Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: FB3 "shutter" control

  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Native Floridian
    Posts
    3,128

    Default

    The GM-20 is by far the best way to go for a shutter. Its not spring loaded though, it uses a torsion bar, which can break if it gets stressed too much. I've seen them sell for about $50 or less surplus. They can't be driven directly from a DAC due to the current requirements, which if I remember correctly, I drive mine with about 5V and it draws around 125-200mA. You have to remember though, that there is a magnetic field developed around a coil of wire in the GM-20, so what ever driver you build for a GM-20 needs to be diode protected from back-EMF when that field collapses.

    (Personally I think it's a dumb requirement, since on a loss of power the lasers turn off anyway!)
    I think this just might be a thing left over from projectors that use ion lasers. If you loose power to the projector, the laser may still be running, plus, with a neos pcaom, the driver may be getting its power externally as well. So this leaves the door open for a situation where power dies in the projector, there is still a beam from an ion and the pcaom is still operating from the driver probably located in a rack external to the projector. So what you would have is a static beam anywhere the scanners decide to come to rest, hence the need for a spring loaded (or torsion bar) shutter. An STP-8 isn't going to do much of anything when it looses power!
    Last edited by DZ; 08-11-2008 at 08:18. Reason: typo!

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,489,459

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by DZ View Post
    I think this just might be a thing left over from projectors that use ion lasers.
    Yeah, I agree. It makes sense if you're using ion lasers that might be housed in a separate enclosure (maybe even fed via fiber) and thus would likely have a separate power source. But when everything is housed in the same enclosure and powered off the same 110 V plug, it's rather pointless.
    An STP-8 isn't going to do much of anything when it looses power!
    That's not true. The arm is heavy enough that it will fall to the rest position all by itself. In fact, I'll bet that if you compare the "close speed" of an STP-8 (with a blanking arm attached) to a GM-20 when you drop the power to both units, the difference will be very small.

    Adam

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Native Floridian
    Posts
    3,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by buffo View Post
    That's not true. The arm is heavy enough that it will fall to the rest position all by itself. In fact, I'll bet that if you compare the "close speed" of an STP-8 (with a blanking arm attached) to a GM-20 when you drop the power to both units, the difference will be very small.

    Adam
    Interesting, and how much would you be willing to wager on this "speed test?" I'd be willing to bet the GM-20 could close at least 3x faster than an SPT-8.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,489,459

    Smile

    3 times faster, eh? Ordinarily I'd jump all over that bet, but considering I've lost to you before on what I considered to be a sure bet, I'm having second thoughts all of the sudden.

    You do realize that we're talking about time to close when the unit is un-powered, right? (I agree that during powered operation the GM-20 could be a lot faster.)

    If so, then how do you propose we measure the time to close?

    And since my pride is on the line, I guess I'll wager you lunch at SELEM, assuming we can figure out a way to measure the time accurately. 3X or faster and I'm buying. Anything less than a 3X difference and lunch is on you.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Native Floridian
    Posts
    3,128

    Default

    HA! Measuring it is going to be interesting. I've been trying to think up an easy way, but what I've come up with isn't going to happen in time for SELEM. So, maybe when I get back I can start working on a way to test it, then you can owe me lunch at FLEM2.5! hehe!

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    simple, you use a laser, power meter and digital oscilloscope

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,489,459

    Cool

    I don't think a standard power meter will be fast enough. Maybe if Steve Roberts brings that fast photodiode sensor of his we could cobble something together though...

    Adam

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    chesterfield uk
    Posts
    466

    Default hi

    cheers for this post helped me out

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •