Solved

Question about zemax element drawing

  • 24 August 2023
  • 3 replies
  • 68 views

Badge

Hi all,

I try to use Zemax Element Drawing for my tolerance analysis report. However, I found the value of Radius tolerance after I clicked Reset from TDE are not consistent with values from Tolerance Data Editor.  The below picture shows that the tolerance for surface 1 is 0.0366 (note: my first surface is 2), however the TRAD for surface 2 is +/-0.1. Could someone explain what happened here?

 

Thanks,

Xiaolei

icon

Best answer by Christian Zimmermann 29 August 2023, 10:04

View original

3 replies

Hi Xiaolei,

you need to consider that “Min” and “Max” as given in Tolerance Data Editor (TDE) are meant as boundary values. Thus all possible numeric values according to a certain distribution (gaussian, parabolic, linear etc.) will stay within a determined interval [Min., Max] when applying a Monte-Carlo-Analysis. The results you obtained in your specific Zemax MC run for Surface 1 to 3 are in agreement with the chosen boundaries for Min. and Max.

 

Example Analysis:

Surface 1:  -0.1000 < 0.0366 < 0.1000

Surface 2:  -0.1000 < 0.0299 < 0.1000

Surface 3:  -0.3200 < 0.2300 < 0.3200     ( Note that TRAD on Surf4 differ from other surfaces before)

 

Keep also in mind that TRAD values for each “Monte-Carlo Scenario” will be randomly generated!

I hope this interpretation helps you.

 

Kind regards,

Christian

Badge

Hi Christian,

You are right, 0.0366, 0.0299 and 0.23 are all radius tolerance value (deviation from nominal design) for surface 1, 2 and 3. However the TDE shows that radius tolerance value for surface 1,2 and 3 are 0.1, 0.1, 0.32. Why they are not consistent?

Thanks,

Xiaolei

Hello xiaoleiwang,

having a look at the screenshot you added I expect given values to be tolerance on radius instead of radius iteself. There is a certain panel named “Tolerances” above the entries “Surface 1” … “Surface 3” and thus radius should be deviation from given nominal value.

I hope this answer is helpful for you.

Kind regards,

Christian

 

Reply