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 12,612 of 12,750    |
|    Phil Hobbs to Rhydian    |
|    Re: Optics question (Fresnel equations)    |
|    10 Feb 22 18:57:22    |
      XPost: sci.electronics.design       From: pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net              Rhydian wrote:       > On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 11:35:31 -0500, Phil Hobbs wrote:       >       >> Rhydian wrote:       >>> Hi,       >>>       >>> I'm building an optical instrument that points a 850nm LED at a       >>> boundary between two materials at an oblique angle, and measures the       >>> (specular) reflection with a photodiode at the same (opposite) angle.       >>>       >>> The first few prototypes are working well but I want to compare the       >>> performance I'm getting with the theoretical limits. My starting point       >>> is the Fresnel equations, but the part I'm having trouble with is that       >>> they give separate results for the s and p polarizations. How do I       >>> combine the two into a total reflected power?       >>>       >>> As the incident angle approaches the critical angle for total       >>> reflection,       >>> both the s and p numbers approach unity, so clearly I can't just sum       >>> them, or take the vector sum, or I would get an answer greater than 1.       >>> Average? Use the highest of the two?       >>>       >>> I'm assuming here that the photodiode detector (Osram SFH2700) has a       >>> response that's insensitive to polarization, but happy to be corrected       >>> on this point.       >>>       >>> I have a copy of "Building Electro-Optical Systems" but there's clearly       >>> something I'm missing. Google is not much help either, it finds       >>> pretty- much exactly the same question (but for microwaves rather than       >>> IR) from two years ago, and no replies.       >>>       >>> TIA       >>>       >>> Rhydian (who should probably have paid more attention in       >>> electromagnetics classes 30 years ago)       >>>       >>>       >> You just treat the two polarizations independently and add up the       >> photocurrents when you're done.       >>       >> LEDs are pretty well unpolarized when you look at them from a distance.       >>       >> There are polarization effects with angle, due to the Fresnel       >> reflections from the top surface. If the LED has a flat top facet,       >> p-polarized light escapes better, so there's a tendency for the light to       >> be somewhat radially-polarized. Textured surfaces and lensed packages       >> smear that out pretty well, though, so to leading order your LED should       >> be unpolarized.       >>       >> Thus, it's a good guess to assume the LED light has equal amounts of s-       >> and p-polarized light. These don't interfere, so the total photocurrent       >> is just the sum of the s and p photocurrents.              > OK, thanks, makes sense now.       >       > The LED is an Osram SFH4050, the top surface is slightly frosted so as       > you say, hopefully I can just treat it as 50:50 split between s and p       > polarization.       >       > One piece of odd behaviour I did see with this LED - I assumed the output       > power would be roughly linear with current, and lose efficiency and tail       > off as the die heated up. But going up in 50 uA steps to about 5 mA (max       > is 100) there's a noticeable upward curve. At first I thought I'd       > somehow screwed up the photodiode amp, but I tested it on an Ophir Nova       > II and got the same results. I don't remember seeing this before with       > other LEDs.       >       > So long as the output power is long-term stable to within a few dB it       > won't matter (there isn't space for a monitor photodiode in the design).       > I will put a few of them on continuously for a few months, just to check.       >              Depends on the device. There's normally a bit of a toe at low       currents--in the low tens of microamps for normal display LEDs--but then       it's pretty linear.              If your LED is something unusual it might behave differently.              Cheers              Phil Hobbs                     --       Dr Philip C D Hobbs       Principal Consultant       ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics       Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics       Briarcliff Manor NY 10510              http://electrooptical.net       http://hobbs-eo.com              --- 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