- Home
- Frequently Asked Questions
- Why is the Optical Performance Sometimes Different at the Image Surface Versus a Co-Located Surface?
Why is the Optical Performance Sometimes Different at the Image Surface Versus a Co-Located Surface?
- By Andrew Locke
- Published 1 September 2006
- Frequently Asked Questions
-
Rating:




Summary
This article has demonstrated the capability of ZEMAX to evaluate optical performance at intermediate surface locations. You must be careful in interpreting the results of analyses performed at intermediate surfaces, always keeping in mind the assumptions that ZEMAX uses for such evaluations. One important assumption made for focal mode optical systems is that many analysis features only make sense if the intermediate surface is at a focus. These analysis features apply a paraxial marginal ray height solve to locate the intermediate surface at paraxial focus.
Related Articles
1 Response to "Why is the Optical Performance Sometimes Different at the Image Surface Versus a Co-Located Surface?" 
|
said this on 28 Jun 2007 10:10:13 AM PDT
Many Thanks for this hint!
I will take care of that!
So far, I sometimes read in the manual, that certain features "assume", that a surface is at a good focal position, but I did not realize, that they in deed "acertain" this.
Thank you once more
Juergen
|
Author)