Hi Frank,
I was pretty heavy into amateur astronomy in
my life prior to submersibles, so have some knowledge on this. First, the
port would act like a lens only if it were shaped like a lens. A bit
thicker in the middle would not necessarily make it a lens. It would
depend upon the amount of curve and the shape of the curve. Lenses (good
ones) are specific geometric shapes such as parabola, hyperbola, etc. If
these shapes are not within specific tolerances, you get chromatic aberration,
spherical aberration, and a buch of other nastyness that makes looking through
them worthless.
A plane disc viewport that was a little
thicker in the middle would not be described as a stronger port as far as ASME
PVHO is concerned. While the port does not have to be scientifically flat
(same thickness from edge to edge), you have to use the thinnest thickness to
calculate the depth rating of the port, since that is it's weakest
point.
If the shape was such that the port acted as
a lens, and assuming the shape was good enough that various aberrations were not
present, then yes you would have to be at the focal point in order to see
anything clearly. This is most likely not going to be a comfortable
viewing angle. It's not like the lens is going to project a bigger image
of the world into the interior of the sub. If the port were 16 inches in
diameter for example, it might be like looking through an 8 inch viewport.
You will have to be some distance back, and your field of vision will
significantly decrease because of that. Unless the port is a perfect lens,
as you view things further at the edges, the distortion gets worse.
The port would not bring more light into the
sub, it would simply focus it into a smaller area. That smaller area would
be brighter since the light rays woud be concentrated, however you are
sacrificing field of view for brightness.
Jon
|