JP5861160B2 - Evaluation method, program and storage medium for combination lens device - Google Patents

Description

  The present invention relates to an evaluation method, a program for executing the evaluation method, and a storage medium storing the program, which are suitable for evaluation when designing a product configured by combining optical components such as lenses, for example. .

  A lens device required by various camera devices and a lens device included in a projection device are configured by combining optical components such as a plurality of lenses. When designing the lens apparatus, in order to obtain necessary optical characteristics, what kind of characteristics should be combined is determined by analyzing the designed data by various methods. The characteristics of the individual lenses determined here include, for example, the radius of curvature of each surface of the lens, the thickness, the distance between lenses, and the refractive index of the lens.

  In addition, by appropriately selecting each characteristic of the lens, a lens device having the required optical characteristics is configured. However, when a lens apparatus is actually manufactured, there are many cases where the characteristics do not become as designed. Specifically, variations in manufacturing of the characteristics of each lens are inevitable, thereby causing variations in the overall characteristic values of the lens device finally obtained.

  In consideration of this variation, in order to design the lens system so that it can be configured as an appropriate lens system, it has been proposed to design a lens by a management method using an L108 orthogonal table (Patent Document 1). The management method using the L108 orthogonal table predicts component variations when mass-producing products, and assigns error factors to the orthogonal table to calculate the overall lens device characteristics.

FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of lens characteristic calculation processing using the L108 orthogonal table.
In this example, 49 types of characteristics are selected as the characteristics of the individual lenses, and the 49 types of characteristics are assigned to the horizontal axis. As the vertical axis, 108 patterns are assigned such as the presence or absence of characteristic deviation of each lens. Then, for the 108 patterns, an overall characteristic value as a lens device when there is an error designated for each lens is calculated. In the example of FIG. 9, a lens performance evaluation value based on a contrast reproduction ratio, which is called an optical transfer function (MTF), is calculated as a characteristic value. Lens performance other than MTF may be calculated.

Further, by performing a simulation using the L108 orthogonal table, it is possible to know which lens characteristics should be improved in order to obtain the expected lens performance (MTF in the example of FIG. 9).
Non-Patent Document 1 describes a design method by simulation using the L108 orthogonal table.

JP 2002-287020 A

Basic off-line quality engineering: Genichi Taguchi, Reiko Yokoyama, published by the Japanese Standards Association in May 2007

  The flow up to the start of mass production in the case of using this L108 orthogonal table is as shown in the flowchart of FIG. That is, first, the entire lens apparatus is designed (step S1), and a characteristic change when there is a variation in the characteristics of each lens constituting the designed lens system is calculated using the L108 orthogonal table. Lens characteristics are selected (step S2). Then, a lens device is prototyped by combining the lenses having the selected variation characteristics (step S3). Then, with respect to the lens device prototyped in step S3, characteristics such as MTF are measured, and after confirming that the characteristics are set, the process proceeds to mass production of the lens apparatus (step S4).

  Here, when the characteristics such as MTF of the lens device (mass-produced product) are measured, the characteristics may deviate from those predicted by the L108 orthogonal table. In such a case, after all, it is necessary to review the variation and redo the prototype. Therefore, it is necessary to repeat the trial production until the characteristics are improved, which is troublesome. That is, the conventional simulation using the L108 orthogonal table has a problem that the reliability of the result is not so high.

FIG. 11 shows a state in which the MTF changes based on the characteristics of each lens constituting a lens device designed by a conventional method, as a factor effect diagram. In FIG. 11, 32 types of characteristics are assigned on the horizontal axis, and (1-MTF) is shown on the vertical axis. The vertical axis in FIG. 11 is set to (1-MTF) so that the best characteristic is obtained when the MTF is “0” (that is, when the (1-MTF) is the highest in the figure of “1”). It is for writing.
In the example of FIG. 11, as the 32 types of characteristics (factors), the surface spacing (D1-1 to D20-1) of each lens and the eccentric amount (Sft1-1 to Sft10-1) of each lens are sequentially arranged from the left end. ), An aspherical shape change (ASP1-1 to ASP2-1) of the aspherical lens is assigned.

  In the example of FIG. 11, three values are shown for each characteristic (factor). For example, if the characteristic value is “1” and the tolerance is “0.02”, these three values are the original characteristic value 1.00 and a value obtained by making ± 0.02 from the value 1.00. Three values of 0.98 and 1.02 are prepared. The lens performance (1-MTF) corresponding to these three values 0.98, 1.00, and 1.02 is calculated. When there is almost no variation in the lens performance values (1-MTF) of the three values shown in FIG. 11, even if there is an error within the tolerance range for the characteristic values, the overall lens performance It means that there is almost no influence on. On the other hand, when there is a large variation in the lens performance values (1−MTF) of the three values, the desired MTF value cannot be obtained unless the tolerance is strictly controlled (that is, the variation is not eliminated). Means.

However, in the calculation process using the L108 orthogonal table, the placed characteristic values are applied in order and the performance is calculated serially by the computer device. Therefore, if the order in which the factors that are lens characteristics are arranged in the L108 orthogonal table is changed, There was a problem that the calculation results would be different.
For example, as shown in FIG. 12, the 32 individual lens characteristics (factors) shown in FIG. 11 may be arranged in a different order from that in FIG.
That is, in the example of FIG. 11, the lens surface interval (D1-1 to D20-1), the lens eccentricity (Sft1-1 to Sft10-1), and the aspherical surface shape change (ASP1-1 to ASP2-1). FIG. 12 shows an aspherical shape change (ASP1-1 to ASP2-1), lens surface spacing (D1-1 to D20-1), and lens eccentricity. It is shown as an example calculated by arranging in the order of (Sft1-1 to Sft10-1).

As can be seen from a comparison between FIG. 11 and FIG. 12, there is a large difference in the calculation result, and it cannot be said that a reliable and accurate simulation can be performed.
In the above description, the problem in designing a lens device composed of a plurality of lenses has been described, but even in the case of designing a mass-produced product composed of a combination of a plurality of parts other than the lens device, In other words, there is a similar problem when designing products in which the characteristics (factors) of each part influence each other.

  The present invention has been made in view of these points, and solves the above-described problems that occur when evaluating a design value when designing a mass-produced product such as a lens device using an orthogonal table. The purpose is to do.

In order to solve the above-mentioned problems and achieve the object of the present invention, the present invention provides a mass production accuracy of a lens apparatus manufactured by combining a plurality of lenses, an orthogonal table for assigning tolerance design conditions, and a variation during mass production. An evaluation method of a combination lens device to be evaluated using a combination table to be reproduced and a computer program for realizing the evaluation method by a computer.

First, in the orthogonal table to which the design conditions of tolerance are assigned, the level width as the tolerance of the design value of any one or a plurality of factors of the surface spacing, axial deviation, inclination, surface shape, and refractive index of the plurality of lenses Assign to multiple stages. Subsequently, when the design values of a plurality of lenses fluctuate, the direction in which the error of a plurality of factors including the variation at the time of mass production fluctuates is assigned to a combination table that reproduces the variation at the time of mass production.

The design value including the level range of the multiple factors assigned to the orthogonal table to which the tolerance design conditions are assigned, and the multiple factors including the fluctuating direction assigned to the combination table reproducing the variation at the time of mass production. By integrating the errors, a comprehensive characteristic value of the lens apparatus under the conditions based on the orthogonal table and the combination table is calculated. Finally, a factor-effect diagram is created for determining factors that have a large influence on the calculated overall characteristic value.

As a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the orthogonal table for assigning the tolerance design condition includes a case where there is a prescribed error width as a tolerance level width of design values of a plurality of factors, and an error width of ½ of that. 2 is an orthogonal table in which two levels are assigned. In addition, the combination table that reproduces the variation at the time of mass production is an orthogonal table in which three levels of error are assigned, that is, no error, + direction error, and − direction error as directions in which the error of multiple factors fluctuates. is there.

According to the present invention, the tolerance design conditions are assigned in the orthogonal table to which the tolerance design conditions are assigned, the variation table in the mass production is reproduced in the combination table in which the tolerance design conditions for each factor are reproduced, and the tolerance is reproduced. Thus, a simulation that combines both of the above and the variation is performed, and it is possible to accurately determine factors that are effective in the calculated overall characteristic value. Therefore, the accuracy of the prototype combination lens device is almost the same as the simulation result, so that it is not necessary to repeat the prototype, and the mass production can be performed immediately after the trial production, and the process up to the production of the combination lens device can be greatly reduced.

It is sectional drawing which showed the example of the lens apparatus designed by one embodiment of this invention. It is a block diagram which shows the structural example of the processing apparatus which performs the arithmetic processing by one embodiment of this invention. It is explanatory drawing which showed the example of arithmetic processing by one embodiment of this invention. It is explanatory drawing which showed the example of the value of each orthogonal table by one embodiment of this invention. It is the flowchart which showed the example of arithmetic processing by one embodiment of this invention. It is the flowchart which showed the example from the design by the process by one embodiment of this invention to mass production. It is the factor effect figure which showed the effect by the value for every factor by the example (Example 1) of one embodiment of this invention. It is the factor effect figure which showed the effect by the value for every factor by the example (Example 2) of one embodiment of this invention. It is explanatory drawing which showed the example of calculation of MTF using the conventional L108 orthogonal table. It is the flowchart which showed the example from the design by the prior art example to mass production. It is an example of the factor effect figure of the prior art example calculated in order of surface interval, eccentricity, and aspherical shape change. It is an example of the factor effect figure of the prior art example calculated in order of the shape change of an aspherical surface, a surface interval, and eccentricity.

Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to FIGS.
The present embodiment is an example of manufacturing a lens device configured by combining optical components such as a plurality of lenses. That is, an example will be described in which the characteristics of a lens device composed of a plurality of lenses are evaluated by simulation from design data.

  The lens device to be designed can be applied to various devices such as a lens device for a projection device and a lens device for various cameras configured by combining a plurality of lenses. In the case of a projection lens device, a reflecting member or a prism that bends the optical path may be disposed as an optical component.

  FIG. 1 is a diagram showing an example of a lens device designed in this embodiment. In this example, a lens apparatus for a projection apparatus, that is, a lens apparatus using a lens system including a plurality of lenses 1 to 13 will be described. In this example, the image light incident on the incident side lens 1 is projected from the exit side lens 13 onto a screen or the like.

  As shown in FIG. 1, each of the lenses 1 to 13 has a lens surface gap shift, a shift (eccentricity) error in a direction perpendicular to the optical axis of each lens, a spherical surface of each lens, By eliminating the spherical error, the overall characteristics of the lens device become favorable. On the other hand, when the values of these factors (characteristics) deviate from the design values, the overall characteristics of the lens device are deteriorated.

  When manufacturing the lens device as shown in FIG. 1, it is preferable to manufacture the lens device so that the values such as the deviation of the distance between the lens surfaces and the shift amount of each lens completely match the design values. Actually, it is inevitable that some error occurs. For this reason, in the evaluation processing of the present embodiment, simulation is performed from design data as to which range the above-described error is to be manufactured and how to approach the desired characteristics.

The evaluation process of the present embodiment is performed by an information processing device (computer device) that designs a lens device, using the lens device design data.
The configuration of the information processing apparatus includes, for example, a CPU 31, a work RAM 32, a storage unit 33, an input / output unit 34, and a display unit 35, as shown in FIG. First, the lens device design data input to the input / output unit 34 is stored in the storage unit 33. And the design data memorize | stored in this memory | storage part 33 are read to the work RAM32, and the evaluation calculation process of the read data is performed under control of CPU31.

  The evaluation results executed in this way are displayed on the display unit 35 or output from the input / output unit 34 in a format such as a table to be described later. A program (software) for performing the above-described evaluation process is also stored in the storage unit 35 and is read by the CPU 31 when the evaluation process is executed. Note that the information processing apparatus shown in FIG. 2 may be designed so that the lens apparatus is designed, and the designed data may be immediately evaluated.

Next, calculation processing for design data evaluation executed in the present embodiment will be described with reference to FIG.
FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an example of evaluation calculation processing according to the present embodiment.
As shown in FIG. 3, in the present embodiment, the L64 orthogonal table that is the first combination table and the L108 orthogonal table that is the second combination table are arranged in a direct product arrangement.

  Tolerance design conditions are assigned to the L64 orthogonal table. Specifically, the level width of each design value of the design data is assigned. In the case of the present embodiment, the L64 orthogonal table is a two-level orthogonal table, and there are a case where there is a specified error width ± σ and a case where there is a half error width ± σ / 2. 64 types are assigned.

The L108 orthogonal table is assigned to reproduce variations during mass production. Specifically, the direction of the change when each design value of the design data changes is assigned. In the case of the present embodiment, the L108 orthogonal table is a three-level orthogonal table, and there are three levels: no error, an error in the + direction, and an error in the-direction. Allocate 108 different combinations.
Then, the product of the values of the two orthogonal tables arranged in the direct product arrangement as described above is calculated. That is, the n = 64 × 108 = 6912 model is calculated by the Cartesian product operation of 64 values according to the L64 orthogonal table and 108 values according to the L108 orthogonal table.

  In this way, the direct product calculation is performed, and the total variation amounts (variances) Vt1, Vt2, Vt3,..., Vt64 of the lens apparatus in each error state, and the substitute values η1, η2 for predicting the yield , Η3,..., Η64. The dispersion Vt1, Vt2, Vt3,..., Vt64 and the yield prediction substitute values η1, η2, η3,..., Η64 of the L64 orthogonal table are, for example, values indicating lens performance [1-MTF value. ] Can be calculated using yij (j = 1 to 64, i = 1 to 108). In other words, the dispersion (Vtj), which is the total amount of variation of the lens apparatus, is calculated by Expression (1), and the yield substitution substitute value ηj is calculated by using Expression (2).

[Equation 1]
Vtj = (yj1 ^ 2 + yj2 ^ 2 + ... + yj108 ^ 2) / 108 (1)
ηj = 10LOG (1 / Vtj) (2)
(However, “yj1 ^ 2” means (yj1 * yj1).)

  FIG. 4 is a diagram showing the actual lens values corresponding to the values in the L64 orthogonal table and the L108 orthogonal table shown in FIG. 3 as a matrix. For example, if the tolerance of the lens having the thickness D1 is 0.03 mm, there is an error in the + direction when the value of the three-level L108 orthogonal table is “1”, and when the value is “2”. There is no error, and when the value is “3”, there is an error in the − direction.

When the value of the L64 orthogonal table of the two levels is “1”, the tolerance is the above-described value of 0.03 mm, and when the value is “2”, the tolerance is the half value of 0.015 mm. It is. Each characteristic value (1-MTF) can be obtained according to the combination of the values 1 and 2 of the L64 orthogonal table for determining the level width and the values 1, 2, and 3 of the L108 orthogonal table for determining the level setting direction. .
In this way, 64 predicted values are obtained by calculating n = 6912 models based on the values of each orthogonal table.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart showing a calculation process using two orthogonal tables arranged in a direct product as shown in FIG.
As shown in FIG. 5, first, j in the L64 orthogonal table in FIG. 3 is set to any value within the range of 1 to 64 (step S11). The value of j is set in order from 1, for example. Next, i in the L108 orthogonal table is set to any value from 1 to 108 (step S12). The value of i is also set sequentially from 1, for example. Then, for the lens device to be evaluated, the individual characteristics of each lens such as the change in the lens surface interval, the state of occurrence of eccentricity, and the aspherical scaling are determined according to the respective conditions according to the orthogonal table ( Step S13).

  Then, the direction of change for each characteristic indicated by the value i of the L108 orthogonal table is set, and the set amount of each tolerance specified by the value j of the L64 orthogonal table is given (step S14). For example, in the case of the lens eccentricity (shift amount), the direction of the change is an upward shift, no shift, or a downward shift. In the case of the lens thickness, the thickness changes to the left side, does not change, and changes to the right side. Here, the set amount of each tolerance is the tolerance as it is, and is ½ of the tolerance.

  With such settings, a model of the lens apparatus with a tolerance is set (step S15), and the MTF, the coordinates of the light rays, and the like, which are comprehensive characteristics, are calculated for the model of the lens apparatus (step S16). When the MTF is obtained, the lens device sensitivity Vtj and the yield prediction value ηj, which are the total variation amount (dispersion) of the lens device, are calculated (step S17).

When the processing so far is completed, it is determined whether there is another i that has not been calculated for the L108 orthogonal table (step S18). If there is another i, the process returns to step S12, and another i is calculated. Repeat the process with the value.
In step S18, if all i values (1 to 108) are processed with the current j value setting, is there another j value not calculated for the L64 orthogonal table? If there is another j, the process returns to step S11 and the process is repeated with another j value.
By repeating the process in this way, the characteristics for a total of 6912 models are calculated by multiplication of j = 1 to 64 and i = 1 to 108.

  If it is determined in step S19 that the characteristic values have been calculated for all the combinations, a factor / effect diagram is created based on the obtained characteristic values (step S20). The factor effect diagram created here is a characteristic diagram as shown in FIG. 7 or FIG.

FIG. 6 is a flowchart showing an operation when the evaluation process shown in the flowchart of FIG. 5 is applied from the design of the lens apparatus to mass production.
As shown in FIG. 6, when the design of the lens apparatus composed of a plurality of lenses is completed (step S101), the designed lens model is evaluated using the design data of the lens apparatus. (Step S102). The evaluation in step S102 is performed by arithmetic processing in which the L64 orthogonal table and the L108 orthogonal table shown in FIG. And, from this evaluation result, since the variation of the characteristics when the designed lens model is actually manufactured is predicted, the variation state of the predicted characteristics and the dispersion characteristics themselves are within the allowable range. A prototype based on the designed data is performed (step S103). If there is no problem with the prototyped lens device, the process proceeds to mass production of the lens device (step S104).

  If there is a problem with the variation or characteristics obtained as a result of the evaluation in step S102, the design data is immediately corrected and the evaluation process is performed again before entering the prototype. Here, the modification of the design data is assumed to be, for example, a review of tolerances of members such as the respective lenses.

Note that the evaluation in step S102 shown in FIG. 6 is an evaluation based on arithmetic processing in which the L64 orthogonal table and the L108 orthogonal table shown in FIG. For this reason, the evaluation which reproduced the state close | similar to the dispersion | variation at the time of actual mass production can be performed.
In other words, since the evaluation using the L108 orthogonal table has been conventionally performed, whether or not each value constituting the lens model has a tolerance is determined and evaluated by 108 different combinations. On the other hand, in the case of the present embodiment, when determining whether there is a tolerance by 108 different combinations, when the tolerance is a specified tolerance as it is, or when it is a half tolerance Judgment is made in 64 different cases.

  Therefore, for each characteristic in the lens model, it is determined how much the effect on the final lens model characteristics is when the tolerance is given up to the allowable value or when the tolerance is limited to half of the allowable value. can do. For this reason, since the factor which should be managed at the time of mass production can be specified, the characteristic of the lens apparatus mass-produced can be made favorable, for example by making the tolerance of the factor into 1/3.

FIGS. 7 and 8 are factor effect diagrams of the lens model created based on the values of the individual factors according to this embodiment.
FIG. 7 is a diagram showing the relationship between each factor and the yield prediction substitute value η by executing an evaluation process for a certain lens model according to the flowchart of FIG. The horizontal axis of FIG. 7 shows each characteristic (factor). That is, lens thicknesses (or lens intervals) D1 to D21, lens decentering amounts L1S to L11S, and aspheric lens shapes ASP1SCA to ASP2SCA are sequentially arranged. For each characteristic, a case where the tolerance is calculated with a prescribed value and a case where the tolerance is calculated with a limit of 1/2 are shown.
The vertical axis in FIG. 7 is the yield prediction substitute value η. This yield prediction substitute value η indicates that the lens characteristics are better as it goes on the upper side of the vertical axis. That is, the yield is good.

  As can be seen from the factor-effect diagram shown in FIG. 7, the lens tolerances L1S, L2R1S, and L2R2S of the individual lens characteristics are reduced to 1/2 of the case where the designed tolerances are maintained. It can be seen that there is a relatively large change in characteristics when the tolerance is limited. Therefore, the decentering amounts L1S, L2R1S, and L2R2S of this lens are extracted as management targets, and the respective tolerances are reviewed. Thereby, the characteristic at the time of mass-producing a lens model can be improved.

  The values shown in the effect factor diagram of FIG. 7 are not affected by the order in which the factors are arranged. That is, in the case of the effect factor diagrams shown in FIG. 11 and FIG. 12 as a conventional example, as compared with FIG. 11 and FIG. There was a big difference, and there was a problem in the reliability of calculation results. On the other hand, in the case of the present embodiment, even if the order of each factor is changed from the state of FIG. 7, the value does not change and the reliability is high.

  FIG. 8 is a factor effect diagram showing a lens model different from FIG. The vertical axis and the horizontal axis are the same as those in FIG. In the example shown in FIG. 8, it is understood that the lens eccentricity L1S is extracted as a management target, and the characteristics of the mass-produced product can be improved by reviewing the tolerance of the lens eccentricity L1S.

As described above, according to the present embodiment, the first combination table and the second combination table are arranged in a direct product arrangement, the level widths of a plurality of factors are assigned to the first combination table, By assigning the direction of the factor variation to the combination table and performing the evaluation calculation, it becomes possible to accurately determine the variation in mass production by the evaluation calculation.
Therefore, it is possible to manufacture mass-produced products with appropriate characteristics by correcting tolerances after the evaluation is completed, and the time and effort required from the design of the lens model to the start of mass production can be greatly reduced. .
That is, conventionally, as shown in FIG. 10, after a problem occurred after the start of mass production, it was necessary to rework and correct the prototype, but in the case of the present embodiment, it is shown in the flowchart of FIG. In this way, if the prototype can be obtained as designed, the influence on the characteristics due to variations during mass production can be estimated. Therefore, it is possible to mass-produce what is estimated at the design prototype stage.

In addition, although the example in the case of selecting the characteristic (factor) of each optical component such as a lens constituting the lens apparatus (lens model) and simulating the overall characteristic of the lens has been described here, other than the lens apparatus In addition, the same evaluation process can be applied to various products.
Specifically, in the case where factors of multiple parts that make up a product mutually affect the overall characteristics of the product, various factors can be used to determine the effect of each factor on the overall characteristics. Applicable to products. Also, the two orthogonal tables in the direct product arrangement are not limited to L64 and L108, and other orthogonal tables may be used as appropriate.

  For example, when designing an optical disc recording / reproducing apparatus incorporating an optical pickup, the balance between the accuracy of various servo mechanisms of the optical disc and the accuracy of signal reading from the disc due to the arrangement of optical components in the optical pickup is balanced. Thus, the present invention can be applied when designing a mechanism with high accuracy. Moreover, you may apply to the design of the product comprised by several components which have nothing to do with optical components.

In the above-described embodiment, the simulation is performed using the dedicated information processing apparatus illustrated in FIG. Instead of such a dedicated information processing apparatus, for example, a program (software) that performs arithmetic processing by arranging two orthogonal tables shown in FIG. In other words, the created program may be mounted on a general-purpose computer device, and the processing may be performed as shown in the flowchart of FIG.
In this case, the program for executing the arithmetic processing may be stored and distributed in various storage media such as an optical disk, a magneto-optical disk, and a semiconductor memory. Alternatively, it may be downloaded via a transmission medium such as the Internet.

  DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1-13 ... Lens, 31 ... CPU, 32 ... Work RAM, 33 ... Memory | storage part, 34 ... Input-output part, 35 ... Display part

Claims (6)

An orthogonal table for assigning tolerance design conditions to the mass production accuracy of a lens device manufactured by combining a plurality of lenses, and any one of the surface spacing, axial deviation, inclination, surface shape, and refractive index of the plurality of lenses A level range as a tolerance of design values of one or a plurality of factors is an orthogonal table assigned to a plurality of stages and a combination table reproducing variations at the time of mass production, wherein the design values of the plurality of lenses are When changing, an evaluation method of a combination lens device that evaluates using a combination table assigned to a plurality of stages, in which the direction of error of the plurality of factors including variation at the time of mass production varies,
The information processing apparatus performs a direct product operation on the design value including the level width of the plurality of factors allocated to the orthogonal table and the error of the plurality of factors including the changing direction allocated to the combination table. And calculating a comprehensive characteristic value of the lens device under conditions based on the orthogonal table and the combination table;
A method for evaluating a combined lens device, comprising: a step of creating a factor-effect diagram for determining a factor having a large influence on the calculated comprehensive characteristic value.   In the orthogonal table, as the level width as the tolerance of the design value, two levels are assigned, that is, when there is a specified error width and when there is an error width of ½ of the specified error width. The evaluation method of a combination lens device according to claim 1.   2. The combination table is assigned with three levels of no error, an error in the + direction, and an error in the-direction as directions in which the error of the plurality of factors varies. 3. The evaluation method of the combination lens device according to 2.   The method for evaluating a combination lens device according to claim 1, wherein the comprehensive characteristic value is MTF or [1-MTF]. An orthogonal table for assigning tolerance design conditions to the mass production accuracy of a lens device manufactured by combining a plurality of lenses, and any one of the surface spacing, axial deviation, inclination, surface shape, and refractive index of the plurality of lenses A level range as a tolerance of design values of one or a plurality of factors is an orthogonal table assigned to a plurality of stages and a combination table reproducing variations at the time of mass production, wherein the design values of the plurality of lenses are In the case of variation, there is an evaluation program for a combination lens device for evaluating the direction in which the error of the plurality of factors including variation at the time of mass production fluctuates by using a combination table assigned to a plurality of stages. And
A direct product operation is performed between the design value including the level width of the plurality of factors assigned to the orthogonal table and the error of the plurality of factors including the varying direction assigned to the combination table, and the orthogonality is obtained. A function of calculating a comprehensive characteristic value of the lens device under conditions based on the table and the combination table;
A combination lens device evaluation program for causing the computer to realize a factor effect diagram for calculating a factor having a large influence on the calculated overall characteristic value.   A storage medium storing the evaluation program for the combination lens device according to claim 5.

Images