Zemax raytracing and which lens element is the STOP

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter OpticsLover
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ray optics
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the definition and identification of the STOP in optical systems using Zemax software. The STOP is defined as the lens element that produces the smallest cone angle from an on-axis object, a characteristic determined by the system configuration rather than user preference. Users express confusion over Zemax's requirement for manual selection of the STOP, arguing that the software should automatically identify it based on the optical design. The conversation highlights the flexibility of Zemax in optimizing stop positions but emphasizes the necessity for designers to have control over this selection to align with their design intentions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of optical design principles, specifically the concept of the STOP.
  • Familiarity with Zemax optical design software.
  • Knowledge of merit functions in optical systems, such as minimizing field aberrations.
  • Basic concepts of lens and mirror configurations in optical systems.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the definition and role of the STOP in optics, referencing authoritative sources like the University of Arizona.
  • Explore Zemax's capabilities for optimizing optical designs, focusing on the merit function settings.
  • Study the iterative processes involved in determining the STOP for complex lens systems, such as the Cooke Triplet.
  • Learn about Köhler illumination systems and their implications for STOP positioning in multi-aperture designs.
USEFUL FOR

Optical designers, engineers working with Zemax, and students in optical sciences who seek to deepen their understanding of STOP definitions and their practical applications in optical system design.

OpticsLover
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Basic question about the STOP in Zemax
We know that in a lens system, the STOP is defined as the element that its entrance pupil makes the smallest cone angle from an on-axis object. This means that the STOP is defined by the system and how the lenses, mirrors, and apertures have been arranged and NOT by the user/designer (i.e the STOP shouldnt bt selectable , it is already there and software should find it). Please let me know if this assumption is wrong.

So why in Zemax, the software wants the user to define which element is the STOP? Based on what I said, the STOP is already known and should NOT be definable or selectable by the user. To my understanding, the user should provide the surfaces/lenses/apertures and then the software should find the actual STOP but why it lets us select it?

Any hint is appreciated.
 
Science news on Phys.org
It's been years since I used Zemax, but is it offering to compute the dimensions of the other elements so that the selected element is the stop?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Whilst for some optical systems the position of the stop is well established, it is beneficial to provide optical designers with the freedom to choose the stop position freely.

This is particularly important when combining many optical components into one system with multiple apertures. In different configurations, the positions of the stop and field apertures may interchange, as seen in Köhler illumination systems.

Kohler_Illumination_en.jpg


Zemax offers enough flexibility to create such a construction, which can automatically find the optimum stop position to optimize a given merit function. For example, the merit function might aim to minimize field aberrations or achieve telecentricity. However, it is advantageous if the designer can set the stop position manually, rather than relying solely on the software, as the software might not always align with the designer's intentions.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
Gleb1964 said:
Whilst for some optical systems the position of the stop is well established, it is beneficial to provide optical designers with the freedom to choose the stop position freely.

This is particularly important when combining many optical components into one system with multiple apertures. In different configurations, the positions of the stop and field apertures may interchange, as seen in Köhler illumination systems.

View attachment 359050

Zemax offers enough flexibility to create such a construction, which can automatically find the optimum stop position to optimize a given merit function. For example, the merit function might aim to minimize field aberrations or achieve telecentricity. However, it is advantageous if the designer can set the stop position manually, rather than relying solely on the software, as the software might not always align with the designer's intentions.
Thank you for the reply. I still dont get it though! You say "it is advantageous if the designer can set the stop position manually". It is like to say "it is advantage to use the Newton's law as F=mv instead of F=ma because in this case we deal with a first order differential equation which is much easier to solve compared to a second order differential equation (coming from F=ma)".
All I am saying is that STOP has a precise definition and it is located by the system configuration not by what the designer likes to be. This is the confusion part for me. We cannot change the laws just because it makes the calculations easier.
 
The problem is that Zemax doesn't know where you intend to set the stop. For example, you have just a spherical mirror (or lens). Where Zemax should place a stop?
Zemax cannot define it itself.
 
Yeah, thats exactly the problem. Why Zemax (such a powerful software) cannot find the STOP? Finding STOP should NOT be difficult: the STOP is the element that its entrance pupil makes the smallest on-axis cone angle.
In the case of one element (e.g. one lens in your example), the STOP is that element itself (because that element is the EP of itself and since it is the only EP, it makes it the EP with smallest cone angle).
 
Last edited:
For a single spherical mirror, the stop can be placed:
  1. At the center of curvature, resulting in an aplanatic design.
  2. At the focal distance, resulting in telecentricity.
  3. At the mirror, as many telescope designs do.
  4. Somewhere else, aiming to trade off the above properties.
It is up to the designer to make the choice. Zemax cannot guess the right choice.
 
Gleb1964 said:
For a single spherical mirror, the stop can be placed:
  1. At the center of curvature, resulting in an aplanatic design.
  2. At the focal distance, resulting in telecentricity.
  3. At the mirror, as many telescope designs do.
  4. Somewhere else, aiming to trade off the above properties.
It is up to the designer to make the choice. Zemax cannot guess the right choice.

No, if we accept the definition of the STOP in Optics books, the STOP is at the mirror, thats it (i.e. if we move the STOP somewhere else, the system is not only one mirror/lens anymore). The only explanation to have a different STOP would be the definition of STOP in Zemax is different from what we learn in optics books/courses. Again, assuming the definitions of the STOP between Zemax and other resources match, why Zemax cannot find the real STOP of the system? Like I said, STOP has a precise definition.
 
OpticsLover said:
No, if we accept the definition of the STOP in Optics books, the STOP is at the mirror, thats it (i.e. if we move the STOP somewhere else, the system is not only one mirror/lens anymore).
To help those of us following this discussion, can you please display the "the definition of the STOP in Optics books" and cite the source? Thanks.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Tom.G and OpticsLover
  • #10
See slides 9-2 and 9-3 of attached. The source is coming from University of Arizona (UofA) (the college of optical sciences of UofA is a prestigious and leading optics institutes in the world)
 

Attachments

  • #11
OpticsLover said:
Again, assuming the definitions of the STOP between Zemax and other resources match, why Zemax cannot find the real STOP of the system? Like I said, STOP has a precise definition.
Thanks for the U of A presentation explaining apertures.
After a bit of googling, it appears to me that the Zemax optical design software is by itself unable to find "the real STOP of the system" because to do so requires a fair amount of trial and error. Here's a video that explains the process:


Note in particular the iterations required to find the aperture stop of a Cooke Triplet lens system:
1743103574101.png
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
832
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
16K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
79
Views
9K