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.

ZBF stands for Zemax Beam File. This format is used in POP to describe the beam at a surface.To create a ZBF text file manually, here are two useful documents:- an Excel sheet that summarizes the syntax of the Help File (The Analyze Tab (sequential ui mode) > Laser and Fibers Group > About Physical Optics Propagation > Defining the Initial Beam > File (defining the initial beam) > Zemax Beam File (ZBF) text format > Zemax Beam File (ZBF) text format). The G column of the tab "ZBF" of the Excel sheet is a ZBF file. To create a ZBF file, copy that column into a text file and save it with a ZBF extension under \Zemax\POP\BEAMFILES. The two other tabs represent and plot the data as a matrix.- the ZBF text file created from the Excel sheet History:Date Version OpticStudio Version Comment 2019/05/20 - - Creation 2020/09/04 v2 - Updated the Excel file with non-zero imaginary profile.  2021/01/06 v3 - In the Pivot_Table tab, there are now 3 colum

HiI am using 2025 R2.02 version. It looks like the issue previously reported about the ISO drawing has been partially solved which is cool (https://community.zemax.com/topic/show?tid=5444&fid=7).I still have one problem, it’s the number of digits used for the SAG and edge thickness on the drawings.There is 5 to 6 digits on my drawing. In the L (R) surf TAB of the drawing, you can uncheck the Automatic box and change the surface sag but it seems to have no effect on the drawing… Do I miss something?Renaud

 Hi Zemaxers,I am trying to understand a non‑paraxial optical system.The system is a decentered lens, and I would like to determine its focal length and the chromatic focal shift.My current understanding is that, since the system is non‑paraxial, even the “paraxial rays” need to go through the coordinate breaks. I tried this approach and obtained the results shown below. However, I am having difficulty interpreting them.In particular, I am unsure how to evaluate the chromatic focal length shift in a non‑paraxial system.As the software states: “This plot may not be meaningful for non‑paraxial systems.”So I’m not sure what the correct method is.Can you kindly give me some advice on these issues?    btw here,  Analysis...PAL/Freeform...Pupil Map  suggested by @Mark.Nicholsonhttps://community.zemax.com/got-a-question-7/non-paraxial-focal-length-3672 I am not sure is it similar to my issues? best regards Yang

Hi All, I have a question regarding EXPP. It seems from the comments here that Zemax calculates EXPP by tracing two parabasal rays +y and -y which are 1e-3 deviated from the on-axis ray (not sure if deviation is in normalized field coordinates, ray direction at stop, or something else) and then find their intersection. I have a few questions regarding that: Is EXPP (which is just a Z-offset from image plane) the plane used to draw the reference sphere for OPD and PSF calculations? Why do we not also trace +x and -x rays and how this affects the accuracy of the reference sphere? That value of EXPP seems to differ if Ray aiming is OFF vs Real. How does the calculation differ in each case? Since EXPP uses parabasal rays, it should be accurate for decentered and tilted systems? Thanks a lot for your insight. Best, 

Hi all, Regarding the built-in grating object in sequential/non-sequential mode (especially in non-sequential mode): I know we can assign different diffraction efficiency (DE) values for different diffraction orders, but this DE is typically constant across all incident angles.Is there a standard way to assign an efficiency profile that varies with incident angle without fully modeling the real grating structure (like with RCWA)?For example, for the 1st diffraction order:-10 deg incidence -> DE = 0.30 deg incidence -> DE = 0.1+10 deg incidence -> DE = 0.2I am looking for a behavioral model rather than a physical one to save simulation time. Would the best approach be writing a User Defined DLL, or is there a way to utilize a Table Coating to modulate the efficiency, or even other potential methods?Thanks for any insights! Best,Kaden

Replaced by the question here:  

Hi everyone!I’m working with an optical system in which I want to evaluate how good the conjugation is. To do this, I analyze the RMS Spot Size at A’ and B’ (referenced to their respective centroids) for a telecentric system. However, I don’t obtain the same results in the Spot Diagram when, instead of using two fields within the same configuration, I use two different configurations (one per field), using the CADY operand to decenter a paraxial lens that generates the same emission cone.I’m attaching a schematic illustrating both approaches, as well as the two .zmx files so you can examine them in detail. Do you know what might be causing this difference? Am I making an incorrect assumption?Thanks a lot, and best regards!  

Hello everybody,I’m trying to optimize a Biconic Zernike lens in the non-sequential mode.I want to control / limit the edge and center thickness of this lens during the optimization.In the SEQ-Mode you can use constraints like MNCG etc., but I don’t know how to implement these constraints in the NSQ-mode.→ Does anybody know how to do this?Thank you very much in advance,Felix

Hi ZemaxersSpecifically, I want to create a graph in Zemax that combines Chromatic Focal Shift and Wavefront Error Best Focus, similar to what CodeV provides.What I have triedMethod 1Use a ZPL(Attached+Merit function) script ZPL Merit Function to calculate the wavefront-error best focus and generate a plot (Fig. 1). Generate the Chromatic Focal Shift plot (System) (Fig. 2). Overlay Fig. 1 and Fig. 2. → This attempt failed.My questions:Is it impossible to overlay a system-generated plot with a ZPL‑generated plot? The Active Overlay option is not always available—are there specific rules that determine when it works?Method 2Use the Universal Plot feature with ZPLM data to generate the required plot. Overlay it with Fig. 3. → This also failed at step 1 (some operands cannot be computed).My questions:I suspect the issue is related to this discussion:https://community.zemax.com/got-a-question-7/can-we-use-zplm-to-read-analysis-window-data-and-optimize-2873 Does this mean ZPLM cannot read

I have a multi-configuration system in non-sequential mode.Is it possible to tolerance all configurations simulaneously, and would this offer any performance gain compared to tolerancing each configuration individually?

I'd like to use the ZPL function DEFAULTMERIT to make a default merit function with the below settings:If I use data = 8 is makes a contrast merit function, but seems to be unsupported in the documentation.I can't see how to set the spatial frequencyor how to limit the merit function to config 1Thanks for any advice,John

Dear communityI’m working on a design which use the OAP to focus collimated beam into a SM fiber. In sequential mode, I want to check the focusing Gaussian beam size on the fiber tip, by using GBPS operand.  (the collimated beam is generated by fiber + collimator combination, where the collimator is a vendor blackbox.  So GBSS and POPD are not working in my real design).The output quite confused me. It seems the GBPS reported the focusing spot by calculating from Parent Focal Length instead of Reflection Focal Length.I duplicated this in a standard vendor zemax file. Below is a Thorlabs OAP with 90deg tilt angle, PFL=1.5”, RFL=3”. I set wavelength at 550nm, collimated input beam waist 1mm. The reported GBPS is 6.67um, and GBSS is 13.34um, POPD equal to GBSS.It’s possible that I find a way to use POPD later, but really want to understand is there a way to get the GBPS reported data close enough. Thanks. 

Hello!I have created a complex system. It consists in a multiconfiguration system with around 700 optical surfaces (multiple mirrors, some of them ignored with multiconfiguration operands, and lots of coordinate breaks), 240 tolerance operands (16 are compensators) and the tolerance is also launched with a self-edited merit function. From my experience, the compensators have always increased a lot the time of the tolerancing, but in this case, which such a complex and huge system, it takes too much, I would like to ask about how zemax does the search for the global minima with the compensators in order to reach the requirements and how could I optimize my process (ZPL, ZOS-API, just launch the simulation in a different computer...)Best regards