1

Diffraction and Spectroscopy

Harsh Menon
Undergraduate Student, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Prescott, Arizona

Experiments on diffraction and spectroscopy have been one of the basic foundations of optics. In this
experiment, using lasers we observe Fraunhofer and Fresnel diffraction, measure the variation of the linear size
of the central maximum with slit width, try to verify the grating equation and measure the intensity of light
through a circular aperture. We also use a spectrometer to study the spectra of sodium, a candle flame and
sunlight.

I. INTRODUCTION

Diffraction is one of the most fundamental optical

phenomena and is loosely defined as the bending of light.
However, a more quantitative definition would involve
differentiating between the two types of diffraction phenomena
– Fraunhofer and Fresnel diffraction. This experiment was
aimed at investigating the two types of diffraction by shining a
laser through different shapes of slits. We started off by
observing the two different types of diffraction and then
measured the linear size of the central maximum in the
Fraunhofer diffraction regime as a function of slit width.

We also observed how the diffraction pattern changes from

rectangular to circular slits as well as from single to multiple
Figure II.1 Setup for Fraunhofer and Fresnel Diffraction.
slits. We then tried to verify the grating equation and then tried
to reproduce the Airy pattern due to diffraction from a circular
aperture. We took a semiconductor (diode) laser and placed it on
the optical bench. We then placed a closed variable width
The second part of this experiment involved spectroscopy rectangular slit in front of the laser and adjusted the height of
and the use of a spectrometer to identify different elements in the width until the light from the laser was shining directly on
various lights such as the candle light and even sunlight. After the slit. We then adjusted the width of the slit until we could
calibrating the spectrometer, we observed the spectrum of a see the Fraunhofer diffraction pattern which can be seen in
sodium lamp, a candle flame and the sun. Figure II.2.
This report outlines the procedures used to accomplish the
goals described above and the data obtained by implementing
the experimental methods. Any shortcomings are noted and are
followed up by recommendations to improve the data.

II. FRAUNHOFER AND FRESNEL DIFFRACTION

The setup for this experiment can be seen in Figure II.1.

Figure II.2 Fraunhofer Diffraction Pattern

The Fraunhofer diffraction lines were differentiated from

the Fresnel diffraction lines by the different nature of the lines.
The white light in the above figure represents the maxima and
 2

the dark regions represent the minima. The Fresnel diffraction

lines that were observed can be seen in Figure II.3. where k is the wave number of the incident light and b is the
width of the aperture. Using equations 1 and 2, we can see that
as b (the width of the slit increases), β increases and hence the
irradiance drops rapidly as θ deviates from 0(Hecht, 4ed.
P452). Thus as the slit width increases, the angular width of
the central maximum goes down, as can be seen in Figure 1.2
which shows the Irradiance(Y-axis) plotted against θ:

Figure II.3 Fresnel Diffraction Pattern

In the figure above, the dark regions represent the

maxima and the bright regions represent the minima. The
Fresnel diffraction lines were not very distinct using the setup
in Figure II.1. Therefore, we used a plano-concave lens of
focal length 75mm and placed it 11cm ahead of the slit. This Figure III.1 Variation of Angular Width of the Central
greatly enhanced our view of the diffraction pattern. Maximum with Aperture Size1

After identifying the two separate regimes of diffraction, This part of the experiment was performed using the setup
we decided to determine the slit width at which the Fraunhofer shown in Figure II.1. The slit width was continually adjusted
diffraction pattern transitions into the Fresnel diffraction and the linear size of the central maximum measured with a
pattern. Fraunhofer diffraction is said to dominate when the slit meter rule.
width is very small compared to the laser beam. The transition
The data obtained can be seen in Table III.1.
slit width was determined to be 12 ± 5 microns.

The transition from the Fraunhofer to Fresnel pattern LINEAR SIZE OF SLIT WIDTH ( MICRONS)
involved the Fraunhofer lines breaking up into two separate CENTRAL MAXIMUM
lines and then further splitting up into more lines until the (CM)
basic nature of the pattern changed to that of the Fresnel ± 0.05 ±5
diffraction pattern. 4.5 6
2.45 8.5
1.45 12.5
III. VARIATION OF THE LINEAR SIZE OF THE
1.1 15
CENTRAL MAXIMUM
0.8 20

The intensity of the Fraunhofer diffraction pattern for a single

Table III.1 Linear Size vs Slit Width.
slit is given by the following equation:

2
A graphical representation in Figure III.2 shows how the
 sin β  linear size of the central maximum varies with slit width.
I (θ ) = I 0   (1)
 β 

where I(θ) is the irradiance as a function of the angle θ, where

θ is the angle measured in the x-z plane. The zeros of this
irradiance will occur when β=mπ, where m= ± 1, ± 2, ± 3…2
β is defined as follows

 kb 
β =  sin(θ ) (2)
 2
 3

\
Linear Size vs Slit Width

5
Experimental Data
4.5 Poly. (Experimental Data)

4
Linear Size of Central Maximum (cm)

3.5
y = 0.0267x2 - 0.9337x + 8.8935
3

2.5

1.5

Figure IV.1 Diffraction patterns due to a single and

0.5
double slit1.
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Slit Width (microns) On switching from a double slit to a multiple slit, the
number of maxima increased with more regions of maxima
Figure III.1 Linear Size vs Slit Width. than the double slit. The intensity of these fringes decreased
with distance from the primary or central maxima. This can be
The limiting factor in measuring the linear size of the central seen in the figure below.
maximum was the meter rule while the limiting factor in Single and Multiple Slit Irradiance Distribution
measuring the slit width was the micrometer. As can be seen 1
from Figure III.2, the linear size of the central maximum
decreases with an increase in slit width. However, the decrease 0.8
is not linear. It appears to have a quadratic nature to it.
0.6

One of the possible ways to expand on this experiment

would be to take more data points and fit a curve to it and test 0.4

the goodness of the fit using the χ2 goodness of fit test and
0.2
quantify the relationship between the linear size of the central
maximum and the slit width.
0

- 0.2
IV. VARIATION IN DIFFRACTION PATTERNS WITH
- 0.02 - 0.01 0 0.01 0.02
DIFFERENT TYPES OF APERTURES
Figure IV.2 Diffraction patterns due to a single slit
This part of the experiment involved observing how the and a multiple slit with 4 slits
diffraction pattern changed as we went from a single slit to a
double slit and eventually a multiple slit.
A potential future expansion of this part of the experiment
Using the same setup as shown in Figure III.1, we initially could be using multiple slits with different numbers of slits and
shined the laser light through a double slit and compared the determining how the diffraction patterns change with the
diffraction pattern to that from a single slit. The major number of slits.
difference we observed was that there were more regions of
high intensity (maxima) in the diffraction pattern of the double
slit than the single slit. This can be expressed graphically in
V. VERIFYING THE GRATING EQUATION
the figure below.

The grating equation is given by the following equation

nλ
sin(θ n ) = (3)
a
 4

where n is the order of the beam, λ is the wavelength of the

laser beam (632.8nm) and a is the distance between the lines in
the grating (1/600)mm.

The setup for this part of the experiment is shown in Figure

V.1.

Figure V.2 Measuring Distances.

By measuring the distances and taking the inverse tangent

of their ratio, the angle in the grating equation was
calculated.

y
θ = tan −1   (4)
D
Figure V.1 Setup to verify the grating equation. The error in the angle was calculated using the following
equation
The laser beam was sent to a diffraction grating as a result
of which the beam was diffracted to three separate points on 2 2
1 − y
the screen. The method in which this experiment was ∆θ =   ∆y 2 +  2  ∆D 2 (5)
conducted was that one of the lab partners held the D D 
diffraction grating while the other lab partner marked off the
positions of the spots on the screen. The data along with their associated errors are tabulated
below:
Later, the distance to from the screen to the grating, the
grating to the points and between the points was measured as Measured Measured Angle Angle from
illustrated in the figure below. Distance (Y) Distance (D) (degrees) Grating
(cm) (cm) Equation
(degrees)

122 362.75 18.588 22.417

452 362.75 51.251 53.5138

There is a significant deviation of the calculated angle

from the angle obtained from the grating equation, more in
the n=1 case than the n=2 case. The reason for this is
primarily due to the systematic error in our experimental
technique, specifically in the process of holding the grating.
The human hand is not steady and so that is a major source
of error that needs to be accounted for and improved. A
better option would be to mount the grating instead of
holding it.
 5

The systematic error due to a shaky hand is hard to We then measured the background intensity and recorded
quantify and so to conclude we failed to verify the grating it. Then we measured the intensity using the voltmeter at
equation. The grating should be mounted to obtain more different radii and measured the distance from the center of
accurate results. the Airy disk to those radii using a meter rule. The data
obtained from the experiment is presented in both tabular
and graphical form below.
VI. AIRY DIFFRACTION PATTERN
Voltage Radius
When light is shined through a circular aperture it results (V) (cm)
in the formation of an Airy pattern given by the following ± 0.001 ± 0.05
equation: 0.151 ± 1.6
0.057 ± 2.4
2
 2 J (kar / L)  0.031 ± 3.7
I = 1  (6) 0.023 ± 5.4
 kar / L  0.014 ± 6.6
where I is the intensity, k is the wavenumber of the Table VI.1 Voltage vs Radius.
incident light, a is the aperture radius, r is the radial distance
from the center of the diffraction pattern and L is the
distance from the aperture to the wall. J1 is a Bessel function
of the first kind of order zero. The Airy pattern can be seen INSERT GRAPH
below which is a plot of the intensity (y-axis) versus kar/L
(x-axis).

One of the major problems we encountered during the

analysis is that our measured points were too sparse and
therefore a future correction we would make to this part of
the experiment would be to take more data points so as to
get a better fit to the Airy Disk Pattern. Other options
involve using a different type of laser to generate the Airy
Disk and seeing the differences with the two lasers.

Figure VI.1 Airy Pattern (Wyant 2003).

VII. CALIBRATING THE SPECTROMETER

For realizing this part of the experiment, we realized that

we had to project the laser beam over a considerable Before using the spectrometer to observe the spectrum of
distance to obtain a good airy disk. So we shined our laser other objects, it was necessary to calibrate it. Out of choice
from one end of the laboratory to the other end of the of gases to calibrate the spectrometer, we chose helium
laboratory. We used the PASCO Scientific Wheel with the because we wanted the gas to have an ample number of
smallest circular aperture and placed it in front of the laser lines.
beam.
Soon after, we obtained a diffraction grating and placed it
We then measured the distance from the aperture to the inside the spectrometer as shown in Figure VII.1.
wall using a tape measure by following the path of the laser.
The next step involved measuring the intensity and the
radius of the rings of the Airy disk. We connected a
photodiode to a current to voltage converter and hooked it
up to a voltmeter.
 6

Calculated Actual
Color Angle Wavelength Wavelength Error
Blue 34.6 460.566 486.6 0.05350185
Green 37 486.27 501.6 0.030562201
Figure VII.1 Spectrometer.
Yellow 44.9 570.879 587.6 0.028456433
Red 53 657.63 662.8 0.007800241
After getting the grating in position, and enclosing the Blue 34.6 470.6 486.6 0.032881217
grating, we adjusted the telescope and the lenses until the
Green 37 497 501.6 0.009170654
spectral lines of helium were ell focused so that we could
Yellow 44.9 583.9 587.6 0.006296801
place the crosshairs of the spectrometer in the center of the
spectral lines. The line spectra of helium can be seen below: Red 53 673 662.8 -0.015389258

Average Values

Blue 34.6 465.583 486.6 0.043191533

Green 37 491.635 501.6 0.019866427
Yellow 44.9 577.3895 587.6 0.017376617
Red 53 665.315 662.8 -0.003794508

Figure VII.1 Emission Spectrum of Helium3. Calculated Actual

Color Angle Wavelength Wavelength Error
Dim-
We decided to make our calibration curve using the Purple 29.5 405.945 410.1 0.010131675
brightest spectral lines of helium, namely, blue, green, Purple 32.6 439.146 434 -0.011857143
yellow, red, dim-purple, purple and teal. Since at the time Teal 35.8 473.418 486.1 0.026089282
of performing the experiment, we were required to calibrate Red 51 636.21 656.2 0.030463273
the curve by hand, both lab partners made their own Dim-
calibration curves and then averaged it to get a better Purple 29.5 414.5 410.1 -0.01072909
calibration equation. Purple 32.6 448.6 434 -0.033640553
Teal 35.8 483.8 486.1 0.004731537
The data is tabulated below and the calibration curve Red 51 651 656.2 0.007924413
can be seen alongside.
Average Values
Calibration Curve for the Spectrometer
700
Dim-
Calibration Curve
Linear (Calibration Curve)
Purple 29.5 410.2225 410.1 -0.000298708
650
Purple 32.6 443.873 434 -0.022748848
y = 10.855x + 90
Teal 35.8 478.609 486.1 0.015410409
600
Wavelength (Nanometers)

Red 51 643.605 656.2 0.019193843

550

500
Table VII.1 Data to plot the Calibration Curve.

450

The calibration equation was obtained to be y = 10.855 +

400
29 34 39 44 49 54 59 90. After having obtained the calibration equation, we could
Angle (Degrees)
then proceed to the next parts of the experiment which
involved studying the spectra of different light sources.
Figure VII.2 Calibration Curve. Wavelength (nm) vs
Angle (degrees).
 7

VIII. SODIUM EMISSION LINES IX. THE SPECTRUM OF A CANDLE FLAME

The sodium emission lines have two primary yellow lines This part of the experiment required us to investigate the
known as the sodium D emission lines in addition to several spectrum of a candle flame. The setup for this experiment
other lines. The basic spectrum of sodium can be seen below: can be seen below.

Figure VIII.1 Sodium Emission Lines3.

We took a sodium lamp and placed it where the helium gas

discharge was. Once again, we focused the spectrometer onto
the lines, slightly increasing and decreasing the width of the
emission lines when they got too bright or faint respectively.
Figure IX.1 Setup to investigate the spectra of a candle.
After measuring the angles at which the lines occur, the
wavelengths of these lines were determined by using the
calibration equation. We replaced the sodium lamp with a candle and placed a
large plano-convex lens between the flame and the
The data obtained from this experiment is tabulated below. spectrometer so as to focus the light from the candle onto the
spectrometer. We then adjusted the distance between the lens
and the candle flame until we could image the light and then
Wavelength
Color Angle(degrees) (nm) we placed the spectrometer at the point where the light got
focused.
± 0.05 ± 0.05
Yellow 45 578.475 On observing the candle through the spectrometer, we
Yellow 45 578.475 first observed continuous spectra with light of all colors
Red 42.8 554.594 merging into one another. However, we also noticed a yellow
Red 42.8 554.594 region which was brighter than the background yellow color.
Yellow 44.9 577.3895 On focusing the lens we saw two yellow lines. However, they
Yellow 45 578.475 kept merging into the background and were thus hard to detect.
Green 43.2 558.936
We moved the candle to the right of the spectrometer in
Green 43.1 557.8505
an attempt to gain insight into what was going on. We noticed
Green 38.6 509.003 the same two yellow lines, only this time with a black
Green-Blue 37 491.635 background. As we continued looking at the two yellow lines,
we saw the continuous spectra re-emerge and disappear.
However, the yellow lines remained.
Table VIII.1 Sodium Lines.
On measuring the angles of the yellow lines we obtained
value of 44.8 ± 0.05 degrees and 44.9 ± 0.05 degrees. By
plugging these values into the calibration curve, we obtained
wave length values of 576.3nm and 577.39nm respectively.
From Table VIII.1 we can see that these values correspond to
the wave lengths of the Sodium D Lines.

X. THE SOLAR SPECTRUM

Investigating the solar spectrum was one of the most

challenging parts of this experiment and was accomplished by
using a concave mirror to direct the sunlight from outside onto
the eyepiece of the spectrometer.
 8

The hardest part in the setup was adjusting the height and
inclination of the mirror to get the light shining onto the
spectrometer and prevent it from moving around. One of the
lab partners went out and held the mirror steady while the
other took the measurements. The data obtained from this part
of the experiment is tabulated below.

Angle Wavelength Element Expected Wavelength Error

(degrees) (nm) (nm)
± 0.05
Red 52.1 655.5455 H_Alpha 656.281 0.001120709
51.1 644.6905
50.9 642.5195
50.8 641.434
50.4 637.092
50.3 636.0065
50.2 634.921
50.1 633.8355
49.9 631.6645
49.8 630.579
49.7 629.4935
48.9 620.8095
48.8 619.724
48.5 616.4675 Ca I 616.218 -0.000404889
48 611.04
47.8 608.869

Orange 47.5 605.6125

47.5 605.6125
47.2 602.356
47 600.185
47 600.185
46.9 599.0995

Yellow 44.9 577.3895

44.8 576.304
44.6 574.133
44.5 573.0475

Green 42.7 553.5085 Mg I 552.843 -0.001203778

42.3 549.1665
42.1 546.9955
42 545.91
41.5 540.4825
41 535.055
40.9 533.9695
40.8 532.884 Fe I 532.419 -0.000873372
40.7 531.7985
39.7 520.9435
39 513.345
38.8 511.174
38.3 505.7465
38.2 504.661
38 502.49
 9

Blue 36.5 486.2075 H_Beta 486.134 -0.000151193

35.8 478.609
35.6 476.438

Violet 34 459.07
32.5 442.7875
31.9 436.2745 H_Gamma 434.048 -0.005129617
31.5 431.9325
31.4 430.847
31.2 428.676
30.6 422.163 Ca I 422.674 0.00120897
29.6 411.308
29 404.795 Fe I 438.356 0.07656106
28.6 400.453

Table X.1 Solar Spectrum

1
The future part of this experiment would involve Wyant, J.C. Optics 505: Diffraction and Interferometry. (2003),
http://www.optics.arizona.edu/jcwyant/optics505(2000).htm
repeating the experiment a couple of times and accurately 2
Hecht, E. Optics (4th ed,) (Addison Wesley, New York, 2002)
quantifying the data as well as identifying it. 3
Köppen, J. Spectra of Gas Discharges. (2003), http://astro.u-
strasbg.fr/~koppen/discharge/

XI. CONCLUSION

The overall goals of the experiment were met as we

successfully identified the two types of diffraction and went
on to determine the relationship between the linear size of
the central maximum of the Fraunhofer diffraction pattern as
a function of the slit width.

Different types and shapes of slits were tested and the

Airy disk pattern was observed and measured. Using the
spectrometer, we managed to successfully calibrate it and
study the spectra of a sodium lamp, candle flame and the
sun.

We however failed to verify the grating equation and

propose to carry out future experiments to better our
experimental techniques and obtain more accurate results.
Other recommendations mentioned in different sections of
this report would also help to obtain more accurate data and
gain a greater insight into the diffraction and spectroscopy.

XII. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author is indebted to his lab partner, Joel Lindstrom,

without whose help and support this experiment would not
have been possible. The author would also like to extend a
special thanks to Dr. Andri Gretarsson whose helpful hints
and discussions in the laboratory were indispensable.