I was eager to try out this new feature in 2024 R2.02, but I don’t think it’s working properly. I tried exporting a simple file, one OAP mirror with 9 fields defined. When opening the file in SpaceClaim, I did not see any ray footprints on the mirror. I tried all 4 file type options, and none seem to do what I would expect. Can somebody explain the intended workflow and outcome here?Thanks,Sean 

Hello, I want to ask how exactly we can calculate the state of polarization in general 3d form or how zemax do it given the optical axis orientation n and the propagation direction of light k How the ordinary and extraordinary E are calculated in this case I think From k and initial polarization we calculate Ein and then Ee​=(Ein​⋅n)n Eo​=Ein​−(Ein​⋅n)nEo experience no and Ee experience effective refractive index Where I can find some detail calculation steps ? Thanks 

I am having trouble understanding the differences between:the sliders in Optimize/Manual Adjustment/Slider the sliders in Optimize/Manual ADjustment/Visual OptimizerFrom what I understand, they both allow to create several sliders on various parameters and visualize their impact on the system. 

Hi zemaxers, I am trying to do a prism surface accuracy simulation in non-sequential mode as illustration below.I used a compound lens to create the prism, but found that it just combine two surfaces as a rectangle object.  it seems the compound lens ignore the tilt parameter in the surface.my questionhow to set the surface tilt in  the compound lens? except the compound lens method, is there any other way to do a surface accuracy effects in non-sequential mode? Thanks Yang   

Hello,I am new here. I believe that the exit pupil is a plane where PARY (0,1) (0,0) is exactly zero (or a very small numerical error). However, in the simple example attached, I read EXPP = -25.26 µm. This difference from zero is bigger than a numerical error. Could you explain why the exit pupil is not exactly where is should be?Thank you,Olivier

I’m having some trouble running a tolerancing script in OpticStudio, where I continually get the “nominal criterion cannot be computed” error when I attempt to run the script. I’ve tracked it down to a CPAR compensator I’ve defined on a Zernike Fringe Phase surface. I’m attempting to use the phase surface Z9 term to null the system spherical for each Monte Carlo file in the tolerance analysis.I’ve confirmed the compensator is defined correctly (CPAR Surf# Param23), and I’m able to set the same parameter to a variable and optimize in the nominal design file, so I can’t understand why the tolerance script cannot implement this as a compensator. If I comment out the CPAR line, the nominal criteria evaluates and the script runs without issue. Can anyone explain why I’m unable to use this compensator?

One year ago, ​@Xianglei wrote a topic (thanks a lot!) about:Since its been quite painful to generate such plots with ZPL (thanks to ​@Erin.Elliott, we might get a fix in 2025 🤞):I’ve been using the ZOS-API option more and more to create animations. It is more stable, but currently lacks a couple of options. Since we’re approaching the Christmas period 🎅, this is my wish list to improve the ZOS-API Layout Exports feature (in order of importance):As far as I understand, we cannot specify the file type of the export. I’ve tried to use multiple extensions in OutputFileName (.JPG, .PNG, ...etc.) but the file size remains the same. Based on the file size, which is rather small (for a given image size), I’m assuming the export is made in .JPG regardless of the extension specified. Can the file type be added to the ZOS-API? Could we get a vector graphics file type? Although there’s a property RaysLineThickness, for me, it doesn’t seem to have an effect. If someone is anyway going to look at

I have a simple system of a laser, pinhole slit, and diffraction grating and having trouble mapping the expected diffraction pattern. I have performed this experiment in real life, and can see the spots align 16 mm apart vertically after exiting the diffraction grating.  I have moved my system to non sequential mode and ray traced, but the detector viewer continues to show one giant spot. Can someone please help me better understand what could be the issue here? I am using scattering surfaces. 

I tried to do Boolean subtraction with Freeform Z object and cylinder volume in order to drill a cylindrical hole through the Freeform Z lens. But Zemax won’t make that boolean subtraction as I wanted.Is this bug or did I miss something here?

Hi all, Is there a fast way to make binary grating from radial grating?Some thing like that:Into:  EDIT:Well I succeed to make a digital function. How I write it in dll. file?Thanks in advance,Nadav

I create a Source Diode file with eliptical ratio of 3 and 0 astigmatism, evergthing including the source sizes are as expected, no problems here, see the raytracing at the left side below. But after I type in a tiny astigmatism of 0.001 (keep everything else untouched), the source size shrinks a lot. What is happening? 

Dear all,I have a question regarding the Quantum Yield when used in the Phosphors and Fluorescence Volume Physics section in the non-sequential mode.I have a simple setup in Zemax (file in attachment) where I want to replicate a fluorescence quantum yield measurement. It consists of a collimated monochromatic excitation source, a rectangular volume with the volume physics set, and a polar detector capturing all the scattered and fluorescent light. The absorption spectrum is flat at the excitation wavelength (550 nm), the emission spectrum is an arbitrary curve around 600-700 nm, and the quantum yield spectrum is a single value of 1. I have chosen the extinction coefficient such that around 60% of the light is absorbed/re-emitted and the rest is transmitted normally.With this setup, I would have expected that no light would be lost. However, looking at the total power captured by the polar detector, only 93% of the light remains. Looking at the flux vs wavelength plots shows that we hav

Hello,I am designing some systems using cylindrical lenses and I am exploring the possibility of using freeform lenses, but I don’t have a lot of experience on this. I know there are some surfaces for this available in OpticStudio, but which one can be best used for cylindrical freeform lenses, such that there is only optical power in one direction?Also, what is generally a good way for such a design? First optimize a standard system and from there introduce some freeform variables? Or directly go to the freeform variables?Thanks in advance!

I found that Zemax pro license doesn’t support “User-Defined Plugin for Surface, Objects, Sources, and Scatter Profiles”, Does this include source DLL and fiber DLL, such that this types of sources won’t be supported in the pro license?  

Hello everyone,I am attempting to create a homogeneous, squared light source using a rectangular array in non-sequential mode. Despite setting the following parameters:Layout Rays = Analysis Rays = 1 Number of X and Y = 13 Spacing in X and Y = 1I am unable to achieve the desired result: a simple 13x13 array of equally spaced rays. Is there an alternative method to model this type of source? Thank you in advance for your help!Best regards,Jesús Muñoz 

As per title. I’m not sure if this was asked and answered before.Is there easy way to figure out total ray numbers of the ray file before tracing it?

I tried to change the object surface type to grid sag surface and imported the grid surface data, but the surface sag map did not change. When I imported the grid sag data to any other surface, it was displayed normally, so I am a little doubtful whether grid sag surfaces can be used on object surface(surface 0)? If not, is there any other way? I want to analyze the imaging results of a complex target surface after passing through a certain optical system. Can adding a grid phase surface after the object surface achieve my goal? if yes, How to convert the grid sag surface into the required grid phase surface?

Hi, I am using Non-Sequential mode in OpticStudio, and I am trying to create a square source from a rectangular array. The problem is that the source only traces rays to a single quadrant of the optical system. I would like to create a square source without having to create four separate sources in each quadrant. Thank you in advance! Best regards,Jesús 

I would like to ask you to help with one Zemax file.I use one Lightpath aspheric lens to collimate beam in 30 mm distance.In POP there is some Newtons circles as picture of irradianceIn don’t know, why there is no standard Gaussian distribution of beam. It is looks like some interference of sources……Is it possible, that in lens model is EVEN ASPHERE used ?Or there is some bad settings somewhere ?POP picture, setting and lens data of the lens are in files.Thanks for any answerBest RegardsFrantisek

I designed a custom objective for a laser system, and I want to compare the efficiency (including aperture clipping), and peak intensity with a catalogue objective, whose Blackbox I have.I found that Huygens PSF gives spot quality without considering efficiency, and the geometrical analysis method GIA shows efficiency but not the realistic spot size and peak intensity.Is there a standard practice for comparisons like these?Thanks in advance. 

Hello Zemax Community,I've modeled a freeform lens in sequential mode using the Extended Toroidal Grating Surface Type in Zemax. I defined my lens with parameters for Radius, Conic Constant, and Extended Polynomial Terms. Since the lens is an astigmatic component, it has curvature along the Y-axis while remaining flat along the X-axis, which is why I selected the extended toroidal grating surface.When I converted the sequential model to a non-sequential model using Zemax’s “Convert to NSC Group” feature, the lens appeared as a combination of Standard Surface, Grid Sag Surface, and Compound Lens. However, the performance doesn’t match my original sequential model, and I suspect the conversion process may not have fully captured the lens design.My question is:Is there an object type in NSC mode that allows me to manually enter my Radius, Conic Constant, and Extended Polynomial Terms to recreate the lens accurately? Are there recommended steps for converting this type of lens from Sequent

I read this article (How accurate is the CAD exchange? – Knowledgebase) and I am wondering how it applies to the 3D .dxf export.I intend to use this exported polygon in a silicon fabrication process called greyscale lithography. And now I am wondering how realistic this polygon is. I have an aspherical lens with its 4th, 6th and 8th order coefficients optimized.I'm not expecting a perfect translation as the greyscale process itself isn't perfect (and transforms this continuous shape in steps). But using as many segments the software allows (128), would you say this export is aspherical "enough"? As in, while it may not be as perfect as the modelling Zemax uses, it is still, nonetheless, an aspherical surface, similar to the one I optimized?My exported aspherical lens with 128 segments.Thank you!

 I am looking to model a conical spatial filter and I am trying to figure out the best way to do this. I started with a non-sequential model and an absorbing annular volume as the spatial filter. I am specifically trying to look at the spatial frequencies being clipped by the spatial filter, the output beam profile, and how the roughness of the surface of the spatial filter can impact the output beam. I am using the detector viewers to look at the output beam but is there a way to quantify these results. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. 

Hello,I created an optical system using Thorlabs collimator  RC08FC-P01 (90 degree reflective mirror) and AL2550M  lens. The Zemax files were obtained from Thorlabs site and modified to fit my needs.If I only use a lens as designed by Zemax engineers, the spot size for 405 nm is 0,15 microns, but if I use a collimator and then put the lens in the beam path, the spot size for the same wavelength is much larger at 55 microns.Is this due to design of collimator, software artefact or something else? I attached .zmx files of the lens and collimator+lens designs.

Assume 5 extreme cases:1  If a surface is transparent with Scatter Fraction 1 , how much power is scattered? 2  If a surface has 0.5 reflectance with Scatter Fraction 1 , how much power is scattered and spcular reflected?3  If a surface has 0.5 reflectance with Scatter Fraction 0.5, how much power is scattered and specular reflected?4  If a surface has 1 reflectance with Scatter Fraction 1 , how much power is scattered and specular reflected?5  If a surface has 1 reflectance with Scatter Fraction 0.5, how much power is scattered and specular reflected?