Got a question?
Can't find the answer you need? Ask your peers!
- 2,344 Topics
- 6,458 Replies
Hi everyone, Can you guys help me. Does the ray emitted on Zemax in POP depend on the number of samplings? Or is it determined by something else? I use sampling of 256 x 256, and in POP analysis, I want to know how many rays that emitted in each of the column of the sampling. For example, in my opinion, in each column, there might be have only one ray or maybe more than one. I really hope someone can teach me and I would love to learn it.
Hi all. I have just visited the OpticsAcademy page https://opticsacademy.zemax.com/ and tried to enrol on the optimization course. The field for Country is mandatory. I'm in the UK but I can't find the UK or Great Britain in the list. Has anyone else had trouble with this? Thanks in advance.
Hi Zemax team, Correct me if I'm wrong but when I use a New User Operand Template - C# (and the same apply to the other ZOS-API mode using C#/C++). A Visual Studio solution gets created for me, and its name starts as CSharpUserOperandApplication, and progressively gets incremented with a number at the end. If I create five different User Operand, I'll have the following folders in my Zemax\ZOS-API Projects: CSharpUserOperandApplication CSharpUserOperandApplication1 CSharpUserOperandApplication2 CSharpUserOperandApplication3 CSharpUserOperandApplication4 This is not informative, and error-prone. Moreover, changing the solution name in Visual Studio is not obvious, unless I'm mistaken again. Would it be possible to be prompted with a dialog box before the solution is created, such that one can input a custom solution name? Let me know if this isn't clear. The solution I've settled for so far is, whenever I create a new User Op
Hello everyone, I need your kindness help for some problems that I had. Actually, I want to make a system that includes 2 beam splitter, 2 mirror and see the result toward 2 image planes (as described in Figure below). Can I ask for your opinion which is the right mode to use in order to make this system, either use Sequential mode or Non-Sequential mode or mixing two of the mode? In my system, at the first image plane, I want to analyze the beam profile (size, centroid, and others), and I think to use POP as my analyzing tool. At the second image plane, I want to see the interference fringes of the beam because two beams will reflect back to the image. Actually, I try to mix the Non- sequential (use 2 BS, 2 mirror) and Sequential (use as image to analyze the beam). But the process is too hard and I had some problems. Then, as Mr. Kevin’s suggestion , he suggested either to use Sequential or Non-Sequential by it owns. So, in order to make this system possible to work, can anyone
I am currently modeling light scattering inside of the human skin. The known mean path for human skin is 0.1 mm. In the knowledge base articlehttps://support.zemax.com/hc/en-us/articles/1500005577062-Using-the-Henyey-Greenstein-distribution-to-model-bulk-scattering I found that The Mean Path (mean free path) was set to 0.0001 mm, which is small relative to the 0.1 mm thickness of the volume. The measured OpticStudio values reproduce those results derived from the theoretical model within statistical error, as we would expect for a case in which each ray is only allowed to scatter once (the results will vary from ray trace to ray trace due to statistics, so you will get different – but very similar – numbers). I am a bit confused what mean path should I use in my model (there is very big difference in the results when using 0.1 mm and 0.0001 mm. May I get more detailed explanation how the reduction of the mean path compensates the single ray scattering approximation. I use the thickn
We would like to import a surface sag dat file of a mirror (even asphere plus surface form) surface into our zemax layout for sequential simulation. Our mirror is circular but it is cut in one edge, y > |L| = 0 (Air). We have this easy equation in x,y of the cut mirror. Our question is, since it is not radially symmetric, what is the platform to describe the suface analytically with equation? Should we write the equation into .dat file? Can you please help on the steps to generate this Grid surface sag, if this is possible to be done? Thank you
Hello, I am building an optical system with a number of surfaces. One of the surfaces I am using is an off axis surface. I put the surface off axis using coordinates breaks. The vertex of the surface is off of the optical axis of the system. The chief ray intersects this surface not at its vertex. I would like to optimize the surface ROC using a merit function BUT I want to constrain the chief ray path length (from the priovious surface to the off axis surface) to a fixed value. How do i constrain this chief ray distance yet allow the ROC to vary based on the merit function? thanks John
I encountered the following error when I open OpticStudio every time, how to avoid it? The problem might not be related to OpticStudio, but related to the graphic settings in your machine. You may search from web for a possible solution, here is a link. You can find more information about Setting OpticStudio to use an advanced graphics card from the following link: https://my.zemax.com/en-US/Knowledge-Base/kb-article/?ka=KA-01707
Hello everyone, I need your kindness help for some problems that I had. I try to make a system that use both sequential and non-sequential mode by mixing them. I use “How to model a mixed sequential/non-sequential system” as my reference from the zemax support. My plan system is as Fig below which mean that laser output and image is sequential mode, and BS, mirror as a non-sequential mode. The entry port is before BS and exit port is before image. Unfortunately, I had a problem which is my reflected light from the mirror had gone into the BS again but why the light did not reflect to the image. I had attached my file below as reference. One of the file is only the system I made using non-sequential, and another one is the mixing of sequential and no- sequential. Can someone correct my system or had another idea on how to fix it. I really hope someone can teach me because I did not know whether there is some mistake, or I did not have enough knowledge about it. Thank
I am designing a non-axial system involving some cylinder lenses. When working with axial systems, I like to use the Y Stretch feature in the Cross Section layout window. However, this view isn't available when working with non-axial systems, so I'm using the 3D viewer and looking at the y-z plane. But here there doesn't seem to be a Y Stretch feature. Any suggestions for how to get something like the Y Stretch feature when working with non-axial systems?
A possible impact on MTF of a complex beamsplitter coating has been investigated on a simple system comprising three lenses and two prisms on top of each other. Coordinate breaks and MIRROR surfaces were used to 'construct' the prisms in 2-D. The said coating has been applied to one of the MIRROR surfaces. The system is polychromatic, on-axis (one field only) and 'polarisation' has been checked in the FFT MTF Setup Window. Now a surprise: with the coating applied or not the values of MTF differ by up to approx. 3 precentage points in the medium frequency range in 'all fields' mode as compared to the 'field 1' mode. This is not dramatic but very probably shouldn't happen... Any explanation? Thank you, Dusan
Hi I am looking for a way to optimize in the following manner: Using the non-sequential editor, I have positioned four sources in a square configuration with variable power settings, and a number of rectangular detectors at stepped distances from the sources. The furthest detector is object number 17. For the sake of argument, let's say that the detector shows a minimum flux of 0 and a maximum of 1.0E-04 I want to optimize the power settings on the lamp so that I can get a minimum flux of 1.0E-09 and a maximum of 1.0E-05, and an even distribution of power settings for the sources. I have tried to use the 'spatial uniformity' wizard to get this. The wizard and the grid are as below. I have let this run to completion, but it seems to leave one of the sources at very high power, while reducing the power in the other three. All I am looking for is a way of adjusting the source power in all ources evenly so that the flux is in between a minimum and a maximum, Is there a way of doi
Q: What the units are for the ZERN value in the merit fucntion. Is it system units, microns, waves, fringes or something else ? Ans: The unit of Zernike Fringe coefficients is same as Wavefront Map, which is waves.The following is an example of a calculation 1.First open the built-in Double Gauss 28 degree field.zmx. Then check Zernike Fringe Coefficients for Field 3. 2.Then copy these value in Excel. In excel, built X and Y mesh and calculate the wavefront manually following the equation. As you can see below. The value is same as that you can find in the Wavefront Map. I didn’t make any change to the coefficients in the test, so I think the unit used in Zernike Fringe should be same as that in Wavefront Map. Since in Wavefront Map it’s unit is “waves”, I think this is same for the Zernike Fringe. I have also calculated P-V, which is also very similar to that reported in Wavefront Map. I think the difference is mainly about the fitting and
My workflow requires exporting my optical designs to CAD, then importing them into SolidWorks. With OpticsStudio 20.3, some change was made to how the document is exported to CAD, so the structure of my imported file has changed significantly, including significantly increasing the import/conversion time. One major problematic change has been the re-interpretation of the rays from lines to splines. Becasue splines can have curvature, I have many difficulties with mates in SolidWorks that I did not have previously. I find it odd that splines are being used since the rays will never have curvature, and the emply spline data would seem to take up more file space. Is there an option to revert to the previous export behavior? If there is not a benefit to using splines instead of lines, please revert this change.
Hi all, OpticStudio can output relative illumination very quickly and accurately from the perspective of the exit pupil's rays, but if you would like to control the relative illumination of a lens system without over-constraining the system, you may be interested to know what else is being optimized as you target relative illumination in the merit function. For example, things to impact relative illumination include image distortion, differential distortion, and the size of the entrance pupil. Here's one way to do it: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.13488891 Cheers, ~ Ronian
Hi everyone, I need your kindness help for some problems that I had. I made a system that use collimator lens by using POP (I had attached my file below). I had one problem which is I use the collimator lens (Thorlabs F220APC-633) from the catalog lens and I want to observe the beam width after the collimator lens (surface 4 in my system). I use the merit function editor (POPD- 23,24) to observe my beam width data. The actual data that I get from Thorlabs stated that the output laser with beam diameter of 2.06 mm will emit after through the collimator lens. But, in my system, the beam width did not have same value as the actual data. In my system, I set the POP with the waist of 0.5 mm and I believe that after the beam go through the collimator lens, the beam width will diverge to 1.03 mm (same as actual data). Is there any suggestion on how to do it, or maybe I don’t understand enough about it. If anyone can help me in order to solve the problems, I really appreciate for y
Hi everyone, I need your kindness help for some problems that I had during analysis using physical optic propagation. I don’t know whether my system is good or not, but I believe can analyze or optimize my system to be better. I had 3 questions that I would like to ask. I use prop report in POP to see each of the surface in my system. What mean by using outside to outside propagator. Is I need to check anything like I tick the use angular spectrum so that my surface become using inside to inside propagator? Or is there another way to solve it. Or I just have to ignore it. Sampling is too low. I use resample after refraction so that I can increase the sampling. Are there any ways so that I can keep the original sampling without increasing it? Inadequate guard band detected. My system shows this warning, and I did not know the ways to solve this problem. Is there any ways that I can use in order to solve it? I am sorry for asking that kinds of problems because I am a beginner
For hammer or global optimization using 'Substitute' I would like to use 1st Material catalogue for 1st lens in the system (or a group of lenses) and 2nd (another) Material catalogue for 2nd lens in the system (or 2nd group of lenses). How to do it?
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.