DOCSLIB.ORG

05.Design the Compact Myopic Ophthalmic Lens by Aspheric Surface and the Optimizing Mass of Lens(¹Q

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
05.Design the Compact Myopic Ophthalmic Lens by Aspheric Surface and the Optimizing Mass of Lens(¹Q Journal of China University of Science and Technology Vol.47-2011.04 Design the Compact Myopic Ophthalmic Lens by Aspheric Surface and the Optimizing Mass of Lens 使用非球面及重量最佳化作精巧型近視眼鏡設計 ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ § ¤ ¨ © ¡ Der-Chin Chen 1, Shih-Wen Lee 2, Mei-Hsiu Lee 3 £ § 1Department of Electrical Engineering of Feng Chia University 2Department of Electrical Engineering, China University of Science and Technology 3 Heng Chun Primary School 摘 要 本文研究目的係使用非球面及重量最佳化設計一精巧型高度近視眼鏡。設 計時著重客製化眼鏡設計以適合高度近視眼睛病患的配戴，設計當中並進一步對 遠、中、近視場進行優化，使眼鏡也適合看遠、中、近距離。本精巧型高度近視 眼鏡除了可矯正高度近視(-8.00D )之外，還可以使配戴-8.00D 眼鏡之後的眼睛解像 " 率在 30lp/mm ! MTF 值達 0.3 經重量最佳化設計之後，還可以使高度近視眼鏡的 邊緣厚度從 6.16mm 降至 3.98mm " # $ % & '( ) ABSTRACT This paper studies the design of the aspheric high power myopic ophthalmic lens by the aspheric surface and the optimizing mass of lens for the minimum edge thickness. The design of myopic ophthalmic lens has considered the effects of myopic eyes and three configurations, named far, middle, and near view fields according to visual action of the human eye. These three configurations have three different view angles for the eye. We have designed a -8.00D aspheric eyeglass lens to correct the myopia. The MTF values have more than 0.3 when spatial 65 Design the Compact Myopic Ophthalmic Lens by Aspheric Surface and the Optimizing Mass of Lens frequency is 30lp/mm.The edge thickness of the lens reduces from 6.16mm to 3.98mm by using this novel technology. Keywords: human eye, diopter, ophthalmic lens, optical design, optimization I. INTRODUCTION A lens has two surfaces with a len’s material separated by a finite amount of center or edge thickness. The power of each surface contributes to the total focal power of the lens. In fact, the total focal power of the lens, which is the capacity of a lens to add either convergence or divergence to incident waves of light, is simply the net effect of its two surfaces. The focal power of a lens, in diopters, is therefore given very nearly by: Focal Power = Front Surface Power + Back Surface Power (1) Modern ophthalmic lenses are generally meniscus—or "crescent-shaped". This means that they typically have a convex front surface (i.e., positive power) and a concave back surface (i.e., negative power). When the negative (concave) back surface is stronger than the positive (convex) front surface, the net power of the two surfaces is negative and the lens is generally a minus lens. This means that the concave back surface will be the highest surface. Consequently, by necessity, a minus lens will generally be thicker at the edge and thinner at the center. Since the thinnest point on a plus lens occurs at the edge, the edge thickness of a plus lens represents its minimum thickness. Conversely, the thickest point on a plus lens occurs at the center, which represents its maximum thickness as shown in Fig.1. The center thickness is given by: Center Thickness = Edge Thickness + (Front Sagitta – Back Sagitta) (2) Since the thinnest point on a minus lens occurs at the center, the center thickness of a minus lens represents its minimum thickness. Conversely, the thickest point on a minus lens occurs at the edge, which represents its maximum thickness as shown in Fig.2. The edge thickness is given by: Edge Thickness = Center Thickness + Back Sagitta - Front Sagitta (3) 66 Journal of China University of Science and Technology Vol.47-2011.04 The minus lenses are never made to a "zero" center thickness, and plus lenses are very seldom surfaced to a "zero"—or knife-edged—edge thickness. There is always some minimum substance or thickness to the lens. Fig.1 Relationship of the center thickness and edge thickness of plus lens Fig.2 Relationship of the center thickness and edge thickness of minus lens II. THE PRINCIPLE OF OPHTHALMIC LENS 1. MYOPIC OPHTHALMIC LENS The ophthalmic lens is a singlet lens with negative or positive power to correct Myopia and hyperopia respectively. Myopia is due to the incoming parallel light entering the eye’s refraction system in a way that the light is imaged in front of the retina, causing the image is blurred [1-3]. Added a negative lens in front of the eye, it makes the parallel light to be divergent before entering the eye. Then the corrected light will be focused to the retina to get a clear image. In general, the radius of the front surface of ophthalmic singlet is chosen by 200 mm as it is used in optics shop, so the focal power of lens is set up by the back surface power of the lens. The aim of this research is to get a rigorous method to design an ophthalmic lens, i.e., finding the construction parameters of the back surface. The optical model of normal eye can be simulated, and its construction data are listed in Table 1. The design parameters shown in Table 1 are simulated by Zemax lens design software. Note the thickness from vitreous to retina is 16.215mm. According to the rigorous lens making formula, it shows as eq.(4) [4-5], 67 Design the Compact Myopic Ophthalmic Lens by Aspheric Surface and the Optimizing Mass of Lens t(n − )1 = 1 = ()− 1 − glass (4) D nglass 1 f R front R front Rback nglass The t is the thickness of the lens which is 3mm. Then choosing the diopters of the ophthalmic lens, we get the corresponding radius of the back surface of the lens by eq.(4). These diopters of lenses are chosen by practical used in optics shop, due to the variation of thickness of vitreous shown in Table 2. The back surface of ophthalmic lens use aspheric surface. The aspheric surface was defined by following formula: 2 = cr +α 2 + +α 10 + +α 16 z 1r ... 5r ... 8r (5) 1+ 1− 1( +k)cr 2 Where r is the radius of curvature, c is the conic constant, and αn is the aspheric surface coefficient. The formula of the gradient 3 surface is shown in the following equation: Table 1 Construction data of normal eye Surface Type Radius (mm) Thickness(mm) OBJ Sphere Infinity 1.00 +09 1 Sphere Infinity 50.00 2 Sphere 7.77 0.55 3 Sphere 6.40 3.16 STO Sphere Infinity 0.00 5 Gradient 3 12.4 1.59 6 Gradient 3 Infinity 2.43 7 Sphere -8.10 16.21 IMA Sphere -12.00 = + 2 + 4 + 6 + + 2 + 3 n n0 nr2r nr4r nr6r nz1z nz2 z nz3z (6) where r 2 = x 2 + y 2 , n is the index of the lens. 2. OPTIMIZE TOTAL MASS The size of myopic ophthalmic lens will optimize for ultra light and minimum thickness at basic requirement of the structure, resolution, and power. By equation (2) and spherical surface formula, the shape of aspherical back surface, front surface curvature and center thickness have known. 68 Journal of China University of Science and Technology Vol.47-2011.04 The volume of the ophthalmic lens calculated by the following equation: f (x, y,z)dxdydz = f (X (u,v,w), Y(u,v,w), Z(u,v,w |)) J(u,v,w |) dudvdw (7) ∫∫∫ST ∫∫∫ ∂X ∂Y ∂Z ∂u ∂u ∂u ∂X ∂Y ∂Z Where J(u,v,w) = ∂v ∂v ∂v ∂X ∂Y ∂Z ∂w ∂w ∂w The small size of lens is equal to small mass at fix optical glass material of lens. The ZEMAX design soft program has TMAS to reduce lens lighter and thinner by optimizing. III. DESIGN EXAMPLE AND RESULT This research is to design an ophthalmic lens with -8.00D myopic; the procedures are described as follows: Table 2 Relationship between ophthalmic lens and the length of eye axis -4.00D -10.00D -1.00D -8.00D Diopter of lens (medium (high (low diopter) (medium diopter) diopter) diopter) Rback 197.3mm 91.5mm 53.1mm 51.9mm Distance * 16.58mm 17.69mm 19.17mm 19.91mm 1. the distance from Vitreous to retina’s distance is 16.21mm at 0.00D 2.’-‘ means negative lens * The distance of Vitreous to retina 1. SETUP THE OPTICAL EYE MODEL Use ZEMAX optic design software to construct a human eye’s optical model[6]. The human eye responds three main wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum. These are the visible light of F, d, and C lines which correspond to three wavelengths 0.486 µm, 0.587 µm, and 0.656 µm, respectively. In this study we use multi-configuration 69 Design the Compact Myopic Ophthalmic Lens by Aspheric Surface and the Optimizing Mass of Lens method to systematically design the myopic ophthalmic lens. The three configurations are shown in Table 3. In the FAR (far) field, the object distance is infinity, and the stop direction is parallel to optical axis, i.e., the visual sight is not rotate about the optical axis. In the MID (middle)and NEAR (near) fields, the object distance is set by 1000 mm, 500 mm, respectively. And the visual sight is rotate about the optical axis by -10 degree, and -20 degree in the MID and NEAR fields as shown in Fig.4. Table 3 Multi-configuration parameters FAR MID NEAR Distance(mm) 10 9 1000 500 Angle(°) 0 -10 -20 2. WEARING THE -8.00D OPHTHALMIC LENS MADE BY USING LENS MAKER FORMULA A myopia eye is chosen by diopter (for example:-8.00D). We change the retina distance from 16.214 mm to 19.174 mm. A model with an ophthalmic lens in front of the eye was proposed, the radius of the back surface was setup to 60.7mm with that front surface was fixed at 200mm to accord the ophthalmic lens of -8.00D.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • View to Define Contact Lens Discomfort And
    Contact Lens Discomfort, Vision Correction Preferences, and Accommodative Treatment in Presbyopic and Non-Presbyopic Contact Lens Wearers Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Erin Marie Rueff, OD, MS Graduate Program in Vision Science The Ohio State University 2018 Dissertation Committee Melissa Bailey, OD, PhD, Advisor Donald Mutti, OD, PhD Teng Leng Ooi, PhD Loretta Szczotka-Flynn, OD, PhD ii Copyrighted by Erin Marie Rueff 2018 iii Abstract Discomfort is the most cited reason for dissatisfaction with and discontinuation of contact lens wear. Most discomfort is attributed to dry eye-type etiologies, but uncomfortable contact lens wearers commonly show few objective signs of dryness, and treatments aimed at eliminating dryness often fail. Uncomfortable contact lens wearers, however, also report symptoms that are similar to binocular vision and accommodative disorders. Research in our laboratory suggested that uncomfortable wearers have an increased incidence of accommodative insufficiency and led us to hypothesize that contact lens discomfort is influenced by symptoms associated with visual discomfort and accommodative fatigue. The projects described in this dissertation sought to better understand how accommodative decline in presbyopes affects comfort and contact lens discontinuation and how alleviation of accommodative demand in non-presbyopes via a multifocal contact lens affects discomfort and satisfaction with contact lens wear. Presbyopes, a group with known accommodative insufficiency, are also known for being particularly uncomfortable contact lens wearers. Few studies, however, have specifically addressed presbyopic reasons for contact lens discontinuation. The first experiment in this dissertation describes a survey study that aimed to determine why presbyopes discontinued contact lens wear and how factors like vision and comfort influenced dropout.
    [Show full text]
  • Professional Fitting And
    PROFESSIONAL FITTING AND INFORMATION GUIDE PARAGON RG-4™ Manufactured in Paragon HDS® 100 (paflufocon D) RIGID GAS PERMEABLE CONTACT LENSES FOR CORNEAL RESHAPING OVERNIGHT WEAR 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction 3 Product Description 3 Actions 6 Indications (Uses) 6 Contraindications 6 Warnings 6 Adverse Effects (Problems and What to Do) 6 Precautions 6 Selection of Patients 6 Fitting Concept 7 Predicting Lens Results 7 Clinical Study Data 7 Risk Analysis 7 Fitting Paragon RG-4™ Contact Lenses for Corneal Reshaping 8 Pre-fitting Examination 8 Initial Lens Power Selection 8 Initial Lens Diameter Selection 8 Initial Lens Base Curve Selection 8 Initial Lens Evaluation 8 Characteristics of a Tight Lens 9 Characteristics of a Loose Lens 9 Diagnostic Lenses 9 Corneal Reshaping Problem Solving 10 Follow-Up Care 12 Recommended Initial Wearing Schedule 12 Myopic Reduction Maintenance Lens (Retainer Lens) Wearing Schedule 13 Handling Of Lenses 13 Patient Lens Care Directions 13 Vertex Distance and Keratometry Conversion Charts 13 How Supplied 13 Reporting Of Adverse Reactions 14 2 INTRODUCTION Paragon RG-4™ Contact Lenses for Corneal Reshaping produce a temporary reduction of myopia by reversibly altering the curvature of the cornea. The Paragon RG-4™ contact lenses are manufactured from Paragon HDS® 100. A slight reduction of the curvature of the cornea can reduce the excessive focusing power of the myopic eye. If the amount of corneal reshaping is precisely controlled as is the objective of Paragon RG-4™ lens design, it is possible to bring the eye into correct focus and completely compensate for myopia. After the contact lens is removed, the cornea retains its altered shape for all or most of one’s waking hours.
    [Show full text]
  • Optical Theory Simplified: 9 Fundamentals to Becoming an Optical Genius APPLICATION NOTES
    LEARNING – UNDERSTANDING – INTRODUCING – APPLYING Optical Theory Simplified: 9 Fundamentals To Becoming An Optical Genius APPLICATION NOTES Optics Application Examples Introduction To Prisms Understanding Optical Specifications Optical Cage System Design Examples All About Aspheric Lenses Optical Glass Optical Filters An Introduction to Optical Coatings Why Use An Achromatic Lens www.edmundoptics.com OPTICS APPLICATION EXAMPLES APPLICATION 1: DETECTOR SYSTEMS Every optical system requires some sort of preliminary design. system will help establish an initial plan. The following ques- Getting started with the design is often the most intimidating tions will illustrate the process of designing a simple detector step, but identifying several important specifications of the or emitter system. GOAL: WHERE WILL THE LIGHT GO? Although simple lenses are often used in imaging applications, such as a plano-convex (PCX) lens or double-convex (DCX) in many cases their goal is to project light from one point to lens, can be used. another within a system. Nearly all emitters, detectors, lasers, and fiber optics require a lens for this type of light manipula- Figure 1 shows a PCX lens, along with several important speci- tion. Before determining which type of system to design, an fications: Diameter of the lens (D1) and Focal Length (f). Figure important question to answer is “Where will the light go?” If 1 also illustrates how the diameter of the detector limits the the goal of the design is to get all incident light to fill a detector, Field of View (FOV) of the system, as shown by the approxi- with as few aberrations as possible, then a simple singlet lens, mation for Full Field of View (FFOV): (1.1) D Figure 1: 1 D θ PCX Lens as FOV Limit FF0V = 2 β in Detector Application ƒ Detector (D ) 2 or, by the exact equation: (1.2) / Field of View (β) -1 D FF0V = 2 tan ( 2 ) f 2ƒ For detectors used in scanning systems, the important mea- sure is the Instantaneous Field of View (IFOV), which is the angle subtended by the detector at any instant during scan- ning.
    [Show full text]
  • Techspec® Precision Aspheric Lenses Precision Techspec® by Edmund Optics by Edmund High Numerical Apertur High Numerical Gener Designed and Manufactur Designed
    Edmund Optics® BROCHURE ASPHERIC LENSES ® COPYRIGHT 2017 EDMUND OPTICS, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 1/2017 RIGHTS RESERVED ALL 2017 EDMUND OPTICS, INC. ® COPYRIGHT PRODUCTS & CAPABILITIES Contact us for a Stock or Custom Quote Today! UK: +44 (0)1904 788600 | GERMANY: +49 (0)721 6273730 [email protected] | FRANCE: +33 (0)8 20 20 75 55 www.edmundoptics.eu/aspheres-17 CNC POLISHING CAPABILITIES Edmund Optics® is a premier manufacturer of aspheric lenses, producing thousands of precision polished aspheres each month. Lenses are manufactured from a variety of Schott, Ohara, and CDGM glasses, fused silica, and a multitude of fluoride and crys- talline materials. Edmund Optics® utilizes state-of-the-art CNC equipment for coarse and fine grinding and polishing of aspheric lenses with convex or concave geometries. Deterministic figure correction through Magneto-Rheological polishing is available for the ulti- mate in precision (see MRF Polishing Capabilities). Aspheric Manufacturing Capabilities Commercial Precision High Precision Diameter 10 - 150 mm 10 - 150 mm 10 - 150 mm Diameter Tolerance +0/-0,100 mm +0/-0,025 mm +0/-0,010 mm Asphere Figure Error (P - V) 5 μm 0,632 - 1,5 µm < 0,312 µm Vertex Radius (Asphere) ±1% ±0,1% ±0,05% Radius (Spherical) ±0,3% ±0,1% ±0,025% ® COPYRIGHT 2017 EDMUND OPTICS, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 1/2017 RIGHTS RESERVED ALL 2017 EDMUND OPTICS, INC. ® COPYRIGHT Power (Spherical) 2λ λ/2 λ/10 Irregularity (Spherical) λ/2 λ/4 λ/20 Sag2 25 mm max. 25 mm max. 25 mm max. Typical Slope Tolerance1 1 μm/mm 0,35 μm/mm 0,15 μm/mm Centering (Beam Deviation) 3 arcmin 1 arcmin 0,5 arcmin Center Thickness Tolerance ±0,100 mm ±0,050 mm ±0,010 mm Surface Quality (Scratch Dig) 80-50 40-20 10-5 Aspheric Surface Metrology Profilometry Profilometry Interferometry Slope specification: Diameter PV (Height) Sag (μm) θ Center Thickness Slope Window (1mm) Figure 1: Slope error quantifies the rate of change Figure 2: General geometry of an aspheric lens.
    [Show full text]
  • LDII16 Lens Design II
    Lens Design II Lecture 8: Special correction features I 2016-12-07 Herbert Gross Winter term 2016 www.iap.uni-jena.de 2 Preliminary Schedule 1 19.10. Aberrations and optimization Repetition Zero operands, lens splitting, lens addition, lens removal, 2 26.10. Structural modifications material selection Correction with aspheres, Forbes approach, optimal location 3 02.11. Aspheres of aspheres, several aspheres 4 09.11. Freeforms Freeform surfaces Astigmatism and field curvature, thick meniscus, plus-minus 5 16.11. Field flattening pairs, field lenses Achromatization, axial versus transversal, glass selection 6 23.11. Chromatical correction I rules, burried surfaces secondary spectrum, apochromatic correction, 7 30.11. Chromatical correction II spherochromatism 8 07.12. Special correction topics I Symmetry, wide field systems,stop position 9 14.12. Special correction topics II Anamorphotic lenses, telecentricity 10 21.12. Higher order aberrations high NA systems, broken achromates, induced aberrations 11 04.01. Further topics Sensitivity, scan systems, eyepieces 12 11.01. Mirror systems special aspects, double passes, catadioptric systems 13 18.01. Zoom systems mechanical compensation, optical compensation color correction, ray equivalent model, straylight, third order 14 25.01. Diffractive elements aberrations, manufacturing 15 01.02. Realization aspects Tolerancing, adjustment 3 Contents 1. Symmetry 2. Camera lenses 3. Stop position 4. Vignetting 4 Principle of Symmetry . Perfect symmetrical system: magnification m = -1 . Stop in centre of symmetry . Symmetrical contributions of wave aberrations are doubled (spherical) . Asymmetrical contributions of wave aberration vanishes W(-x) = -W(x) . Easy correction of: coma, distortion, chromatical change of magnification front part rear part 2 3 1 5 Symmetrical Systems Ideal symmetrical systems: .
    [Show full text]
  • Correction Of
    Correction of Presbyopia with GP Contact Lenses Development of the Correction of Presbyopia with GP Contact Lenses booklet was supported through an educational grant from Acknowledgements Polymer Technology, a Bausch & Lomb company. REVIEWERS Albert Noguera Kathryn Dumbleton, MSc, FAAO Director General, Conóptica S.L. Senior Clinical Scientist, Centre for Contact Lens Research Barcelona, Spain EXECUTIVE EDITOR Waterloo, Canada Desmond Fonn, MOptom, FAAO Craig W. Norman, FCLSA Director, Centre for Contact Lens Research Ron Beerten, OD, FAAO South Bend Clinic Professor, School of Optometry, University of Waterloo Director Professional Services, Procornea South Bend, Indiana, USA Eerbeek, Netherlands PROJECT MANAGER Kirstin P. Rhinehart, OD Bonnie Boshart, BBA Hans Bleshøy, BSc, Ph.D, MCOptom, FAAO South Bend Clinic Business Development Coordinator, Centre for Contact Lens Research Danish Contact Lens Consultants South Bend, Indiana, USA Skive, Denmark AUTHORS Philippe Seira, Dipl. Augenoptiker Luigina Sorbara, OD, MSc, FAAO Alex Cannella, RN, FCLSA Lecturer at the University of Applied Sciences, Clinical Scientist, Centre for Contact Lens Research Contact Lens Educator / Consultant Northwestern Switzerland Associate Professor, School of Optometry, University of Waterloo Westford, Massachusetts, USA Olten, Switzerland Craig Woods, PhD, FAAO William Edmondson, MAT, OD, FAAO Frank Widmer, Dipl. Ing. (FH) Augenoptik Research Manager, Centre for Contact Lens Research Professor of Optometry & Chief, Contact Lens Service Hecht Contactlinsen GmbH Adjunct Associate Professor, School of Optometry, University of Waterloo Northeastern State University, College of Optometry Freiburg, Germany Tahlequah, Oklahoma, USA EDITOR Michael Wyss, Dipl. Augenopiker, FAAO Alisa Sivak, MA Michael A. Johnson, FCLSA Kontactlinsen Studio H+M Bärtschi Communications Coordinator, Centre for Contact Lens Research Director of Consultation Services, Art Optical, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Complete Course in Dispensing
    Continuing education CET Complete course in dispensing Part 6 – Lens selection After last month’s article (November 14, 2008) discussing the basic properties of materials used for the manufacture of spectacle lenses, Andrew Keirl and Richard Payne give an overview of the vast selection of lens types and designs available for the ‘normal’ power range. Module C10361, two general CET points ith the prevalence of wavelengths. These are the chromatic online information aberrations (6) which were addressed available for consum- in article 5 of this series. The six aberra- ers today, many lens tions are: manufacturers have 1 Spherical aberration -4.00 -2.00 -4.00 -8.00 -6.00 -4.00 Wseen the need to enhance their product +8.00 +6.00 +4.00 +4.00 +2.00 +0.00 2 Coma ranges with marketable brands, employ- 3 Oblique astigmatism ing household names and retail market- 4 Curvature of field ing tactics to ensure their lens ranges are 5 Distortion more appealing. With such an extensive +4.00 D lenses -4.00 D lenses 6 Chromatic aberration (TCA) range of options now available, it is A best form spectacle lens is a lens vital that practitioners can see past the Figure 1 designed to minimise the effects of ever increasing lists of brand names and Lens form oblique astigmatism and therefore marketing terminology used to properly comparisons provide the best possible vision in consider the true attributes of any given oblique gaze. Secondary considerations lens design and use the appropriate are distortion and transverse chromatic ‘tool’ for the appropriate ‘job’.
    [Show full text]
  • Spherical Aberration Compensation Plates
    Optical Components Spherical aberration compensation plates Scott Sparrold, Edmund Optics, Pennsburg, Pennsylvania, USA Anna Lansing, Edmund Optics GmbH, Karlsruhe, Germany Imaging optics strive to obtain perfect or near diffraction limited performance. The main detriment to imaging systems is spherical aberration, and it costs money and effort to eliminate or minimize. This article will outline a new optical component for controlling this aberration. Typical optical components are standard- ly, the article will explore compari- ized to focal length and diameters but sons between aspheres, spherical not so much to their level of aberration. lenses and spherical aberration Within the last decade aspheric lenses have plates in typical user applications. become a commodity, basically eliminating spherical aberration for a single wave- 1 Theory of spherical aberration lens produces “undercorrected” spherical length and specifi c imaging parameters. aberration, defi ned as the marginal rays The introduction of spherical aberration To obtain a mathematically perfect image, focusing closer to the lens than the paraxial plates provides another tool for construct- a mirror requires a parabolic surface while a rays. For a collimated beam and a spherical ing systems that can adequately control lens requires an elliptical surface (Lüneburg lens, equation 1 describes the deviation W and manipulate light. lens) [1]. For ease of manufacturing and from an ideal spherical wavefront [2]. This article will highlight typical scenarios testing, however, most optical elements W = W · ρ4 (Eq.1) involving spherical aberration and demon- have spherical surfaces. This introduces 040 strate how to control it. We’ll discuss the blur or a halo in the image due to spheri- where W040 is the wavefront aberration magnitude of the aberration via equations cal aberration, which results from differ- coeffi cient for spherical aberration (units and general rules of thumb.
    [Show full text]
  • Presbyopia Correction of a Higher Order Introducing the TECNIS® Multifocal IOL
    Presbyopia Correction of a Higher Order Introducing the TECNIS® Multifocal IOL. The first and only pupil independent, full diffractive, wavefront-designed aspheric lens that corrects spherical aberration to essentially zero and reduces chromatic aberration. High-quality vision in any light condition • Near, far, and intermediate: Excellent vision day or night1 • Proprietary non-apodized optic and proven clear hydrophobic acrylic for best image quality Exceptionally high patient satisfaction • Over 94% of patients:2 – Achieve simultaneous 20/25 or better distance and 20/32 or better near – Function comfortably without glasses for ALL distances, including intermediate – Would choose the TECNIS® Multifocal IOL again • Nearly 9 out of 10 patients NEVER wear glasses2 • Low-light reading speed is twice as fast compared to ReSTOR® IOL3 • Delivers a predictable and consistent full range of vision with less halos than other PC-IOLs2,4,5 REFG-5466 TMF Sales sheet V15.indd 1 10/27/08 1:56:43 PM Highest Patient Satisfaction With Proven Superior Results Clinical Data Comparison Data from the US clinical trial demonstrate that the TECNIS® Multifocal IOL provides better performance and extremely high patient satisfaction compared to the ReSTOR® Aspheric IOL.2,4 The study shows that the TECNIS® Multifocal IOL consistently delivers high-quality vision with reports of less halos and glare than other presbyopia-correcting IOLs for optimal visual results.2,4,5 TECNIS® ReSTOR® Aspheric Crystalens® Multifocal IOL2 One-piece IOL4 IOL5 Patient satisfaction 94.6%
    [Show full text]
  • Contact Lens Alternatives for Presbyopia
    8/16/2019 Multifocal Contact Lens Patient Selection, Fitting and Presbyopic Market Problem-Solving • 74 million Baby Boomers born between 1946‐1964* • 66 million Generation Xers born between 1965‐1980* • In 2010, about 1/3 of US population was between 40‐ Edward S. Bennett, OD, MSEd, FAAO and 59 years of age. Vinita Allee Henry, OD, FAAO • In 2015 US census data reports 40% of the population is over 45 • In the next decade, 28% of all contact lens wearers will COPE Course ID: 63329‐CL be >50 y.o. Qualified Credit: 2 hour(s) • 90% of all CL wearers between 35‐55 have worn CL’s majority of their life *Pew Research Center Presbyopic Market Growth of Multifocals from Contact Lens Spectrum 1/2019 • Steady growth of multifocals • Surpassed monovision • Presbyopes are in their peak earning period • Knowledge of multifocal contact lenses is limited • More tech savvy, desire high technology • Want information • Fit early Contact Lens Spectrum 1/2016 Contact Lens Alternatives for Presbyopia • Single Vision/Reading Spectacles • Monovision • Bifocals/ Multifocals 1 8/16/2019 Monovision Issues Driving/Critical Vision Tasks • Depth Perception • Monovision wearers have difficulty suppressing • Possible Suppression headlights with night driving with one-third experiencing glare • Contrast Sensitivity/Vision Loss • It is advised for monovision patients to avoid • Night Driving driving or operating dangerous machinery • Liability during adaptation • Over-correction spectacles strongly recommended MONOVISION VERSUS CL BI/MULTIFOCALS • Johnson J, et al; Multivision Vs. Monovision: A comparative study: presented at CLAO, Feb, 2000 • 6 weeks GP multifocal; 6 weeks monovision (or vice versa) • 75% who completed study preferred multifocal Monovision Versus CL CL MULTIFOCALS DO NOT WORK .
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparison and Evaluation of Aspheric Lens Designs Terry Draeger Kyle Fairless Tom Norfleet
    A COMPARISON AND EVALUATION OF ASPHERIC LENS DESIGNS 1994 TERRY DRAEGER KYLE FAIRLESS TOM NORFLEET ABSTRACT: Six aspheric, single vision lens designs, were subjectively and objectively compared by four non-presbyopic, hyperopic patients. The lenses chosen were Sola Optical's ASL Polycarbonate and Spectralite, Rodenstock's Cosmolit, American Optical's Aspherlite, Silor Optical's Hyperal, and Gentex Optic's Profile. The subjects were previously wearing spherical design single vision spectacles or contact lenses to correct their ametropia. Two of the four subjects preferred the Spectralite Aspherics overall, while the remaining two subjects preferred their habitual contact lenses. INTRODUCTION: Hyperopic patients have long been subject to heavy, thick­ centered, and magnified appearing prescription eyeglasses. Lens manufacturers are continually striving to design new materials free from distortions and other aberrations which become detrimental to image quality and a patients ability to function on both a visual and cosmetic basis. Studies have been conducted which have attempted to describe the aberrations produced by spherical as well as aspherical lenses (1) . Similarly, studies describing measuring and/or comparing distortions produced by progressive addition lenses have been described (2,3,4). Single vision, aspheric lenses are an example of how lens designers have tried to meet the visual and cosmetic needs of the non-presbyopic, hyperopic patient, by utilizing the Cartesian Oval Theory with different lens materials (5). This study was conducted to assess the consequences of fitting non-presbyopic, hyperopic, spherical design spectacle or contact lens wearers with six different aspheric lens designs in order to determine which design(s) seems best based upon subjective and objective subject responses.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Bradford Ethesis
    University of Bradford eThesis This thesis is hosted in Bradford Scholars – The University of Bradford Open Access repository. Visit the repository for full metadata or to contact the repository team © University of Bradford. This work is licenced for reuse under a Creative Commons Licence. Ocular Biometric Change in Orthokeratology An investigation into the effects of orthokeratology on ocular biometry and refractive error in an adult population Annette PARKINSON Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Bradford School of Optometry and Vision Science 2012 Annette Parkinson Title: Ocular Biometric Change in Orthokeratology Keywords: Orthokeratology, Ocular Biometry, Corneal Topography, Refractive error ABSTRACT Aim; This study looks at the effect of orthokeratology on a number of biometric parameters and refractive error in an adult population. Method; Forty three myopic subjects were recruited to a twelve month study into the effects of orthokeratology on ocular biometry and refractive error. Two different back surface lens designs were applied right eye) pentacurve and left eye) aspheric. The aspheric design was chosen to more closely mimic the cornea’s natural shape. Anterior and posterior apical radii and p-values; corneal thickness and anterior chamber depth were measured using the Orbscan IIz; together with ocular biometry by IOL Master and a standard clinical refraction. All measurements were repeated at one night, one week, one, three, six and twelve months. Refractive changes were analysed against biometric changes. Results; Twenty seven participants completed one month of lens wear. Twelve subjects completed twelve months of lens wear. Subjects with myopia ≤ -4.00DS were successfully treated with orthokeratology. Both anterior and posterior apical radii and p values were altered by orthokeratology.
    [Show full text]