Hi All, I’m trying to use python to export data from the FFT MTF analysis. I want to export data only up to 20 lp/mm, but when I try to do this, I only get a series out to 40 lp/mm. I also tried a different frequency above 40 lp/mm, and it only will output the data out to 40 lp/mm.     newWin = TheAnalyses.New_FftMtf()    newWin_settings = newWin.GetSettings()    newWin_settings.MaximumFrequency = 20    newWin_settings.SampleSize = ZOSAPI.Analysis.SampleSizes.S_128x128    newWin.ApplyAndWaitForCompletion()    newWin_Results = newWin.GetResults()    data = newWin_Results.GetDataSeries(1)    xRaw = data.XData.Data    x = np.array(tuple(xRaw))    print(x)Does anyone know how to make it so that I only get data up to a specified frequency? 

Dear all, I made a simulation of a laser scanning confocal microscope in OpticStudio for teaching purposes.The simulation can be launched here: https://laser-scanning-confocal-simulation.microscopybench.com/You’ll find more details about the simulation here: https://microscopybench.com/an-interactive-ray-tracing-simulation-of-laser-scanning-confocal-microscopy/And my OpticStudio files here: https://github.com/Omnistic/laser_scanning_confocal_simulationI used some ZPL tricks to get the file to also work nicely with the built-in sliders of OpticStudio.And as is becoming customary, tagging ​@Erin.Elliott in the hope that more programmatic options for image exports are added to the layouts and more ways to customize rays (I think the ray thickness is broken in 2026 R1 or at least it works very differently than in 2025 R1 and 2).Take care all, David

Hello,I am building a non-sequential model and have observed unexpectedly high back reflection from a surface with an I.98 coating.I have attached the Zemax file for reference. Two detectors were placed just before the surface: one records rays propagating toward the surface, and the other records the back-reflected rays. Based on the I.98 coating, I would expect only ~2% reflection. However, the results show that nearly 50% of the light is being reflected.Has anyone encountered a similar issue? Could there be a reason why the coating appears to be ignored in this setup?Any insights would be greatly appreciated.Regards,Hugh

Hi Zemax users,I am trying to build a transmission grating system.The layout is as follows:ray source → 1st transmission grating → 2nd transmission grating.The diffracted angle from the first grating is used as the incident angle for the second grating.My understanding is that if both gratings use the same diffraction order (here, m = −1), the dispersions should be additive.However, in the LDE, using −1 for both gratings does not seem to work. Instead, using −1 for the first grating and +1 for the second grating works, but the total dispersion is cancelled.I am not sure whether this is due to an incorrect setting, or if my understanding is fundamentally wrong.I also tried another configuration: I rotated the second grating by 90° with respect to the first grating and used the same diffraction order (m = −1).In this case, the result matches what I originally expected for the original configuration.Could you please help explain how to achieve the expected behavior in the original layout,

Hi Zemax users,I am trying to set up a lens system layout as shown below, but I am confused about the following points:Why does the direction of the Fletch arrows reverse? Why does the paraxial focal length of the lens not seem to work as expected?I have attached my data. I would really appreciate any help.Could you please point out what I am doing wrong? Expected Layout and Fletch Arrow direction  Attached Zemax Data Best Regards Yang

HiCan you please help me to set the “Field Height” in image simulation feature.I wish to use the image simuation feature in Wide angle sysyem, lets take for example “Wide angle lens 210 degree field.zmx” file in Zemax examples subdirectory \Sequential\Objectives. For a source file I took the file “Demo Picture 640X480.bmp”What should be the Field Height in this case? The digonal field 105 degrees? or the full Horizonatl field in degress? I wish that Horizontal field to much the Height of my detectorWhen I turned on the feature, the deafult Field Height parameter is 148 degress ? Why?I found this link:https://optics.ansys.com/hc/en-us/articles/43071095752467-How-to-set-up-Image-Simulation-toolbut still, I dont understand what Field Height parameter should I use.Thanks,Talimu

Hi all,I think I found a bug in the RMS wavefront error plotting tool - initially saw it in the 2025 R4 version, but I downloaded the latest 2026 R1 and it’s still there.I was working through some analysis and noticed a discrepancy in the RMS wavefront error values reported on the plot vs evaluation in the merit function. As seen in the example below, the merit function operand RWCE was reporting a fairly different value compared to the plot. Initially I assumed this was due to sampling, but the difference persisted (I also tried comparing rectangular array vs Gaussian quadrature). Next, on a whim, I evaluated the RWCH (chief ray reference) operand and noticed it did match the plot value, which I found odd, because the default for the plot is to reference the centroid. Looking closer at the plot, I noticed that although Centroid is selected as the reference in the settings, the title block reports “Reference: Chief Ray”. Likewise, when Chief Ray is selected in the settings, the plot sh

Hello all, I have a model of the objective, from the supplier as well the lens and wavefront data with Zernike values.The Zernike coefficients in the model do not match the values in the measurements which I assume comes from the manufacturing and assembly tolerances.I want to use the optimization function with the lens dimensions as variables, including tilt and decenter and use the optimization process to reach the dimensions and other parameters that yields similar Zernike values as the measurements.I set up the Zernike polynomial operands with the wavelength and other settings. Use the values of the different Zernike coefficients that I want to reach as “targets” in the editor but when running the optimization, I am far off from the values where I want to be. Am I making a mistake in setting up the operands? Or am I underestimating the complexity of what I want to do, and it will not be feasible?Measured valuesMerit function editor setup​​​​Has anyone performed such an analysis bef

I need the L,M,N values for vectors normal to plane surfaces in non-sequential mode.  I have tried many different ways, and just haven’t found the magic decoder ring yet.  How can I get surface normal components for plane faces on objects in non-sequential mode?

Dear all, In case it can be useful to others, perhaps ​@Robert.Campbell who previously asked:I made a paraxial interactive Kohler illumination simulation.The actual simulation can be launched here: https://kohler-simulation.microscopybench.com/.I have a description of it and a link to the Github repository where the OpticStudio files are hosted here: https://microscopybench.com/an-interactive-ray-tracing-simulation-of-kohler-illumination/.Currently there are some limitations and I cannot realistically add any other controls with my current workflow. If you have any idea how this could be improved, I’d appreciate your help. Perhaps ​@Erin.Elliott has some ideas?I’ll also post a similar content to image.sc: https://forum.image.sc/t/interactive-paraxial-kohler-illumination-simulation/119906.Thanks a lot and take care, David

I don’t know about other users, but I find the new help system that requires an internet connection with login to an Ansys account to be rather annoying and less user friendly than the previous built-in CHM help file.A while back, Tom posted a note that an option for accessing help files without needing an internet connection was in the works:Just wondering if someone from Ansys can comment?Thanks,Jeff

Hello, I am trying to simulate a LED array arranged in a circle with a collimation towards the center of the ring. For some reason, the source rays are interacting with a mirror I arranged in the same way but not with both collimation optics. Why are the lenses not considered in the simulation?Best, Thomas.

An error message is popping up which states: An entry with the same key already exists. I am curious why this error is occurring and what I can do to mitigate.Specifically, this error occurs when I perform a tolerance analysis with a single tolerance operand. I am using the TEZI operands to tolerance the surface form of a conical mirror, and if I only include zernike polynomial 5 (by setting Max# = 5 and Min# = 5). Furthermore, the error only occurs if the tolerance analysis criterion is set to Merit Function and when the RSRE operand is used in the Merit Function. Lastly, I did try to recreate this error on a simplified zemax model made from scratch, and was not able to recreate, which is quite unfortunate. It therefore seems somewhat tied to the specifics on my model. Regardless, I am hoping that understanding where this error comes from may give a hint as to what is happening. Adam  

Maybe it’s just me, but I am no more able of opening the “Go To Surface” popup window from any Editor.The following does not come up (image taken from Help file):I am using opticStudio version 2025 R1.00

I came across the Seidel Coefficient page and found a typo. 

I'd like to point out some mandatory features which, in my humble opinion, the ISO Element drawing utility lacks. I'm probably referring to all well known issues, but still, I believe them to be of paramount relevance to be left unsolved over the years. 1) support for triplets. 2) xml file support for doublets/triplets. More on this, I report a sneaky behaviour of the current feature: if a doublet design is saved, no error is reported by OpticStudio and an empty xml file is saved instead, so that the average user can believe its manually inserted data are securely saved, but actually they are not. When opened, such xml file just reports the string 'XML output is not currently supported for doublets'. 3) drawings saving in a native vector format, such as pdf or svg. At the present time an external pdf printer sw is needed to do so, often with unpredictable results. The same request holds for every graphic output of OpticStudio (diagrams, histograms, plots,...). The cha

Good morning, good afternoon,I am trying to set boundaries on longitudinal compensators on my tolerancing analysis with Monte Carlo runs. As I am using a Merit Function criterion, the boundaries (from what I understood), must be explicitely defined in the Merit Function tab with the PMLT and PMGT operands for each surface that acts as a compensator. I did set them, as you can see in the next screenshot.I also declared the compensators in the Tolerance Data Editor (2nd screenshot), by using the CPAR operand (I found a topic on the forums explaining that it was the method to follow). I declared the 4 compensators I wanna use (I would like to use the thickness of these surfaces as compensators), so I did use the #1 parameter. But when I try to run the tolerancing, the error message appears (CPAR 6 1 is invalid). Would you know where this problem comes from? Maybe I am not doing this the right way or there is another method to do so.Help would be greatly appreciated!Thank you very much :DM

Hi, I am using Physical Optics Propagation and try to compute the coupling into a monomode fiber.Should I use “Gaussian Waist” as fiber type? I think “Top Hat” is for multimode, right?And what is “Waist X-Y”, is it the physical diameter onf the fiber core, or the Mode Field Diameter (MFD) of the fiber?ThanksJulien D. 

What is the difference between Orthogonal Descent and Damped Least Squares?

Hi, I am trying to use RMS wavefront as criterion for tolerancing. When I check the value of the criterion in the tolerancing tool, it is 10 times lower than in the wavefront map! I tried to improve the sampling either in the tolerancing menu or in the wavefront map menu, but it didn’t help. I only have one wavelength and one field to simplify.Thanks if anyone has an explanation…Julien

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

Dear members,I am trying to use the NSC quick Focus button but an error occurs saying that there are not Sequence /groups available.What is a sequence or group and how can I define it? Thanks Regards Gabriele

Hello,I need to model an imperfect retroreflector, such as those found on safety jackets or road signs, as shown in the picture below. I would like the retroreflection to be within a cone of angles ranging from 2 to 10 degrees from the source.In Sequential mode, I discovered that we can add a retroreflector surface, but the beam still only reflects from the original source. I tried changing the scattering surface, but even when I used a Lambertian, Gaussian, ABg or BSDF and set the Scatter Fraction to 1, it still didn’t work. The rays still go back to where they came from.In Non-Sequential mode, I managed to add a Lambertian, Gaussian or BSDF in the Scatter Model panel, but when I give an angle to the surface, there is still a specular (BRDF) effect. There is something to change here but I don’t know what nor how.Is there a way to simulate such backscattering or retroreflection?Thank you for you help

Hi friends,I don’t have part designer, so I always struggle to get a CAD file to a User defined surface. Looking at all the posts closest I see is the link below, but the author never posted the .csv file or the CAD so I can’t test the code since step1 and step2 didn’t work out for me. Wondering if anyone else had the same issues and if someone figured out a way to convert a CAD file to a closed loop freeform or a aspheric surface?Converting CAD data of the TIR lens into the parametric surface for optimization in NSQ mode | Zemax Community 

I know I can manually load the ZTD file using Tolerancing data viewer and copy the data to excel.  I would like to automate the procedure using Matlab or Python since I have more than 50 ZTD files. Thank you very much.