As the source size decreases, the geometric unsharpness also decreases. However, since it affect so few rays, it might not be worth the hassle of debugging each ray. Industrial x-ray tubes often have focal spot sizes of 1.5 mm squared but microfocus systems have spot sizes in the 30 micron range. I understand that you want to know where those errors are coming from, but when using scattering, and ray splitting, this is bound to happen. Two points (segments, rays or lines) that divide a. Do that a couple of time, and a problematic ray will eventually appear: A point (or segment, ray or line) that divides a segment into two congruent segments bisects the segment. If you've enabled the settings of your NSC 3D Layout as I mentioned above, you can refresh this window by double-clicking on it, and it might give you a different ray, based on the scattering it experiences. The scattering, and splitting adds randomness to the rays when they interact with the different objects of your file. This is an example of one such ray (I hope it is large enough for you to read, let me know otherwise):Īs you can see, the ray initially managed to be transmitted through Object 15 (segment 7), but then, was reflected off Object 19 (segment 12), went back through Object 15, and bounced a couple of times inside Object 15 before being terminated due to a Missed error (R = Reflect | T = Transmitted). The Z filter string select only rays that produced an error. Then, I used the Analyze.Ray Database Viewer, and I displayed the first 1 million rays with a String Filter Z. This saves all the rays, even if they generate an error, to a *.ZRD file. Before running the raytrace, I also ticked Ignore Errors, and Save Rays. I kept only Sources 2-6 with 1E6 ray each because I knew this generated a couple of errors. This being said, at first, I wasn't sure what was exactly happening, so let me explain you what I did. Second, I've noticed in your NSC 3D Layout, you did not tick Use Polarization, Split NSC Rays, and Scatter NSC Rays (under Settings), which you should if you want to see the same thing as for your raytrace. In fact, since you have 6 Watts total, and 5E6 rays, each ray carries 1.2E-6 Watt, meaning you probably have about 10 rays which are causing you an issue out of the 5 millions. I'm assuming you are using Sources 2-6 for your design, and the sources at the end of your non-sequential data editor are your attempt to understand the geometry error.įirst of all, when running a raytrace with 1E6 rays (arbitrary) from each source 2-6 (1 W each = 6 Win total), and ignoring the errors, I get a Lost energy (errors) value of about 1E-5, which I consider completely negligible with respect to the total 6 W. Here are some coments based on what I've investigated so far.