20Jun2017 Spectroheliograms: Hydrogen

I LOVE finding out about different ways to appreciate the Sun and light in general. Use this forum to post your info or questions about various outside the mainstream ways to appreciate our life giving star!
User avatar
Almost There...
Almost There...
Posts: 941
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:59 pm
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Re: 20Jun2017 Spectroheliograms: Hydrogen

Post by p_zetner » Wed Dec 20, 2017 6:25 pm

Some last words on the SHG lineshape function.

Here is a figure showing model calculations of the line profile of a grating spectrometer for various slit widths.
GaussBox siz.png
GaussBox siz.png (68.29 KiB) Viewed 410 times
These lineshape functions were calculated by performing a convolution of a box function representing the slit transmission (no diffraction) with a Gaussian function (4 pixels fwhm) representing the diffraction limited performance of the spectrometer. The choice of a Gaussian function was made based on the arguments in section 2.6.5 of Eversberg and Vollman ("Spectroscopic Instrumentation" Springer 2015).

The Gaussian function was chosen to have a fwhm of 4 pixels, consistent with measurements made using my SHG. For any given instrument, the fwhm of this limiting Gaussian is dependent on the optical speed of the collimator and camera lens systems as well as the illuminated area and groove density of the grating.

The figure is consistent with figure 12.2 in "Spectrophysics" by Thorne, Litzen and Johansson (Springer 1999). The flat topped lineshape moves to a smoother function with decreasing slit width but its fwhm is ultimately limited by diffraction, as we'd expect, and decreasing slit width below the diffraction limit will only reduce instrumental throughput without affecting spectral resolution.

The next figure shows a Gaussian fit performed on the "10 px image slit" profile in the previous figure.
GausFit - GaussBox siz.png
GausFit - GaussBox siz.png (41.78 KiB) Viewed 410 times
You can see that a Gaussian fit to the real (modelled) lineshape function is not bad. The flat-topped feature of the real lineshape function is apparent but the fwhm and overall shape of the real function don't depart too severely from the Gaussian shape. The Gaussian shape is, thus, a pretty good approximation to the real lineshape for reasonably small slits.


Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests