STAND AND DELIVER!!! 2 Watts of Red….Out of the Optics Bed!!!

Printable View

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

11-01-2011, 16:35
CDBEAM

2 Attachment(s)

STAND AND DELIVER!!! 2 Watts of Red….Out of the Optics Bed!!!

Since the ML520G71 thread has grown rather large... and now seems to be encompassing different LD options…I thought I would refocus with this thread. I believe that several members are in search of the 635nm to 640nm line... with an output of 500mW to 3Watts. This is just a SWAG. My personal goal is about 2 Watts of red...prior to propagation into the scanner head. I do NOT care if the beam comes out of Beelzebub’s Butt !! I WANT two (2) Watts of RED !!

Currently… in the running are: ML520G71, ML501P73 or the Opnext HL6388MG.

With the new lower price of the HL6388MG…and the emitter size being 20uM…perhaps a multi-diode…six (6) LD design would be optimal using the Opnext HL6388MG. Because there would be three (3) beams stacked after the knife edges….To beam correct I would lean toward the use of Anamorphic Prisms. A set of A-prisms after each group of three (3) LD’s . The LD’s would require a slight overdrive…rated at 250mW…driven to 300mW each. Therefore…300mW x 6 = 1800mW (Thanx Steve )

The other option might be a Quad of ML501P73. These diodes could be driven within spec…or 500mW x 4 = 2000mW.

See both concept drawings. As of this time…I am guessing that there will be acceptable beam correction optic solutions available. I just throw this out there because these seem to be the most promising directions….at least for multi-diode designs.

BEAM
11-02-2011, 04:32
Phredy1

Just curious why your using a waveplate rather than just turning 1/2 the diodes 90 degrees?
11-02-2011, 04:45
steve-o

Probably because the beams come out of the diodes like this || and turned they'd be like this __ __ ? Just a guess..
11-02-2011, 04:50
andy_con

if you rotate one set of diodes you end result will look like a cross +

use a waveplate and your end result will be - so you get a better beam
11-02-2011, 06:12
CDBEAM

Yes, To eliminate the need for a waveplate…one would need to rotate ½ of the set up ( 3 LD’S ) 90 degree…not just the LD’s…but the knife edge and A-Prism beam correction optics also…the whole set up…then the rotated pair would enter the PBS like = and combine with the other pair to deliver something like this # This is what Swamidog does with his 445 Dual. My thinking is that a higher energy density is produced by adding ll + ll to produce a ll geometry, and that would deliver superior apparent luminosity… but…perhaps a # would produce a better result ?? Until I experiment or see the results of others….I do not really know !! I suppose I take my lead from the Kvant Multi-diode design. Comments ???

Beam
11-02-2011, 06:16
andy_con

keep it simple is the best way

http://www.photonlexicon.com/forums/...iode-445-build
11-02-2011, 08:35
blowfly

I have been following the ML520G71 thread closely as I want to build a 2W red in the near future too!

The ML501P73 looks interesting. The price doesn't seem too bad either. Has anyone found a set of optics that work well with it? I did a quick search but didn't see anything conclusive.

Mike
11-02-2011, 08:56
swamidog

1 Attachment(s)

in my build, the "+" blended better with the size and shape of the red and green lasers i was combining with. i would recommend a "#" instead of a "=" or a "||" so all axis of your projected spot have the same divergence.

dual 445 spot at 40':
Attachment 28438

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDBEAM

Yes, To eliminate the need for a waveplate…one would need to rotate ½ of the set up ( 3 LD’S ) 90 degree…not just the LD’s…but the knife edge and A-Prism beam correction optics also…the whole set up…then the rotated pair would enter the PBS like = and combine with the other pair to deliver something like this # This is what Swamidog does with his 445 Dual. My thinking is that a higher energy density is produced by adding ll + ll to produce a ll geometry, and that would deliver superior apparent luminosity… but…perhaps a # would produce a better result ?? Until I experiment or see the results of others….I do not really know !! I suppose I take my lead from the Kvant Multi-diode design. Comments ???

Beam
11-02-2011, 09:52
mccarrot

2 Attachment(s)

You could use our tripple block for this setup, this block allready got a area for the prismpair
11-02-2011, 12:18
CDBEAM

BlowFly...School is still out on what tames the ML series...Currently....I would like to see the combination of the Lasershowpart adjustable LD mount , with a short FL Collimation lens coupled to Cylinderical lens set with an eight (8) magnifacation.

Steve-O...What collimation lens did you you use with your HL6388MG set up to get 1.09 divergence ??? I know you only use one (1) prism.....that does leave the propagation path at an odd angle....but does reduce transmission losses some.

Andy_con...Kvant uses only telescope optics...right ?? To compress an array of beams down to one bundled beam...Would telescope optics be a superior solution vs Anamorphic prisms ????? What does Kvant use to beam correct astigmatic/elipitical LD output of the 445 or the 640 LD's ???

Swamidog... I truly desire a pattern of symetry at the target plane !!! and the + shape delivers that...one can see that in your pic....but...at the end of the day....which arrangment actually looks better....for beam shows or graphics ???? I think it is Density vs. a fuller/rounder beam shape. I remain undecided as to what gives the best look !!

Has anyone else experimented with the HL6388MG or with the Swamidog + layout ??

Thanx all for your comments. We ALL stand on each others shoulders in advancing the art and science !!!

BEAM
11-02-2011, 15:08
steve-o

Quote:

CDBEAM Wrote:
Steve-O...What collimation lens did you you use with your HL6388MG set up to get 1.09 divergence ???

Melles Griot 06GLC002/D. Found them in a buy/sell/trade here at PL a few years ago.
Slightly pricey if not discovered by accident ..
The beam is rather large at the aperature tho - 5 x 8 mm

http://www.cvimellesgriot.com/Produc...de-Lasers.aspx
11-02-2011, 16:14
Phredy1

I guess I just assumed you were doing beam shows only....
11-02-2011, 18:51
CDBEAM

Yikes Steve...5mm x 8mm !!! Can you experiment with other Collimation lenses ??? like a 405 G-2 ??
11-03-2011, 05:59
steve-o

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDBEAM

Yikes Steve...5mm x 8mm !!! Can you experiment with other Collimation lenses ??? like a 405 G-2 ??

Yes, I probably could, but as we all know beam size at aperture is usually inverse proportion to divergence , so I'll probably stick with this until I find something better. I have the 405G2 lenses on a dual 445 I built and they work well, but I thought they were AR coated for 405-(445) and would not transmit well for longer wavelengths. Or is this incorrect?
11-03-2011, 06:44
Solarfire

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve-o

Yes, I probably could, but as we all know beam size at aperture is usually inverse proportion to divergence , so I'll probably stick with this until I find something better. I have the 405G2 lenses on a dual 445 I built and they work well, but I thought they were AR coated for 405-(445) and would not transmit well for longer wavelengths. Or is this incorrect?

Here's a cutout out of another thread where I did some testing.

"I did some measurements with different collis with some amazing results with blue AR coated lenses giving better results than some red AR coated. I got best results with the 405-G-2 with less than 5% loss and with the mccarrot blue with <1% loss? Yeah… I’m still scratching my head on that one, but I double checked it and it’s so. I didn’t do a graph for the Axis red since these showed losses of > 20%.

Taking into account price, beam size/profile (<2mm @ aperture) and power loss I may end up using the 405-G-2 lens in some red setups."
11-03-2011, 07:13
steve-o

Good info, thanks SF. What diode were you testing with?
11-03-2011, 09:31
Solarfire

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve-o

Good info, thanks SF. What diode were you testing with?

That was with the LPC815 and 826..
11-03-2011, 11:52
steve-o

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solarfire

That was with the LPC815 and 826..

Umm .. aren't those the 660s that are fairly easy to tame with just about any basic pointer lens, or am I getting this confused with some other diodes?
11-03-2011, 11:56
Doc

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve-o

Umm .. aren't those the 660s that are fairly easy to tame with just about any basic pointer lens, or am I getting this confused with some other diodes?

Yes but the point in discussion was the low power loss red diode/blue coated lens :)
11-03-2011, 12:42
steve-o

Yes, good info. Glad to see the transmission thru the blue AR coating is also good for red. The reason I asked which diodes Solarfire was testing with was in the previous post prior to my question he wrote:

Quote:

Taking into account price, beam size/profile (<2mm @ aperture) and power loss I may end up using the 405-G-2 lens in some red setups."
11-03-2011, 12:47
CDBEAM

DTR also did a collimation lens comparrision with the ML520G71 @ 638nm. The 405 G 2 provided the least transmission loss. He did NOT test with the Mccarrot lens. Mr. Mcarrot....OK....I have seen your set up B4....looks clean and organized....but....how much for the Mount, LD holders and Collimation Lenses ???? A complete set up....less A-prisms and LD'd....ready to roll ????? And....if I remember correctly.....your lenses are NOT the M9 geometry.....so....the entire assembly need be purchased as a package....I have no issue with this.....but just wanted to clairify. I am not saying...this IS the way to go....but it is a consideration ...depending on cost. Thanx.

BEAM
11-04-2011, 03:06
Solarfire

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDBEAM

DTR also did a collimation lens comparrision with the ML520G71 @ 638nm. The 405 G 2 provided the least transmission loss. He did NOT test with the Mccarrot lens. Mr. Mcarrot....OK....I have seen your set up B4....looks clean and organized....but....how much for the Mount, LD holders and Collimation Lenses ???? A complete set up....less A-prisms and LD'd....ready to roll ????? And....if I remember correctly.....your lenses are NOT the M9 geometry.....so....the entire assembly need be purchased as a package....I have no issue with this.....but just wanted to clairify. I am not saying...this IS the way to go....but it is a consideration ...depending on cost. Thanx.

BEAM

The killer is the price of his lens/carriers @ >60€ a piece (after tax and shipping) and his mount will only work with these due to the bore holes for the lens carrier being 11mm.
11-04-2011, 04:13
mccarrot

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDBEAM

DTR also did a collimation lens comparrision with the ML520G71 @ 638nm. The 405 G 2 provided the least transmission loss. He did NOT test with the Mccarrot lens. Mr. Mcarrot....OK....I have seen your set up B4....looks clean and organized....but....how much for the Mount, LD holders and Collimation Lenses ???? A complete set up....less A-prisms and LD'd....ready to roll ????? And....if I remember correctly.....your lenses are NOT the M9 geometry.....so....the entire assembly need be purchased as a package....I have no issue with this.....but just wanted to clairify. I am not saying...this IS the way to go....but it is a consideration ...depending on cost. Thanx.

BEAM

the black tripple block cost 69,- euro, a collimator costs 49,- but I can can give you a set discount.

the lenses are M9, but the barrel is 11mm.

The big advantage of using these barrels is you can rotate the barrels so you can get the polarization spot on. And also fitting the diodes or replacing diodes in very easy because you remove the barrel out of the mount.

The lenses and barrels are the same as the quality collimator Marco sells, so if you can get a better price from Marco feel free to buy from him.

We made these blocks to make our life easy and get a reasonably affordable quality red and blue.

We currently use the blocks and collimators to make 500mW 640nm lasers with superb beam specs, and 1W blues in our RGB projectors. Its very easy to assemble and adjust.

see here for some pictures

http://www.photonlexicon.com/forums/...hlight=rgbrick
11-04-2011, 04:29
steve-o

What kind of diode is the 640?
11-04-2011, 04:37
LaNeK779

i suppose 3x opnext 6385 ??
11-04-2011, 05:12
mccarrot

The standard 642nm 150mW opnext diodes
11-04-2011, 05:44
steve-o

Quote:

Originally Posted by mccarrot

We currently use the blocks and collimators to make 500mW 640nm lasers with superb beam specs

So I guess that you're over-driving them just slightly to acheive 500mw at the aperture? That would be 6 diodes for 1 Watt. Not bad for a good beam. I wouldn't look forward to aligning 6 diodes, though. Although it seems easy for some people.. I guess I'm just not one of them .. :o
11-04-2011, 07:28
mccarrot

If you keep them cool they run fine on 300-320mA (280mA default)
11-05-2011, 16:28
steve-o

Cool :D

___________
11-06-2011, 20:14
CDBEAM

1 Attachment(s)

Hey Steve-O....would you try the 405 G 2 Collimation lens with the HL6388MG and post the geometry after the prism and at Farfield. If you have a set of Lava Cylinderical optics....I really wonder what they would provide with the HL6388MG ????? Also did you not say the emitter size on the 6388 was 20 uM ??????? I am being a proponent for both the Mitsuibishi and the Optnext solutions !!!.... Perhaps a six (6) multidiode could be done using Cylinderical lenses ??????? See Pic....Yikes...yet another drawing !!!

Beam
11-07-2011, 00:17
mccarrot

Hi CDBeam,

in your drawings you have a thick beam going into the cylindrical optics, and a small beam out of the optics, but its the other way around, you maginify the beam so you beam will be thicker when it exits.
11-07-2011, 05:59
CDBEAM

Trouble ahead

Actually...yes Mcarrot....the beam when it exits the C-Lenses will expand the Fast axis. I wonder if we will not hit a problem with knife edging with the ML series ??? Too large a geometry after the Cylinderical Lenses...and that is with the current 4X of the Drlava lenses...not the proposed 6 ~ 8....which will expand the geometry even furthur !!! The Optnext...with their smaller emitter may be the only option for a multi-diode design ????? [popcorn]

BEAM
11-07-2011, 06:27
andyf97

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDBEAM

Actually...yes Andy....the beam when it exits the C-Lenses will expand the Fast axis. I wonder if we will not hit a problem with knife edging with the ML series ??? Too large a geometry after the Cylinderical Lenses...and that is with the current 4X of the Drlava lenses...not the proposed 6 ~ 8....which will expand the geometry even furthur !!! The Optnext...with their smaller emitter may be the only option for a multi-diode design ????? [popcorn]

BEAM

For the ML
My exit beam after optics is 2mmx2mm, I plan to use them in a 4mm x 4mm square of 4 beams / knife edged together then wave plate and PBS another 4 into the mix so that based on running them over speck at 500mW each. 4W at 638nm.

Edit: Just realized I can rotate the second set of 4 so don't even need the wave plate. 4W is enough. Ahh but then if the 500mW version can be over powered to say 800mW that will yield 6,4W with the same setup
11-07-2011, 06:46
Anthony

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyf97

For the ML
My exit beam after optics is 2mmx2mm, I plan to use them in a 4mm x 4mm square of 4 beams / knife edged together then wave plate and PBS another 4 into the mix so that based on running them over speck at 500mW each. 4W at 638nm.

Edit: Just realized I can rotate the second set of 4 so don't even need the wave plate. 4W is enough. Ahh but then if the 500mW version can be over powered to say 800mW that will yield 6,4W with the same setup

Please stop..... i am getting a stiffy :-) wuahahaha
I am targetting 2 watts. If you are confident you can get +4W.... than 2W must be more easy :-)
11-07-2011, 06:54
andyf97

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony

Please stop..... i am getting a stiffy :-) wuahahaha
I am targetting 2 watts. If you are confident you can get +4W.... than 2W must be more easy :-)

I am just wondering how for the layout, it wont be so small and cost quite a bit but still a hell of a lot cheaper than to buy.

As for now each diode will have a DRLava correction.
Two of the diodes need to be stepped up 2mm higher than the other 2 to make this 88 kind of shape, needs the mounts to be 2mm higher, no problem. The DRlava correction can all be the same height as they are tall enough.

A sketch please CDBEAM.

I guess this can be done with two FMP3 aswell and a couple of tec coolers.

So for optics at 4W would need:

8xML5..G71 (No Part Number) About 69usd each from DSR
8xDiode Mounts (OPT-DH56) 27usd each Lasershowparts.com
8xLenses mounted in M9x0.5 info to come
8xFlexMount (OPT-FMM1) 22usd each Lasershowparts.com
8xMirrors info to come
8xSets of DRLava Correction info to come
1xPBS info to come
2xFMP3 info to come
And a base plate to mount it all on. info to come

For the 6,4W version, just change the diodes.
11-07-2011, 06:58
CDBEAM

Sorry Mcarrot....you pointed out my problem with geometry !! YIKES....there is ALOT on the table !!! And I want to see pics of it all !!! We currently are considering three different LD's ( HL6388MG, ML520G71, ML501P73)... three different different C-Lens optics ( 3X,6X,8X ) and two different Collimation lenses ( FL3 and 405 G 2 ) !!! That is 18 different combinations !!!! And I am not even throwing A-prisms into the pot !!! YIKES

Andy...so....AFTER your Drlava Cylinderical lenses....and your short FL collimation lens....you beam geometry is 2mm x 2mm ??? Am I correct in this understanding. THAT is " A horse of a Different Colour " meaning....that is very good.....and my initial thinking is that a " 88 " geometry may work !!! I will be testing close to that set up shortly when I get my LSP mount/lens..I will work on a drawing.

BEAM
11-07-2011, 08:23
andyf97

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDBEAM

Sorry Mcarrot....you pointed out my problem with geometry !! YIKES....there is ALOT on the table !!! And I want to see pics of it all !!! We currently are considering three different LD's ( HL6388MG, ML520G71, ML501P73)... three different different C-Lens optics ( 3X,6X,8X ) and two different Collimation lenses ( FL3 and 405 G 2 ) !!! That is 18 different combinations !!!! And I am not even throwing A-prisms into the pot !!! YIKES

Andy...so....AFTER your Drlava Cylinderical lenses....and your short FL collimation lens....you beam geometry is 2mm x 2mm ??? Am I correct in this understanding. THAT is " A horse of a Different Colour " meaning....that is very good.....and my initial thinking is that a " 88 " geometry may work !!! I will be testing close to that set up shortly when I get my LSP mount/lens..I will work on a drawing.

BEAM

YES After the collimation then the drlava correction the beam is 2x2
11-07-2011, 13:34
CDBEAM

1 Attachment(s)

A Red Dream

Yikes times Yikes.... Stand and Deliver indeed !!!This drawing was a PITA....Just imagine the BUILD..... I will go out on a limb here...Using eight HL6388MG's....with the smaller emitter size...This ONE will likely work....and give 2W... driven to spec.....NOW....with eight (8) ML501P73....That would be a solid 4W....driven to spec....IF the optics work !!!..

Concerning the drawing...LD3, LD4, LD7 and LD8 would ALL need to be 2mm higher in elevation....AND...their Knife edge mirrors would need to be elevated also....so that the beams of LD1, LD2, LD5 and LD6 would pass under the bottom edge of the knife mirror. To obtain the desired higher powers....it is demended we employ a more complicated design !!! NO way around that !!!

BEAM
11-07-2011, 13:41
andyf97

Great drawing.

What are you using to do these drawings, they are all usually quite good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDBEAM

Yikes times Yikes.... Stand and Deliver indeed !!!This drawing was a PITA....Just imagine the BUILD..... I will go out on a limb here...Using eight HL6388MG's....with the smaller emitter size...This ONE will likely work....and give 2W... driven to spec.....NOW....with eight (8) ML501P73....That would be a solid 4W....driven to spec....IF the optics work !!!..

Concerning the drawing...LD3, LD4, LD7 and LD8 would ALL need to be 2mm higher in elevation....AND...their Knife edge mirrors would need to be elevated also....so that the beams of LD1, LD2, LD5 and LD6 would pass under the bottom edge of the knife mirror. To obtain the desired higher powers....it is demended we employ a more complicated design !!! NO way around that !!!

BEAM
11-07-2011, 13:45
polishedball

2 Attachment(s)

That is basically what I am doing with the 660's right now. C-lens options don;t seem to be needed when using the lpc-815's or the 150mw 640's.

And yes it was many hours to get the beams as tight as they are.

Attachment 28534 Attachment 28535
11-07-2011, 18:12
CDBEAM

1 Attachment(s)

Eight Banger

Andy...I use Quickcad V8 by Autodesk...It is a Autocad lite wannabee !!! Hey...costs alot less...and I get around it OK !! I did another drawing of what the 3 degree off-axis knife edged might look like. Wow....this one will be a real hoot to align....if we need to off axis the beams into the into the C-Lenses !!! Thanx Solarfire for this finding !!

Nice Eight Banger PB !! Yea...Aligning knife edges is a real PITA. BUT...the RESULT !!!! AHHHHHHH !!

BEAM
11-07-2011, 23:13
Solarfire

Hey Andy, when are you going to unveil the data on your mystery lens?
11-08-2011, 00:14
andyf97

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDBEAM

Andy...I use Quickcad V8 by Autodesk...It is a Autocad lite wannabee !!! Hey...costs alot less...and I get around it OK !! I did another drawing of what the 3 degree off-axis knife edged might look like. Wow....this one will be a real hoot to align....if we need to off axis the beams into the into the C-Lenses !!! Thanx Solarfire for this finding !!

Nice Eight Banger PB !! Yea...Aligning knife edges is a real PITA. BUT...the RESULT !!!! AHHHHHHH !!

BEAM

I was wondering about that too.

Solafire, maybe today if I get time to play with lenses.
11-08-2011, 05:50
steve-o

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDBEAM

Hey Steve-O....would you try the 405 G 2 Collimation lens with the HL6388MG and post the geometry after the prism and at Farfield. If you have a set of Lava Cylinderical optics....I really wonder what they would provide with the HL6388MG ????? Also did you not say the emitter size on the 6388 was 20 uM ??????? I am being a proponent for both the Mitsuibishi and the Optnext solutions !!!.... Perhaps a six (6) multidiode could be done using Cylinderical lenses ??????? See Pic....Yikes...yet another drawing !!!

Beam

At the moment both my 405G2 lenses are in use on a 445 glued into place and my 6388 diodes are also glued into housings. I can take one diode loose tho.. I need to buy a 405G2 lens. I think DTR sells 'em w/ fast shipping so I'll order that today and post results hopefully by the weekend. Yes the 6388 emitter I believe I read is 20 um. (The 445s are 14) . Also last w/e I ran one of the 6388s at 614 mA for over 2 hours with no degradation or pwr loss. Looks promising. Not sure of exact p-out because my home-brew pwr meter is "for reference only" lol but it looked to be over 300+mW. I do have a LavaLens set on order, shoud be here any day.
11-08-2011, 06:22
polishedball

I thought I had read somewhere that they failed with red due to the AR coating for 405.

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve-o

At the moment both my 405G2 lenses are in use on a 445 glued into place and my 6388 diodes are also glued into housings. I can take one diode loose tho.. I need to buy a 405G2 lens. I think DTR sells 'em w/ fast shipping so I'll order that today and post results hopefully by the weekend. Yes the 6388 emitter I believe I read is 20 um. (The 445s are 14) . Also last w/e I ran one of the 6388s at 614 mA for over 2 hours with no degradation or pwr loss. Looks promising. Not sure of exact p-out because my home-brew pwr meter is "for reference only" lol but it looked to be over 300+mW. I do have a LavaLens set on order, shoud be here any day.
11-08-2011, 06:53
steve-o

Quote:

Originally Posted by polishedball

I thought I had read somewhere that they failed with red due to the AR coating for 405.

I thought I read that they were great for red even though coated for 405-445 !!!! ???? I'll have to go back and try to find the posts ..

-edit- from post # 15 on this thread by SolarFire.
Here's a snip from that post:

Quote:

I got best results with the 405-G-2 with less than 5% loss

SF was testing w/ 658nm diodes. I don't know if 638 will be different.

What about Andy's special mystery lens? I'd like to hear about the results from that before $45 goes out to a 405G2.. (money's tight these dayz ) :/
11-08-2011, 11:22
Doc

Here's what I'm working on, I'm probably going to go with the HL6388MGs to give myself more of a chance.

http://www.photonlexicon.com/forums/...2&d=1300390743
http://www.photonlexicon.com/forums/...6&d=1300389603
http://www.photonlexicon.com/forums/...7&d=1300389603
http://www.photonlexicon.com/forums/...4&d=1300389603
http://www.photonlexicon.com/forums/...5&d=1300390673
11-08-2011, 11:28
polishedball

Are you going to telescope that? Not being critical but the beams on your full stack side don;t seem very tight? Sharp looking build though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doc

Here's what I'm working on, I'm probably going to go with the HL6388MGs to give myself more of a chance.

http://www.photonlexicon.com/forums/...2&d=1300390743
http://www.photonlexicon.com/forums/...6&d=1300389603
http://www.photonlexicon.com/forums/...4&d=1300389603
http://www.photonlexicon.com/forums/...5&d=1300390673
11-08-2011, 11:34
Doc

Quote:

Originally Posted by polishedball

Are you going to telescope that? Not being critical but the beams on your full stack side don;t seem very tight? Sharp looking build though.

Yes I have telescope optics from Edmund and also a wave plate, however the collimator lenses that are installed in these pics are not the lenses that will be used in the build, they are just shitty Aixiz glass jobbies; I was going to use Optima lenses but I'm waiting to see the developments here (also these are old pictures, the build has progressed a fair bit from this, but the project has been back burnered for a few months due to having no time through summer).
11-08-2011, 17:38
steve-o

5 Attachment(s)

Ok, anything for you guys and the cause.. I ripped the 405G2 lens from my bluey, put a MG6388 LD behind it and here are the results (from my very wobbly set-up): 1mm x ~4mm at the ap, and, at a distance of 100 ft with no prism correction looks to be fast-axis no more that 1-2 feet across (I couldn't measure it exactly, as it was too high up in the air. Looks to be about the same as an uncorrected 445 :] (and it immediately smokes electrical tape right out of the aperture.. hehe -still my 1st choice test of raw power.. cant help meself ) ..

Damn cameras are too sensitive.. have to turn the laser output power down too much .. anyway ..

The outside shot was a very clear night.. no fog in the air (of course ) .. :/
Attachment 28546 Attachment 28547 Attachment 28548 Attachment 28549

The 405G2 with the 6388, nice call CDBEAM . Attachment 28550

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:44.