Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Richard:
Quite on topic, I commend you! Yanno, back when I was a young feller, we lived in the sierra nevada foothills. I remember traveling to my favorite swimming hole on bicycle. It was over a five miles distant ride, but for the exuberance of youth, that was no distance what-so-ever. And, gawd, how hot and ready for a swim we would be when we finally reached it on our bicycles. Many times we would take fishing poles with us. Bluegill, trout and bass could all be caught in the creek there. I never cared for fish that much myself, but there was always a member of the family which was more than anxious to take the fish from our hands and make themselves a meal of it. Other times we would take along 22 rim fire rifles and plunk around, shooting targets, bottles and cans. My favorite was a Remington rifle, single shot bolt action. I had a semi-auto but would go though ammunition faster than I could make money to replace it. Many of the other kids parents where not comfortable having their children around guns, so to their parents, we always kept such secret. Never an accident, and always behaved in a sane manner with weapons. I that my father to this day for the excellent instruction he imparted to me in handling weapons, and the great respect he inspired me to hold for them. When I was older, I purchased a 9mm german lugar, I still have it to this day, along with a 45 cal auto, both are favorite guns of mine. But, the stories of those guns are for another day... Even did a little gold panning there. The area was a source of vast amounts of gold during the gold rush. To this day, gold can still be found in most any stream in that area. And, back then, there were still a few prospectors around which actually were able to eek out a living by sluicing the streams there and selling the gold to jewelers. Later in life I even bought a keen 8 inch dredge and went back. I ended up finding quite a bit of gold in those creeks and rivers with that dredge, a buddy and a couple of wet suits. Just loved to drink beer and float about dredging all day long. This is another fond memory of mine, but again, a story for another day... Ahh, those days were some of the most favorite of my youth... However, I digress here a bit. So, this brings me to the important point of this post, and the point I had first set out to develop. I once (well, maybe more than once) seen a glare on the water of that swimming hole... John "Richard Clark" wrote in message ... Glare (1): In the context of matching for both Optical and ordinary RF applications encountered in the Ham Shack; it is meant to be described as the unwanted reflection of energy (or power, or what-have-you). Glare (2): In the context of the physiological response to observing unwanted reflections; it is meant to be described by applications that give rise to this annoyance. This can sometimes be confused with the first meaning of Glare that is suitable close, but can come into conflict with that meaning. Glare, and Glare reduction: When the topic of Glare is expressed in regard to the second usage, it is always wavelength specific, and application specific. In fact this is true of both meanings, but the commercial marketplace overwhelms by example in the second. With that in mind, we have to consider WHO is being served by Glare reduction. This is often the naive public who would otherwise be encumbered by Glare where their attention is drawn to it as it masks what is trying to be presented to them. So, Glare masks the perception by reflections of light from, most usually, a pane of glass, plexiglass, or acrylic (and so on down the line) that covers or windows an exhibit. Usually we are speaking of covered art work, or display cases exhibiting samples or products (this being the most common form of Glare reduction application). The quickest and most absolute method of Glare reduction in a showcase window on the street looking into a storefront is to simply tilt the window at the top, toward the viewer. This renders all light source reflections (typically higher than the head of the viewer) down. Ten or twenty degrees of tilt is often enough to give the illusion of there being no glass at all. Note my usage of "illusion" as Glare is all about perception in this second usage. This form of Glare reduction is wide-band and exhibits very little sensitivity to wavelength. The same Glare reduction of tilting glass covered artwork is also suitable for the same reason. However, I would point out that in such cases, the display staff make every effort that the lights be spotted on the artwork, otherwise if your face is illuminated, the artwork suddenly becomes a mirror. Where both meanings of Glare converge for the same purposes, we find a more specific remedy. Specific because it employs tuned interfaces to reduce (not eliminate) reflections. Here is where the convergence demands two different wavelength specifications, and importantly WHY. As I have offered elsewhere, there are two types of vision, Photopic and Scotopic (with a third, Mesopic, between the two which is the process of accommodation of migrating from one to the other - "acquiring" night vision is a commonplace description). Anti-Glare materials that employ thin-film technologies seek to accommodate the major sources of Glare that fall into these two wide band regions of 550nM and 510nM. They are also application specific in that there are two forms of common illumination involved that compounds this to a four way solution. Those sources of illumination are Metal Halide and High Pressure Sodium lamps. There are others, certainly, but these specie exhibit characteristics that are extrapolated to similar sources. Metal Halide lamps exhibit a comb of resonances, as does the High Pressure Sodium, that makes Glare elimination impossible. However, it does not make it impractical as among those major lines of emission, the optical engineer can select the biggest contributor such as 510nM for the night vision component of the eye's response. However, this doesn't make much sense because it also reduces the eye's ability to perceive what is being illuminated by that wavelength too. Not much night vision advantage in that, is there? However, when considering this is placed over artwork commonly, artwork exhibits a Lambertian distribution of reflected light, not a specular form of reflection. Hence the specular form exhibited by a pane of glass is reduced and the Lambertian reflection emerges with a greater contrast (another benefit of choosing anti-Glare products). High Pressure Sodium, on the other hand, has a very strong line at the 610nM wavelength. This, too, would be a natural thin-film wavelength selection. In regards to night vision, such a reflection (that is, without Glare reduction) would be nearly invisible anyway. As such, its use would be oriented towards those WHO have a light adapted eye, that are in a darkened viewing situation. However, as described, these are very poor solutions to the problem they attempt to answer. This is because these sources exhibit a comb of such wavelengths in their emissions. It follows that one interference layer may impact one line, but certainly not all (there being easily a dozen lines of emission for either source in either light adapted vision). Hence we have the multi-layer methods that my quote offered from the marketplace. It should come as no surprise that anti-Glare products are wholly useless under common tungsten lighting whose bandwidth is broad and continuous. There is one exception, and it is commonly found for computer screen reflection reduction. I must note that such reduction has absolutely nothing in common with wavelength interference. This class of reflection reduction employs a wide band light reduction. Principally it seeks to reduce all ambient light from striking the display's surface and then reducing the reflections even further. This is a double whammy, where the display suffers it only once. However, you can control the brightness of the display to replace that loss, and in this sense you have increased your signal+noise/noise ratio. Finally there is one source of reflection elimination that is common to both the optical engineer and the rf engineer (and apparently wholly unknown by binary engineers). I offered above one display window trick of tilting the top of the window towards the viewer. When this is done at a particular angle (and the ground below is not illuminated by the reflection - another feature of display window design), then there will be no perception of the window at all. Many people have knocked there heads against such windows trying to get a closer look at what was being displayed. Lawyers trumped designers by begging this was a possible source of litigation for those so injured. Some of these windows may yet survive in the older parts of your town where they cater to high-end shoppers. You may note that there are rails placed in the way to keep the curious from getting to close and bruising their noggins. Now, I offered that there is a particular angle. For both the optical engineer and the rf engineer, it is called the "Brewster Angle." This is also known as the angle of maximum absorption and minimum reflection. When light or RF (it doesn't matter which) of vertical polarization strikes an interface at this angle, all of that energy passes through the interface with minimum reflection. When you perform a vertical antenna far field measurement, you may note that the lobe "sucks in" at the very low radiation angles. This angle that exhibits poor propagation results is a consequence of the air/earth boundary that is identical in all respects to an optical interface between two materials of differing indices. The optical engineer calls it the index of refraction/reflection (and can be examined through Snell's Laws); the rf engineer finds the same property in the ratio between the characteristic Z of air and the characteristic Z of the earth. An instance to illustrate the rf scenario. With Air the Z is roughly 400 Ohms, for the Ocean it is roughly 10 Ohms. That ratio, in this case 40, results in a Brewster Angle of about 1½°. If we were to consider something more remote, and dryer like the ground in my neighborhood where the characteristic Z is closer to 100 Ohms (luckily I can see a vast body of seawater from my window); that ratio is 4 which results in a Brewster Angle of about 15°. Try as I might in directions other than towards Puget Sound, I will never launch any significant signals at angles lower than this 15°. As a closing comment about the Brewster Angle, nearly every Laser uses this in their output window. Next in this series: T HE FAILURE OF POOR CONCEPTS IN DISCUSSING THIN LAYER REFLECTIONS otherwise called by me as the WHEREFORE. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Have you had an FT-817 finals failure? | Equipment | |||
Have you had an FT-817 finals failure? | Equipment |