Expand this Topic clickable element to expand a topic
Skip to content
Optica Publishing Group

Beam shaping with a plano-freeform lens pair

Open Access Open Access

Abstract

It has been shown in [ J. A. Hoffnagle and C. M. Jefferson, Opt. Eng. 42, 3090, (2003)] that a pair of plano-aspheric lenses can be used to transform a radially symmetric, Gaussian beam to a radially symmetric flat-top beam. In this paper it is shown that a pair of plano-freeform lenses can be used to transform a collimated light beam of arbitrary (including, non-radially symmetric) intensity profile to a collimated output beam of constant phase and a priori specified intensity pattern over a given flat region. The curved surfaces of both lenses can be chosen strictly convex which should facilitate fabrication. The required pair of plano-freeform lenses is designed using the supporting quadric method (SQM) [ V. I. Oliker in Trends in Nonlinear Analysis, (Springer-Verlag, 2003)] combined with ideas from optimal mass transport [ V. I. Oliker, Arch. Rational Mechanics and Analysis 201, 1013 (2011)]. Such approach provides a rigorous methodology for designing freeform optics for irradiance redistribution. In this paper, this approach is applied to design of a laser beam shaping system with two lenses.

© 2018 Optical Society of America under the terms of the OSA Open Access Publishing Agreement

1. Introduction

In many applications an optical system is required to redirect the light from a source and shape its output irradiance distribution so that a prescribed field is generated on a given target. Systems with such capabilities are needed in numerous areas of modern science and technology. Laser technology is one such area in which the beam generated by a laser has to be transformed so that some given region of space is illuminated with an irradiance pattern different from that of the source [1,2]. Similar tasks must be solved in nanotechnology, photonics, photolithography, directed-energy, material processing, astronomical instruments, sensing systems, solar collection, optical engineering metrology, buildings and roads illumination, and many others.

A systematic approach to beam shaping (and to many other optical design problems) is to assume a priori that the solution and the data are rotationally symmetric (RS) [1–6]. In fact, most of the currently used conventional optical devices rely on lenses and mirrors which are rotationally or rectangularly symmetric or can be described by explicit formulas. The principal drawback of this approach is that the inherent limitation of assumed special symmetry excludes or makes highly inefficient utilization of so designed optics in applications requiring control of irradiance produced by nonsymmetric sources and distributed over areas of irregular shape. By contrast, a freeform optical surface is a surface designed without any a priori assumptions of available symmetry or explicit formula. Consequently, freeform surfaces provide significantly more degrees of freedom to create optical systems for a wide variety of applications. In addition, such systems can be more compact, energy efficient and light. The goal of this paper is to present a systematic and mathematically rigorous approach to design of a pair of plano-freeform optical surfaces for beam shaping without any a priori symmetry assumptions. At the same time it will be shown that our approach is engineeringly viable and practical.

A typical configuration of a beam shaping optical system is shown schematically on Fig. 1. The spatial coordinates are (x, z) with x = (x1, x2) ∈ α, where α is the plane z = 0. We work in the geometrical optics (GO) framework and use the associated notions of wavefronts, rays, radiances and irradiances. In analytic formulation of the beam shaping problem (BSP) the lens R1 is represented as a graph of some function z(x), x ∈ Ω̄, where Ω̄ is the cross section of the input beam. In practice, a lens has the second side, say, to the left of R1. We assume that that side is inactive, that is, it does not change the directions of incoming light rays; this comment applies also to the lens R2 with obvious modifications. Everywhere in the paper Ω denotes a bounded open domain on α and Ω̃ its closure. The same convention is used to denote the target set d in the plane z = d. Points of the set d to be illuminated by the output beam produced by the lens R2 are denoted by (p, d), where p = (p1, p2) ∈ α and is the projection of d on α. This two-lens system defines a ray mapping Pd : Ω̄ → d; Pd(x) = (p = P(x), d). The graph of the function w(p), p, is the lens R2. The radiance I1 of the input beam and the irradiance I2 of the output beam are related by Eq. (1) below. The design task is to determine the functions z and w realizing the required optical transformation of rays and radiances.

 figure: Fig. 1

Fig. 1 A system of two plano-freeform lenses for beam shaping; only the active (non-planar) sides of the lenses are shown. The two lenses R1 and R2 are required to transform a collimated input beam with an arbitrary radiance I1(x) into a collimated output beam with a prescribed irradiance I2(p) at a given region on the plane α′ : z = d; n = const is the normalized refractive index of R1 and R2 (as explained at the beginning of Subsection 2.1). From Ref. [7].

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

Using the GO setting and applying the Snell and energy conservation laws, the relation between the radiance I1 and irradiance I2 the plane z = d can be expressed as

I2(Td(x))|detJ(Td(x))|=I1(x),xΩ,
where J(Td) is the Jacobian matrix of the ray mapping Td. Calculating explicitly J(Td), a partial differential equation (PDE) for the function z [7] can be derived. However, this PDE is strongly nonlinear of second order with second derivatives under the determinant sign [8] and, except for very special cases, such equations can not be solved numerically reliably by available methods. An example of such a special case is when the ray mapping can be represented in the form Td(x) = ∇f(x) where f is a scalar function to be determined and ∇f denotes the gradient of f. Then the Eq. (1) assumes the form
I2(x,f(x))[f11f22f122]=I1(x),xΩ.(Herefij=2fxixj,i,j=1,2.)
This particular form of Eq. (1) arises, for example, in reflector design [9] and in the paraxial approximation in the two-lens design problem [10].

The PDE for design of beam shaping optics with two refractive lenses is not among such special cases. In such circumstances the usual approach to a given design task is to use an ad hoc heuristic technique in each specific case [11,12].

In this paper we avoid direct use of PDE methods. Instead, our approach is based on the mathematically rigorous geometric supporting quadric method (SQM) [9] combined with the variational (optimal transport) theory [7].

It is worthwhile noting that freeform optics can be useful even in the RS case. For example, in [1] the authors designed a two-lens beam shaper under assumption that the input and output radiance patterns are RS. Their approach requires an initial circularization and filtering of the input beam from the laser before it can be accepted by the beam shaper; see Fig. 2. Clearly, a solution unconstrained by RS requirement will provide a useful improvement of the process by eliminating the step (a)→(b) and possibly (b)→(c); see Fig. 2.

 figure: Fig. 2

Fig. 2 Design of a two-lens system for transforming a non-uniform laser beam into a uniform intensity RS beam requires first circularization (a)→(b) and filtering (b)→(c) of the beam from the laser. Then a RS beam shaper can convert it into a “flat-top” (c)→(d); from Ref. [13] with permission.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

2. Variational formulation and solution of two-lens beam shaping problem (BSP)

2.1. Statement of BSP

The geometry of the BSP is shown in Fig. 1 and below we refer to this figure. It is assumed that (after a normalization, if necessary) the media to the left of R1 and to the right of R2 have constant refractive index n, while the media between R1 and R2 has refractive index 1. In other words, n denotes the relative refractive index. Because collimated beams propagate longer distances without dispersion and distortion [1] it is physically natural to assume (and we do so) that the input beam is collimated and propagates in direction k. The output beam is also required to be collimated, propagating in the same direction, and of constant phase. It is assumed that the lenses R1 and R2 as well as the media are lossless, that is, no energy is lost during the propagation of light. An individual light ray of the input beam propagating in the positive z-direction k is tagged by a point x ∈ Ω̄. The light rays of the input beam are refracted by the lens R1 and produce a beam (not collimated!) which is intercepted and refracted by R2, producing the collimated output beam of direction k. The output beam, after lens R2, in addition to being collimated, must produce a prescribed irradiance distribution μ on a given target domain d, which is in the plane z = d parallel to α and located at the distance d > 0 from α. Thus, d is the cross section of the output beam by the plane z = d.

Similar to [1] we consider here the case when the refractive index n > 1. The case 0 < n < 1 is similar but requires additional considerations. We plan to treat this case in a separate paper. In [1] the authors, in addition to the refractive index n, use the distance between the lenses as the given design parameter. In the radially symmetric case such distance is taken as the distance along the common axes of revolution for the two lenses. When radial symmetry is not assumed this parameter is not well defined. Instead, when the lenses are freeform surfaces, we use the parameter β = lnd, where l = nz(x) + t(x) + n(dw(P(x)) is the optical path length (OPL) [14]. Thus, the refractive index n, the distance d in Fig. 1 and OPL l are constant design parameters. It is known that β = 0 is physically inconsistent with n ≠ 1 [7]. Physical considerations show that only the case β < 0 is of interest and this is assumed in this paper.

It is convenient to recall here the expression for the ray mapping in case when the function z is differentiable. Decompose the ray mapping Pd : Ω̄ → d as Pd(x) = P(x) + dk, where P : Ω̄ → is the orthogonal projection of Pd on the plane α. We refer to P as the refractor map. Put p = P(x) and M(x)=1+(1n2)|z(x)|2, (∇ ≡ grad). It was shown in [7,15] that

P(x)=xβz(x)M(x),xΩ¯.
The function w defining the lens R2 can be obtained from z [7,16]:
w(P(x))=z(x)+β1n2[n+1M(x)],xΩ¯.
As stated earlier, the goal of this paper is to demonstrate that the beam shaping design problem can also be solved without assuming rotational symmetry. Therefore, it was natural to assume that n > 1 as it was done by the authors of [1]. In this case, formula (3) implies that if β > 0 then the lens R2 may be in front of lens R1. To avoid this situation we assume that β < 0.

It is important to note that the factor M(x) in the denominator of Eq. (2) precludes application of the Monge principle as in [17]. Replacing M(x) ≈ 1 corresponds to paraxial approximation.

2.2. The supporting quadric method (SQM)

In recent years the SQM has often been applied to design freeform mirrors, lenses and diffractive optical elements [18–23]. It provides a viable and rigorous alternative to the approach requiring solution of the complex nonlinear PDE. With the SQM combined with optimal transport theory the solution of the BSP is found in the class of functions called weak solutions (to be defined below) which are continuos, convex but not necessarily two times differentiable everywhere. Consequently, the SQM requires re-formulation of the BSP in geometric terms not involving explicit use of Jacobians. The basic principles of the SQM have been described before [9,22,24]. However, its particular implementation for the BSP requiring two refracting surfaces is presented here for the first time. In order to make our presentation reasonably self-contained we need to recall the geometric/optical properties of two-sheeted hyperboloids. Eventually, the required lenses are obtained as envelopes of families of sheets of such hyperboloids.

The notations here are as in Fig. 1. Put also

H(x,p):=nβc(x,p)n21,wherec(x,p):=β2+(n21)(xp)2.
Lemma 2.1 (see [7]). For arbitrarily fixed (p, η) ∈ α × ℝ the graph of the function
ξp,ηl(x)=H(x,p)+η,xα,
is the left branch of a two-sheeted hyperboloid of revolution with axis parallel to the z-axis and eccentricity n. Its foci and center are
Fp,ηl=(p,η+nn21(β|β|)),Fp,ηr=(p,η+nn21(β+|β|)),Cp,η=(p,η+nβn21).
A horisontal light ray hitting the branch (5) from the left refracts and passes through focus Fp,ηr. An illustration of this refracting property in a plane is shown in Fig. 3.

 figure: Fig. 3

Fig. 3 Hyperbola Hl maps the segment [a, b] into Fr.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

Similarly, for an arbitrary fixed (x, ξ) ∈ α × ℝ the graph of the function

ηx,ξr(p)=H(x,p)+ξ,pα.
is the right branch of the two-sheeted hyperboloid of revolution about the axis parallel to z-axis, with eccentricity n, and foci and center
Fx,ξl=(x,ξnn21(β+|β|)),Fx,ξr=(x,ξnn21(β|β|)),Cx,ξ=(x,ξnβn21).
Refractive properties of hyperbolas and ellipses have already been known to R. Descartes. Analogous properties of hyperboloids and ellipsoids of revolution were obtained by R.K. Luneburg [25] as consequences of continuity of solutions to the eikonal equation; see also [7] for detailed derivations.

The freeform lenses for beam shaping designed here are envelopes of families of suitable sheets of hyperboloids of the type (5) and (7). Such envelopes are defined as follows.

Definition 2.2 Let Ω and T be two bounded domains on the plane α and Ω̄, T̄ their closures. Denote by C(Ω̄) and C() the set of continuous functions on Ω̄ and T̄, respectively. Let n > 1 and β < 0. A pair (z, w) ∈ C(Ω̄) × C() is called a two-lens (TL) system of type A (or Keplerian) if

z(x)=minpT¯{H(x,p)+w(p)},xΩ¯,
w(p)=maxxΩ¯{H(x,p)+z(x)},pT¯.
Similarly, a pair (z, w) ∈ C(Ω̄) × C() is called a TL system of type B (or Galilean) if
z(x)=maxpT¯{H(x,p)+w(p)},xΩ¯,
w(p)=minxΩ¯{H(x,p)+z(x)},pT¯.
The set of TL systems of type A (B) is denoted by ΛA(Ω̄, ) (ΛB(Ω̄, )). Below, when a statement is valid for both types of systems, ΛA(Ω̄, ) and ΛB(Ω̄, ), we simply write Λ(Ω̄, ).

An illustration of Eqs. (9)(10) in 2D and consisting of five points p1, ..., p5 is in Fig. 4, where for brevity we put Fpi = H(x, pi) + w(pi), i = 1, ..., 5. The points Qi = (pi, w(pi)) are their second foci lying on the lens R2. Because β < 0, by Lemma 2.1 for a fixed p the hyperboloid H(x, p) + w(p) transforms the plane front into spherical front with center at (p, w(p)). According to Eq. (9), the lens R1 defined as the graph of z(x), x ∈ Ω̄, consists of pieces of hyperboloids Fpi,fi, i = 1, ..., K, such that a ray in direction k incident on R1 is intercepted by the “nearest” Fpi,fi and refracted so that it passes through the focus Qi. Thus, in this case the lens R1 is an “envelope” defined by Eq. (9) of a family of suitable hyperboloids and the lens R2 is an envelope defined by Eq. (10).

 figure: Fig. 4

Fig. 4 The function z in Eq. (9) defines the first lens R1. The second lens R2 is defined by Eq. (10).

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

We call the branches H of hyperboloids in the definition (2.2) “supporting” hyperboloids. Obviously, at each point of a TL system of type A and B there exists at least one supporting hyperboloid. In Fig. 4 the supporting hyperboloids of R2 are not shown.

Definition 2.3 For a TL system in Λ(Ω̄, ) the refractor map Pz,w : Ω̄ → T̄, possibly multivalued, and its inverse Pz,w1 : → Ω̄ are defined by equations

Pz,w(x)={pT¯|z(x)=H(x,p)+w(p)},xΩ¯,
Pz,w1(p)={xΩ¯|w(p)=H(x,p)+z(x)},pT¯.
Let (z, w) ∈ Λ(Ω̄, ). It is clear from Eqs. (9), (10) and (11), (12) that in both cases the functions z and w have continuous extensions , ŵ to the entire plane α. Further,
(i)Pz,w(Ω¯)=Pz^,w(α)=T¯and(ii)Pz,w1(T¯)=Pz,w^1(α)=Ω¯.
These extensions satisfy uniformly on α the Lipschitz condition with the constant 1/n21. In addition, in any pair (z, w) ∈ ΛA(Ω̄, ) the function is concave and ŵ is convex [7]. For systems of type B convexity/concavity of the and ŵ, in general, does not hold.

We now formulate precisely the weak form of the beam shaping problem. First we define, following [7], the light transfer from Ω̄ to for TL systems. Let I1 be a nonnegative integrable function on α with spt(I1) ⊆ Ω̄, where spt(I1):={xΩ¯|I1(x)0|}¯. Physically, I1 is the intensity of the radiance distribution of the input beam. Denote by () the set of subsets of measurable with respect to the usual area measure on α. Let (z, w) ∈ Λ(Ω̄, ) and Pz,w the refractor map defined by (z, w). Then for any set τ() the set Pz,w1(τ) is measurable and the function

Gz,w(τ)=Pz,w1(τ)I1(x)dx
is a non-negative, completely additive and finite measure (≡ distribution) on (). Physically, for each τ the value Gz,w(τ) is the total radiance “delivered” by the TL system to the set τ. Moreover, the function Gz,w is weakly continuous, that is, if (zk, wk) ∈ Λ(Ω̄, ), k = 1, 2, ..., is a sequence such that zkz in C(Ω̄) and wkw in C() then
limkT¯f(p)Gzk,wk(dp)=T¯f(pGz,w(dp))fC(T¯).
Definition 2.4 Let I1 be as above and I2 ≥ 0 a given irradiance distribution on T̄. A pair (z, w) ∈ Λ(Ω̄, ) is a weak solution of the TL beam-shaping problem if
Pz,w(Ω¯)=T¯
and
Gz,w(τ)=μ(τ)τ(T¯),whereμ(τ):=τI2(p)dp.
In Eq. (17) we are writing μ for the irradiance instead of its expression in terms of I2 to emphasize that the irradiance distribution may be a delta-function (or a sum of delta-functions) concentrated, for example, at points. This is physically meaningful, in particular, when we deal with the discrete version of Eq. (17). Thus, a pair (z, w) ∈ Λ(Ω̄, ) satisfying Eq. (17) defines two lenses which convert the collimated beam defined by Ω̄ with radiance intensity I1 into a collimated beam irradiating at with distribution I2. The condition (16) assures the highest possible energy efficiency of the such two-lens. Naturally, the input and output distributions are required to satisfy the necessary condition
Ω¯I1(x)dx=μ(T¯).
Because in this definition it is not assumed that z and w are differentiable the pair is a “weak” solution of the BSP. By construction both functions are continuous and the refraction law is built into the definition of the pair (z, w) as envelopes of families of hyperboloids for each of which the law of refraction is satisfied in classical sense; see Lemma 2.1. Furthermore, as it was already mentioned, if (z, w) ∈ ΛA(Ω̄, ) then also by construction the function z is convex in the k direction while w is convex in −k direction. According to a well known theorem in convexity theory, these fuctions are twice differentiable everywhere except possibly sets of zero area on their graphs [26].

2.3. Optimal transport and discrete minimization problem

Our next task is to describe an algorithm for solving the discretization of Eq. (17). We will concentrate on the case when (z, w) ∈ ΛA(Ω̄, ) since both lenses in this case are convex. First we note that solution of Eq. (17) is equivalent to a solution of an optimal mass transportation problem [7]. In order to outline the connection, recall the formulas (9)(10) and define the following class of admissible pairs of functions

AdmA(Ω¯,T¯)={(z,w)C(Ω¯)×C(T¯)w(p)z(x)H(x,p)(x,p)Ω¯×T¯}.
Clearly, ΛA(Ω̄, ) ⊆ AdmA(Ω̄, ).

Theorem 2.5 Suppose n > 1 and β < 0 and I1 and μ as above and satisfy Eq. (18). Put

(z,w)=T¯w(p)μ(dp)Ω¯z(x)I1(x)dx,(z,w)AdmA(Ω¯,T¯).
Then the problem
(z,w)minoverAdmA(Ω¯,T¯)
has a solution (zmin, wmin) ∈ ΛA(Ω̄, ). The minimizing pair in Eq. (21) is unique (up to an additive constant) on each connected component of spt(I1).

Furthermore, this pair (zmin, wmin) is a weak solution of Eq. (17) and conversely any weak solution of Eq. (17) is a minimizing pair of Eq. (21).

Remark 2.6 It is important to note that in Theorem 2.5 it is assumed that AdmA(Ω̄, ) ≠ ∅. This imposes a constraint on separation of Ω̄ and T̄ in the direction perpendicular to the z axis. For example, if Ω̄ = T̄ then this condition is satisfied. Alternatively, geometric arguments show that condition AdmA(Ω̄, ) ≠ ∅ can be achieved by adjusting the OPL and the distance d in a way similar to the way it was done in [27]. In practice this property can be verified by a trial run of the code on the given data.

In view of 2.5, to solve Eq. (17) we need to solve the minimization problem (20)(21). For that we use a computational algorithm based on linear programming theory [28]. The discrete version of Eqs. (20)(21) is stated and solved as follows.

Step 1. Discretization. Let M, N ∈ ℕ, M ≥ 1, N ≥ 2. Subdivide Ω̄ into M measurable subsets ωiMΩ¯, i = 1, ..., M, and into N measurable subsets τjNT¯, j = 1, ..., N, such that for each i = 1, ..., M diameters ωiM<1/M and for each j = 1, ..., N the diameters ωjN<1/N, and for 1 ≤ t, kM, 1 ≤ h, lN,

i=1Mω¯iM=Ω¯,ωtMωkM=iftk;j=1Nτ¯jN=T¯,τhNτlN=ifhl.
For i = 1, 2, ..., M and j = 1, 2, ..., N pick points xiMωiM and pjNτjN, and put
EiM=ωiMI1(x)dx,FiN=μ(τjN).
For measurable sets ω ⊆ Ω̄ and τ we define
EM(ω)=xiMωEiMandFN(τ)=piNτFik.
Assume that
i=1MEiM=j=1NFjN.
Step 2. Minimization problem and its solution. Let
M,N(z1M,,zMM,w1N,,wNN):=j=1NwjNFjNi=1MziMEiM
and
AdmM,N={wjNziMH(xi,pj),i=1,,M,j=1,,N}.
The minimization problem is to find z¯M=(z¯1M,,z¯MM), w¯M=(w¯1N,,w¯NN) satisfying Eq. (22) and such that
(z¯M,w¯N)=infAdmM,NM,N(zM,wN).
This is a discrete linear programming problem which can be solved by known numerical methods [29]; see also [30] for related results. The numbers z¯M=(z¯1M,,z¯MM) and w¯M=(w¯1N,,w¯NN) satisfying Eqs. (22) and (23) are, respectively, the approximate values of the function z(x), x ∈ Ω̄ at points xi, i = 1, ..., M giving the curved side of the first lens and the approximate values of the function w(p), p at points pj, j = 1, ..., N giving the curved side of the second lens.

Step 3. Refining the subdivisions of Ω̄ and one obtains a sequence of solutions of discrete problems guaranteed to converge to a weak solution of Eqs. (20), (21).

Remark 2.7 It was proved in [7], Lemma 4, that the slopes of designed surfaces do not exceed 1/n21 . We also note that the above theory guarantees collimation of the shaped beam for lenses designed exactly. In practice, possible collimation errors depend on the numerical accuracy of the design, fabrication and propagation distance. Some related results are contained in [15]. We hope to further address these issues in a separate publication.

3. Design examples

As a first example, we consider the calculation of two plano-freeform lenses transforming the circular incident beam with a uniform radiance I1(x) = 1/(πR2), xΩ={(x1,x2)|x12+x22R2} into a rectangular beam with a uniform radiance I2 (p) = 1/(w1w2), pTd = {(p1, p2) | |p1| ≤ w1/2, |p2| ≤ w2/2}. The propagation directions of the incident and of the outgoing beams coincide with the direction of the z axis. The lenses were designed for the following parameters: radius of the incident beam R = 10 mm, the side lengths of the outgoing rectangular beam w1 = 50 mm and w2 = 25 mm, the distance between the tips of the lenses along the z axis t(0) = w(0) − z (0) = 30 mm, and the refractive index of the lens material n = 1.5. Without loss of generality, we assume z(0) = 0.

It follows from the results in Subsections 2.2 and 2.3 that the surfaces of the plano-freeform lenses z(x) and w(p) are the solution of a linear programming problem (22)(23) for the Keplerian configuration. For the Galilean configuration one needs to solve the linear programming problem obtained from Eqs. (22)(23) by reversing the inequality in Eq. (22) and maximizing the functional in Eq. (23). In both cases, the function z(x), x ∈ Ω was defined on a regular grid with M = 10000 points z¯iM, i = 1, . . ., M. The function w(p), pTd was defined on a 100 × 100 rectangular grid with N = 10000 points wjN, j = 1, . . ., N. The corresponding linear programming problems were solved using an in-house implementation of the interior point algorithm taking into account the special sparse form of the constraints matrix given by Eq. (22). The calculation time on a modern PC was about two hours. The calculated two-lens systems are shown in Fig. 5. In the Keplerian configuration, both lenses are convex [Figs. 5(a), 5(b)], whereas for the Galilean configuration [Figs. 5(c), 5(d)], only the second lens is convex [Figs. 5(c), 5(d)].

 figure: Fig. 5

Fig. 5 The designed systems of two plano-freeform lenses in a Keplerian (a, b) and a Galilean (c, d) configurations to transform an incident circular beam into a rectangular outgoing beam. The dashed lines show the z axis.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

In order to estimate the performance of the designed two-lens systems, we simulated them in the commercial ray-tracing software TracePro in the following way [31]. First, the calculated optical surfaces represented by the sets of points z¯iM, i = 1, . . ., M and wjN, j = 1, . . ., N were exported to a computer-aided design software Rhinoceros [32], in which 3D-models of the two plano-freeform lens systems were created (Fig. 5). Then, these 3D-models were used in TracePro for the simulations. Figures 6(a) and 6(b) show the calculated normalized radiance distributions generated by the Keplerian lens system in the planes z = 10 cm and z = 100 cm. The presented results were obtained by tracing 1 000 000 rays and demonstrate the formation of a rectangle with the required size.

The fact that the size of the rectangle and the radiance distribution remain nearly unchanged at different distances from the element confirms that the wavefront of the beam generated by the lenses is nearly plane. Indeed, the calculated root-mean-square deviation of the optical path length from a constant value at z = 10 cm does not exceed 1 nm. The normalized root-mean-square deviations (NRMSD) of the numerically simulated radiance distributions from a constant value amount to 12.1% and 13.8% at z = 10 cm and z = 100 cm, respectively.

Note that the radiance smoothly decreases toward the boundaries of the rectangle [see the cross-sections in Figs. 6(a) and 6(b)]. This decrease is due to Fresnel losses, which were neglected when designing the lens surfaces. Indeed, in the Keplerian configuration the deflection angles of the rays upon refraction by the freeform surfaces of the lenses vary from zero for the central ray going to the center of the generated rectangle to 35.8° for the rays going to the corners of the rectangle. Since the Fresnel losses increase with an increase in the deflection angle [33], the generated radiance smoothly decreases toward the boundaries of the rectangle in Figs. 6(a) and 6(b) Because of such large deflection angles, the total Fresnel losses on the freeform surfaces of the lenses amount to 24.6% of the incident beam flux.

 figure: Fig. 6

Fig. 6 Normalized radiance distributions generated in the planes z = 10 cm (a, c) and z = 100 cm (b, d) by the designed Keplerian (a, b) and Galilean (c, d) lens systems calculated in TracePro. The radiance cross-sections along the coordinate axes are shown at the top and at the right of the figures.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

Figures 6(c) and 6(d) show the calculated normalized radiance distributions generated by the Galilean lens system at the same distances z = 10 cm and z = 100 cm. The radiance distributions generated in this case are near-uniform and have better quality comparing to the previous case. The NRMSD of the numerically simulated radiance distributions from a constant value amount to 3.9% and 4.1% at z = 10 cm and z = 100 cm, respectively. The better uniformity of the generated rectangular radiance distribution can be explained by decreased deflection angles leading to lower Fresnel losses. Indeed, in the Galilean configuration, the deflection angles of the rays do not exceed 26°. In this case, the total Fresnel losses on the freeform surfaces of the lenses amount to 10.1% of the incident beam flux.

As a second, more sophisticated example, we considered the design of a two-lens system transforming an incident circular beam with uniform radiance into a star-shaped beam with uniform radiance. The vertices of the star (of the region Td) lie on a circle with radius Rst = 24.2 mm. We assume the distance between the tips of the lenses along the z axis t(0) = w(0) − z (0) = 50 mm, with the rest geometric and simulation parameters (R, n, M, N) remaining the same as in the previous case. In this example, we consider only the Galilean configuration since it provides a higher quality of the generated distribution. The plano-freeform lenses calculated by solving a linear programming problem Eqs. (22)(23) at M = N = 10000 are shown in Fig. 7. Figure 8 shows the calculated normalized radiance distributions generated by the two-lens system at z = 10 cm and z = 100 cm. The simulation results confirm the formation of a star-shaped beam with the required size. The NRMSD of the calculated distributions from a constant value amount to 5.1% and 8.4% at z = 10 cm and z = 100 cm, respectively. As in the previous example, the estimated root-mean-square deviation of the optical path length from a constant value at z = 10 cm does not exceed 1 nm.

 figure: Fig. 7

Fig. 7 (a) The calculated system of two plano-freeform lenses transforming an incident circular beam into a star-shaped beam. The dashed line shows the z axis. The first plano-freeform lens with the surface z(x) (b) reshapes the input radiance, whereas the second lens with the surface w(p) (c) reshapes the phase.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

 figure: Fig. 8

Fig. 8 Normalized radiance distributions generated by the two-lens system shown in Fig. 7 in the planes z = 10 cm (a) and z = 100 cm (b) calculated in TracePro. The radiance cross-sections along the coordinate axes are shown at the top and at the right of the figures.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

4. Summary

It is shown theoretically and by computed simulation examples that beam shaping with two plano-freeform refractive lenses is feasible even when the lenses are not required to be rotationally symmetric. Utilization of freeform lenses improves dramatically the efficiency of a laser output applied for illumination of a given area with a prescribed irradiation distribution. Since our approach is not constrained by the requirement of rotational symmetry of any component of the designed system, the number of possible applications is also substantially increased in comparison with designs relying on systems with all components rotationally symmetric [1]. In this paper such capabilities are demonstrated for nonisotropic parallel input and output beams. Spherical input with parallel output beams are also possible and will be considered in separate publications.

Funding

US AFOSR FA9550-18-1-0189 (V. Oliker); Russian Science Foundation 18-19-00326 (L. L. Doskolovich, D. A. Bykov).

Acknowledgments

The theoretical study concerning solution of the two-lens beam shaping problem is based upon work supported by the US Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR) under award number FA9550-18-1-0189; the work on design and simulation of the considered examples of two-lens systems was supported by the Russian Science Foundation.

References

1. J. Hoffnagle and C. Jefferson, “Beam shaping with a plano-aspheric lens pair,” Opt. Eng. , 42(11), 3090–3099 (2003). [CrossRef]  

2. F. M. Dickey, ed., Laser Beam Shaping: Theory and Techniques, 2nd ed. (CRC Press, 2014). [CrossRef]  

3. B. R. Frieden, “Lossless conversion of a plane laser wave to a plane wave of uniform radiation,” Appl. Opt. 4(11), 1400–1403 (1965). [CrossRef]  

4. J. L. Kreuzer, “Coherent light optical system yielding an output beam of desired intensity distribution at a desired equiphase surface,” U. S. Patent No. 3,476,463 (1969).

5. P. W. Rhodes and D. L. Shealy, “Refractive optical systems for irradiance redistribution of collimated radiation: their design and analysis,” Appl. Opt. 19(20), 3545–3553 (1980). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

6. J. A. Hoffnagle and C. M. Jefferson, “Design and performance of a refractive optical system that converts a Gaussian to a flattop beam,” Appl. Opt. 39(30), 5488–5499 (2000). [CrossRef]  

7. V. I. Oliker, “Designing freeform lenses for intensity and phase control of coherent light with help from geometry and mass transport,” Arch. Rational Mechanics and Analysis 201, 1013–1045 (2011). [CrossRef]  

8. D. Gilbarg and N. S. Trudinger, Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order, 2-nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, 1983). [CrossRef]  

9. V. I. Oliker, “Mathematical aspects of design of beam shaping surfaces in geometrical optics,” in Trends in Nonlinear Analysis, M. Kirkilionis, S. Krömker, R. Rannacher, and F. Tomi, eds., (Springer-Verlag, 2003).

10. Z. Feng, B. D. Froese, C.-Y. Huang, D. Ma, and R. Liang, “Creating unconventional geometric beams with large depth of field using double freeform-surface optics,” Appl. Opt. 54, 6277–6281 (2015). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

11. R. Wu, L. Xu, P. Liu, Y. Zhang, Z. Zheng, H. Li, and X. Liu, “Freeform illumination design: a nonlinear boundary problem for the elliptic Monge-Ampére equation,” Opt. Lett. 38(2), 229–231 (2013). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

12. C. Bösel and H. Gross, “Double freeform illumination design form prescribed wavefronts and irradiances,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 35(2), 236–243, (2018). [CrossRef]  

13. J. A. Hoffnagle and M. Jefferson, “Transformation of the transverse intensity profile of a laser beam by aspheric lenses,” presented at SLAC, Oct . 2012.

14. M. Born and E. Wolf, Principle of Optics, 7th ed. (Cambridge University, 1999). [CrossRef]  

15. V. I. Oliker, “On design of freeform refractive beam shapers, sensitivity to figure error and convexity of lenses,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 25(12), 3067–3076 (2008). [CrossRef]  

16. D. L. Shealy and J. A. Hoffnagle, “Aspheric optics for laser beam shaping,” in Encyclopedia of Optical Engineering, R. Driggers, ed. (Taylor & Francis, 2006).

17. V. I. Oliker, J. Rubinstein, and G. Wolansky, “Ray mapping and illumination control,” J. of Photonics for Energy 3, 035599 (2013). [CrossRef]  

18. S. V. Kravchenko, E. V. Byzov, M. C. Moiseev, and L. L. Doskolovich, “Development of multiple-surface optical elements for road lighting,” Opt. Express 25(4), A23–A35 (2017). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

19. F. Fournier, “Freeform reflector design with extended sources,” Ph. D. Dissertation, (University of Central Florida, 2010).

20. C. Canavesi, “Subaperture conics and geometric concepts applied to freeform reflector design for illumination,” Ph. D. Dissertation, (University of Rochester, 2014).

21. D. Michaelis, P. Schreiber, and A. Bräuer, “Cartesian oval representation of freeform optics in illumination systems,” Opt. Lett. 36(6), 918–920 (2011). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

22. V. I. Oliker, “Controlling light with freeform multifocal lens designed with supporting quadric method (SQM),” Opt. Express 25(4), A58–A72 (2017). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

23. L. L. Doskolovich, M. A. Moiseev, E. A. Bezus, and V. Oliker, “On the use of the supporting quadric method in the problem of the light field eikonal calculation,” Opt. Express 23(15), 19605–19617 (2015). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

24. V. I. Oliker, A rigorous method for synthesis of offset shaped reflector antennas, Computing Lett. 2(1–2), 29–49 (2006). [CrossRef]  

25. R. Luneburg, Mathematical Theory of Optics (University of California, 1964).

26. R. Schneider, Convex Bodies: The Brunn–Minkowski Theory, 2-nd ed., (Cambridge University, 2014).

27. V. I. Oliker, J. Rubinstein, and G. Wolansky, “Supporting quadric method in optical design of freeform lenses for illumination control of a collimated light,” Advances in Appl. Math. 62, 160–183 (2015). [CrossRef]  

28. P. R. Thie and G. E. Keough, An Introduction to Linear Programming and Game Theory, 3-rd ed. (J. Wiley & Sons, 2008). [CrossRef]  

29. L. Rúshendorf and L. Uckelmann, Numerical and analytical results for the transportation problem of Monge-Kantorovich, Metrika 51(3), 245–258 (2000). [CrossRef]  

30. Q. Mérigot and É. Oudset, “Discrete optimal transport: complexity, geometry and applications,” Discrete & Computational Geometry 55(2), 263–283 (2016). [CrossRef]  

31. Opto-mechanical software TracePro.https://www.lambdares.com/tracepro/

32. Rhinoceros.http://www.rhino3d.com

33. M. A. Moiseev, E. V. Byzov, S. V. Kravchenko, and L. L. Doskolovich, “Design of LED refractive optics with predetermined balance of ray deflection angles between inner and outer surfaces,” Opt. Express 23, A1140–A1148 (2015). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

References

  • View by:

  1. J. Hoffnagle and C. Jefferson, “Beam shaping with a plano-aspheric lens pair,” Opt. Eng.,  42(11), 3090–3099 (2003).
    [Crossref]
  2. F. M. Dickey, ed., Laser Beam Shaping: Theory and Techniques, 2nd ed. (CRC Press, 2014).
    [Crossref]
  3. B. R. Frieden, “Lossless conversion of a plane laser wave to a plane wave of uniform radiation,” Appl. Opt. 4(11), 1400–1403 (1965).
    [Crossref]
  4. J. L. Kreuzer, “Coherent light optical system yielding an output beam of desired intensity distribution at a desired equiphase surface,” U. S. Patent No. 3,476,463 (1969).
  5. P. W. Rhodes and D. L. Shealy, “Refractive optical systems for irradiance redistribution of collimated radiation: their design and analysis,” Appl. Opt. 19(20), 3545–3553 (1980).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  6. J. A. Hoffnagle and C. M. Jefferson, “Design and performance of a refractive optical system that converts a Gaussian to a flattop beam,” Appl. Opt. 39(30), 5488–5499 (2000).
    [Crossref]
  7. V. I. Oliker, “Designing freeform lenses for intensity and phase control of coherent light with help from geometry and mass transport,” Arch. Rational Mechanics and Analysis 201, 1013–1045 (2011).
    [Crossref]
  8. D. Gilbarg and N. S. Trudinger, Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order, 2-nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, 1983).
    [Crossref]
  9. V. I. Oliker, “Mathematical aspects of design of beam shaping surfaces in geometrical optics,” in Trends in Nonlinear Analysis, M. Kirkilionis, S. Krömker, R. Rannacher, and F. Tomi, eds., (Springer-Verlag, 2003).
  10. Z. Feng, B. D. Froese, C.-Y. Huang, D. Ma, and R. Liang, “Creating unconventional geometric beams with large depth of field using double freeform-surface optics,” Appl. Opt. 54, 6277–6281 (2015).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  11. R. Wu, L. Xu, P. Liu, Y. Zhang, Z. Zheng, H. Li, and X. Liu, “Freeform illumination design: a nonlinear boundary problem for the elliptic Monge-Ampére equation,” Opt. Lett. 38(2), 229–231 (2013).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  12. C. Bösel and H. Gross, “Double freeform illumination design form prescribed wavefronts and irradiances,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 35(2), 236–243, (2018).
    [Crossref]
  13. J. A. Hoffnagle and M. Jefferson, “Transformation of the transverse intensity profile of a laser beam by aspheric lenses,” presented at SLAC, Oct. 2012.
  14. M. Born and E. Wolf, Principle of Optics, 7th ed. (Cambridge University, 1999).
    [Crossref]
  15. V. I. Oliker, “On design of freeform refractive beam shapers, sensitivity to figure error and convexity of lenses,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 25(12), 3067–3076 (2008).
    [Crossref]
  16. D. L. Shealy and J. A. Hoffnagle, “Aspheric optics for laser beam shaping,” in Encyclopedia of Optical Engineering, R. Driggers, ed. (Taylor & Francis, 2006).
  17. V. I. Oliker, J. Rubinstein, and G. Wolansky, “Ray mapping and illumination control,” J. of Photonics for Energy 3, 035599 (2013).
    [Crossref]
  18. S. V. Kravchenko, E. V. Byzov, M. C. Moiseev, and L. L. Doskolovich, “Development of multiple-surface optical elements for road lighting,” Opt. Express 25(4), A23–A35 (2017).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  19. F. Fournier, “Freeform reflector design with extended sources,” Ph. D. Dissertation, (University of Central Florida, 2010).
  20. C. Canavesi, “Subaperture conics and geometric concepts applied to freeform reflector design for illumination,” Ph. D. Dissertation, (University of Rochester, 2014).
  21. D. Michaelis, P. Schreiber, and A. Bräuer, “Cartesian oval representation of freeform optics in illumination systems,” Opt. Lett. 36(6), 918–920 (2011).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  22. V. I. Oliker, “Controlling light with freeform multifocal lens designed with supporting quadric method (SQM),” Opt. Express 25(4), A58–A72 (2017).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  23. L. L. Doskolovich, M. A. Moiseev, E. A. Bezus, and V. Oliker, “On the use of the supporting quadric method in the problem of the light field eikonal calculation,” Opt. Express 23(15), 19605–19617 (2015).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  24. V. I. Oliker, A rigorous method for synthesis of offset shaped reflector antennas, Computing Lett. 2(1–2), 29–49 (2006).
    [Crossref]
  25. R. Luneburg, Mathematical Theory of Optics (University of California, 1964).
  26. R. Schneider, Convex Bodies: The Brunn–Minkowski Theory, 2-nd ed., (Cambridge University, 2014).
  27. V. I. Oliker, J. Rubinstein, and G. Wolansky, “Supporting quadric method in optical design of freeform lenses for illumination control of a collimated light,” Advances in Appl. Math. 62, 160–183 (2015).
    [Crossref]
  28. P. R. Thie and G. E. Keough, An Introduction to Linear Programming and Game Theory, 3-rd ed. (J. Wiley & Sons, 2008).
    [Crossref]
  29. L. Rúshendorf and L. Uckelmann, Numerical and analytical results for the transportation problem of Monge-Kantorovich, Metrika 51(3), 245–258 (2000).
    [Crossref]
  30. Q. Mérigot and É. Oudset, “Discrete optimal transport: complexity, geometry and applications,” Discrete & Computational Geometry 55(2), 263–283 (2016).
    [Crossref]
  31. Opto-mechanical software TracePro. https://www.lambdares.com/tracepro/
  32. Rhinoceros. http://www.rhino3d.com
  33. M. A. Moiseev, E. V. Byzov, S. V. Kravchenko, and L. L. Doskolovich, “Design of LED refractive optics with predetermined balance of ray deflection angles between inner and outer surfaces,” Opt. Express 23, A1140–A1148 (2015).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]

2018 (1)

2017 (2)

2016 (1)

Q. Mérigot and É. Oudset, “Discrete optimal transport: complexity, geometry and applications,” Discrete & Computational Geometry 55(2), 263–283 (2016).
[Crossref]

2015 (4)

2013 (2)

2011 (2)

V. I. Oliker, “Designing freeform lenses for intensity and phase control of coherent light with help from geometry and mass transport,” Arch. Rational Mechanics and Analysis 201, 1013–1045 (2011).
[Crossref]

D. Michaelis, P. Schreiber, and A. Bräuer, “Cartesian oval representation of freeform optics in illumination systems,” Opt. Lett. 36(6), 918–920 (2011).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

2008 (1)

2006 (1)

V. I. Oliker, A rigorous method for synthesis of offset shaped reflector antennas, Computing Lett. 2(1–2), 29–49 (2006).
[Crossref]

2003 (1)

J. Hoffnagle and C. Jefferson, “Beam shaping with a plano-aspheric lens pair,” Opt. Eng.,  42(11), 3090–3099 (2003).
[Crossref]

2000 (2)

J. A. Hoffnagle and C. M. Jefferson, “Design and performance of a refractive optical system that converts a Gaussian to a flattop beam,” Appl. Opt. 39(30), 5488–5499 (2000).
[Crossref]

L. Rúshendorf and L. Uckelmann, Numerical and analytical results for the transportation problem of Monge-Kantorovich, Metrika 51(3), 245–258 (2000).
[Crossref]

1980 (1)

1965 (1)

Bezus, E. A.

Born, M.

M. Born and E. Wolf, Principle of Optics, 7th ed. (Cambridge University, 1999).
[Crossref]

Bösel, C.

Bräuer, A.

Byzov, E. V.

Canavesi, C.

C. Canavesi, “Subaperture conics and geometric concepts applied to freeform reflector design for illumination,” Ph. D. Dissertation, (University of Rochester, 2014).

Doskolovich, L. L.

Feng, Z.

Fournier, F.

F. Fournier, “Freeform reflector design with extended sources,” Ph. D. Dissertation, (University of Central Florida, 2010).

Frieden, B. R.

Froese, B. D.

Gilbarg, D.

D. Gilbarg and N. S. Trudinger, Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order, 2-nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, 1983).
[Crossref]

Gross, H.

Hoffnagle, J.

J. Hoffnagle and C. Jefferson, “Beam shaping with a plano-aspheric lens pair,” Opt. Eng.,  42(11), 3090–3099 (2003).
[Crossref]

Hoffnagle, J. A.

J. A. Hoffnagle and C. M. Jefferson, “Design and performance of a refractive optical system that converts a Gaussian to a flattop beam,” Appl. Opt. 39(30), 5488–5499 (2000).
[Crossref]

J. A. Hoffnagle and M. Jefferson, “Transformation of the transverse intensity profile of a laser beam by aspheric lenses,” presented at SLAC, Oct. 2012.

D. L. Shealy and J. A. Hoffnagle, “Aspheric optics for laser beam shaping,” in Encyclopedia of Optical Engineering, R. Driggers, ed. (Taylor & Francis, 2006).

Huang, C.-Y.

Jefferson, C.

J. Hoffnagle and C. Jefferson, “Beam shaping with a plano-aspheric lens pair,” Opt. Eng.,  42(11), 3090–3099 (2003).
[Crossref]

Jefferson, C. M.

Jefferson, M.

J. A. Hoffnagle and M. Jefferson, “Transformation of the transverse intensity profile of a laser beam by aspheric lenses,” presented at SLAC, Oct. 2012.

Keough, G. E.

P. R. Thie and G. E. Keough, An Introduction to Linear Programming and Game Theory, 3-rd ed. (J. Wiley & Sons, 2008).
[Crossref]

Kravchenko, S. V.

Kreuzer, J. L.

J. L. Kreuzer, “Coherent light optical system yielding an output beam of desired intensity distribution at a desired equiphase surface,” U. S. Patent No. 3,476,463 (1969).

Li, H.

Liang, R.

Liu, P.

Liu, X.

Luneburg, R.

R. Luneburg, Mathematical Theory of Optics (University of California, 1964).

Ma, D.

Mérigot, Q.

Q. Mérigot and É. Oudset, “Discrete optimal transport: complexity, geometry and applications,” Discrete & Computational Geometry 55(2), 263–283 (2016).
[Crossref]

Michaelis, D.

Moiseev, M. A.

Moiseev, M. C.

Oliker, V.

Oliker, V. I.

V. I. Oliker, “Controlling light with freeform multifocal lens designed with supporting quadric method (SQM),” Opt. Express 25(4), A58–A72 (2017).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

V. I. Oliker, J. Rubinstein, and G. Wolansky, “Supporting quadric method in optical design of freeform lenses for illumination control of a collimated light,” Advances in Appl. Math. 62, 160–183 (2015).
[Crossref]

V. I. Oliker, J. Rubinstein, and G. Wolansky, “Ray mapping and illumination control,” J. of Photonics for Energy 3, 035599 (2013).
[Crossref]

V. I. Oliker, “Designing freeform lenses for intensity and phase control of coherent light with help from geometry and mass transport,” Arch. Rational Mechanics and Analysis 201, 1013–1045 (2011).
[Crossref]

V. I. Oliker, “On design of freeform refractive beam shapers, sensitivity to figure error and convexity of lenses,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 25(12), 3067–3076 (2008).
[Crossref]

V. I. Oliker, A rigorous method for synthesis of offset shaped reflector antennas, Computing Lett. 2(1–2), 29–49 (2006).
[Crossref]

V. I. Oliker, “Mathematical aspects of design of beam shaping surfaces in geometrical optics,” in Trends in Nonlinear Analysis, M. Kirkilionis, S. Krömker, R. Rannacher, and F. Tomi, eds., (Springer-Verlag, 2003).

Oudset, É.

Q. Mérigot and É. Oudset, “Discrete optimal transport: complexity, geometry and applications,” Discrete & Computational Geometry 55(2), 263–283 (2016).
[Crossref]

Rhodes, P. W.

Rubinstein, J.

V. I. Oliker, J. Rubinstein, and G. Wolansky, “Supporting quadric method in optical design of freeform lenses for illumination control of a collimated light,” Advances in Appl. Math. 62, 160–183 (2015).
[Crossref]

V. I. Oliker, J. Rubinstein, and G. Wolansky, “Ray mapping and illumination control,” J. of Photonics for Energy 3, 035599 (2013).
[Crossref]

Rúshendorf, L.

L. Rúshendorf and L. Uckelmann, Numerical and analytical results for the transportation problem of Monge-Kantorovich, Metrika 51(3), 245–258 (2000).
[Crossref]

Schneider, R.

R. Schneider, Convex Bodies: The Brunn–Minkowski Theory, 2-nd ed., (Cambridge University, 2014).

Schreiber, P.

Shealy, D. L.

P. W. Rhodes and D. L. Shealy, “Refractive optical systems for irradiance redistribution of collimated radiation: their design and analysis,” Appl. Opt. 19(20), 3545–3553 (1980).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

D. L. Shealy and J. A. Hoffnagle, “Aspheric optics for laser beam shaping,” in Encyclopedia of Optical Engineering, R. Driggers, ed. (Taylor & Francis, 2006).

Thie, P. R.

P. R. Thie and G. E. Keough, An Introduction to Linear Programming and Game Theory, 3-rd ed. (J. Wiley & Sons, 2008).
[Crossref]

Trudinger, N. S.

D. Gilbarg and N. S. Trudinger, Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order, 2-nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, 1983).
[Crossref]

Uckelmann, L.

L. Rúshendorf and L. Uckelmann, Numerical and analytical results for the transportation problem of Monge-Kantorovich, Metrika 51(3), 245–258 (2000).
[Crossref]

Wolansky, G.

V. I. Oliker, J. Rubinstein, and G. Wolansky, “Supporting quadric method in optical design of freeform lenses for illumination control of a collimated light,” Advances in Appl. Math. 62, 160–183 (2015).
[Crossref]

V. I. Oliker, J. Rubinstein, and G. Wolansky, “Ray mapping and illumination control,” J. of Photonics for Energy 3, 035599 (2013).
[Crossref]

Wolf, E.

M. Born and E. Wolf, Principle of Optics, 7th ed. (Cambridge University, 1999).
[Crossref]

Wu, R.

Xu, L.

Zhang, Y.

Zheng, Z.

Advances in Appl. Math. (1)

V. I. Oliker, J. Rubinstein, and G. Wolansky, “Supporting quadric method in optical design of freeform lenses for illumination control of a collimated light,” Advances in Appl. Math. 62, 160–183 (2015).
[Crossref]

Appl. Opt. (4)

Arch. Rational Mechanics and Analysis (1)

V. I. Oliker, “Designing freeform lenses for intensity and phase control of coherent light with help from geometry and mass transport,” Arch. Rational Mechanics and Analysis 201, 1013–1045 (2011).
[Crossref]

Computing Lett. (1)

V. I. Oliker, A rigorous method for synthesis of offset shaped reflector antennas, Computing Lett. 2(1–2), 29–49 (2006).
[Crossref]

Discrete & Computational Geometry (1)

Q. Mérigot and É. Oudset, “Discrete optimal transport: complexity, geometry and applications,” Discrete & Computational Geometry 55(2), 263–283 (2016).
[Crossref]

J. of Photonics for Energy (1)

V. I. Oliker, J. Rubinstein, and G. Wolansky, “Ray mapping and illumination control,” J. of Photonics for Energy 3, 035599 (2013).
[Crossref]

J. Opt. Soc. Am. A (2)

Metrika (1)

L. Rúshendorf and L. Uckelmann, Numerical and analytical results for the transportation problem of Monge-Kantorovich, Metrika 51(3), 245–258 (2000).
[Crossref]

Opt. Eng. (1)

J. Hoffnagle and C. Jefferson, “Beam shaping with a plano-aspheric lens pair,” Opt. Eng.,  42(11), 3090–3099 (2003).
[Crossref]

Opt. Express (4)

Opt. Lett. (2)

Other (14)

J. A. Hoffnagle and M. Jefferson, “Transformation of the transverse intensity profile of a laser beam by aspheric lenses,” presented at SLAC, Oct. 2012.

M. Born and E. Wolf, Principle of Optics, 7th ed. (Cambridge University, 1999).
[Crossref]

F. Fournier, “Freeform reflector design with extended sources,” Ph. D. Dissertation, (University of Central Florida, 2010).

C. Canavesi, “Subaperture conics and geometric concepts applied to freeform reflector design for illumination,” Ph. D. Dissertation, (University of Rochester, 2014).

F. M. Dickey, ed., Laser Beam Shaping: Theory and Techniques, 2nd ed. (CRC Press, 2014).
[Crossref]

J. L. Kreuzer, “Coherent light optical system yielding an output beam of desired intensity distribution at a desired equiphase surface,” U. S. Patent No. 3,476,463 (1969).

D. Gilbarg and N. S. Trudinger, Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order, 2-nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, 1983).
[Crossref]

V. I. Oliker, “Mathematical aspects of design of beam shaping surfaces in geometrical optics,” in Trends in Nonlinear Analysis, M. Kirkilionis, S. Krömker, R. Rannacher, and F. Tomi, eds., (Springer-Verlag, 2003).

Opto-mechanical software TracePro. https://www.lambdares.com/tracepro/

Rhinoceros. http://www.rhino3d.com

D. L. Shealy and J. A. Hoffnagle, “Aspheric optics for laser beam shaping,” in Encyclopedia of Optical Engineering, R. Driggers, ed. (Taylor & Francis, 2006).

R. Luneburg, Mathematical Theory of Optics (University of California, 1964).

R. Schneider, Convex Bodies: The Brunn–Minkowski Theory, 2-nd ed., (Cambridge University, 2014).

P. R. Thie and G. E. Keough, An Introduction to Linear Programming and Game Theory, 3-rd ed. (J. Wiley & Sons, 2008).
[Crossref]

Cited By

Optica participates in Crossref's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from Optica Publishing Group journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (8)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1 A system of two plano-freeform lenses for beam shaping; only the active (non-planar) sides of the lenses are shown. The two lenses R1 and R2 are required to transform a collimated input beam with an arbitrary radiance I1(x) into a collimated output beam with a prescribed irradiance I2(p) at a given region on the plane α′ : z = d; n = const is the normalized refractive index of R1 and R2 (as explained at the beginning of Subsection 2.1). From Ref. [7].
Fig. 2
Fig. 2 Design of a two-lens system for transforming a non-uniform laser beam into a uniform intensity RS beam requires first circularization (a)→(b) and filtering (b)→(c) of the beam from the laser. Then a RS beam shaper can convert it into a “flat-top” (c)→(d); from Ref. [13] with permission.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3 Hyperbola Hl maps the segment [a, b] into Fr.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4 The function z in Eq. (9) defines the first lens R1. The second lens R2 is defined by Eq. (10).
Fig. 5
Fig. 5 The designed systems of two plano-freeform lenses in a Keplerian (a, b) and a Galilean (c, d) configurations to transform an incident circular beam into a rectangular outgoing beam. The dashed lines show the z axis.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6 Normalized radiance distributions generated in the planes z = 10 cm (a, c) and z = 100 cm (b, d) by the designed Keplerian (a, b) and Galilean (c, d) lens systems calculated in TracePro. The radiance cross-sections along the coordinate axes are shown at the top and at the right of the figures.
Fig. 7
Fig. 7 (a) The calculated system of two plano-freeform lenses transforming an incident circular beam into a star-shaped beam. The dashed line shows the z axis. The first plano-freeform lens with the surface z(x) (b) reshapes the input radiance, whereas the second lens with the surface w(p) (c) reshapes the phase.
Fig. 8
Fig. 8 Normalized radiance distributions generated by the two-lens system shown in Fig. 7 in the planes z = 10 cm (a) and z = 100 cm (b) calculated in TracePro. The radiance cross-sections along the coordinate axes are shown at the top and at the right of the figures.

Equations (31)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

I 2 ( T d ( x ) ) | det J ( T d ( x ) ) | = I 1 ( x ) , x Ω ,
I 2 ( x , f ( x ) ) [ f 11 f 22 f 12 2 ] = I 1 ( x ) , x Ω . ( Here f i j = 2 f x i x j , i , j = 1 , 2 . )
P ( x ) = x β z ( x ) M ( x ) , x Ω ¯ .
w ( P ( x ) ) = z ( x ) + β 1 n 2 [ n + 1 M ( x ) ] , x Ω ¯ .
H ( x , p ) : = n β c ( x , p ) n 2 1 , where c ( x , p ) : = β 2 + ( n 2 1 ) ( x p ) 2 .
ξ p , η l ( x ) = H ( x , p ) + η , x α ,
F p , η l = ( p , η + n n 2 1 ( β | β | ) ) , F p , η r = ( p , η + n n 2 1 ( β + | β | ) ) , C p , η = ( p , η + n β n 2 1 ) .
η x , ξ r ( p ) = H ( x , p ) + ξ , p α .
F x , ξ l = ( x , ξ n n 2 1 ( β + | β | ) ) , F x , ξ r = ( x , ξ n n 2 1 ( β | β | ) ) , C x , ξ = ( x , ξ n β n 2 1 ) .
z ( x ) = min p T ¯ { H ( x , p ) + w ( p ) } , x Ω ¯ ,
w ( p ) = max x Ω ¯ { H ( x , p ) + z ( x ) } , p T ¯ .
z ( x ) = max p T ¯ { H ( x , p ) + w ( p ) } , x Ω ¯ ,
w ( p ) = min x Ω ¯ { H ( x , p ) + z ( x ) } , p T ¯ .
P z , w ( x ) = { p T ¯ | z ( x ) = H ( x , p ) + w ( p ) } , x Ω ¯ ,
P z , w 1 ( p ) = { x Ω ¯ | w ( p ) = H ( x , p ) + z ( x ) } , p T ¯ .
( i ) P z , w ( Ω ¯ ) = P z ^ , w ( α ) = T ¯ and ( i i ) P z , w 1 ( T ¯ ) = P z , w ^ 1 ( α ) = Ω ¯ .
G z , w ( τ ) = P z , w 1 ( τ ) I 1 ( x ) d x
lim k T ¯ f ( p ) G z k , w k ( d p ) = T ¯ f ( p G z , w ( d p ) ) f C ( T ¯ ) .
P z , w ( Ω ¯ ) = T ¯
G z , w ( τ ) = μ ( τ ) τ ( T ¯ ) , where μ ( τ ) : = τ I 2 ( p ) d p .
Ω ¯ I 1 ( x ) d x = μ ( T ¯ ) .
Adm A ( Ω ¯ , T ¯ ) = { ( z , w ) C ( Ω ¯ ) × C ( T ¯ ) w ( p ) z ( x ) H ( x , p ) ( x , p ) Ω ¯ × T ¯ } .
( z , w ) = T ¯ w ( p ) μ ( d p ) Ω ¯ z ( x ) I 1 ( x ) d x , ( z , w ) Adm A ( Ω ¯ , T ¯ ) .
( z , w ) min over Adm A ( Ω ¯ , T ¯ )
i = 1 M ω ¯ i M = Ω ¯ , ω t M ω k M = if t k ; j = 1 N τ ¯ j N = T ¯ , τ h N τ l N = if h l .
E i M = ω i M I 1 ( x ) d x , F i N = μ ( τ j N ) .
E M ( ω ) = x i M ω E i M and F N ( τ ) = p i N τ F i k .
i = 1 M E i M = j = 1 N F j N .
M , N ( z 1 M , , z M M , w 1 N , , w N N ) : = j = 1 N w j N F j N i = 1 M z i M E i M
Adm M , N = { w j N z i M H ( x i , p j ) , i = 1 , , M , j = 1 , , N } .
( z ¯ M , w ¯ N ) = inf Adm M , N M , N ( z M , w N ) .

Metrics

Select as filters


Select Topics Cancel
© Copyright 2022 | Optica Publishing Group. All Rights Reserved