Combination
1
N-FK51A/N-KZFS8/N-BALF4
9.33
2
N-FK58/N-LAF35/LLF1HTi
7.94
3
N-PK52A/SF5/N-SK2HT
8.45
4
N-PK52A/N-LASF44/LF5HTi
8.38
5
N-PK52A/SF1/N-SK2HT
8.22
Table 8.
Output Glass Combinations Sorted by for Three Glasses () and Five Input
Wavelengths () Using de Albuquerque
et al.’s Method
, 0.55, 0.66,
0.83, 1.6 (µm)
No
Combination
1
N-PK52A/SF2/N-SK2HT
8.62
2
N-FK58/LLF1/N-BALF4
10.55
3
N-PK52A/SF4/N-SK2HT
8.084
4
N-PK52A/F2HT/N-SK2HT
9.06
5
N-FK58/N-LASF41/N-BAK1
11.30
Table 9.
Output Glass Combinations Sorted by for Three Glasses () and Six Input
Wavelengths () Using de Albuquerque
et al.’s Method
, 0.55, 0.66,
0.83, 1.2, 1.6 (µm)
No
Combinations
1
N-PK52A/LF5HTi/N-SK2HT
9.93
2
N-PK52A/LF5/N-SK2HT
9.94
3
N-PK52A/F5/N-SK2HT
9.46
4
N-FK58/N-KZFS4HT/N-BAK2
10.72
5
N-PK52A/F2HT/N-SK2HT
9.04
Table 10.
First 10 Combinations Sorted by when Sampling the Blue
End More than the Infrared Part ()
, 0.55, 0.66,
0.75, 0.83, 1.6 (µm)
No
Combinations
1
N-PK52A/P-LASF47/N-SK2HT
11.55
2
N-PK52A/SF5/N-SK2HT
8.46
3
N-PK52A/SF2/N-SK2HT
8.63
4
N-PK52A/SF1/N-SK2HT
8.23
5
N-FK58/LLF1/N-BALF4
10.55
Table 11.
First Five Combinations Sorted by when Using the Weighted
Least Squares Method ()
Add to BibSonomy
