Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    sci.optics    |    Discussion relating to the science of op    |    12,750 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 11,790 of 12,750    |
|    Phil Hobbs to haiticare2011@gmail.com    |
|    Re: transmission through turbid media -     |
|    04 Apr 14 11:07:26    |
      From: pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net              On 04/04/2014 09:56 AM, haiticare2011@gmail.com wrote:       >       >>       >>       >> Optical Coherence Tomography?       >>       >       > I see that in the literature, and it uses the same hobgoblin as the FTIR -       the       > moving mirror in an interferometer.       >       >       > I wonder how difficult it is to cook up such a device within, say, 2 weeks.       > And I hear the "splush" of quick sand. But open to any opinions.       >       > I would try to cannabalize a micrometer caliber and drive it with a stepper       > motor. This contraption has to be pointed at something to get a signal. Same       > for FTIR reflectometry.       >       > I'd much rather push the complexity into the electronics-software domain       AMAP.       > In that line of wishful thinking, it would be dreamy to have a special filter       > in front of a cmos sensor. Presto! The output of the cmos sensor would be an       > interferogram of the FT, suitable for analysis.       >       > Several academic groups have made noises along these lines, one in Japan, but       > researchers continue to use the moving mirror.       >       > Any of you have any opinions on the difficulty of a portable, non-invasive       > device like this for FTNIR reflectometry? I immediately think of a DVD RW       > device. The FTNIR is much simpler, but the guts of the devices seem to bear       > some resemblances...       >       > In sum, 2 questions:       >       > 1. How daunting is it to whip up a FTNIR?              Hard. The motion precision is the first issue, and keeping the detected       amplitude stable throughout the motion is the second. Then there's       calibration.              Back in the '70s, iirc, people were doing things like dropping the       corner cube mirror in a vacuum column and taking the path difference to       be 1/2 g*t**2, but it turned out that surface stiction and ambient       vibration made the initial velocity and rotation rate too uncertain.              Cheers              Phil Hobbs                     --       Dr Philip C D Hobbs       Principal Consultant       ElectroOptical Innovations LLC       Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics              160 North State Road #203       Briarcliff Manor NY 10510              hobbs at electrooptical dot net       http://electrooptical.net              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca