To: Professor Brinkley

From: Liem Nguyen (student)

Date: 8/7/17
Subject: Snells Law lab report

Purpose:
This lab was designed to help us explore the behavior of light when it propagates from
one medium into another. The laser in the setup showed us directly where the light will path
itself through the medium, from which we measured the incident and refractive angles.

Procedure:
We began by setting up the ray table on the optics bench. On top of this ray table (that
acted as both the platform and the measuring tool) we set a semicircular acrylic lens on the
direct center. With the flat side of the lens pointed towards the laser, we directed the beam
through the lens and measured both the incident and refractive angles of the beam as we
rotated the acrylic lens through five different angles.
This process was repeated a second time, though this time the laser beam was directed
through the curved side of the lens. The incident and refractive angles were recorded as we
rotated the acrylic lens through five different angles.

Data/Analysis:

Acrylic lens flat side facing the laser source:

1 (degrees) 2 (degrees)
7 9.5
10 22
25 39
35 57.5
45 85

Acrylic lens curved side facing the laser source:

1 (degrees) 2 (degrees)
30 20
45 29
75 41
60 36
30 42
 Part 1:

sini vs. sinr

1.2

0.8
y = 0.4201x + 0.5992
sinr

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
sini

Part 2:

sini vs. sinr

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5 y = 0.6189x + 0.0826
sinr

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
sini

0.42011.49
first value % error = | | 100 = 0.7181 100 = 71.8%
1.49
0.61891.49
second value % error = | 1.49 | 100 = 0.5846 100 = 58.5%
the value was not the same for both methods.
 In the first setup, the flat side of the lens allowed the beam to pass without much
refraction through to the other curved side of the lens. In the second setup, the curved side of
the lens bends the beam so much upon entry that the beam almost doesnt pass through the
other flat side of the lens.

Conclusion:
Though our results were fairly close to what we were expecting, they couldve still been
much closer. If we were to do the experiment again, we would use a more precise method of
measuring the incident and refractive angles than eyeballing markings on the ray table. In
addition to this, we would have used precision tools to position the acrylic lens in such a way
that it lays perfectly flat along the lines and we could fire the laser beam through the exact
center of the lens. Since we were eyeballing the laser, we may have not been able to direct the
beam in a straight line relative to the center of the acrylics lens. To improve the experiment, I
think we couldve used more accurate and precise measuring instruments if only to fine tune
the exactness of our measurements and thus our resulting calculations.