Does this support assemblies that have fiber optics? Can this handle several fiber optics on one assembly? Do you have a material library of optical materials?
There are organized Quadoa training seminars e.g. in Jena, Germany optonet-jena.de/events/master-optical-design/?lang=en . Quadoa offers free student licenses within the Quadoa Student Program. You can apply for a free student license here: www.quadoa.com/license-education
@@quadoa Thanks, that's great! I'll try your demo version soon, looks like I need to upgrade my Linux box 🙂 The reason I asked about Buchdahl is that I wrote a program that calculates all of his aberration coefficients in full generality (any order, aspherics included, chromatic aberration coefficients, in any coordinates ("any" means "generalised paracanonical" in his terminology)). And I started playing with it and it's a rather interesting bag. High order aberration coefficients, like order 15 (Buchdahl would call it "order 7" as "n" for him means "order 2n+1" in modern terminology) can get very large, esp. with larger curvatures, a pattern already visible in his papers in which he calculates order 9 and 11 spherical aberration coefficients. But here is an interesting thing I ran across last week: I took a Zemax-optimised lens from the web and compared it to a Ludwig-Bertele-designed lens from US Pat. US3154628A (Example 4). Both are reasonably complex, 17 and 19 surfaces, respectively. Surprise: Bertele's design seems much better as far as the coefficients go. Even normalising for the larger surface curvatures, the difference in the coefficients is clear. I don't know what to think except being very impressed how Ludwig Bertele could do it with just logarithmic tables! And why Zemax wouldn't optimise better? Anyway, I thought this was interesting, sorry to talk your ear off.
Nice! Now I can design my own 10 mm - 1200 mm 1.4f lightweight zoom lens
Incredible, glad this exists
Too bad there's no synchronised time dilation trichromatic anastigmat separation generator. Would buy it if it did.
I know, there’s not even a workable solution to eliminate sinusoidal deplaneration
do you support distortion optimization when working with anamorphic lenses
Yes, this is possible. If you need any help with setting up the merit-function please contact the Quadoa support.
Does this support assemblies that have fiber optics? Can this handle several fiber optics on one assembly?
Do you have a material library of optical materials?
Quadoa can model fiber coupling efficiency, but not fiber propagation. Quadoa has an optical material library integrated.
Do you organize training to students? can it be downloaded with your permission?
There are organized Quadoa training seminars e.g. in Jena, Germany optonet-jena.de/events/master-optical-design/?lang=en . Quadoa offers free student licenses within the Quadoa Student Program. You can apply for a free student license here: www.quadoa.com/license-education
Windows only, good grief. Do you implement Buchdahl aberrations (mono- and chromatic)?
Quadoa is running on linux as well
@@quadoa Thanks, that's great! I'll try your demo version soon, looks like I need to upgrade my Linux box 🙂 The reason I asked about Buchdahl is that I wrote a program that calculates all of his aberration coefficients in full generality (any order, aspherics included, chromatic aberration coefficients, in any coordinates ("any" means "generalised paracanonical" in his terminology)). And I started playing with it and it's a rather interesting bag. High order aberration coefficients, like order 15 (Buchdahl would call it "order 7" as "n" for him means "order 2n+1" in modern terminology) can get very large, esp. with larger curvatures, a pattern already visible in his papers in which he calculates order 9 and 11 spherical aberration coefficients. But here is an interesting thing I ran across last week: I took a Zemax-optimised lens from the web and compared it to a Ludwig-Bertele-designed lens from US Pat. US3154628A (Example 4). Both are reasonably complex, 17 and 19 surfaces, respectively. Surprise: Bertele's design seems much better as far as the coefficients go. Even normalising for the larger surface curvatures, the difference in the coefficients is clear. I don't know what to think except being very impressed how Ludwig Bertele could do it with just logarithmic tables! And why Zemax wouldn't optimise better? Anyway, I thought this was interesting, sorry to talk your ear off.
hot sh***te