Research Article Vol. 56, No.

9 / March 20 2017 / Applied Optics 2517

Algorithm for designing free-form imaging optics

with nonrational B-spline surfaces
RENGMAO WU,1,2 JOSÉ SASIÁN,1 AND RONGGUANG LIANG1,*
1
College of Optical Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721, USA
2
State Key Laboratory of Modern Optical Instrumentation, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China
*Corresponding author: rliang@optics.arizona.edu

Received 23 January 2017; revised 20 February 2017; accepted 20 February 2017; posted 22 February 2017 (Doc. ID 285486);
published 16 March 2017

The local control of B-spline surfaces has the potential to provide better surface representation for free-form
imaging optics; however, it also makes B-spline surface optimization more challenging. To solve this problem,
we, for the first time to the best of our knowledge, present an algorithm to design free-form imaging optics with
nonrational B-spline surfaces. In this method, the local z-coordinates of a set of data points on B-spline surfaces
are defined as independent variables, and the location of each ray point in the image plane is considered as a
nonlinear function of these independent variables. By this mathematical consideration, a prescribed imaging
system design with B-spline surfaces can be converted into an overdetermined system of nonlinear equations,
and the least-squares solution to this nonlinear problem is found by using the Gauss–Newton method based
on a ray-tracing technique. An off-axis two-mirror system is presented to demonstrate the elegance of this method
in imaging system design with B-spline surfaces. © 2017 Optical Society of America
OCIS codes: (080.2740) Geometric optical design; (080.2720) Mathematical methods (general); (220.1250) Aspherics.

https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.56.002517

1. INTRODUCTION is not disclosed; therefore, imaging system design with B-spline

Compared with traditional rotationally symmetric surfaces, free-
form surfaces can generate more compact and lightweight imag-
ing systems because of their high degrees of design freedom.
With the development of fabrication and testing methods,
free-form surfaces are playing an irreplaceable role in imaging
systems [1–6]. Due to the nature of optimization requirements,
surface parameterization becomes a critical aspect in the design of
free-form imaging optics. The current surface parameterization
in commercial software for designing free-form surfaces is based
mainly on polynomial prescription, such as XY polynomials,
Zernike polynomials, and Chebyshev polynomials. A B-spline
surface can be considered as a piecewise polynomial surface
and has excellent local control property [7], which is quite differ-
ent from traditional polynomial surfaces. The local control of
B-spline surfaces allows us to easily control the surface locally
and, therefore, has the potential to achieve better control on
ray propagation in optical design. Because of this intrinsic prop-
erty, B-spline surfaces have been widely used in illumination
design [8–12]; however, the application of B-spline surfaces
to imaging design is still not well addressed due to the difficulties
in B-spline surface optimization. Although the feasibility and
effectiveness of B-spline surfaces in imaging system design have
been reported by limited literature [13–17], the optimization
technique, which is critical in the design of B-spline surfaces,
surfaces is still being covered with a veil of mystery.
In this paper, we employ nonrational B-spline surfaces to re-
present free-form surfaces in imaging design and present an op-
timization method to design nonrational B-spline surfaces. In
this proposed method, the local z-coordinates of a grid of pre-
defined data points on nonrational B-spline surfaces are consid-
ered as independent variables, and the location of each point of
ray in the image plane is considered as a nonlinear function of
these variables. Then, the prescribed imaging system design is
converted into a system of nonlinear equations, and the final
solution is obtained by numerically solving these equations.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we will introduce
some mathematical considerations to convert a prescribed imag-
ing system with B-spline surfaces into an overdetermined system
of nonlinear equations. Also in this section, a ray-tracing-based
numerical technique will be presented to find a least-squares sol-
ution to the overdetermined problem. In Section 3, a design
example will be presented to verify the proposed method, and
some characteristics of the proposed method will be discussed
before we conclude our work in Section 4.
2. DESIGN METHODOLOGY
This section will introduce the mathematical essence of an
imaging system design with B-spline surfaces and develop

1559-128X/17/092517-06 Journal © 2017 Optical Society of America

 2518 Vol. 56, No. 9 / March 20 2017 / Applied Optics
Fig. 1. Flow chart of the proposed optimization algorithm.
a ray-tracing-based numerical technique to find a solution to
the mathematical problem. Figure 1 shows a flow chart of
the proposed optimization method. In this method, the opti-
mization process includes two key design phases: numerical cal-
culation and ray tracing. Numerical calculations are performed
in MATLAB. TracePro software is used here to construct non-
rational B-spline surfaces and do ray tracing. The dynamic data
exchange (DDE) channel between MATLAB and TracePro
allows these two programs to communicate and exchange data.
More details about the design process of this proposed optimi-
zation method will be given below.
A. Overdetermined System of Nonlinear Equations
Figure 2 shows a “black-box” model of an imaging system,
which includes at least one free-form surface. For an illustrative
purpose, these free-form surfaces are not plotted in the figure.
In Fig. 2, XYZ represents the global coordinate system of
the imaging system, and xyz is the local coordinate system
defined for each surface. A grid of data points Q k ;l
(k
0; …; n; l
0; …; m) is defined for each free-form sur-
face, and the local z coordinates of these data points are con-
sidered as independent variables, which can be optimized to
improve image quality of the system. For each grid of points
Q k;l , we can construct a nonrational B-spline surface to re-
present the free-form surface. The nonrational B-spline surface,
which passes through the data points Q k;l can be defined as [7]
Fig. 2. “Black-box” model of an optical system with B-spline surfaces.
Research Article
X
n X
m
Su; v
N k;p uN l ;q vCPk;l ;
k
0 l
0
0 ≤ u ≤ 1; 0 ≤ v ≤ 1; (1)
where fCPk;l g are the control points, and fN k;p ug and
fN l ;q vg are the pth-degree and qth-degree B-spline basis
functions defined on the knot vectors. The control points
and knot vectors can be calculated by using B-spline surface
interpolation [7].
A chief ray (ray 1) from a sampled field position impinges
upon the image plane at point T i1 after deflection by the
B-spline surfaces, as shown in Fig. 2. Here, the subscript i1
denotes the i1-th sampled field. From Snell’s law, we know that
the location (local coordinates) of point T i1 in the image plane
is defined by highly nonlinear functions of these independent
variables, which are the local z coordinates of those predefined
data points mentioned above. A non-chief ray (ray 2), also from
the i1-th sampled field, intersects with the image plane at point
P i1;j1 after deflection by the B-spline surfaces. The subscript
(i1; j1) denotes the j1-th non-chief ray from the i1-th sampled
field. Similarly, the location of point P i1;j1 is also defined by
highly nonlinear functions of those variables. Usually, point
P i1;j1 will deviate from point T i1 due to the aberrations of
the system. We assume that Δx i1;j1 and Δyi1;j1 are, respectively,
the differences between the points P i1;j1 and T i1 in the x and y
directions in the xyz local coordinate system, as shown in
Fig. 2. Then, we know the fact that both Δx i1;j1 and Δy i1;j1
are also defined by highly nonlinear functions of those indepen-
dent variables. We assume that Δx i1;j1 and Δyi1;j1 can be math-
ematically represented by
Δx i1;j1
f i1;j1 z; Δyi1;j1
g i1;j1 z; (2)
where the vector z denotes the independent variables, which
are the local z coordinates of those predefined data points
on B-spline surfaces. Equation (2) tells us that all the non-chief
rays from the i1-th sampled field will form a focused spot on
the image plane after deflection by the B-spline surfaces due to
the aberrations. Beside, the chief ray from each sampled field
may not converge to its target image point due to the aberra-
tions. The deviation between its actual point and target point
on the image plane is usually represented by distortion [18].
Again, the distortion of each field is also a nonlinear function
of z. We assume the distortion of the i1-th sampled field can be
mathematically represented by
disti1
r i1 z: (3)
For an ideal image system with B-spline surfaces, it is required
that both the deviation between P i1;j1 and T i1 and the deviation
between T i1 , and its target image point should be zero. When
designing an imaging system, some of the sampled fields may be
more important than the other fields. We could define different
weights for these fields to achieve balances of aberrations, such as
ray spot size and distortion. Then, the prescribed imaging system
design with B-spline surfaces can be converted into a set of
weighted nonlinear equations, which can be written as
 Research Article
8 2
< wi1 × f i1;j1 z
0
w × g z
0 ; i1
1; …; M 1; j1
1; …; M 2;
: i1 i1;j1
κi1 × r i1 z
0
where the weights wi1 and κi1 are, respectively, used for control-
ling the spot size and distortion; M1 is the number of sampled
fields; and M2 is the number of sampled non-chief rays from
each sampled field. Because the distortion does not deteriorate
the sharpness of a point image, the distortion control can be
pulled out of Eq. (4), and the final images from the system
can be unwrapped by some calibration methods to remove
the distortion [19]. For the system governed by nonlinear equa-
tions given in Eq. (4), the number of equations is usually much
greater than that of the unknowns (independent variables).
It means the nonlinear system in Eq. (4) is overdetermined,
and usually there is no z that satisfies Eq. (4). Instead of finding
a z to solve these equations, we can find a solution that mini-
mizes the 2-norm (the residual) of Eq. (4). Such a solution is
called the least-squares solution to Eq. (4). For ease of descrip-
tion, we rewrite Eq. (4) as
Fz
0;
where F
F 1 ; …; F M 3  and M3 is the number of nonlinear
equations; z
z 1 ; …; z M 4  and M4 is the number of un-
knowns. The 2-norm of Eq. (5) is given by
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u M3
uX
‖Fz‖
t F2 z:
2 (6)
i
1
A merit function (MF), which is used here to quantify the optical
performance of the design, is defined as
MF
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
PM 1 PM 2 2 2
w f z  g
2
i1
1 j1
1 i1 i1;j1 i1;j1

PM 1 2
i1
1 κ i1  2M 2 wi1 
Because the weights wi1 and κi1 are constant in the design,
from Eqs. (5)–(7) we can see the least-squares solution, which
minimizes the 2-norm in Eq. (6) and also can minimize MF
in Eq. (7).
B. Numerical Calculation Based on Ray Tracing
Equation (4) shows that a chief ray yields one equation and
a non-chief ray leads to two. Due to the local control property
of B-spline surfaces, usually a large number of sampled fields
(chief rays) and non-chief rays are needed to achieve a good
balance over the field of view. Thus, the imaging system design
with B-spline surfaces will lead to an overdetermined system of
high-scale nonlinear equations. Solving such high-scale nonlin-
ear equations is challenging. In the proposed method, we use
the Gauss–Newton method [20] to find the least-squares sol-
ution. According to the Gauss–Newton method, we can estab-
lish an iterative scheme for solving the nonlinear system
Fzt   F 0 zt zt1 − zt 
0;
where zt is the solution obtained from the t-th iteration, and
F 0 zt  is the Jacobian matrix of F at zt , which is given by
Vol. 56, No. 9 / March 20 2017 / Applied Optics 2519
3
∂F 1
 ∂F 1
6 ∂z 1 ∂z M 4 7
6 . .. 7
6 .. 7
F 0 zt 
6 .. . . 7:
6 7
(4) 4 ∂F M 3 ∂F 5
∂z 1    ∂z MM 3
4
We can, from Eq. (1), see that a nonrational B-spline surface is
governed by a grid of control points and two knot vectors. That
means the analytic expressions of these nonrational B-spline
surfaces in the imaging system are unknown. Consequently,
the analytic expressions of the nonlinear equations F i z are
also unknown, and direct calculation of those first-order partial
derivatives in the Jacobian becomes impossible. Instead of tak-
ing derivatives of the functions F i z, we use finite differences
to approximate these derivatives, which can be defined as
∂F i F i z 1 ; …; z j  Δz; …; z M 4  − F i z 1 ; …; z j ; …; z M 4 
≈ ;
∂z j Δz
(9)
where Δz is the step size. Equation (9) is a first-order approxi-
mation, and the approximation error can be reduced by reduc-
(5) ing the step size. Similarly, the analytic calculation of the values
of the functions F i z in Eq. (9) is also impossible. In the pro-
posed method, we use a ray-tracing technique to calculate the
values of these functions and the Jacobian, as shown in Fig. 3.
According to this ray-tracing technique, we first define a small
step size Δz and change the j-th variable z j to z j  z, while
i keeping the other variables unchanged. Only the location of the
j-th data point will be changed when we compute ∂F i ∕∂z j .
With these data points, we calculate the control points and
knot vectors using B-spline surface interpolation and construct
the nonrational B-spline surface using these control points and
knot vectors. Then, those sampled chief rays and non-chief rays
PM 1 2 2 ffi
z  are traced, and the intersecting points of these rays on the image
i1
1 κ i1 r i1 z
: plane are obtained. After that, we compute the finite differences
2
for ∂F i ∕∂z j i
1; …; N 3, which correspond to the j-th
(7) column of the Jacobian, and repeat the whole calculation until
j
M 4. In this method, the ray tracing is performed in
TracePro, and the numerical calculation is performed in
MATLAB. The DDE channel allows these two programs to
communicate and exchange data. Equation (8) shows that we
need to solve a linear least-squares problem during each iteration,
and the design will then evolve until some predefined criteria are
met. After we get the least-squares solution to the system of non-
linear equations given in Eq. (5), the optimized B-spline surfaces
(8)
Fig. 3. Ray-tracing technique used to calculate the Jacobian.
 2520 Vol. 56, No. 9 / March 20 2017 / Applied Optics Research Article

are imported into the Zemax program for final performance performance of this final imaging system is given in Fig. 7.
evaluation. Figure 7(a) shows the RMS spot radii over the FOV, which
tells us that the maximum RMS spot radius equals
3. DESIGN EXAMPLE AND CHARACTERISTICS 11.10 um, the minimum RMS spot radius equals 2.51 μm,
OF THE PROPOSED METHOD and the average value of the RMS spot radii of those sampled
fields equals 6.23 μm. Figure 7(b) plots the MTF curves of the
In this section, an off-axis two-mirror system will be given to
verify the proposed method, and some intrinsic features of the
imaging system design with B-spline surfaces will be discussed.
As an example, an imaging system consisting of two off-axis
mirrors is designed with a focal length of 30 mm, a rectangular
field of view (FOV) of 24° × 17°, and the diameter of the
entrance pupil of 8 mm. We assume that the system is sym-
metric about the Y Z coordinate plane. The plane symmetry
allows us to sample half of the FOV. Because the B-spline sur-
face can be controlled locally, an adequate number of field
positions should be sampled to achieve a good balance over
the FOV. Thus, 81 sampled fields are used here, and 221
points are sampled on the entrance pupil. There are several
types of pupil sampling, such as polar, Cartesian, and hexapolar
sampling forms [18]. These sampling forms are all applicable to
the proposed method. In this design example, we use the polar
form to sample the entrance pupil, as shown in Fig. 4.
We let p
3 and q
3 in Eq. (1), meaning that the two
mirrors are bicubic nonrational B-spline surfaces. A 20 × 30 grid
of data points is used for the primary mirror and a 26 × 40 grid
for the secondary mirror. We assume that the distortion is not
controlled here and those sampled fields are equally weighted.
Because the Gauss–Newton method is used here to find the
least-squares solution, a starting point should be given to start
the iteration. The optical performance of the starting point is
shown in Fig. 5. The root-mean-squared (RMS) spot radii over
the FOV are plotted in Fig. 5(a). From this figure, we know that
the maximum RMS spot radius equals 77.40 μm, the minimum
RMS spot radius equals 5.07 μm, and the average value of the
RMS spot radii of those sampled fields equals 25.81 μm (the
radius of airy disk is equal to 2.935 μm). Figure 5(b) gives
the modulation transfer function (MTF) curves of 12 fields from
the 81 sampled fields. This figure tells us that the minimum
MTF value at 30 lp/mm equals 0.03 and the average MTF value
at 30 lp/mm equals 0.37.
With this starting point, the least-squares solution is found
after six optimization cycles, with the MF value decreasing from
Fig. 5. Optical performance of the starting point. (a) RMS spot radii
0.03454 to 0.00678. Then, the final solution is imported into
over the FOV. (b) MTF curves of 12 fields from the 81 sampled fields.
Zemax for final performance evaluation. The geometrical lay-
out of the optimized system is given in Fig. 6, and the optical

Fig. 6. Optimized imaging system with two bicubic nonrational

Fig. 4. (a) Sampled field positions. (b) Polar pupil sampling. B-spline surfaces.
 Research Article
12 fields. The minimum MTF value at 30 lp/mm equals 0.48
and the average MTF value at 30 lp/mm equals 0.72. Figures 5
and 7 show that the performance of the system is improved
significantly by the use of the proposed method. These results
clearly show the effectiveness of the proposed method in the
imaging system design with B-spline surfaces.
The remainder of this section will discuss some character-
istics of B-spline surface optimization. More data points used to
construct a B-spline surface usually means more degrees of
design freedom that can be used in the optimization design.
We analyze the influence of the number of variables on the
MF value, as shown in Fig. 8. This figure shows that the
MF value decreases significantly from 0.01187 to 0.00720
when the number of data points is increased from (10 × 15,
10 × 15) to (20 × 30, 20 × 30); however, the MF value only
decreases by 0.00042 when the number of data points is further
increased to (20 × 30, 28 × 42). From this figure, we also can
see the MF values of the last two designs are almost the same,
which tells us that more data points may not yield better per-
formance. Thus, trade-offs should be made between the design
efficiency and optical performance of the imaging system.
According to the local property of B-spline surfaces, we know
that changing one control point CPk;l of a B-spline surface affects
the surface only in the rectangle uk ; ukp1  × v l ; v l q1 ) [7].
Fig. 7. Optical performance of the final solution. (a) RMS spot radii
over the FOV. (b) MTF curves of 12 fields from the 81 sampled fields.
Vol. 56, No. 9 / March 20 2017 / Applied Optics 2521
That means ∂F i ∕∂z j in Eq. (9) may equal zero because changing
the j-th data point may not affect the i-th equation. If none of
those equations in Eq. (5) is affected by the change of the j-th
data point, those elements in the j-th column of the Jacobian will
all be equal to zero. A zero vector in the j-th column means the
j-th variable is not restricted by the least-squares problem and can
change arbitrarily. This problem usually takes place at the four
corners of the B-spline surface and consequently makes the design
fail to converge. Let us take the primary mirror as an example. We
assume that the mirror is defined on a rectangular domain Ω0 , as
shown in Fig. 9(a). Due to the plane symmetry of the mirror, we
can discretize only half of the domain, and the data points on the
other half can be obtained by mirror operation. The green point
cloud in Fig. 9 represents the projections of the footprints of the
sampled rays in the local xy coordinate plane of the mirror, and
the blue squares represent the projections of the data points of the
mirror in the local xy coordinate plane. Figure 9(a) shows that
some data points near the lower right and upper right corners
of the domain Ω0 are far from the footprints. Due to the local
control of B-spline surfaces, we may encounter complications
associated with singularities at the corners of the free-form surface,
as shown in Fig. 9(c), and the singularities then lead to design
failure. In the proposed method, we employ the L2 Monge–
Kantorovich (LMK) theory [21,22] to solve this problem. We
define a new domain Ω1 , which is a super-ellipse and whose mini-
mum bounding rectangle is the domain Ω0 . Both the mass den-
sities ρ0 and ρ1 on Ω0 and Ω1 are assumed to be constant and
satisfy the condition that the total mass is conserved. According to
Fig. 8. Influence of the number of variables on the MF value.
Fig. 9. (a) Rectangular domain. (b) Super-elliptical domain.
(b) Obvious difference between the mirrors generated by these two
different domains.
 2522 Vol. 56, No. 9 / March 20 2017 / Applied Optics
the LMK theory, we can find an optimal mapping that takes the
density ρ0 to the density ρ1. Then, those data points on Ω0 can
be mapped onto Ω1 by using the obtained optimal mapping, as
shown in Fig. 9(b). Figure 9(b) shows that the new discretization
allows the data points to be much closer to the footprints of
the sampled light rays, yielding a smooth B-spline surface and
a successful design, as shown in Fig. 9(c). It is of interest to men-
tion that the use of the LMK theory to discretize the B-spline
surface depends on how many data points are sampled on each
B-spline surface and how many light rays are traced. With a few
data points and sampled field positions, we may not encounter
the corner problem; consequently, the LMK theory may not
be needed here. However, the optical performance of the
imaging system may not be good enough due to the limited data
points. Although the rectangular domain has been changed to a
super-ellipse, we still can calculate the control points and knot
vectors from these discrete data points using B-spline surface
interpolation.
4. CONCLUSION
The local property of a B-spline surface has the potential to
provide better surface representation; however, it makes the
imaging system design with B-spline surfaces quite challenging.
In this paper, we present an optimization method to design
imaging systems with nonrational B-spline surfaces. By the
proposed method, a prescribed imaging system design with
B-Spline surfaces can be converted into an overdetermined sys-
tem of nonlinear equations, and the least-squares solution to
the overdetermined equations is found by using a ray-tracing
technique. Due to the local control of B-spline surfaces, a mod-
erate number of data points should be used to achieve better
representation of the desired free-form surface, and an adequate
number of field positions should be sampled to achieve better
balance over the field of view. Thus, trade-offs should be
between the design efficiency and optical performance of the
imaging system. Complications associated with singularities
at the corners of B-spline surfaces may be encountered due
to the local control of B-spline surfaces. The application of
the LMK theory to discretizing the B-spline surface can solve
those corner problems. The design example perfectly shows the
effectiveness of the proposed method in the imaging system
design with B-spline surfaces. Although the design example
is a mirror system, the proposed method is also applicable
to refractive and catadioptric optical systems.
REFERENCES
1. D. Cheng, Y. Wang, H. Hua, and M. M. Talha, “Design of an optical
see-through head-mounted display with a low f-number and large field
of view using a free-form prism,” Appl. Opt. 48, 2655–2668 (2009).
Research Article
2. O. Cakmakci and J. Rolland, “Design and fabrication of a dual-
element off-axis near-eye optical magnifier,” Opt. Lett. 32, 1363–
1365 (2007).
3. Z. Zheng, X. Liu, H. Li, and L. Xu, “Design and fabrication of an off-axis
see-through head-mounted display with an x-y polynomial surface,”
Appl. Opt. 49, 3661–3668 (2010).
4. T. Yang, J. Zhu, X. Wu, and G. Jin, “Direct design of free-form surfaces
and free-form imaging systems with a point-by-point three-dimen-
sional construction-iteration method,” Opt. Express 23, 10233–
10246 (2015).
5. Y. Nie, R. Mohedano, P. Benítez, J. Chaves, J. C. Miñano, H.
Thienpont, and F. Duerr, “Multifield direct design method for ultrashort
throw ratio projection optics with two tailored mirrors,” Appl. Opt. 55,
3794–3800 (2016).
6. J. Liu, P. Benítez, and J. C. Miñano, “Single free-form surface imaging
design with unconstrained object to image mapping,” Opt. Express 22,
30538–30546 (2014).
7. L. Piegl and W. Tiller, The NURBS Book (Springer, 1995).
8. P. Benítez, J. C. Miñano, J. Blen, R. Mohedano, J. Chaves, O. Dross,
M. Hernández, and W. Falicoff, “Simultaneous multiple surface optical
design method in three dimensions,” Opt. Eng. 43, 1489–1502 (2004).
9. Y. Luo, Z. Feng, Y. Han, and H. Li, “Design of compact and smooth
free-form optical system with uniform illuminance for LED source,”
Opt. Express 18, 9055–9063 (2010).
10. A. Bäuerle, A. Bruneton, R. Wester, J. Stollenwerk, and P. Loosen,
“Algorithm for irradiance tailoring using multiple free-form optical sur-
faces,” Opt. Express 20, 14477–14485 (2012).
11. T. L. R. Davenport, “3D NURBS representation of surfaces for illumi-
nation,” Proc. SPIE 4832, 293–301 (2002).
12. R. Wu, L. Xu, P. Liu, Y. Zhang, Z. Zheng, H. Li, and X. Liu, “Free-form
illumination design: a nonlinear boundary problem for the elliptic
Monge-Ampére equation,” Opt. Lett. 38, 229–231 (2013).
13. P. Ott, “Optic design of head-up displays with free-form surfaces
specified by NURBS,” Proc. SPIE 7100, 71000Y (2008).
14. Y.-L. Liu, W.-Y. Hsu, Y.-C. Cheng, and G.-D. Su, “Progressive addi-
tion lens design by optimizing NURBS surface,” Proc. SPIE 8128,
81280H (2011).
15. D. Cheng, W. Zhou, C. Xu, and Y. Wang, “Optomechanical design
and analysis with NURBS free-form surface,” in Renewable Energy
and the Environment Congress, OSA Technical Digest (2013),
paper FW3A.6.
16. M. P. Chrisp, “New free-form NURBS imaging code,” Proc. SPIE
9293, 92930N (2014).
17. M. P. Chrisp, B. Primeau, and M. A. Echter, “Imaging free-form optical
systems designed with NURBS surfaces,” Opt. Eng. 55, 071208
(2016).
18. H. Gross, Fundamentals of Technical Optics, Vol. 1 of Handbook of
Optical Systems (Wiley, 2005).
19. Z. Zhang, “Flexible camera calibration by viewing a plane from un-
known orientations,” in Proceedings of IEEE Conference on
Computer Vision (IEEE, 1999), pp. 666–673.
20. D. P. Bertsekas, Nonlinear Programming (Athena Scientific, 1999).
21. M. M. Sulman, J. F. Williams, and R. D. Russell, “An efficient approach
for the numerical solution of Monge-Ampère equation,” Appl. Numer.
Math. 61, 298–307 (2011).
22. R. Wu, Y. Zhang, M. M. Sulman, Z. Zheng, P. Benítez, and J. C.
Miñano, “Initial design with L2 Monge-Kantorovich theory for the
Monge-Ampère equation method in free-form surface illumination de-
sign,” Opt. Express 22, 16161–16177 (2014).