Hello, I was wondering if there is a way to coherently sum POP results, for two different wavelengths, having used the POP “use polarization” option in both cases? According to the OpticStudio user manual, page 1154, under “Use polarization” it says that “Because these 2 beams cannot be coherently summed, any complex field data for the output (i.e. real, imaginary, or phase data) will be set to zero.” In my case I want to coherently sum the electric field information for Ex and Ey for two wavelengths. However, I am not sure if this is possible since the phase information is cleared at the end of the POP simulation when using “use polarization”. Thank you in advance,Yannis

Dear all, I’m trying to create a multi-configuration system with two set of fields. Each set of fields will focus onto an image surface, and therefore I’m having two image surfaces after finished the initial configuration. However, the two image surface is not ideal. I would like to control and combine them into one image surface. Is there any idea for doing that? Attached picture shows what exactly I’m trying to achieve. IMG1 and IMG2 are two image surfaces corresponds to different set of fields, and I wish to combine these two surfaces into one perfectly aligned image surface. Thanks for your time! Best wishes Daoming

I just got v22.1 installed and it runs very slowly. Is there an issue or setting that I should be aware of? [Edit: moved to more appropriate forum category]

I have an optical fiber bundle with core diameter 910 microns and NA = 0.22 and I would like to make the source as the optical fiber output end with rays coming out of this fiber. The objective of this simulation is to get a collimated rays at the image plane by using a collimating lens. Since I am using a fiber bundle the rays from the farthest point cannot be collimated easily so there would some losses and I need to find how much is overall efficiency of this system. My question is can I design the fiber output end by providing as many fields points to represent the fiber bundle and assume each point emits a cone of light with NA = 0.22. If not how can I model the fiber end as a source?

Hello Users and Zemax Staff, The design I am working on is transient grating. I would like to ask if there is a possibility to use a 300fs laser pulse as light source. Because when using pulsed beam if the two paths differ with more than the pulse length then the beams might overlap in space but not in time and there will be no interference pattern. I want to use Zemax to simulate how the beam movement influences transient grating. Thanks! Best, Wanyu

I have a light source (LED)in my hand with spectral graph, I would like to analyze its spectral distributions in studio. In knowledge base LED modelling is there. But this is not as direct as adding the coating files in catalogue. Help me to fix this.

I have designed an imaging lens assembly incorporating two plastic lenses. The first is Zeonex E48R and the other is PMMA. The manufacturer has supplied the lenses well within tolerance, including the surface irregularity P-V. I have remodelled the system incorporating all supplied component tolerances and surface irregularities and i am never getting above a 50% MTF contrast of 50lp/mm compared to the design value of 110lp/mm. The worst case modelled MTF over 1000 Monte Carlo runs is 80lp/mm. Note that i have also included the lens barrel tolerances in the model. Any suggestions as to what could be causing the further consistent loss of MTF, particularly wit plastic lenses? The lenses come from several tooling cavities, but this has no impact on the results. Illumination is at 850nm and the transmission of the filters used has been confirmed as correct.

Hi all.I want to make a model as shown below. A beam whose wavelength is 532 nm is incident to the light pipe placed vertically to the bottom. The exit port of the light pipe and the detector are immersed in the water.Even though the water is rolled by some vibrations, the light would not be refracted because the tip of the pipe is under the moving surface. So, I configured like attached zemax model.The rolling water was simplified to a simple wedge.However, as you see the Layout, the rays are refracted at the surface of the rolling water. It is the wrong result. And if the beam is tilted a little, it has to be refracted at the tip of the pipe, not at the surface of the water. Could you please solve this simple problem? Thanks.

I have a number of optical subcomponents that can be combined into different systems (think a variety of objectives and tube lenses). Currently if I were to design a new objective and I wanted to see how it performed with all the different tube lenses, I would have to copy and paste it into each tube lens file. I’d like a way to combine these programmatically. I’m imagining two drop down menus, one for objective and one for tube lens, and they’d refer to a library of designs. I’d pick each component and they’d load into one Zemax file, from which I could then calculate mag, MTF, lateral color, etc. What’s the best way to accomplish this? I have some ZPL and Matlab experience and no ZOS-API experience, but I do have several teammates with experience in Matlab, Python, and C# who I can call upon for assistance (and I’ve been meaning to learn Python and C# anyhow). Does anyone have any suggestions for where I should start attempting this project?

Dear Sir/Madam, I am analyzing a system which is containig a LED and a rectangular light guide of material “PMMA” with Silver coating on the side faces with 6.99mm lenght. LED is having power of 29 lumens and light guide is touching the LED as a result approximately all power is coupling to the light guide. But at the output of light guide I am getting only around 22 lumen. But light guide is having only 6.99mm length, so it is not digestable to have only 22 lumen at output. While ray tracing I am enabling “use polarization” and “ignore error”. Is this power at output is fare enough or I am doing something wrong, can you help me out? I am attaching the zemax file of my design. Thanks.

Using Extended Scene Analysis > image simulation, settings:pixel size=0.02X pixels=3000Y pixels=1000 After Save as, we can get the picture as below, but this image simulation result is limited by screen size. Could I get a 3000x1000 pixels image(bmp)? Thank you~

Hi! I try to optimize an human eye model and I am not sure what is going on… The RMS of spot diagram of normal model is a little bit over 3um and after the optimization it is over 17um, and the Seidel coefficients are higher than before optimization. Can anyone help me understand what is the problem of worse RMS and how can I prevent it? I tried to use different Image Quality types and it didn’t work. Thank you very much!

Hey Zemax team, I was running a Global Optimization today when Malwarebytes decided to quarantine OpticStudio.exe and the link on my desktop to it: I simply restored them from Malwarebytes’ quarantine, but you should register this as a false positive with Malwarebytes to prevent this happening. Lots of organizations won’t simply release files from quarantine as easily as I can. Mark

I was trying to run the ‘Interference Example 2: A Mach-Zehnder interferometer’ simulation file from the Zemax Opticstudio directory (non-sequential mode), but I couldn’t see any power redistribution between the two output arms of interferometer. The intensity pattern distribution in one arm should be complimentary (negative) to the other one. But it is not happening in simulation. In a perfectly parallel beams with zero divergence, I would expect change in power splitting in output arms with phase difference. That is not happening in the given sample simulation. Please share your comments/explanations for this issue.

Good afternoon, dear colleagues. I’m working with optical testing of the convex aspheric mirror. In the interferogram simulation I’ve got stripes like it is shown at the picture. There is a strange white circle at the edge of interference pattern. On the Optical Path figure you can see something like a break of the plot. Is it possible to fix this wavefront break? I use Binary 2 surface to model diffractive optical element (corrector of spherical aberration). Perhaps, it’s an approximation error of the wavefront, because this surface use polynomials to set a phase shift. Thank you for the future answers!

Hi Zemax I recently implement the Lidar system simulation successfully by referring to the tutorial below. https://support.zemax.com/hc/en-us/articles/4408930472467-Modeling-a-Flash-Lidar-System-Part-1 These days, we are discussing with lens manufacturers to realize our Lidat system.However, it is said that they can provide lens data only in the form of a zemax black box lens. Is there any way for me to analysis the Lidar system using black box lens data?Although many attempts have been made, the NCS mode could not use a black box lens. Best regards,

Hello, I am currently trying to use a flat-field concave-gratings in an optical spectrometer setup.The latter has improved shape and design so that the grooves are neither parallel nor equidistant. The main purpose is to minimize astigmatism and coma. (typically: https://www.ssioptics.com/product-category/diffraction-gratings/flat-field-concave-gratings/) I am wondering which procedure I should follow in Zemax to create this type of Grating shape and/or if anybody else worked using this king of gratings using Zemax? I am working in sequential mode since it is the one which I am feeling the most confortable with. I used the surface type diffractive grating to create my gratings combined with a concave curvature. However I am quite sure it is not the best way to simulate it, and I will certainly not have a proper estimation of my astigmatism and coma. I am open to invest time to learn non-sequential mode if it is needed. Thanks a lot in advance for your help and suggestions!

Hi, I am trying use ‘decenter of a lens’ as a compensator in Tolerancing. For that i have made coordinate breaks before and after the lens that i want to decenter. Then used the tolerancing operand CPAR and used the first coordinate break as the surface and parameter as the x and and y decenter. My question is will the pickup solve on the second coordinate break will cause problems when the Sensitivity based tolerancing is carried out. Is there any other method to use element decenter as a compensator in tolerancing analsis. Thanks in advance.

Dear Zemax Team, my optical system is a mixed POP and geometric propagation model, i.e. I have checked “Use Rays to Propagate to Next Surface” in the Lens Data Editor Physical Optics dialog for parts of my optical design, where I don’t expect significant diffraction effects, also improving processing time and avoiding phase aliasing effects. The tolerance analysis adds Dummy surfaces into the design, e.g. for the TEDX operator, which is convenient to see e.g. in the MC_Best.ZMX file. I have noticed that the setting “Use Rays to Propagate to Next Surface” seems to be not set for the dummy surface as in the original lens data (i.e. it is unchecked, althought the original lens data was checked). In my interpretation this means, that the propagation of the dummy surface will be, if I do a physical optics run, as POP propagation, not ray propagation. As my resolution at this Dummy surface is not properly set (or cannot be achieved), the propagation results will be significantly altered if I

How to evaluate the a manufacturing difficulty of surface kinoform (binary 2)?

Hello Zemax Support Team, I’m trying to model a volume hologram in a film inside a glass substrate. In particular, I’d like to be able to calculate the diffraction efficiency of the structure. However, the system seems to have an unreasonable polarization dependence which causes energy to not be conserved for some polarization states such that {input_power ≠ diffracted_power (1st order) + transmitted_power (0-order)}. I am using the volume hologram feature (set to 1) in the Hologram Lens object in non-sequential mode. Collimated input laser beam is normal to the glass and the outcoupled beam totally internally reflects inside the glass substrate upon diffraction. I have 2 monitors: 1) color detector capturing the 0-order transmission and, 2) color detector capturing the 1st diffraction order. X-linearly polarized light and Y-linearly polarized light produce different diffraction efficiencies, as expected. However, for linear X polarization the sum of the 1st-order diffraction and 0-ord

Hello Zemax users, I started using a Zemax optic studio premium version (21.3). I am from University of Virginia and want to understand the reflection, scattering and transmission through a glossy paint surface (~50 micron thick) after MIR laser irradiation (10 mm collimated beam) on it. I am unable to find the paint (polymeric) material in Zemax catalogue. Also tried to put coating on plane glass but unable to do. Is it possible to simulate scattering data for 2.7 um wavelength on paint? If yes, kindly help me as I am a new user. I am considering Source rays as source, Rectangular volume as a sample and two detector rectangles as detector surfaces. Am I doing correct? Can we change the angle of incidence at 45 degree?

Dear all, How to design a paint materials (thinfilm) incorporated with TiO2 nanoparticles for scattering? In coating catalogue I could not find similar to our material. Thank you.

I have tried to model the propagation of light through the fiber, but my model doesn't looks it undergoes TIR. Can anybody please help me to identify what parameters should I check and alter ? Expecting your guidance on this for my good understanding. (For your reference i have attached the LDE of Seq & NS and the parameters) Kindly let me know if any more parameters needed Core Nd=1.49 ; Clad Nd=1.43 EPD = 0.5 (Syst Expl) Core dia = 0.98 micron Clad dia = 1 micron SEQ LDE NS LDE Actual Expectation:

I want to measure the amount of power on a surface between particular angles. I used a rectangle detector which parameters 12-15, in the user manual it says it work only for radion intensity. Usermanual: The minimum and maximum x and y direction angles in degrees. These settings are used to control the sensitivity of the detector to rays incident upon the detector at an angle when displaying radiant intensity or radiance in angle space. The default setting is -90.0 degrees to +90.0 degrees in both x and y directions, which allows display of angle data for all rays striking the detector. If the angular range is set to cover a subset of the possible incident angles, rays that strike the detector at angles outside the defined range are ignored ONLY for radiant intensity and radiance in angle space displays. So I used the macro function: Ptotal(i) = NSDD(1,17,0,2) Where I should get the total flux in angle space for all pixels. But this still hold the default value of +90° to -90°. So my q