Dear all, In the manual, it is written : “Samp: The grid size. A value of 10 would yield a 10 x 10 grid of rays”. I need to use CENX(Y) with the highest accuracy. What is the maximum acceptable value of samp ? Is there another way to increase the accuracy of CENX(Y) ? Many thanks. Best regards, Thierry. 

Dear all,I’m working on a project of ultra-precise micro-arcsecond relative astrometry space observatory (Theia). Especially, I need to map the image plane (0.5°x0.5°) with a very high accuracy. For instance, I have to study the variations of positions of the PSF (with CENX/CENY) due to some perturbations (distortion, tilts of the mirrors...).By default, the number of fields is limited to 2025 for my premium version, but I would need 100x100 fields.It’s rather easy to generate such a new grid, but the parameter “i” (field number) of CENX/Y refers to the (default) field table.Is there a way to use CENX/Y with this new grid ?Many thanks,Thierry.

Hello,I would like to model the propagation of a polarized light beam through a biaxial crystal.While methods for uniaxial crystals seem to be well established, I am unsure how to approach this problem for biaxial crystals.How do I handle this case?Thank you very much for your help.Best regards,Dirk

From this KB it is clear that we can pivot an element about any arbitrary pivot point in space. This is Ok for intermediary optical elements in the optical chain but breaks when you want to pivot either the Object of Image surface.Here is a an example showing a simple Optic Fiber with Chief ray centered on to Image surface. How can I pivot Surfaces 1→3 about the Pivot point centered on the Image surface?  

Hi,I would like to have your assistance.I got a design with a Blackbox. I want to export a STEP file with solid beam.I manage to create STEP file with all the our options (XY fan, grid, ring, etc.) but the solid beam. When I export with solid beam, the export fails.Do you know how to solve this issue?

Is anyone else here experiencing 2026R1 crash randomly when trying to use MTF or set anything in the MTF analysis settings? Or as a matter of fact, any other analysis window and its setting?Since upgrading to 2026R1, the app has crashed multiple times and always has to do with analysis window settings or IIRC even trying to dock/undock analysis windows.  I have not experienced this issue in 2025R204.  Cheers!

Here are some notes for references if you are trying to change the preferences settings in ZOS-API! The ZOSAPI.IZOSAPI_Connection.PreferencesFile only works in standalone mode and not in other 3 modes. When you didn't specify a PreferenceFile (or when the given path is wrong), all settings in the preferences cannot be changed by API. In other words, only in standalone mode, you can change preferences settings. The only way to read a second preferencesFile is to close the current IZOSAPI_Application, change the path, and reconstruct the IZOSAPI_Application. In other words, I cannot read a new PreferenceFile in real time when I’m opening a file via ZOS-API in the standalone application mode. Best regards, Michael

Hello!I’m working on a system in which I evaluate physical optics propagation (POP) for beams of several different sizes in the merit function. The way I change the beam size within POP is using a little macro I wrote (see snippet below). This code works well when I’m optimizing or playing with values in the LDE, but it does not yield consistent results when I run a tolerance analysis. I suspect this is because of how .cfg files are handled during tolerancing.Is there a better way to modify the POP parameters so that they are modified appropriately during tolerancing?  path$ = $PATHNAME() + "\"lensFilename$ = $FILENAME()lengthFilename = SLEN(lensFilename$)shortenFilename$ = $LEFTSTRING(lensFilename$, lengthFilename-3)cfgFilename$ = path$ + shortenFilename$ + "CFG"w0_in = PVHX() # read in the HX parameter. "PV" is a mnenomic for "pass value"! change the beam waist of the light coming from the fiberMODIFYSETTINGS cfgFilename$, POP_PARAM1, w0_in # Waist X of beam definition tabMODIFYSETTI

Hello everybody, I am designing holographic elements using the optically fabricated hologram surface (OFH) in OpticStudio 2023, and I tried sharing my file with someone using OpticStudio 2025 and the behaviour of the surface in both version does not match.In OpticStudio 2023 (which seems to work well), all of the rays are diffracted by the OFH surface, however in the 2025 version, only the central area of the OFH diffracts light, or only a line along the x-axis diffracts the rays. The stop size also keeps changing.Does anybody have experience working with OFH in OpticStudio 2025 and could point me to obvious differences between the two versions? Or could anybody explain the difference in behaviour I am seeing?Thanks a lot for your help,Cheers,P  

I stumbled today on this and thought I would share the bug and workarounds as it may hit someone else one day (OpticStudio 2026 R1.00 on Windows 11).I wanted to multiply the beam X and Y widths from POP by a constant (to have the FWHM) and thought I could use PROB for that. Here is what the merit function returned:No issue with the POPD computation. However, as you may notice on rows 14 and 20, Zemax thinks that 0.0328921 and 0.0369547 multiplied by 0.849 is 0.I decided to move the multiplications as the bottom all together (tried with and without a CONF 1 without change) and found that Zemax is still confused (at row 23)Here are the 2 workarounds I have found:1- instead of multiplying by 0.849, divide by its inverse (1.177). DIVB seems to be fine with it2- introduce a constant with the value and use PROD to multiply the operands by the constant operand Not being a programmer, I would assume that there is some threading issue and that PROB does not wait for the result of POPD (which is

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.