Got a question?
Can't find the answer you need? Ask your peers!
- 2,344 Topics
- 6,458 Replies
Hi everyone, I have multiple number of ray database files in non-sequential mode. The ZRD files are output of ray traces for different angles. With the multiple ZRD files, I want to see all these traced rays in my detector together. How can I achieve this? Any comments or ideas are welcome.
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
For GMTA or any operand that is related to an analysis window (MTF operands or Spot operands), is there a way to enable the polarization feature from the analysis window with the GMTA operand? I would like the merit function to consider the “Use Polarization” value of the GMTA for optimization and for Universal Plots.Here you can see the difference between the two Geometric MTF analysis windows for the same system when using the “Use Polarization” option.Here is the first MTF plot without the “Use Polarization” option. The tangential MTF performance at 1.0 cyc./mr is about 0.18.Geometric MTF plot without the “Use Polarization”Now with the “Use Polarization” option enabled. This returns a tangential MTF performance of about 0.6 cyc./mr.Geometric MTF plot with the “Use Polarization”The GMTT operand in the merit function returns the same value as reported in the analysis plot that does not use the “Use Polarization” option.The GMTT operand returns the MTF tangential value without consider
Hello! How to add to my NSC design a silicon detector response curve for Color Detector? Maybe simply add a “thin filter” at the top of the detector area having this spectral characteristic, is it appropriate? Or maybe to add different weights for, e.g., 10 wavelengths based on detector response curve. Thanks
Hey Zemax team,I have a request for the relative illumination plot:Please add a checkbox ‘Show cos^4(chief ray angle)’. This will help show where aberrations are affecting the RI performance. For example, it’s not obvious whether this lens has an RI better than or worse than the cos^4 benchmark, nor at which fields it’s happening.Mark
Hi,i am trying to create a cylindrical mirror with elliptic shape, but i cannot find the proper surface type in NSC. My aim is to steer light from one focal point of the ellipse to the other and use two halves of this shape for two light sources, while tilting both half elliptic shapes to match their second focal point. See below.What type of surface could i use?
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 wishesDaoming
Since the latest Zemax update my files no longer work when I conduct a ray trace, all my files crash terminating Zemax. I’ve rolled back to 23.1 and I can do a ray trace again without my files crashing (sometimes because I saved the file in 23.2 and it changed something in the file older versions of Zemax don’t like), but I have now run across another issue.When I do a ray trace I get “NA” for pixel values on both surface and rectangular detectors. Does anyone have any experience seeing this? Is it something I have changed that could cause this?
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
Hi,I’m trying to investigate the effect of different parameters on fiber coupling (receiving fiber only), such as focal length of the injection lens, wavefront aberrations, fiber NA, etc…The system is a 19mm parallel beam, a paraxial lens, and a single mode fiber at the focal plane.It seems that the wavelength value has no effect on the fiber coupling efficiency (FICL operand). This seems not physical to me…Any idea?Thanks
I am using the C# script (CSharpStandaloneApplication) to access OpticStudio and generate a custom file. I was hoping someone with experience with the different versions of OpticStudio could tell me if there is any issue that will arise if I am using OpticStudio 22.2.1 and I sent a .exe using the script to someone using, say, 15.1? I see 20.3 is the oldest version on the website, so I do not know if the previous versions were sequential as well.Thanks for the help.
Hi everyone,We have a microscope with different zoom lens design (8 configurations). And the analyzed results show below. According to Rayleigh criterion, the object side N.A. should determine the resolution: 0.61*lambda/N.A. Therefore, the first configuration with largest magnification should have the best optical resolution. correct? However, the airy disk radius should also determine the optical resolution, then configuration 4 should have the best optical resolution. I am confused why these two are not consistent with each other? And which one is right to determine the optical resolution of microscope? I think object side N.A should determine. Please let me know if I am wrong or miss something here. Any information would be helpful!Thanks, XWConfiguration Magnification WFNO Object side N.A. Airy disk Radius (micron) Note: this value from the spot diagram 1 0.361 9.17 0.02 6.265 2 0.322 8.66 0.019 5.917 3 0.193 7.36 0.013 5.031 4 0.138
Hi all, I am trying to simulate a Laser-Driven Light Source (or LDLS) in NSC. In particular, I have an EQ-99X, which I need to focus on a sample. The details of the source can be found here and here. My setup is quite straightforward, as it only consists of two lenses. It is shown in the following image: I would like to have a spot size of 10 µm, while the source has a dimension of 100 µm, therefore I started by designing a sequential system with magnification M=10, which I then optimized. I then chose and ordered the lenses, and the real setup works fine. I am now trying to understand if I can optimize the non-sequential system, to achieve better uniformity and spot size. However, the NS detector does not detect any photons, which is in contrast with the experimental results. Therefore I guess I am doing an error in the model, but I am not able to find it. In particular, I am not sure that I chose the right Source object to model the LDLS: since the source has a circular
Dear Zemax support Team, I'm trying to convert my SEQ design to a NSQ mode, but by doing this I loose my coordinate reference frame. I placed a sphere to highlight the position of the coordinate reference frame in NSQ. The reference frame I need is assigned to surface 16 in the SEQ design. I would be glad if you can help me understanding what is wrong in my approach. I send you the SEQ and the converted NSQ files. Thanks for your help. Best regard Gabriele
I would like to simulate bulk scattering in non-sequential mode. However, the density of scattering centres in my material should not be homogeneous, but should increase as a function of the bulk width x. How is this possible? Is there already a .dll I could use? Thank you for your help!
For our application, we are simulating a camera that has pixels with an asymmetric angular response. We are wondering the best way to include it and calculate the PSF of the system.This could be done with a flat, zero-thickness layer near the image plane The angular response means it changes the amplitude of the ray depending on the position and the incidence angle (so it depends on Hx, Hy, Px and Py ) The angular response is custom and not radially symmetric.We tried to include it has a custom coating, but since the angular response is not symmetric with respect to the optical axis, it does not work great. Is there a way to include it using OpticsStudio Standard?Would it be possible to implement it with DLLs? Or is there another “programming” option? Many thanks
The direction of propagation of the beam with POP is dictated by the direction of the Chief ray of that particular field point through the optical system. If you want to send beam in slightly off axis, you can create another field point, which is not parallel to the optical axis, and select that field point in POP.
Hi - Anyone know if there are any tools around that would enable looking at TM-25 source files in Zemax? (Searching the help or Knowledge base in Zemax turns up nothing, so I'm guessing this is not a feature yet). Here is what TM25 files are about: https://github.com/JuliusMuschaweck/TM25RaySetTools Best regards, John
Hi, I'm trying to simulate a system with a diffractive grating and a detector. I added two relay paraxial lenses in between to conjugate the grating and the detector. Here's my lens data: I only looked at the +/-1 diffractive orders. The beam should interferece at the focal plane of the first lens(obj3) and form two dots on the dector(obj4). It does form two dots on the first detector(obj4), but I don't know why the left dot is brighter than the right dot. After the second paraxial lens(obj5), I expect to see interference fringes on the second detector(obj6) which is at the focal plane of the second lens(obj5). However, what I got is: There's no interference pattern on the second detector. If I change the second paraxial lens to a real lens, then I can get interference pattern on the 2nd detector. But I need a perfect lens to simulate my system. How to solve it?
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.