There is an incredible amount of interest in testing mirrors using Interferometers and we are always being asked if testing with Interferometers is better than a conventional Null test?
vz|(KN[ The answer is a resounding "No"
[-i&)eX Interferometers cannot compete with the "Time Honoured" method of a knife edge and the human eye in a Double Pass Null test for accuracy. If they could, we would be using an Interferometer instead of conventional methods.
^>>9? But it is amazing the faith placed in an Interferometer result! We are occasionally getting challenged about the specification of our mirrors on the basis of a poor Interferometer test. There seems to be a semi religious belief that the Interferometer result is correct and our method is wrong, - when in reality it is the opposite way round!
Mlr'h}:H Even firms in the optics industry who should know better are being taken in by Interferometer results. We are making some information available on the level of accuracy that can be expected from our tests compared with Interferometer tests.
f*A B Im "Conventional Methods" - The Double Pass Null Test
>ts}\.(] What follows is a description of the Double Pass Null Test as carried out at Oldham
Optical. This is the basic test we use on all large parabolic mirrors. The description is very simplified and is aimed at peak to valley (PV), measurement, but all the Double Pass strengths are brought out to illustrate why it is such a good test of a mirror. This test is also known as "Auto-collimation" and most professional mirror makers agree with us that it is the definitive test of a parabolic mirror.
aOd | ;Z 
gK(
