prism pair position/angle confusion

[neskusen]

This page on the Edmund Optics website tells what angles and positions my prisms need to be to get the amount of magnification I need.
http://www.edmundoptics.com/optics/p...sm-pairs/2429/



However, when I create it in my editor, the V value (Vertical Separation, see above) isn't the same.
For 2x magnification it says it should be 1.75mm, but I get 3.048mm.
Did I misunderstand something?

[LaNeK779]

the prisms do not have to touch each other

check again the 13.86 figure, i think it should be closer to 14.42 ιif we accept that the sides are indeed 8 and 12

however, i seriously doubt that 12 refers to a side size and that prism size matters
to my experience, only their relative angles matter

in any case, a few years back we had this http://www.photonlexicon.com/forums/...176#post161176

use it and be done with it

you don't use search too much, do you?

[neskusen]

They do not have to touch each other but I guess they need some kind of relative position so a fat beam will fit.

check again the 13.86 figure, i think it should be closer to 14.42 ιif we accept that the sides are indeed 8 and 12

however, i seriously doubt that 12 refers to a side size

It does. Did you check the STEP or other CAD files provided on the page I linked to (click the "Documents" tab)? One of them contains the prisms as 3d model, with those sizes for the edges.
I don't think the CAD files are modelled wrongly.

As for the printable template you linked to, it has only 3 types of magnification, not 5. I actually wanted to make one myself but with 5 magnification types and share here.

---------------

you don't use search too much, do you?

You are overestimating the search tool of a forum. Many long term forum members do. A forum is not Google or a Q&A site. Important posts can be buried under hundreds of off-topic or unrelated posts of a thread and the thread itself might be about something completely different than the post. And a bigger problem is the post might not contain the exact keyword you search for and in that case it won't be found.
I know for someone who has engaged in that conversation it feels like the "info is right here" but it really isn't, forums aren't very organized and easy to browse. Please don't blame me for not using the search tool. If it worked for me it would save a lot of my own time as well.
I'll grant you that I might not be very good at searching, but I definitely try before posting.
As an example I just searched every post containing the word "NUBM44" earlier today to learn everything about the NUBM44 diode mentioned in this forum, it took about an hour and reading hundreds of unrelated material and I still didn't get every question about it answered, and maybe there's more about the diode in some post that doesn't name it for the search to list it. Just an example for what I mean. In this case it's not even one keyword you can search.

[skot]

A forum is not Google or a Q&A site. .

That all depends how you use search tools.... Limit the search to the forum (using the terms site:photonlexicon.com in addition to what your topic is)

In any case reading other topics, whilst not necessarily related to the specific answers, can lead you off on interesting tangents. I personally dont mind people regurgitating past questions, as I learn from them also...

[neskusen]

That all depends how you use search tools.... Limit the search to the forum (using the terms sitehotonlexicon.com in addition to what your topic is)

It does so by default, that wasn't my point.

In any case reading other topics, whilst not necessarily related to the specific answers, can lead you off on interesting tangents.

Yes, it can, and often it doesn't.

But regardless, that pdf only has 3 magnification angles.

[neskusen]

The Edmund Optics email support is away for few weeks so if someone else can chime in you would really help me out here.