遥远的路 |
2013-04-24 00:05 |
公差分析与实际模拟的出入
学习公差分析的时间不长,其实很多时候真的感到很疑惑,好像有时候在最差的十项里面未必就是最差的,好像有时候会出现比这里面其中的一些还敏感的却没有出现在最差的十项里面,最近一直不求甚解,但今天遇到一问题实在不得不让我去求甚解。事情是这样的,我对一个镜头进行分析,公差分析结果贴在下面,其中第10到11面的空气间隔就是L5-L6的间隔,按照最差的十项来说,应该是变化这个间距MTF会下降比较大,可实际上MTF却没有什么下降,而4到6面的间距(L2和L3之间的空气间隔)变化MTF下降的确比较明显,真不明白这是为什么,镜头的镜片排序大致如下面所示。还有,我请教了前辈,前辈说公差模拟是随机的,不一定正确的,只是有参考价值而已,而且他还说假如公差分析设置的操作数一样,那每次公差分析的结果也不一定相同,这让我有点疑惑,好像我印象中不是这样的,我好像这么做过,但分析的结果是一样的,当然这个我自己去试试就知道了,只是现在太晚了,不想去试一试,想睡觉了,所以对于其他问题,希望各位不吝赐教,谢谢!还有,希望各位看看我公差分析的结果,看看里面是否有设置不对的地方,有的话请指正,再次谢过。 wZolg~dg J-,X0v"
[attachment=48103] >?\ !k
c .oOt(K+ L3前面两竖线是光阑 R(#;yn nFOG=>c} 公差分析结果: mTu9'/$( LA(JA Units are Millimeters. 206jeH9 ' <jp.sZQ Paraxial Focus compensation is on. In this mode, all -CNv=vj 3 compensators are ignored, except paraxial back focus change.
0>J4O:k t z>X'L WARNING: Boundary constraints on compensators are ignored when 'Z%aBCM using fast mode or user-defined merit functions. r/w@Dh]{_ X%qR6mMfT7 Criteria : Diffraction MTF average S&T at 180.0000 lp/mm Pg}G4L?H;J Mode : Sensitivities DWO: Sampling : 3 (9QRg; Optimization Cycles : Automatic mode >~r@*gml Nominal Criteria : 0.38686619 W_lNvzag Test Wavelength : 0.5460 Ji:@z%osr Z%d4V<fn Fields: User Defined Real Image height in Millimeters h*'5h! # X-Field Y-Field Weight VDX VDY VCX VCY YtKX\q^. 1 0.000E+000 0.000E+000 1.000E+000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Y\F H4}\S 2 0.000E+000 1.151E+000 1.000E+000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 JVYYwA^. 3 0.000E+000 1.918E+000 1.000E+000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ))zaL2UP. 4 0.000E+000 2.685E+000 1.000E+000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 H`..)zL| 5 0.000E+000 3.452E+000 1.000E+000 0.000 -0.105 0.002 0.105 ,S K6*tpI 6 0.000E+000 3.836E+000 1.000E+000 0.000 -0.217 0.014 0.217 6@361f[ e=$xn3)McY Sensitivity Analysis: h(K4AiGE |#,W3Ik(l |------------ Minimum ------------| |------------ Maximum ------------| |W[rywxx Type Value Criteria Change Value Criteria Change z{_Vn(Kg TTHI 2 3 -0.010000 0.386393 -0.000473 0.010000 0.380196 -0.006670 _Xe< JJvq TTHI 4 6 -0.010000 0.380717 -0.006149 0.010000 0.378999 -0.007867 rkXSygb TTHI 7 8 -0.010000 0.380585 -0.006282 0.010000 0.386480 -0.000386 TW?
MS em TTHI 10 11 -0.010000 0.375901 -0.010965 0.010000 0.385879 -0.000987 p#NZ\qJ TTHI 12 13 -0.010000 0.386971 0.000105 0.010000 0.386709 -0.000158 cSWVHr TTHI 14 15 -0.010000 0.386958 0.000092 0.010000 0.386722 -0.000144 7i\[Q8f 2,`mNjHh Worst offenders: ZPog)d@! Type Value Criteria Change p{GDW_ TTHI 10 11 -0.010000 0.375901 -0.010965 5Uz(Bi TTHI 4 6 0.010000 0.378999 -0.007867 AE~}^(G` TTHI 2 3 0.010000 0.380196 -0.006670 7guxkN# TTHI 7 8 -0.010000 0.380585 -0.006282 <o`]wOrl TTHI 4 6 -0.010000 0.380717 -0.006149 eeZ9 w~< TTHI 10 11 0.010000 0.385879 -0.000987 jt*@,+e| TTHI 2 3 -0.010000 0.386393 -0.000473 wN.Jyb TTHI 7 8 0.010000 0.386480 -0.000386 jl7-"V>j?; TTHI 12 13 0.010000 0.386709 -0.000158 Qk?Jy<Ra TTHI 14 15 0.010000 0.386722 -0.000144 <FLc0s s47"JKf" l0)6[yXK Estimated Performance Changes based upon Root-Sum-Square method: C*zdHzMj Nominal MTF : 0.3869 DSa92:M} Estimated change : -0.0124 n\,W:G9AR7 Estimated MTF : 0.3745 j(N9%/4u A}O9e Compensator Statistics: BGOI Change in back focus: Cl=ExpX/O Minimum : -0.008974 SesO$=y Maximum : 0.008997 {%dQV#'c Mean : 0.000002 xEqrs6sR Standard Deviation : 0.004372 =25"qJr n`1i k'x? A
2 )%+ Monte Carlo Analysis: 0}!lN{m? Number of trials: 20 b?,y%D)' vN+!l3O Initial Statistics: Normal Distribution %UhF=C H|?`n
uiD Trial Criteria Change n_Dhq (. 1 0.381931 -0.004936 B(U`Zd 2 0.386597 -0.000269 cgAcAcmY 3 0.380763 -0.006103 6IH^rSUSK 4 0.385898 -0.000968 kdq55zTc<6 5 0.379542 -0.007324 pj`-T"Q 6 0.386121 -0.000745 +g&W | |