RE: [atm_free] Re: High Intermdeiate zone MOT, and targeted work on the higher segm
I leave my lap and mirror together at all times when not testing. I have not seen imprinting of the lap on the mirror.
Once when making a lens I used a pitch lap to support the relatively thin lens while I polished the other side. The lens taped in position and was in contact with the supporting lap for the entire polishing time on the opposite side. I could see an imprint of the supporting lap on the glass. I believe it was from slight movements against the supporting lap as I worked. I suppose it could have been chemical etching. Some types of glass might be more susceptible to etching. It didn’t take long to remove it.
Yours does not show in the OF analysis. I would think that it can’t be but a few nm deep.
Your pitch lap shows signs of
It looks like you might reach your goal with just a little more work.
I think you could do one more turn with the 115 mm long MOT COC stroke to get the high zone down a little more. Only one turn this time.
The correction would decrease a little more.
Then if you want to make a bold step to see if you can reach your goal you could add some correction with
1 turn MOT large W with 3 or 4 forward and back strokes across the mirror in one direction, do the increment of rotation stroke a W back across the other direction. If it is easier for you can center the disk for the rotation increment and then move the disk to the side to work another W across again in the same direction each time. Do this about 12 positions around the mirror.
And then 1 turn TOT large W with 3 strokes across the W. Same as with the MOT stroke do only 1 W across at each of about 12 positions.
I think that will get it done, Strehl about .874 :) If not it should be real close.
- Hi Vladimir,
The pattern remained even after a round of polishing. So as Jerry commented, they are probably in the glass.
--- In email@example.com, "Vladimir" <vladimir.galogaza1@...> wrote:
> >Now that I looked at the pictures second time, I feel they are not lap
> >imprints as the patterns are not exactly square.
> I also doubt that imprints are real. In my opinion they could be CeO that
> was squeezed in channels of the lap left on to the mirror for a prolong time.
> If this is a case they should go away with few strokes which may not be true
> for real imprints (indentations).
> What was your experience with disappearance of "imprints" after you have
> continued with figuring?