We use cookies to enhance and personalize your experience. If you accept you agree to our full cookie policy. Learn more about our cookies.
We use 3 different kinds of cookies. You can choose which cookies you want to accept. We need basic cookies to make this site work, therefore these are the minimum you can select. Learn more about our cookies.
Hello friends, I have a license key that expires on April 2016. What is the last version of optic studio I can use? I am currently using 14.2 and its working fine but I don’t know if that is the last version of optic studio before april 2016. Any feedback will be helpful.
The documentation about Image Simulation on the “Apply fixed apertures” is : Apply Fixed Apertures If checked, all surfaces with optical power that have no aperture defined are modified for this computation to have a circular aperture at the current clear semi-diameter or semi-diameter value. Without this change in the aperture definition, rays may pass the surface beyond the listed clear semi-diameter or semi-diameter, especially if the Field Height exceeds the field of view defined by the field points. This leads to misleading illumination, typically at the edges of the image. I’m kinda confused by the vocabulary here, probably just by lack of knowledge on my side. In the first sentence, “… have no aperture defined...” refers to the surface’s Aperture data ? so that means “for surfaces whose Aperture data is None for Pickup From and Aperture Type” ? - like so : Then, “to have a circular aperture at the current clear semi-diameter” : from what I understnd, with “Clear Semi-Diameter” s
I tried those code: FOR i = -0.500, 0.500, 0.1 PRINT $STR(i)," ",NEXTPRINT! This one starts from -0.5 and ends at 0.5 FOR i = -0.500, 0.500, 0.05 PRINT $STR(i)," ",NEXTPRINT ! This one starts from -0.5 and ends at 0.5 FOR i = -0.500, 0.500, 0.01 PRINT $STR(i)," ",NEXTPRINT ! This one starts from -0.5 and ends at 0.49, WHY? Thanks! Xing
Hi, I’m currently trying to trace a large amount (~1 million) of rays with very specific output position and trace their path length it takes them to reach a detector and then output the position as well as the specific path length of that beam. Currently not using scattering, but in future, I would like to extend this to scattering as well. My first thought was to create a loop that would create single rays, trace them, return the OPL through a Merit Function and then output in the end, but I assume that this would take forever to compute. Any idea how this would be done more efficiently? I’ve seen that batch ray trace might be an option, but I don’t know enough about it or other alternatives to evaluate correctly. Thank you for any help!
I don’t understand how I should set the Filter and RayDatabaseFile of the DetectorViewer in non-sequential mode. SHould I use : DetectorView = zos.system.Analyses.New_DetectorViewer() or : DetectorView = zos.system.Analyses.New_Analysis(zos.ZOSAPI.Analysis.AnalysisIDM.DetectorViewer) Then should I use : settings = DetectorView.GetSettings() and/or ? settings = zos.ZOSAPI.Analysis.Settings.RayTracing.IAS_DetectorViewer(settings) Then using : settings.RayDatabaseFilename = db_file settings.Filter = "h9" Those seems to make the analysis fail
The Ray Database Viewer reports quite a bit of data, but it doesn't seem to have angle of incidence. Is there an option to show that information? Or do I have to derive it myself?
EDIT TITLE: How to setup boundary constraints for custom Compensator Surface in LDE/MFE. Hello: I am having trouble understand how to constraint a compensator surface. Setup: I am using Surface7 as a compensator as shown below defined by MNCA, MXCA, PMGT and PMLT operands to control the boundary limits of this compensator surface variables (thickness, Decenters X&Y, Tilts in XYZ). For test: I apply a DecenterX of -0.002mm on Surface3. When I execute optimization; I notice that the Optimizer can change the Compensator thickness value to go beyond the set boundary limits. Why does this occur? How can I strictly limit the Optimizer to limit itself within the boundary limits I specify? Thanks - Asuku
Hi everyone, I'm working on an afocal system using its paraxial layout, and I’m wondering if there's a way to specify or constrain the F# of a single paraxial lens within the MFE. Specifically, I’d like to optimize both the focal length and diameter of the lens, but maintain a fixed ratio between them (i.e., control the F#), or at least define some boundary conditions to keep them consistent. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance!
I want to overlay a pair of greyscale Huygens PSFs from the same source field, but two different wavelengths. It’s a spectometer, so the image locations are different. SOLVED! the Huygens PSF plots are showing the different wavelengths at the correct locations. Not sure why it didn’t seem to be working last night.
I want to create a universal plot of Huygens PSF FWHM vs wavelength or field. Is there an operand that would make this possible or do I need to write a script to (or manually) extract the FWHM from the Huygens plot data? This is for a spectrometer. I’d also like to get the local dispersion around a number of central wavelengths. If you can think of any built-in tools or shortcuts for doing this, please let me know. Thanks!
I used global optimization on a 2-lens imaging system with each lens having dual even asphere surface. The merit function improved a lot but now the diffraction MTF seems too good compared to how the rays look focusing in the 3D layout and how they look in the spot diagram. The only thing I can think is that since I have rather steep slopes to my lenses (due some high conic constants and one surface have high r^8 coefficient) that maybe there is some sampling issue. I did increase the ray density for the spot diagram and it does improve, but I am still concerned about the accuracy of the results I am getting. Any advice would be helpful -- Dan
I’m trying to export CAD for someone who can’t read STEP 242, but can read STEP 214. Is there a way to do this in Zemax? Thanks!
Hi Everyone, I would like to ask for help with an assignment that addresses the topics of polarization and absorption? I will try to introduce you to the problem at the beginning. Unpolarized light at a small angle of incidence reaches the front surface of the cell (a 1mm window of MgF2), and then passes through a cell filled with absorption gas. During propagation, the gas absorbs 99% of the P-polarized light and transmits 100% of the S-polarized light. At the end of the cell is another MgF2 window through which the beam passes. The axis of the crystal is parallel to the optical axis. I expect that because of this residual p-polarized light, the total polarization state will change (probably not much) but I would like to quantify the final polarization state. I don't quite know how to model in Zemax the absorption coefficients k as a function of wavelength for different polarization components and in turn determine the final polarization state. I tried to use the Birefringece In/Out s
112 points
50 points
27 points
22 points
23873 points
14518 points
13557 points
11074 points
10588 points
Already have an account? Login
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.