Refraction

Purpose:
The purpose of this lab was to understand refraction and how it applies to prisms, total internal
reflection, and the lens-makers formula, among other things.
Procedure:
-

Exercise 1: We separated white light into its constituent colors by shining it at an angle through a
prism, and observed the order and deflection of the color spectrum that was created. We then
shined three different colors of light through the prism to see how they were deflected. Next we
shined a beam of light through a rectangular slab of acrylic to see how the light was refracted as it
passed through.
Exercise 2: We shined a ray of light onto the acrylic rhombus to observe when total internal
reflection of the ray would take place. We then compared this value to a value calculated with
Snells Law.
Exercise 3: We shined a laser pointer through liquid-filled triangular prisms and found the angle of
minimum deviation (the smallest angle of deflection) for prisms filled with corn syrup and water.
We then used these values to calculate the index of refraction for the liquids and compared them to
accepted values.
Exercise 4: We used beams of light to find the radii of curvature for a double concave lens, then
used them, the known index of refraction, and the lens-makers formula to calculate the overall
focal length of the lens.

Data:
-

Exercise 1:
o Prism:
Color order: Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Violet
Color refracted at the largest angle: Violet
Color expected to refract at the largest angle from Snells Law: Violet
3 colored rays tend to converge
o Slab:
Angle of Incidence:
Angle of Refraction:
Index of Refraction (calculated):
Trial 1:
48 degrees
31 degrees
1.44
Trial 2:
59 degrees
35 degrees
1.49
Trial 3:
40 degrees
27 degrees
1.42
Uncertainty: +1 degree in angles, +.05 in index of refraction
Average calculated index of refraction: 1.45
Expected index of refraction: 1.5 (3.3% difference)

Exercise 2:
o Angle of internally reflected ray: 85 degrees
Critical angle: 42.5 degrees
Uncertainty: +1 degree
o Expected critical angle (from Snells Law): 41.8 degrees
o Percent difference: 1.6%

Exercise 3:
o Water prism:
Minimum deviation: 24 degrees
Calculated index of refraction for water: 1.34
Expected index of refraction for water: 1.33
o Corn syrup prism:
Minimum deviation: 38 degrees
Calculated index of refraction for corn syrup: 1.51
Expected index of refraction for corn syrup: around 1.5 (no exact value found)

Exercise 4:
o Double convex lens:
Focal length for either face: 6.4 cm
Radius of curvature for either face: 12.8 cm
Calculated focal length for lens: -12.8 cm
Measured focal length for lens: 12 cm
Uncertainty: +.2 cm for focal length of the faces, +.5 cm for measured focal length
of the lens

Analysis:
-

Exercise 1:
o For the prism part of this exercise, what we expected and observed was that the prism
would separate the white light into classic rainbow order (ROYGBV). However, with the
knowledge that the index of refraction of a material increases with the frequency of the
light, we were able to better understand why the colors separate like this. Red has the
lowest frequency of visible light, increasing up to violet, which has the highest. This means
that violet light would have the highest index of refraction in a material of all the visible
light colors, which would also cause it to refract furthest from the normal. We observed this
phenomenon. Also, when we shined colored light on the prism, in the order blue, green, red
from left to right, we found the colored beams began to converge. This made sense because
the blue light, having a higher frequency than the green light, would deflect slightly more
and the green slightly less, causing the two colored rays to converge. The same logic applies
to the red and green light.

For measuring the refraction through the rhombus, we found that by using Snells Law
(n1sin(1)=n2sin(2)) we could confirm that the index of refraction of acrylic was about 1.5,
as was expected. We also found that the angle of the ray that left the rhombus was the
same as the angle of the ray that entered the rhombus. This isnt surprising because,
according to Snells Law, the ray should be refracted equally and oppositely upon entering
and leaving the rhombus, making the initial angle of incidence and the final angle of
refraction the same.
Exercise 2:
o Again using Snells Law, we were able to predict, using the accepted index of refraction of
acrylic of 1.5, that the critical angle for total internal reflection would be about 41.8
degrees. When we measured the internal angle for total internal reflection, we got about 85
degrees, which is about twice the critical angle (because the critical angle is the incident
angle, and the incident angle is equal to the reflected angle, which makes the total reflected
angle twice the critical angle). This made our measured critical angle (42.5 degrees) quite
close to the expected angle. We also found that as the angle increased past the critical
angle, the reflected ray got brighter and clearer. Also, we found that the critical angle for
red light would have to be greater than the critical angle for violet light. This makes sense
because, when we approached the overall critical angle, the refracted violet light
disappeared before the red light. However, since the violet light has a higher frequency and
thereby a greater index of refraction than the red light, and the critical angle has an inverse
relationship with the index of refraction, the violet lights higher index of refraction led to its
having a smaller critical angle.
Exercise 3:
o Having measured the minimum deviation of each prism, we found it fairly simple to use the
equation

(
(

)
)

to find the index of refraction for each liquid (water and corn

syrup). Our results were very accurate to the expected index of refraction for water,
although we had to use an estimate for the index of refraction of corn syrup because we
couldnt locate that exact value online.
Exercise 4:
o We found this exercise to be most challenging, mostly because we found it hard to
differentiate between the focal length of the lens as opposed to the focal length of the
faces of the lens. However, using the equation

)(

) , we were able to find

that, interestingly, the focal length of the lens was roughly twice the focal length of each
face of the lens. We also had a bit of trouble with sign conventions, but when we did figure
them out it made sense. With the radii of curvature negative, we calculated a negative focal
length for the lens as a whole, which makes sense because it creates a virtual, not a real,
image. The focal length we calculated was also fairly close to the length we measured by
tracing rays, although our tracing was rather inaccurate and we had some troubles getting
the rays to converge to the same point. Also, we theorized that having a thicker lens may
not change the overall focal length of the lens, but we werent altogether sure.

Conclusion:
This lab really helped me understand how refraction works and why certain lenses work the way they
do. Every elementary school kid knows that you can make a rainbow by shining white light through a
prism, but now I know the science that makes it happen, which I find very exciting, since the rainbow
episode of the Magic School Bus was one of my favorites when I was growing up. Overall this quarter, I
enjoyed the labs far more than I did the labs for my previous physics classes, and I actually feel I learned
more as well. I look forward to different and exciting labs in the future, and thanks again for everything!