Diffraction and Interference

Elaine O. Espiritu *, Ardaina B. Austria , Camille Anne Mendoza , Mark Alvin Remolacio , Jezreel
1, 2 2 1

Sumagang , Dan Darren Torrecampo , and Moses Immanuel L. Tuazon

2 3 1

1
Institute of Mathematical Sciences and Physics - CAS, UP Los Banos
2
Department of Industrial Engineering - CEAT, UP Los Banos
3
Department of Electrical Engineering - CEAT, UP Los Banos
*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract
The experiment performed aims to discern the effects of diffraction and
interference on the nature of light using single and double slit plates, laser, camera,
and optical bench. Different patterns of light are observed through the adjustment
and installment of varying number of slits, slit width and distance between the
screen and the slit plates. As slit width increases, the distances between the patterns
decrease and the sizes of these pattern increase. As slit width is increased, the light
and dark bands increase. Also, as slit separation increases, both the interference
fringes and diffraction envelopes increase.

Keywords: diffraction, interference

1. Introduction
Like all waves, light waves also have wavelengths, amplitudes, crests (highest part of a wave), and troughs
(lowest part of a wave). When two waves meet, say light waves, their effects meet This shows wave interference
wherein waves interfere with one another. There are two things that can happen in wave interference: (1)
constructive interference and (2) destructive interference.
Constructive interference happens when two light waves meet and their crests and troughs meet as well,
forming a resultant wave. In this case, we could imagine that the crests of the two waves add up, and the troughs
also add up. Therefore, we could also expect that the amplitude of the resultant wave as greater than that of the two
light waves. On the other hand, destructive interference happens when two light waves meet, but unlike constructive
interference, the crest of one wave meets with the trough of the other wave. Adding the highest part of the wave with
the lowest part of the wave, we could expect that the resultant wave’s amplitude is much smaller than that of the two
interfering waves. This can be better visualized in Figure 1.a and 1.b.

Figure 1.a. Constructive interference Figure 1.b. Destructive interference

When light hits an obstacle, the light waves tend to spread out and propagate. This phenomenon is called
diffraction and is demonstrated in the experiment with single slit diffraction and double slit diffraction. The
propagation of the wave depends on the width of the slit given, for both cases, and the distance between the slits
which is applicable only for double slit diffraction. The smaller the slit width, the bigger the obstacle it seems for
thee light wave. In this case, light waves tend to diffract more than in wider slit widths. Since there is a propagation
in light wave, there is also a tendency for the light waves to interfere with one another.
This experiment aims to measure of the maxima in the diffraction pattern, determine the effect of slit width
on the pattern produced, differentiate single slit and double slit diffraction, determine the effect of slit separation in a
double slit on the pattern produced, and profile the light intensity formed from a single slit and double slit.

2. Methodology
The materials used for the first experiment were an optical bench, a laser, a single split plate, a
double slit plate with variable, slit width and slit distance, a camera, a screen, and the ImageJ software.
In part A of the experiment, the effect of slit width on the pattern was illustrated in the first part.
The laser pointer was aligned with the single slit plate and screen shown in Figure 2. The laser pointer was then
turned ON and the position of the screen was adjusted until the patterns can be seen clearly. After the alignments,
the camera was prepared. Then, the patterns produced were taken. It was ensured that the measurement scale needed
was attached on the screen that will serve as basis of the scale in the ImageJ measurement. The slit width and the
distance between the slit and the screen for this set-up were recorded. These steps were repeated for different slit
widths maintaining all other parameters. The slit widths were recorded and captured.

\
Figure 2. Set-up for light

The second part showed the effect of distance between slits on the pattern. The laser pointer was aligned
with the double slit plate and the screen as in Figure 1. The laser pointer was turned ON and the position of
the screen was adjusted until the patterns can be seen clearly. The patterns were taken using a camera and
the slid width, distance between the slits, and the distance between the slit and the screen for this set- up
were recorded. This procedure was repeated for the remaining different slit distances maintaining all the
parameters constant. The different slit distanced and patterns were taken and analyzed.
Lastly, the effect of distance between the slits and the screen on the pattern was demonstrated in the last
part of the exercise. The laser pointer was again aligned with the single slit plate and the screen as in Figure
1. The laser was turned ON and the position of the screen was adjusted until the patterns can be seen clearly. The
patterns were captured by a camera. The slit width and the distance between the slit and the screen for this
setup were recorded. The steps enumerated in this part were repeated for different slit-screen distances. All
other parameters were remained. The different slit distanced and patterns were taken and analyzed.

3. Results and Discussion

Through proper execution of the given procedures, the experiment was able to show and analyze significant
results regarding the laser light properties, specifically diffraction and interference, as the light passes through a
single and double slit. The experiment also showed implications providing evidences for the wave nature of light.
Fig. 1 shows the 1-cm line that was used as the global scale for plotting intensity profiles. This was done so
that the Distance in the Distance vs. Gray value of intensity profiles will have the correct units (in centimeters).
 Figure 1. The 1-cm line on the paper (the bottom one), used as basis for scaling

Based from the pictures obtained from the experiment, two general observations for the single-slit intensity
patterns can be concluded: (1) the pattern formed is a broken line with varying lengths; (2) the intensity of the light
increases as the line of light gets closer to the center, with the central line being the brightest and the lines on the
edges being the faintest.

Part 1. Effect of slit width on the pattern.

In the first part of the experiment, the effect of the slid with pattern was observed. The figures and graphs
below show the plot of the intensity profiles of the pattern observed using single slit plate.

Figure 2.1a. Laser light diffracted by a single-slit plate with 0.02

slit width.
 Figure 2.1b. Intensity profile of laser light diffracted by a single-slit
plate with 0.02 slit width.

Figure 2.2a. Laser light diffracted by a single-slit plate with 0.04 slit width.

Figure 2.2b. Intensity profile of laser light diffracted by a single-slit plate with
0.04 slit width.

Figure 2.3a. Laser light diffracted by a single-slit plate with 0.08 slit width.
 Figure 2.3b. Intensity profile of laser light diffracted by a single-slit plate
with 0.08 slit width.

Figure 2.4a. Laser light diffracted by a single-slit plate with 0.16

slit width.

Figure 2.4b. Intensity profile of laser light diffracted by a single-slit

plate with 0.16 slit width.

The plot profile of each image shows the distance (in centimetres) of the image section from the left edge
and its corresponding gray value (intensity of light in that image section). Where the image section is brighter, the
graph of the profile at that section is high. Therefore, the graph of each profile resembles a mountain, with the peak
at the center of the brightest line. It also has many relative extrema, corresponding to the broken-line where the
relative minimum points are at the center of the gaps in the broken-line pattern of the image.
Based from the images obtained in the experiment, there is an existing relationship between the slit width
and the distance between adjacent bright fringes. In Fig 2.1a, the light diffracted by the 0.02 slit plate consisted of
long fringes with gaps. In Fig 2.2a, the 0.04 slit plate projected shorter fringes with shorter gaps as compared to the
preceding image. The fringes’ and the gaps’ decrease in length is consistent with the remaining two figures, with Fig
2.4a having the shortest fringes. This decrease of the distance between adjacent fringes happens as the slit width is
increased. In symbols,

( y ❑m+ 1− y ❑m) ∼m/d (1)

 Where y ❑m+1 − y ❑mis the distance between adjacent bright fringes, d is the slit width, and m =0, ±1, ±2,
….
Table 1 shows the slit width of the plate used and the intensity of the brightest spot of the diffracted light formed.

Table 1. Relationship between the slit width and the distance between adjacent fringes.
Slit width ( ) Distance between adjacent bright fringes ( )

0.02

0.04

0.08

0.16

Part 2. Effect of distance between slits on the pattern.

Figure 3.1. Double-slit plate distanced at 100 cm from the screen having 1 cm line (bottom) used as scaling basis.

In the second part of the experiment, the intensity profile of the patterns was observed using the double slit
plate fixed at 100 cm from the screen (as shown in Fig. 3.1) varying the distance between the slits. Slit traveling
outwards or spreading out served as sources of waves when the laser light passed through the double slit plate.

Figure 3.2a. Laser light diffracted by double-slit plate with 0.04 slit width and 0.5 distance between the slits.
 Figure 3.2b. Intensity profile of laser light diffracted by double-slit plate with 0.04 slit width
and 0.5 distance between the slits.

Comparing the graph of intensity profiles of laser light diffracted by double-slit plate with 0.04 slit width,
diffraction with a 0.5 distance (refer to Fig. 3.2 above) between slits has a much wider normally distributed graph
than a 0.25 distance (refer to Fig. 3.3 below).

Figure 3.3a. Laser light diffracted by double-slit plate with 0.04 slit width and 0.25 distance between the slits.

Figure 3.3b. Intensity profile of laser light diffracted by double-slit plate with 0.04 slit width
and 0.25 distance between the slits.

Comparing the graph of intensity profiles of laser light diffracted by double-slit plate with 0.04 and 0.08
slit width varying distances between the slits, greater slit width has a much steeper graph.
 Figure 3.4a. Laser light diffracted by double-slit plate with
0.08 slit width and 0.5 distance between the slits.

Figure 3.4b. Intensity profile of laser light diffracted by double-slit plate with 0.08 slit width
and 0.5 distance between the slits.

Comparing the graph of intensity profiles of laser light diffracted by double-slit plate with 0.08 slit width,
diffraction with a 0.25 distance (refer to Fig. 3.5 below) between slits has a much wider normally distributed graph
than a 0.5 distance (refer to Fig. 3.4 above).

Figure 3.5a. Laser light diffracted by double-slit plate with

0.08 slit width and 0.25 distance between the slits.
 Figure 3.5b. Intensity profile of laser light diffracted by double-slit plate with 0.08 slit width
and 0.25 distance between the slits.

For double-slit plate, addition of more light through adding a second slit leads to several darker region;
combination of interference of light from the two slits and a diffraction from within each slit. Interference will only
be visible to where diffraction allows light to make it to the screen.

Table 2. Intensity of bright spots in a double slit diffraction varying distance between slits.
Slit Width Distance between slits Intensity of bright spots

0.5 12.5
0.04
0.25 6.25

0.5 6.25
0.08
0.25 3.125

In order to know the intensity bright spots of a double-slit diffraction,

m=d/a (2)

where m is the order number of the interference maximum (bright spot), d is the distance between the slits
and a is the slit width. Cutting the distance between the slits into half increases the number of dark fringes formed
when waves travel and interfere with each other. However, this also decreases the intensity of bright spots.

Part 3. Effect of distance between the slits and the screen on the pattern.

The third part of the experiment focused on the effect to distance between the slits and the screens on the
pattern. The figure and graphs below shows the intensity profile of the patterns observed using the single slit plate
with varying slit-to-screen distances.

Figure 4.1a. Laser light diffracted by a single-slit plate 70 cm from

 the screen.

Figure 4.1b. Intensity profile of laser light diffracted by a single-slit plate

70 cm from the screen.

Figure 4.2a. Laser light diffracted by a single-slit plate 60 cm from

the screen.

Figure 4.2b. Intensity profile of laser light diffracted by a single-slit plate

60 cm from the screen.

It can be noted that as the distance between the slit and the screen increases, the diffraction pattern becomes
smaller (likewise the distance between adjacent fringes). As the distance decreases, the diffraction pattern becomes
bigger. It can be observed that a focused laser light seemed to spread or change its direction as it passes through the
slits. This observation suggests an idea about the wave nature of light. Therefore, it can be concluded that as the
distance between the slit and the screen increases, the distance between adjacent bright fringes also increase. In
symbols,

( y ❑m+ 1− y ❑m) ∼mR (3)

Where y ❑m+1 − y ❑mis the distance between adjacent bright fringes, R is the distance between the slit
and the screen, and ,m = 0, ±1, ±2, … . The table below shows the intensity of the brightest spot with varying slit
width and distance between the slits and the screen.

Table 3. The distance between the slit and the screen and the distance between adjacent bright fringes.
Slit width ( ) Distance between adjacent bright Distance
fringes ( )

0.04 0.25

0. 04 0.5

0.08 0.25

0.08 0.5

4. Conclusion and Recommendation

After analysing the data and observations gathered, it can be concluded that during diffraction, it shows that
narrower the slit, the broader the entire diffraction pattern it produce. Another thing that also observed is that in a
single slit pattern, the resulting image formed on the sheet is fine and straight while as compared to the image
formed using double slit pattern the image is jagged and striated.In single slit diffraction, a one wavelength
difference produces a minimum value the light from the center since its distance is have a wavelength causing
destructive interference. While on the double slit diffraction, a wavelength difference in pathlength produces a
constructive interference. Upon performing this experimentation make sure that there is no other source of light
aside from the light source coming from the experiment for it will affect the observed intensity caused by
diffraction.

5. References
1. Young, H.D. & Freedman, R.A. (2016). University Physics with Modern Physics (14th ed.). Pearson
Education, Inc., United States.
2. Khan Academy. (n.d). Retrieved from https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/physical-
processes/light-and-electromagnetic-radiation-questions/a/diffraction-and-constructive-and-destructive-
interference
3. Labman Physics. (n.d) Retrieved from http://labman.phys.utk.edu/phys136/modules/m9/diff.htm
4. Diffraction and Interference. Retrieved from http://www.pa.msu.edu/courses/2013spring/PHY252/Lab9.pdf

Member’s Contribution:
Name Contribution Signature

Austria, Ardaina Results and Discussion

Espiritu, Elaine Methodology

Mendoza, Camille Anne Introduction

Remolacio, Mark Alvin Abstract

Sumagang, Jezreel Conclusion and Recommendation

Torrecampo, Dan Darren Results and Discussion

Tuazon, Moses Immanuel Results and Discussion