| Literature DB >> 35890971 |
Shan Mao1, Huaile Nie1, Tao Lai1, Na Xie2.
Abstract
The special dispersion and temperature characteristics of diffractive optical element (DOE) make them widely used in optical systems that require both athermalization and achromatic aberrations designs. The multi-layer DOE (MLDOE) can improve the diffraction efficiency of the overall broad waveband, but its diffraction efficiency decreases with changes in ambient temperature. When the ambient temperature changes, the micro-structure heights of MLDOE and the refractive index of the substrate materials change, ultimately affecting its diffraction efficiency, and, further, the optical transform function (OTF). In this paper, the influence of ambient temperature on the diffraction efficiency of MLDOE in a dual-infrared waveband is proposed and discussed, the diffraction efficiency of MLDOE caused by ambient temperature is derived, and a computational imaging method that combines optical design and image restoration is proposed. Finally, a dual-infrared waveband infrared optical system with athermalization and achromatic aberrations corrected based on computational imaging method is designed. Results show that this method can effectively reduce the diffraction efficiency of MLDOE by ambient temperature and improve the imaging quality of hybrid optical systems.Entities:
Keywords: computational imaging; diffractive optical element; dual-infrared waveband; hybrid optical system design; optical design
Year: 2022 PMID: 35890971 PMCID: PMC9318033 DOI: 10.3390/s22145291
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Figure 1The incoming and outgoing fields for DLDOE.
Figure 2Surface profile of DLDOE when ambient temperature changes.
Figure 3Diagram of the schematic.
Design specifications of D-RHIOS.
| Paremeter | Value | |
|---|---|---|
| Imaging optical system | Waveband/μm | 3~5 and 8~12 |
| Field of view/° | 10 | |
| Effective focal length/mm | 100 | |
| Aperture/mm | 50 | |
| Ambient temperature | Temperature Range/°C | −40~60 |
| Detector | Pixel/μm | 30 |
| Image size | 320 × 256 | |
| Lens barrel material | AL |
|
Layout of D-RHIOS.
| Surface | Type | Radius (mm) | Thickness (mm) | Materials |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Object | Standard | Infinity | Infinity | -- | -- |
| 1 | Standard | 117.744 | 16.481 | AMTIR1 | -- |
| 2 | Standard | 272.931 | 4.970 | -- | 23.6 |
| 3 | Standard | 9.793 × 105 | 12.650 | GE | -- |
| 4 | Standard | 1027.119 | 0.1 | -- | 23.6 |
| 5 | Standard | 441.957 | 12.819 | ZNS | -- |
| 6 | Standard | 247.541 | 80.641 | -- | 23.6 |
| 7 | Standard | 69.898 | 10.444 | ZNSE | -- |
| 8 | Standard | 998.210 | 1.672 | -- | 23.6 |
| 9 | Standard | 2194.902 | 9.999 | ZNSE | -- |
| 10 | Binary | 239.218 | 0.044 | -- | 23.6 |
| 11 | Binary | 239.218 | 8.820 | GE | -- |
| 12 | Standard | 111.391 | 12.276 | -- | 23.6 |
| Stop | Standard | Infinity | 19.995 | -- | 23.6 |
| Image | Standard | Infinity | -- | -- | -- |
Surface profile of the DLDOE.
| Surface | Normal Radius | A1 | A2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | 100 | −1.4227 × 103 | 1.0222 × 104 |
| 11 | 100 | −1.4227 × 103 | 1.0222 × 104 |
Figure 4Layout of the dual-infrared waveband imaging optical system.
Figure 5MTF for D-RHIOS at different ambient temperatures.
Temperature parameters of substrate materials in different wavebands.
| Waveband | MWIR | LWIR | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Substrate Materials | GE | ZNSE | GE | ZNSE |
| 5.7 | 7.1 | 5.7 | 7.1 | |
| 424 | 63 | 404 | 61 | |
Design results of the DLDOE.
| Wavebands/µm | 3~5 | 8~12 |
|---|---|---|
| Design wavelength/µm | 3.8 | 10.2 |
| Design order/% | −137 and 138 | −50 and 51 |
| 365.013 | ||
| 174.133 | ||
Figure 6Relationship among diffraction efficiency-waveband-ambient temperature for DLDOE in dual-infrared waveband.
Figure 7Relationship between BIADE and ambient temperature for DLDOE in dual-infrared waveband.
BIADE for DLDOE at different ambient temperatures in dual bands.
| Ambient Temperature/°C | BIADE/% | |
|---|---|---|
| MWIR | LWIR | |
| −40 | 45.289 | 83.773 |
| 20 | 77.799 | 94.990 |
| 60 | 66.880 | 93.190 |
Figure 8The original imaging of simulation considering diffraction efficiency effects.
Figure 9The optimal imaging after restoration.