Broadband Multi-Element Optical Delivery System — Zemax Study
I developed a multi-element broadband optical-delivery model in Ansys Zemax OpticStudio and evaluated it across multiple wavelengths, field angles, and three saved configurations. The prescription uses fused silica and CaF₂ elements with multiple powered and AR-coated surfaces. Native analyses include configuration-matrix spot diagrams, polychromatic diffraction encircled energy, and wavefront evaluation. The design concept included polarization preservation as an objective, but the saved evidence here does not contain a polarization-specific metric, so I do not present that behavior as demonstrated.
Summary
- Physics & Modeling
- Major project
- In development
Evidence on file
My contribution
I independently built the sequential optical prescription, selected the element materials and surface geometry, configured the wavelength and field sets, created the three design configurations, and generated the native OpticStudio analyses shown here.
Project overview
Why I built this
I wanted to explore how a multi-element sequential prescription could manage spatial optical behavior across a broad visible-to-near-infrared wavelength set and multiple field angles.
The saved prescription uses fused silica and calcium fluoride (CaF2) elements across multiple powered and AR-coated surfaces.
The model also gave me a useful evidence question: which design objectives are actually demonstrated by the analyses that were preserved? The saved outputs support discussion of spot structure, diffraction encircled energy, and wavefront error. They do not supply a polarization-specific result.
Native Zemax analyses
- 01Polychromatic FFT diffraction encircled-energy analysis for Configuration 2 across multiple field positions.
System architecture
The model is a sequential multi-element optical system. The preserved prescription supports multiple powered and AR-coated surfaces using fused silica and calcium fluoride (CaF2).
- Multi-element sequential optical prescription in Ansys Zemax OpticStudio.
- Fused silica and CaF₂.
- Multiple powered surfaces and AR-coated surfaces.
- The page documents the optical prescription and saved analyses, not a manufactured or aligned physical assembly.
Broadband wavelength design
The saved wavelength/configuration matrix spans approximately 0.42–1.60 µm. The visible values below establish the sampled wavelengths; they do not establish equal weighting.
| Range | Visible saved wavelengths |
|---|---|
| Visible | 0.420, 0.450, 0.500, 0.550, 0.650, 0.750 µm |
| Near-infrared | 0.850, 1.000, 1.150, 1.300, 1.450, 1.600 µm |
| Weighting | The preserved evidence does not establish that all wavelengths use equal weighting. |
Field-angle evaluation
The native configuration matrix evaluates the design at twelve angular field positions. This supports field-dependent spatial analysis; it does not by itself establish throughput or uniform performance across the field.
- 12 angular field positions.
- Each of the three displayed configurations is shown across the field matrix.
- The matrix displays spatial spot structure across wavelength and field; it is not a power-transmission result.
Three design configurations
The saved model contains three configurations. The source evidence does not establish what physical change each configuration represents, so I do not assign them names or treat them as polarization states.
Wavefront analysis
In the saved Configuration-2 on-axis analysis at 850 nm, OpticStudio reports PV = 0.1073 waves and RMS = 0.0310 waves. The reported exit pupil diameter is 3.4621 mm.
This is one saved wavelength, configuration, and field case. It is not an overall-system, broadband, or polarization result.
- Configuration 2 of 3; 0.8500 µm; on axis.
- 0.1073 waves.
- 0.0310 waves.
- 3.4621 mm.
Polychromatic encircled energy
This saved FFT diffraction analysis shows that encircled-energy behavior was evaluated polychromatically for Configuration 2 across multiple field positions. It does not provide throughput, power transmission, or energy-conversion efficiency.
Polarization: design intent versus evidence
Polarization preservation was part of the design intent, but the analyses I preserved from this model evaluate spatial optical behavior: spot structure, diffraction encircled energy, and wavefront error. Those outputs do not demonstrate input-to-output polarization preservation. A stronger test would require a polarization-specific analysis such as Jones/Stokes behavior, retardance, or diattenuation across wavelength and field.
Limitations and next analysis
The preserved evidence does not establish polarization extinction ratio, retardance performance, diattenuation, measured throughput, efficiency, fabrication, bench alignment, physical assembly, or laboratory performance.
Next I would define what each saved configuration changes, preserve the wavelength weights, run polarization-specific analyses across wavelength and field, and add tolerancing before making any statement about a physical optical system.
Evidence and provenance
Native OpticStudio analysis exports are preserved with the matching model filename and author information. The visible 10/5/2026 date is the export date, not a claimed project start date. Editable source archives are retained privately.
Evidence
Related work
I developed two related sequential optical models in Ansys Zemax OpticStudio to study how a microlens could direct broadband solar illumination toward a small rectenna microcell plane. The models explore different lenslet geometries, wavelength ranges, and field angles. Native OpticStudio outputs include 3D layout, optical-path-difference analysis, and saved 850-nm wavefront results. Because the two prescriptions and pupil conditions differ, I treat their results as evidence of design exploration rather than a controlled before-and-after performance comparison.
I built and simulated a crossed-nanowire optical detector model in Tidy3D FDTD, using orthogonal NbTiN detector elements inside a multilayer SiO₂ and gold optical stack. The completed V1 run records electric-field distributions and directional flux near 1.55 µm. The crossed geometry was intended to reduce polarization dependence, but the surviving simulation uses only one incident linear polarization — so polarization insensitivity remains a design goal rather than a demonstrated result.
I designed a computational nanophotonics study around a simple question: can an optical metasurface remain useful after realistic fabrication defects are introduced? The model is a 6 × 6 periodic supercell of TiO₂ nanodisks on glass, with missing disks, radius and height variation, and positional jitter. Instead of optimising only a perfect geometry, I designed the Tidy3D FDTD workflow around robustness — transmission, reflection, diffraction, field behaviour, and a quantitative defect-sensitivity metric. I also iterated through earlier Tidy3D models and completed multiple solver runs. Those development runs used earlier geometry and wavelength settings, so I treat them as evidence of the simulation workflow rather than validation of the final visible-band defect-tolerance study.