Determination of the Grating Constant of a Diffraction

Grating Through Spectrometry

Ian Ibañez1, Vanessa Marie Valdez2 and Jo-Dia Jean Lorenana Valles3*
1
Institute of Civil Engineering, University of the Philippines Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines
2
Department of Physical Sciences and Mathematics, University of the Philippines Manila, City of Manila,
Philippines
3
Department of Geodetic Engineering, University of the Philippines Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines
*Corresponding author: jyvalles1@up.edu.ph

Abstract
In this study, the grating constant of the diffraction grating was determined by
comparing the computed wavelengths of incident light from a mercury lamp
to its theoretical values. Grating constant is the number of slits per unit length.
The wavelength of the incident light was computed using the angular readings
of a spectrometer. To determine the grating constant of a diffraction grating,
linear regression of the 𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛥𝜃) vs 𝜆𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜 plot of the dispersed light was done.
The results from the experiment shows that the spectrometer can determine
accurately the grating constant of the diffraction grating.

Keywords: grating constant, wavelength, spectrometer, diffraction.

I. Introduction
Light spectroscopy is a method for obtaining the spectrum formed by the dispersion of light into the constituent
colors of its source. This method is useful for the inference of the physical and chemical properties of an object,
especially for objects not physically accessible such as celestial bodies [1].
Dispersion is done using diffraction gratings, which are optical elements made up of closely spaced periodic
grooves. This grooves or lines bends light when it passes through the grating at normal incidence according to the
equation given by
𝑑𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃 = 𝑚𝜆 (1)

where m is the diffraction order, 𝜆is the light wavelength, d is the slit width (spacing of grooves or lines), and
𝜃is the diffraction angle measured from the normal.
Since the value of d is very small due to the very close spacing of the grooves, the value D, otherwise called
the grating constant, is used for differentiating between different diffraction gratings. The value of D is given by
the equation
1
𝐷 = (2)
𝑑

which is usually expressed in lines/mm [2].

Figure 1: Student Spectrometer.

Physics 73.1 WDE1

1st Sem AY 2017 - 2018
12 December 2017
1
 In order to view and analyze the different wavelengths produced by a light passing through a diffraction grating
and measure the corresponding angles at which these wavelengths occur, a device called the spectrometer is used
[3]. An example of a spectrometer is the student spectrometer, which has three main components - the collimator,
the dispersing element, and the telescope as shown in Figure 1. The collimator is the component responsible for
the light to emerge as parallel rays at the end of the tube. Light passes through a slit and a lens, which narrows
and shapes the light beam as parallel rays which strikes the dispersing element at the same angle of incidence.
The dispersing element is responsible for the diffraction of light into its constituent colors - each specific color
having a specific diffraction angle. The light dispersed by the grating can then be viewed through the telescope,
which is attached to a rotating base with angle markings. Rotation of the telescope to either the clockwise or
counterclockwise direction gives the diffraction angle of a specific constituent color obtained from the diffraction
of light. The angle of diffraction is measured using the Vernier scale, which is read similar to the Vernier caliper
[4].
The objective of this experiment is to determine the grating constant of a diffraction grating using the computed
wavelengths of the incident light from the angular readings of a spectrometer. The different equations relating
order, slit width, wavelength and diffraction angle will be used to compute for the experimental grating constant
and compare it to theoretical grating constant of the diffraction grating.

II. Methodology
In the experiment, the student spectrometer was calibrated first by focusing the telescope on a distant object and
then aligning it directly opposite the collimator. The focus of the collimator was then adjusted so that the
collimator slit is in sharp focus. The slit width was adjusted and made as small as possible for a clear and bright
image. The crosshair was then aligned to one of the edges of the slit image by using the fine adjust knob.
After focusing the spectrometer, the 100 lines/mm diffraction grating was placed on the spectrometer. The
mercury lamp was turned on and placed near the collimator slit. The light exiting the collimator tube was checked
if it is incident at the middle of the diffraction grating.

Figure 2: Schematic diagram of the experimental setup

Since the zero-degree mark of the Vernier scale is usually not aligned with the optical axis, its offset was
considered when diffraction angles were being measured. After aligning the diffraction grating, the diffraction
angle was measured. The position of the central diffraction line, the direct image, was measured using the Vernier
scale. When measuring the position of the central diffraction line, the clockwise and counterclockwise readings
were then recorded as the initial angles. When measuring the position of the first-order green spectral lines, the
telescope was to be rotated to the left and recorded the measured angle as the clockwise angle. The telescope was
then rotated to the right and the measured angle was recorded as the counterclockwise angle.
In gathering the data, magnifying glass was used to read the angles. The angle between the central diffraction
line and the first-order green spectral line was calculated for both clockwise and counterclockwise readings.
Furthermore, the absolute difference of the two angles was then calculated to check if the diffraction grating is
properly aligned.
After calibrating the spectrometer, the grating constant was determined. To determine this, the wavelength of
the light source was to be calculated. The angular position of each color on the right side of the central diffraction
line was measured. The angular displacements for the first-order and second-order image of each visible bright
line and calculated the experimental wavelength of each color using equation 1. After obtaining the experimental

Physics 73.1 WDE1

1st Sem AY 2017 - 2018
12 December 2017
2
 wavelengths of each color, they were compared to their theoretical wavelengths and the percent error was then
calculated.
The values of 𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛥𝜃) vs 𝜆𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜 for the first and second-order measurements were then plotted using Microsoft
Excel and linear regression was used. The value of the slope of the best fit line obtained is the experimental value
of the grating constant. It was then compared to the theoretical value (100 lines/mm) and the percent error was
calculated.

III. Results and Discussion

Calibration of the student spectrometer is required to ensure that the data collected will be consistent throughout
the experiment. This was done by measuring the clockwise and counterclockwise diffraction angle of the green
line for the 100 lines/mm grating. Calculation of the resulting difference between the clockwise and
counterclockwise angles yielded an error of 3 ± 1’ for the 100 lines/mm grating.
Since the error is relatively small compared to the differences in the diffraction angles of the different line
spectra, there will be no significant effect to the data. Data for the angular difference for violet, blue violet, blue
green, green and yellow were then obtained after calibration. The telescope is rotated only counterclockwise for
consistency throughout the whole experiment, and the angular difference between the angle reading of the bright
line being considered and the initial angle reading was obtained for the first and second orders (as shown in Table
1).

Table 1: Angular readings for first order and second order bright lines for 100 lines/mm grating.

𝚫𝛳
Color
First Order Second Order

Violet 2°14’ 4°31’

Blue Violet 2°29’ 5°1’

Blue Green 2°56’ --------

Green 3°10’ 6°10’

Yellow 3°17’ 6°32’

No angular reading was obtained for the second order blue green light due to its extreme faintness. The reason
for this difference in light intensity is due to its order - while the order increases, the intensity of the light decreases.
This means that while no data was obtained for the second order blue green light, the light still exists, only
undetectable by the naked eye. The same is true for higher diffraction orders - while the bright lines for each of
these exists, the naked eye will not be able to detect these lines due to their low intensity [5].
The angle was then used to obtain the experimental wavelength ( 𝜆𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑡 ) of each specific bright line by
rearranging equation 1 to become
𝑑𝑠𝑖𝑛𝛥𝜃
𝜆𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑡 = (3)
𝑚

where d is slit width, Δθ is the angle obtained from the experiment and m is the order of the bright line being
considered. The calculated wavelengths are then compared to the theoretical wavelength ( 𝜆𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜 ) (as shown in
Table 2).

Table 2: Angular readings for first order and second order bright lines for 100 lines/mm grating.

𝜆𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑡 (𝑚𝑚)
Color 𝜆𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜 (𝑚𝑚)
First Order Second Order

Violet 404.66 389.69 393.75

Blue Violet 435.83 433.29 437.23

Physics 73.1 WDE1

1st Sem AY 2017 - 2018
12 December 2017
3
 Blue Green 491.60 511.74 --------

Green 546.07 552.41 537.10

Yellow 579.06 572.74 568.91

The deviation between theoretical and experimental wavelengths of the first and second order bright lines were
then calculated as shown in Table 3. It can be seen from the data that there is no general trend between the error
of the first and second order wavelengths. This means that the error calculated is not dependent on the diffraction
order of the wavelength.

Table 3: Error between theoretical and experimental wavelengths.

% Error
Color
First Order Second Order

Violet 3.70 2.70

Blue Violet 0.58 0.32
Blue Green 4.10 --------
Green 1.16 1.64
Yellow 1.09 1.75

The error obtained from the experiment may be due to parallax error, a phenomenon where different observers
reads slightly different sets of data because the focus of their eyes were not aligned to the focus of the instrument.
When taking angular measurements using the magnifying glass, the reading slightly changes when the angle of
tilt of the magnifying glass is changed. A good way to avoid this is to take several measurements, then average
the data to obtain a proper reading of the angle, but due to time constraints the group wasn’t able to do such a
method. Also, note that blue green and violet both have relatively large errors compared to the rest of the data.
This may be attributed to the difference of their intensity to the rest of the bright lines. As said earlier, the intensity
of the second order blue green light is so faint that the naked eye can’t detect it. This is partially true for the first
order blue green and violet lights, only that it is faint enough for the naked eye to detect it.
After verification through error that the experimental data obtained is valid, the diffraction grating constant
was then obtained by plotting the best-fit line of the values of 𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛥𝜃) vs 𝜆𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜 for each diffraction angle (as
shown in Figures 3 and 4). The slopes obtained from the best-fit lines is 0.000105805 and 0.000195198 for both
first and second orders respectively, which were then recorded as M. The slit width is then calculated using the
equation given by
𝑀
𝑑 = (4)
𝑚

where m is the diffraction order.

Figure 3: Sin(Δθ) vs λtheo plot for the 1st order diffraction.

Physics 73.1 WDE1

1st Sem AY 2017 - 2018
12 December 2017
4
 Figure 4: Sin(Δθ) vs λtheo plot for the 2nd order diffraction.

Upon calculation of the slit width, the diffraction grating constant can now be obtained using equation 2 after
some unit conversions. The resulting diffraction grating constants are 105.8 lines/mm and 97.5 lines/mm for both
the first and second order diffraction respectively. Computation of the error between the theoretical diffraction
grating constant (100 lines/mm) resulted to a percent error of 5.8 % and 2.5%, again for the first and second order
diffraction respectively.
Since there were errors even before the plotting of data, error must have propagated to the final value of the
diffraction grating constant. Another possible source of error is the lack of data, and thus lack of points to be
considered for the computation of a best-fit line. In statistics, the resulting best-fit line is more reliable if there are
more data points to be considered since the error will be able to distribute itself to more data points. Since in the
experiment, only five data points are considered (four for the second order), the error will only be distributed to
five points, resulting to a relatively large percent error.

IV. Conclusion
Using the gathered data in the experiment, the errors calculated showed minimal deviation of the experimental
values to their theoretical values. The experiment shows that the errors between theoretical and experimental
wavelengths are less than 5%. These percent errors show that the experimental wavelength can be considered as
close to the theoretical value. On the other hand, the computed error between the theoretical diffraction grating
constant (100 lines/mm) resulted to a percent error of 5.8 % and 2.5%, for the first and second order diffraction
respectively. The results also show that calculated grating constant are as close to the theoretical value.
Through this, we could conclude that the calculated grating constant is quite accurate. We could also say that
determination of grating constant through spectrometer is an accurate and feasible method. The observed possible
sources of errors are parallax error and lack of data. It is recommended to take several measurements and use the
average of data to obtain a proper reading of the angle. In addition, it is also recommended to observe more color
and/or to measure higher order angular positions to produce more reliable best-fit line.

V. References
[1.] What is Spectroscopy?. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://loke.as.arizona.edu/~ckulesa/camp/spectroscopy_intro.html
[2.] Lab Manual Authors. (2017). Experiment 9: Determination of grating constant. In Physics 73.1
laboratory manual (pp. 1-6). Quezon City, NCR: UP NIP
[3.] Spectrometer. (2014). Retrieved from
https://chem.libretexts.org/Core/Analytical_Chemistry/Instrumental_Analysis/Spectrometer
[4.] Lab Manual Authors. (2017). Experiment 8: Student Spectrometer. In Physics 73.1 laboratory manual
(pp. 1-6). Quezon City, NCR: UP NIP
[5.] Diffraction grating. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://hyperphysics.phy-
astr.gsu.edu/hbase/phyopt/grating.html
[6.] Schiff, M. (2015). Big Data Will Create More Accurate Predictions. Retrieved from
https://tdwi.org/articles/2015/08/11/big-data-will-create-more-accurate-predictions.aspx

Physics 73.1 WDE1

1st Sem AY 2017 - 2018
12 December 2017
5