Dear all, I am interested in Know about the procedure to convert Prosource file to ZEMAX file. Is there any post about it?It is possible to help me to do it with one file? in my case the manufacturer also is CREE Thanks a lotSoniaP
Dear all,Thanks very much for your help. I have just download the .zar (hexagonal ones) but any .dll is inside the zip. Could you please help me? Maybe the .dll file is in another directory?Any help?thank you in advancedSoniaP
Thanks Casilla for your help,in my study case, i have used a transmittance model that depens with the wavelength too. I wonder if absorption coefficients interfere with transmittance or if I must to consider both for the transmissive model. Must be the absortion coefficient “1” when a transmittance model is consider in the material (GLASS TABLE)?Thanks a lot
Dear all, we have been spenting time to study how to model human skin for PPG in transmittion model instead of reflective one that has been used in https://support.zemax.com/hc/en-us/articles/1500005579202-How-to-model-the-human-skin-and-optical-heart-rate-sensors-in-OpticStudioUnfortunatly, we dont understand very well the model henvey-g for transmittion instead of reflective case in order to know how to define transmittance without interfering with “transmition parameter” or if henvey-G is right in that case instead of example link. If anyone can help for the future we will appreciate it.thanks a lot
I was recently asked to perform some simple tissue scattering simulations in the NIR, so I spent a little bit of time looking into the details, including reading the referenced Knowledge Base article. I’m not sure why the calculated MFP and Transmission values do not agree with those used in the sample model. Perhaps Csilla can respond. However, in more general terms, I have a few thoughts for what they’re worth: 1. When implementing a scattering model in OpticStudio, it would seem to me that just the scattering coefficient (and not the absorption coefficient) is needed. In the earlier literature, some authors use a so-called “total interaction coefficient” which is the sum of the linear absorption coefficient and the scattering coefficient. For example, see this paper by Wang et al.: This type of approach appears to be the origin for using the following equations in the KB article: 2. However, this “total interaction” approach seems to be geared toward pure Monte Carlo type m
Dear all,we have performed a simulation with a lambertian surface and we have noticed a strange behaviour. We suppose that the more scatttered ray the more the energy is shared among the number of rays, so we suppose that the more scattered ray the less is the energy from each ray and in that case the irradiance value near surface would be lower.That behaviour is shown as we increase the N rays (lambertian coating) but, when the N rays is upper than a certain value, the irradiance value is bigger that expected ( increasing instead of decreasing).Could you tell us what is the problem? I am stuck :P thank you very much for your support
Hello Sandrine,thanks you very much for your help.We will try to run test as you recommendSoniaP
Hi Berta,thanks very much for your explaining about scatter and how to zemax treats the “scatter box” to simulate. Do you know if there is any documentation about how many scatter rays must be taken into an account when a scatter surface is simulated? Is there any reference value? what is the dependency between the number of scatter rays and type of material when scattering is defined? Where could i find information about how to choose an aproppiate number of rays for a defined material with difusse behaviour? thank you very much in advanced,SoniaP
Already have an account? Login
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.