Hi all, I am thinking of upgrading my laptop in the future, and I wonder if zemax did some benchmark test between Intel core i9-13980HX and AMD Ryzen 7945HX?https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/232138/intel-core-i9-13980hx-processor-36m-cache-up-to-5-60-ghz.htmlhttps://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-ryzen-9-7945hxFurthemore, does 32GB ram is enough for both of these CPU? Thanks,Nadav 

I have been asked to re-create a Zemax design from 2007.  All they have is the Prescription data text file.  Is there  a tool to import this data from the ascii file?  I think I saw such a feature, but can’t find it now in OS.  I enter the data manually, but direct import/conversion would be easier & more accurate.

Is it possible to plot multiple PSFs in zemax in one window using macro? Best,

Why the angular and radial pixels of the polar detector affect the peak intensity and polar angle while the radial size of the detector is same? How the pixels should be decided? 

I’d like to constrain the absolute value of a series of surface curvatures to be less than some value. The only way I see to do this is list each surface with CVVA, use ABSO, and then MAXX and OPLT. Is there an easier strategy?It would be nice to have a operand that controls multiple surfaces, like MNEA for example, to do this more efficiently and automatically include new surfaces added within the set range...Thanks for any help or advice.

Dear all,to choose the best aperture diameter of a lens I need to make a plot where on the x axis is reported the aperture diameter of a surface and on the y axis the percentage efficency of the optics (I mean the number of  unvignetted rays divided  the total number of rays).I’d like to use the plot tools of Zemax and for this I need to hfind two optimization operators which correspond to the Parameter I cited above.However I cannot find something suitable to represent the percentage efficency in the optimization parameters library.Has somebody an idea if there’s one? And if not how could I overcome the lack of it?Thanks a lotBest RegardsGabriele

For some reason, the set vignetting doesn’t work properly. there is an black box lens in the file which should introduce vignetting, some rays are even outside of the boundary. however, when I click the set Vignetting button. it doesn’t seem work. the same file was working on other computer. does any one knows what went wrong here? Thanks,Yu 

Hi,So I’ve been trying to model a system that involves using light that passes through some optical elements into the back pupil of a microscope objective, focuses onto a mirror, and then reflects back through the objective (Thorlabs - TL10X-2P 10X Super Apochromatic Microscope Objective, 0.5 NA, 7.77 mm WD). Both the forward and reverse blackbox files are directly available for download on Thorlabs website, but my attempts so far to actually model using them haven’t been successful unfortunately. The first pass works as expected, since that’s pretty much just taking the already available forward blackbox file. The issue comes with regards to trying to correctly define the backwards path (or if it’s even possible and instead I have to try and break the simulation up into two different setups for each pass). I’ve tried a variety of attempts that end up with either none of the reversed rays seemingly interacting with the reverse blackbox, or where the spot diagram for the image plane wil

I am trying to simulate the image of an off axis telescope when the object is at different distances and I am having strange results after 850km. I used the MCE to vary the thickness of the OBJECT, everything seems normal (even in the Huygens PSF analysis) but when I get to 900 km I get really strange results in the image simulation.Thanks for the help.Setup 850km850km900km900km 

Below I demonstrate how it works for built-in RCWA dll but it could expand to other diffraction mode. The trick was shared by Yihua using NSRA with only one order observed in one configuration.For built-in RCWA surface, the trick is to use the parameter "only these orders", this is explained in detail in the KBA. Simulating diffraction efficiency of surface-relief grating using the RCWA method – Knowledgebase (zemax.com)We can check if the parameter has been set correctly in the 3D layout to see if there is only the order that we want to observe.Then we are interested in the last segment of the ray, so we use the NSRA to see the direction cosine of the last segment. The direction cosine can be read by NSRA 4-6.  

 I’d like to built a freeform lens like the Figure.How do we set the NSC editor in the Zemax?And what is the syntax for setting the freeform lens parameters like freeform coefficient in the python?    

I’d like to built a freeform lens like the Figure.How do we set the NSC editor in the Zemax?And what is the syntax for setting the freeform lens parameters like freeform coefficient in the python?

Hello,I’m designing a high NA imaging system with strong spherical aberrations, and I am looking at the Geometric MTF to better understand its resolution.  The problem is I enter different values for the Maximum Frequency setting, and this seems to change the curves on the plot itself (and in the text data).  For example, the MTF values for the same spatial frequency changes significantly when I set Maximum Frequency to 50cyc/mm vs 200cyc/mm.My understanding is that this value should only change the cutoff frequency on the plot, and should not affect the MTF data. Could someone please clarify what I am misunderstanding about this Maximum Frequency setting?

I would like to create a surface that has a spherical and/or cylindrical power. I beleive I can use a Zernike Fringe Phase surface and enter Zernike coefficients to mimic the spherical and cylindrical powers by tuning Z4 / Z5 and Z6 (spherical power + both astigmatism coefficients). However when I play around with the value of Z4 and add some spherical aberration to my surface it does not add any power to my optical system. Is this behavior expcted? Which type of surface should I use instead that would creat optical power on my system based on the Zernike coefficients?

Hello,I would like to model how much stress-induced birefringence we can tolerate in a slab of material. I am not really interested in the forces, but just the amout of anisotropy we can tolerate, i.e. the retardance induced for a given anisotropy. The slab’s length is fixed to 20 mm. The material can be anything but isotropic to start with. I need to do this in non-sequential to be able to implement it later on in a larger model.I understand that we can specify the refractive index of the material as being anisotropic and define the uniaxial crystal orientation vector and the axis length. Can I use these parameters to specify the anisotropy? At least by playing around some numbers, it seems to work. The issue then is how I can correlate these parameters to the induced retardance (in waves, nm, radians, or whichever)?

Dear Zemax Community,I am using a toroidal surface in my system to mimic a deformable surface which can have various sphere and cylinder power. I am tuning the radius of this curvature according to the desired sphere power using the simple formula:R=delta_n/P_sphere Zemax is computing the EFFL of my system and gives me consistent results so I’m happy so far (100mm efl for a psherical power of 10D).Now I am computing the radius of rotation of my toroidal surface using the sum of sphere power and cylinder power. If the cylinder power power is 0D, I get a nice spherical cap corresponding to my spherical power alone:When I change the cylinder power to a non-zero value, the surface deforms and I get for 10D of cylinder:Now, I would like to double check if my reasoning is okay by computing the spherical and cylinder power from the Zernike coefficients. Here is where my troubles begin...I extract the Zernike Fringe Coefficients in the image plane:Field                        :    0,0000 (deg)

Hi everyone, I’m trying to use POPD operand to acquire the coupling value (data 0) in my model.For some unknown reason when I use POPD in the merit function I get zero coupling (or close to zero) value.However this comes in contrast to the values I see in the POPD module where I get close to 99%  coupling value.Please note I have verified the beam position and size to be close to nominal values.In addition it seems there is no surface dependency and the problem occurs for every surface in the model. Has anyone encountered such an issue in the past?I would appreciate any help with this issue. Thank you. 

Greetings to everyone.I’ve stumble upon this wide-view collimator design and it could be useful for me if RMS spot size radius is less then Airy radius.The goals:- RMS spot less then Airy radius,- EFFL to be very close to 2000mmm and- that a group of lenses be around 400 mm.The article and Zemax file are attached.Thanks for help.Regards, Ned

Hello there friends from the Zemax community, I have a freeform surface which was obtained via an external numerical routine. My numerical routine provides me with the surface sag information (x and y coordinates and the associated surface height).I have tried importing this surface into a sequential mode system via a grid sag object. However, I can observe that the surface profile changes depending on the distance set between my previous surface and the imported freeform surface. I would expect the surface to have the same extension always, isnt it?  Any comment or feedback will be highly appreciated!  

Hi team,Usually, our customer provides one step file for an optical assembly (Series of lenses). By using other softwares like tracepro, we can apply surfaces properties to individual components in the assembly. Here my question is, is it possible to apply individual components of an optical assembly, in non-sequential mode of zemax, without using any external cad softwares.Broader application is illumination analysis.Thanks in advance,Regards,Arun 

Dear all,I'm grabbing with a simple small telescope that consists of two mirrors. They are described in a paper and here is its snippet:  With these parameters, i tried to build it in zemax as shown in the following screenshot:  and clearly i do not fully understand how to control the coordinate breaks although I looked up several examples but I think each one is unique.  The Zemax file is in the attachment and I would appreciate any guidance or direction to produce similar layout as the one in the paper. The coordinate break feature is something Im trying to quickly grasp and master. Kind Regards         

Hello,Is there an operand to get the maximum ray angle impinging onto the image plane (relative to surface normal) in sequential mode ?I know about the operands listed in help section Constraints on Real Ray Data, but they require setting normalized pupil coordinates Px/Py first. Marko

Hi,I have a problem while performing the lateral color analysis of my optical system.Everything seems to go right, the MTF calculates as expected and all of the rays trace to the image plane.While using the lateral color analysis, i get the following discontinuity:  Could you help me find the reason for that?

Hello Zemaxers!I encountered some issues when working with zoom lens with multiconfiguration settings defined using THIC (different Zooms) and YFIE (Field Height). I noticed that when the “Set Vignetting” is applied. Despite there are multiple Configs, the Vignetting factors will only applied to the current active configuration, and apply the same vig factors for all other configs. I did some reading in the help files, I guess the operands like FVCX, FVXY, FCDX, FVDY could be used in the editor for each configurations. There is also a FVAN which I am unsure about how to use.  My question is that rather than this manual entering vig factors for 3 Fields for multiple configurations, is there a smart work around in this case? Regards,Yadong

Hi everyone,I am working on mirror system, consisted of two OAP mirror at the front (sketch below). I’m looking for a way to make a tolerancing analysis - especially irregularity of surface. Do anyone knows and can explain how the irregularity would be calculated if my elements are part of “parent” mirrors? How can I correctly analyse the manufacturing? The only thing I was found it’s: But the problem is that my program version (Zemax 13) does not support Composite surfaces. Thanks in advance for any helpIC