> From: Mark Spitzer <MSPITZER/> > > Presumably the 15 degrees is set by the angle subtended by a single pixeI, > time the number of pixels. I think that the telescope doesn't work because > it also increases the pixel (spot) size by 10x, so you end up with needing > a yet higher FOV. Output angle is determined by the phase delay imparted by the Bragg cell to light crossing the acoustic axis. The phase delay is related to product of the optical transit time in the Bragg cell and the variation of the index of refraction. While you're correct in recognizing that the telescope will increase the pixel size, you can't reasonably conclude that you need "a yet higher FOV". What you need is a narrower beam profile, which you can obtain by performing spatial filtering on the input beam. Something I forgot to mention before is that if you're using a Bragg cell, your temporal resolution is limited by the fringe transit time across the cell (at 617 m/s in TeO2 or 1720 m/s in water). If you launch a chirp down the cell, you can have a continously varying deflection angle at the cost of increased beam width. If instead you launch successive groups of monochromatic fringes down the cell the output beam will on average be narrower, but there will be periods during which the beam is widened (i.e. mixing output angles). You could shut off the laser during these transitions to obtain better pixel separation. Finally, some groups have had success using LCDs (without polarizers) as low efficiency phase delay elements to display CGHs. It would be neat to see how well you could do using one of these for beam steering. Better yet, use a micromirror array as a binary interferogram. -Rehmi -- Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" to
Wear-Hard Mailing List Archive (searchable): http://wearables.ml.org
From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty
Archive created with babymail