From tom@clark.phys.nwu.edu Mon Mar 17 09:20 CST 1997
Return-Path: 
Received: from relay.acns.nwu.edu by belmont.astro.nwu.edu. (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id JAA24996; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 09:20:30 -0600
Received: from clark.phys.nwu.edu by relay.acns.nwu.edu with SMTP
	(1.40.112.8/16.2) id AA012612631; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 09:30:31 -0600
Received: by clark.phys.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA05300; Mon, 17 Mar 97 09:26:14 CST
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 97 09:26:14 CST
From: tom@clark.phys.nwu.edu (Tom Renbarger)
Message-Id: <9703171526.AA05300@clark.phys.nwu.edu>
To: jdotson@belmont.astro.nwu.edu
Subject: Re: lenses
Cc: tom@clark.phys.nwu.edu
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1593
Status: RO


Jessie,

Sorry for taking this long in getting back to you, but I've been sick and have
not been able to check my email since Wednesday.

All the focal lengths were determined from your design, retaining the original
position of the lenses.  The pupil diameter increased to 1.75", which is the
only number that changed from your design.

At this time, all the lenses are quartz.  There is still the issue whether we
want polyethylene array lenses, but for the moment we have at a minimum a full
set of (supposedly) functional reimaging lenses.  If you recall, quartz has an
n = 2.1076, give or take 1 in the last digit I've given.  Also, the array and
field lenses are plano-convex, while we have two pupil lenses, one plano- and
one bi-convex.

Field lens:

d = 0.750" =  1.905 cm
t = 0.100" =  0.254 cm
f = 4.650" = 11.811 cm
r = 5.150" = 13.082 cm

Pupil lens (plano-convex):

d = 1.750" =  4.445 cm
t = 0.230" =  0.584 cm
f = 2.530" =  6.426 cm
r = 2.802" =  7.117 cm

Pupil lens (convex-convex):

d = 1.750" =  4.445 cm
t = 0.180" =  0.457 cm
f = 2.530" =  6.426 cm
r = 5.604" = 14.235 cm

Array lens:

d = 0.750" =  1.905 cm
t = 
f = 5.250" = 13.335 cm
r = 5.815" = 14.770 cm

The array lens has a listed thickness of 1", which I don't believe.  It's 
possible that that is supposed to read 0.100", but I wouldn't necessarily go
with that, either, as that is the supposed thickness of the field lens, and
the radii of curvature of the two lenses differ, while their diameters are the
same.  One or both of us should double check these thicknesses.  d and f were
specified in the order