Hello there again friends from the Zemax community, I am trying to run some non-sequential ray-tracing of a system which consists of two elements: one cylinder with planar interfaces and one imported CAD element which has the first surface being flat and in direct contact with the upper surface of the cylinder. When I use the standard user interface to Zemax I do not have any issue with this system but once I try to move to the python API in where I do batch ray-tracing, I notice that somehow the ray-tracer accounts for both “touching” interfaces in between both volumes.  This is an overview of the system I am modeling: In theory, I should only see 3 interfaces and the transition from the upper surface in the cylinder to the upper volume should count only as s single interface. However, I can see that the ray-tracer does not handle this in this way: I was wondering about what could I do to improve this? I have already tried importing the upper surface just as a single surface without d

Dear community, I’ve got the problem of lens data editor that  the MFE related to the initial state after the parameter values in the lens data editor changed.I have the values of the specified parameters in three sets (A, B, C) of lens data editor, including thickness, radius of curvature, and eccentricity and tilt of coordinate discontinuations, etc..I find that the coupling efficiency of B in MFE obtained from A-->B is different from that obtained from A-->C-->B. (After setting the parameters each time, I only performed the operation of refreshing the MFE and did not make any optimization.)Why do the MFE results corresponding to the change of parameter group B from A and from C be different?Looking forward to your answer. I really appreciate it!!

Hello. I am trying to model a Angle Cleaved fiber source that emits beam. I would like to show the exit beam is offset at 4° from the optical fiber mechanical axis. How can I model this in SEQ mode?  Essentially, I want to model something like shown below in Zemax Sequential mode.PS: I am referencing this KB article to model a Angle Cleaved fiber on the receiving side. 

Hello, I am currently trying to replicate some of the previous chats that say you can rotate multiple objects around a common object in the NSCE.  Aligned cylinders (see image above) I currently have a small ellipse as my object  I want the two cylinders to rotate around. The first cylinder has one edge right where the ellipse is and it extends 90mm. Then I wish to start a new cylinder that is smaller in diameter from the end of the first cylinder. This new cylinder extends 50mm. I wish to have both rotate around the ellipse that I have. That is when I rotate the ellipse, the two cylinders rotate and stay centrally aligned to one another. Currently when I try to do the pickup method, I get this result (see image below). The second cylinder rotates 5 degrees, but does not stay aligned with the end of the bigger cylinder. I am not sure how to fix this? I have tried doing pickup on several variables and am not getting any luck. Any and all help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks! 

In the design and analysis of freeform surfaces, local surface data including sag, slope curvature, etc. are extremely important. The newly introduced Surface Data plots in OpticStudio can help you obtain this information easily.

First, can someone confirm that ht Through Focus MTF tool works by modifying the thickness of the second-to-last surface (when the last surface is the image plane) ? If so, would it be possible to specify which surface thickness to vary ?

Hi there,I found a very helpful description of Mark Nicholson on “How to model a black-box optical system using Zernike coefficients”.When I start calculating Huygens PSF in that paraxial equivalent model, I see some deviations to the real system (especially when I go to large field angles).Why and what should I consider to make Huygens PSF work “correctly” in that case? Any ideas?Kind regards!

I have a Gaussian to flattop beam shaper, the layout is attached, the website does not alow me to upload Zemax file. The POP irradiance plot shows strange not-rotational-symmetric wide fringes, although the Guassian beam data used in the layout and POP are exactly the same and the system is rotational symmetric. If converting this system is to NSC, there is no such wide fringes. Can someone explain this? Thanks. 

When I set up an inverted light source, all the components seemed to be malfunctioning. 

Hello,I am currently trying to understand the sampling behavior of the FFT PSF analysis in OpticStudio. The analysis has two sampling parameters:‘Sampling’, hereafter referred to as S, documented as “The size of the ray grid used to sample the pupil”. ‘Display’, hereafter referred to as D, documented as “The display size indicates what portion of the computed data will be drawn when a graphic display is generated. The display grid can be any size from 32 x 32 up to twice the sampling grid size. Smaller display sizes will show less data, but at higher magnification for better visibility”.Based on implementations described in the literature and basic tests with OpticStudio, I assumed the PSF calculation works like this:Sample the wavefront at the pupil with a sampling S; Zero-pad the wavefront to the maximum possible display sampling Dmax; Crop the result to a size D. This last step was inferred from OpticStudio’s output.Based on the properties of the Fourier transform, I assume the foll

I don’t understand some results generated by the Power Pupil Map analysis feature.  Perhaps someone here in the forum can provide insight.For a general lens system, consider the wavefront leaving the exit pupil.  This wavefront is typically not spherical because of aberrations, or perhaps because the lens is a freeform optic.  In either event, the min and max values of the local curvature at any point on the wavefront in the pupil determine the min and max focusing power associated with that pupil location.  Equivalently, we can look at the max and min local focal lengths, which are just the reciprocals of the powers.  The Power Pupil Map is a nice tool to help the user visual this effect.  Several options are available for the form of the data.  Also, a surface must be selected. Consider a simple test case using a plano-convex lens that focuses an on-axis collimated beam.  Spherical aberration causes the exit pupil wavefront to have local curvature that varies over the pupil.  Presuma

We’re excited to introduce a new feature experiment: NSC Sequence Selector in Ansys Zemax OpticStudio 2025 R1.01! This tool is designed to help you track, filter, and analyze rays following a specific optical path in Non-Sequential mode by generating persistent sequence filters.This tool allows you to:Identify and track unique ray sequences Assign and modify sequence filters Use sequence filters in analyses and save/retrieve them Maintain persistent sequences throughout the systemThis feature can be useful for component-level stray light analysis in applications like cellphone cameras, VR/MR devices, HUDs, and folded optical systems.You can access the Sequence Selector from the Help Tab in Non-Sequential mode:Help > Test Lab > Feature Experiments > Sequence Selector Your input is crucial in shaping this feature for future releases. Try it out and share your experience in this thread. Let us know what works, what doesn’t, and any improvements you’d suggest.

In the manual it says “The Rayleigh distance is ignored on input and is automatically recomputed by OpticStudio” however when it is recomputed by Zemax it does not take into account the BPP of the beam, is there any way to make Zemax use the Rayleigh range from the ZBF file? Would making a DLL fix this or does Zemax also ignore the Rayleigh range in a DLL?

Hello everyoneI want to simulate darkfield imaging in zemax nsq mode.In the attached file, I have implemented the reflective target (made by Part designer in Zemax, + shaped) that I want to image, and the coaxial illumination and side illumination.The target is made of two different types of metals that are very thin, and I have actually confirmed that it appears as a darkfield in a microscope or other illumination optical system.(The attached file is a simply configured 4f imaging system.)I want to check whether darkfield illumination is implemented by simply setting the illumination and scattering characteristics of the target in this optical system, so that only the edge of the target is visible as a line.I want to check whether darkfield imaging is implemented by making the side illumination angle closer to the target than in the attached file, and whether any scattering model is used.What parameters should I adjust?       Thank you.    Best Regard

Hi everyone!I'm working with an optical system that operates using a single field (an on-axis collimated beam - object at infinity), and I’d like to estimate its distortion.As I understand it, distortion is typically evaluated by comparing multiple fields, so I would need to add additional ones to get a result. However, I’m wondering if there’s a way to estimate distortion using only one field.I've attached a layout screenshot showing the image space of the system. Is it possible, for example, to infer distortion by analyzing the standard deviation of distances D1, D2, D3, D4, etc.? Presumably, if distortion were zero, these distances would all be equal (I already developed that metric in Non-Sequential raytraces with the API). I realize this is limited to a single axis, but switching to Non-Sequential mode isn't an option in this case, as the system includes a black box component.Any insights would be greatly appreciated.Thank you! 

Hi, using the waveront map analysis, the results are always given in waves. Is there a way to display the results in nanometers? Could be convenient when the specifications are in nanometers, and when you have a lot of different wavelengths and fields, the manual conversion is long…Thanks

Is it possible to import a STEP file model of an optical system into Zemax?  

Hi, I am using a non-sequential mode to simulate a fisheye lens imaging quality. I can see the focused image on the sensor if use log10 intensity scale, And I think the efficiency is too small. I know in the sequential mode, for fisheye we have to choose ray aiming turn off to have better efficiency. Do I have to do something similar in the non sequential mode? or Do I just need to add some lens housing to have a better efficiency? Thanks a lot. 

I create a UDA with 10 dark lines of 0.01mm width and 10 mm length. I place this UDA on Physical Optics Top Hat light source. Some lines are missing in a 2D plotting, increaing sampling does not help. But all lines are show up in Cross X profile. See the 3 graphs below. My question is how to show all the lines in 2D plotting? 

Hello,I’m working in sequential mode with a nonsequential component, which is a CAD part (stp). It’s a quite complex part which I exploded into 13 parts. When I change something (like assigning a material or scaling a part) the program freezes and it takes approx.. 2 minutes loading until I can do anything again, although I disabled the auto-update of all windows. When I update the shaded model the whole program freezes and around 10 minutes later it finishes loading. I already deleted all unneccessary parts and neither the working memory nor the cpu are at full capacity. Does anyone have any ideas on what I could do to be able to work smoothly (or even just a little more smoothly) with complex cad files?Thanks in advance for any help!

I am using configurations to combine multiple arms over a wide wavelength range so I can make sure everything lines up exactly.  I am using a black box lens from a vendor.  The glass in that lens does not work with a wavelength I am using in a different arm.  That black box lens is ignored when the system has the wavelength in question, but this still causes the “Not within valid range” error for the glass.  Is there a way to get around this?  Since it is a black box lens, I can’t go into the glass catalog to make the range larger.

I just noticed this in the user manual in The Setup Tab > Systems Group (the Setup Tab) > System Explorer > Units  It seems the “References on Lens Design” section of the manual used to have this heading. An internet search did not yield any older manuals with a “What doesn’t OpticStudio do?” section, but changing my search to “What doesn’t Zemax do?” resulted in a manual from 2011.  

In order to properly model the polarization rotation of an object made of birefringent material, we have to set up the ray trace mode of the object in the Non-Sequential Component Editor under Object Properties > Index > Birefringent type > Mode: The Mode control allows selection of which rays are actually traced. The distribution of energy does not change with this setting, and energy assigned to rays that are not traced are placed in the “lost energy (thresholds)” sum. Either ordinary or extraordinary rays, or both, may be traced. Waveplate Mode traces the energy along the path of the ordinary ray, however, the extraordinary electric field is also propagated with the ray, and the total electric field will be phase rotated by the differential index in the ordinary and extraordinary directions. Waveplate mode has to be used to model the polarization rotation of the object. In the attached example file, an extended source (Source Rectangle) launches rays parallel to th

The summary is in the text file. The way to save text files from the API is to use the “Output to File” entry that lives in the Classic tab of the Tolerancing tool in the OS GUI. This will save the tolerancing output by the name specified in the same folder that the system is in (be sure to include .TXT to the end). The corresponding API code for this is below:tol.OutputFile = "OutputName.TXT"To store the MonteCarlo and sensitivity data, we need to use the tolerance data viewer to open the saved ztd file and then store the dataset.In order to save the .ZTD files from the ZOS-API, you will need to use the SaveTolDataFile property, and you may set the filename via TolDataFile under ZOSAPI.Tools.Tolerancing.ITolerancing Interface Reference:tol.SaveTolDataFile = Truetol.TolDataFile = "myFile.ztd"Then, once the tolerancing is done, from the Tolerance Data Viewer, you may read the created .ZTD files, by defining the file name and then running the tool. The corresponding python code is as fol

Dear all,I am performing a tolerance analysis in combination with Physical Optics Propagation, and I am noticing a computational time that is a lot longer than expected.More specifically, I am doing a sensitivity analysis using the merit function as the criterion, and with a thickness compensator (COMP) using 5 optimization cycles. The merit function is the fiber coupling efficiency calculated using POP.  The system itself is quite simple, with a single lens to perform the fiber coupling. The file is found in attachment.To investigate the very long computational time, I compared the sensitivity analysis of a single operand both when done manually, and when done using the tolerance tool.Manually, I changed the value of the operand and then ran the optimizer, taking around 2 minutes:Using the tolerance tool, I added the compensator and single operand in the tolerance data editor, and ran the tolerancing tool, which took around 12 minutes on a multi-core processor. This is more than doubl