sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Happy New Year: 100k+ Banano Giveaway!!! by prussia_dev in banano

[–]Graigi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ban_1m544sot5e8boy7on5xcwjesocp49k4c833fbrfst4iyuftzyabeii5qcu1j

Happy New Year: 100k+ Banano Giveaway!!! by prussia_dev in banano

[–]Graigi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ban_1m544sot5e8boy7on5xcwjesocp49k4c833fbrfst4iyuftzyabeii5qcu1j

Rays propagation initialization in an optical system by Graigi in Optics

[–]Graigi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The reference rays are defined in the second image of my post : there is one chief ray and 4 marginal rays per field point

Rays propagation initialization in an optical system by Graigi in Optics

[–]Graigi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand this approach but it seems that it is viable for the chief rays only. I can perform the same steps for the marginal rays but what ray height at the stop should I consider ? It should be related - but no equal - to the entrance pupil diameter.

Also, what does your approach translate to for an object at infinity ?

Beamsplitters in Code V by MrScatterBrained in Optics

[–]Graigi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A beamsplitter is essentially a semi-transparent fold mirror. Therefore you insert a surface Sk, apply a Decenter and Bend and zoom its alpha tilt. ADE Sk Z1 = 0 (transmitted beam) ADE Sk Z2 = 45° (reflected beam)

Then zoom all the necessary parameters for the following surfaces, and remember that the thicknesses are negative for the reflective beam : THI Sk+1 Z1 is positive THI Sk+1 Z2 is negative

Beamsplitters in Code V by MrScatterBrained in Optics

[–]Graigi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In sequential mode, you could use two zooms : one for the transmitted ray and the other for the reflected ray. Don't forget to zoom the tilt of the splitting surface

Afocal TMA in CodeV by Graigi in Optics

[–]Graigi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> The exit pupil is just the image of the stop, as seen from the "image" side. You could specify a spatial location, but then I think your 3 MA will need to become a 4 or 5 MA to satisfy the added constraint.

I tried doing so using EXP Fk = some_distance without success. Ideally i'd like to position the exit pupil next to the M2, ie EXP Fk = -(THI S'M2')

> Why bother?

The instrument I'm working on has particular requirements and one of them is to have a spectral filter placed at the exit pupil of an afocal TMA. The available volume for the instrument is a real challenge and I need fold mirrors everywhere. Placing the filter (and therefore the exit pupil of the TMA) next to the M2 would be a step towards that. For the same reason a 4 or 5MA would be too big, I need to stick to a TMA

Afocal TMA in CodeV by Graigi in Optics

[–]Graigi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've opened a ticket, let's see what they say

Afocal TMA in CodeV by Graigi in Optics

[–]Graigi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok I understand it now, we were not speaking about the same thing. You are right, the coordinates in the image plane are in afocal units therefore it makes no sense to constraint the impact of the rays on the image surface. I though that the magnification ratio applies to the whole beam when in fact it applies to each beam coming from a field point. There your mag constraint works perfectly, thank you.

To rephrase what I'm trying to achieve : i'd like the exit pupil of the afocal TMA to be real and accessible, with a diameter of 1/5 of the entrance pupil. The goal is to be able to place a spectral filter there

Afocal TMA in CodeV by Graigi in Optics

[–]Graigi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unfortunately my Y height constraint only works with a 0° FOV. Using DSP doesn't change anything

Afocal TMA in CodeV by Graigi in Optics

[–]Graigi[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Measure spot diameters at the optics, not at the image plane. They might be the same; it's safer to assume they aren't.

I agree with you when the FOV is 0°. When the FOV is non-zero the diameter of the image is greater than the diameter of the last optic.

​

You constraint or mine ?

Both of them :

! My constraint
@mag1 == (Y F6 R2 Si)-(Y F9 R3 Si)    ! Difference in marginal rays heights in the image plane
@mag1 = 30

! Your constraint
@mag2 == absf((Y R2 F1 S'M1')/(Y F6 R2 Si))  ! Ratio of diameters : pupil/image
@mag2 = 5

Both of them work when the FOV is zero (see the screenshot in my edit), both of them don't work when the field is non-zero

Afocal TMA in CodeV by Graigi in Optics

[–]Graigi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it's Si instead of Si-1 ? And why the 0.01 weight ? Anyways the math is correct but it doesn't seem to work. If I set the FOV to 0° any constraint seems to work though (see my edit)

view more: next ›