Pioneer 12X Blu-Ray-- BDR-205

Tabish said:

We should donate to a 12x murder fund !!!!! lol

Seriously.

Even if each member donates a few bucks. We can easily have enough to test/kill one 12x

Click to expand...

Umm, wasn't it you, who said it was a waste of time, at the beginning of the previous one? :crackup:
Otherwise.. I wouldn't mind... :angel:


If people buy more 12x's and plot them, and the plots keep overlapping those of 8x's, then it WILL be necessary to kill one, just to determine if there is a difference...

If on the other hand more accurate measurements show the Ith is higher, and the efficiency spread overlaps 8x's only partially, and then exceeds them, we'll know it's not the same diode.


Another interesting experiment would be to leave an 8x and a 12x in their sleds, but hook them up to a driver, and test how much of the power comes out of the objective lens... Altho they would have to be of the same efficiency, which is impossible to determine before extraction..

Hmm, i have another idea...


Dave, could you plerhaps ship the empty 12x sled to me?

I could put an 8x into an 8x sled and then into the 12x sled, and measure the efficiency of the optics... If it's done with the same diode, it would be much more accurate... If the 8x sled has better optics efficiency (since it has the beam circularizer), the 12x sled would have to contain a higher power diode....

If you have an 8x somewhere outside an AixiZ module, you might be able to try yourself...

IgorT said:

Dave, could you plerhaps ship the empty 12x sled to me?

I could put an 8x into an 8x sled and then into the 12x sled, and measure the efficiency of the optics... If it's done with the same diode, it would be much more accurate... If the 8x sled has better optics efficiency (since it has the beam circularizer), the 12x sled would have to contain a higher power diode....

If you have an 8x somewhere outside an AixiZ module, you might be able to try yourself...

Click to expand...

I do have the 12X (205) sled. However, I do NOT have my old 8x (203) sled. You are welcome to it.

Peace,
dave

LuxIgnis said:

Considering the different driver ( the electronic components probably have a 5% variance) and considering that diodes are not exactly the same (as seen with phr diodes).... I let you come up with a conclusion.

Click to expand...

Regular resistors have a 5% variance. But we don't set the currents with 5% resistors. Most people set them on a dummy load, using a DMM, and DMMs have an accuracy much better than 5%..

I use a special driver with two displays for plotting diodes, one display for current, the other for voltage, again, i calibrated it against a good DMM.


I do assume errors in graphs between different members, but most of these errors come from the LPMs used.. For example some LPMs show as much as 7% too much.


In any case, Daguin has made several 8x plots, i'll soon have collected 14 8x plots, and i already know how much Daguin's meter is away from mine (not enough to matter, but i'll compensate)...


Once we see the efficiency spread of a large number of 8x's, and then compare it to several 12x's, only if 12x's don't show the same efficiency variations, would i dare say they are "cherry-picked" 8x's....


But even if 12x's are high efficiency 8x's, it might be worth paying ~$50 more, just to be sure you don't get a low efficiency diode...

daguin said:

I do have the 12X (205) sled. However, I do NOT have my old 8x (203) sled. You are welcome to it.

Peace,
dave

Click to expand...

Great! First Class Air will be just fine...


Another question.. Did you keep the square heatsink it came in?

I got the 8x's out by bending the heatsink a bit, they just pop out. If you do the same, and have one, it would help me with this test, i'm not sure what i did with mine.. :yabbem:

If on the other hand you cut them appart, never mind.. I'll just have to figure something out (or hope i can find the two 8x heatsinks in the mess)..


P.S. What did you do with the 10 LG 8x sleds? :thinking:

IgorT said:

Regular resistors have a 5% variance. But we don't set the currents with 5% resistors. Most people set them on a dummy load, using a DMM, and DMMs have an accuracy much better than 5%..

I use a special driver with two displays for plotting diodes, one display for current, the other for voltage, again, i calibrated it against a good DMM.


I do assume errors in graphs between different members, but most of these errors come from the LPMs used.. For example some LPMs show as much as 7% too much.


In any case, Daguin has made several 8x plots, i'll soon have collected 14 8x plots, and i already know how much Daguin's meter is away from mine (not enough to matter, but i'll compensate)...


Once we see the efficiency spread of a large number of 8x's, and then compare it to several 12x's, only if 12x's don't show the same efficiency variations, would i dare say they are "cherry-picked" 8x's....


But even if 12x's are high efficiency 8x's, it might be worth paying ~$50 more, just to be sure you don't get a low efficiency diode...

Click to expand...

You are right there. Paying 50$ extra can mean getting a 50 - 100mw higher diode. Definitely worth it.

And yes I was originally against the 8x murder haha, but changed my mind quickly when I realized the benefits.


If only I was totally confident I could build one (which I'm not atm) , I would order the 12x drive right away....

Dave, first of all thanks a lot for taking the time to test it (and taking the plunge to buy it!). One question: What was the whole time duration of the testing process? Did you do the "burn in"?

Tabish said:

If only I was totally confident I could build one (which I'm not atm) , I would order the 12x drive right away....

Click to expand...

Why do i have the feeling that's my fault? :angel:

No, but seriously! NO ONE should use an 8x or a 12x diode for a practice laser! Before handling a $200+ diode, everyone should make at least a few PHR lasers FIRST, to see how many they kill in the process...

I killed many a diode by accident at the very beginning, and that even tho i had 9 years previous experience with electronics and soldering!





BACK ON TOPIC:

Otherwise, i made a new corrected plot, where i tried to more accuratelly calculate the slope efficiency and the starting point from the given data, and then worked upwards, unlike with the first where i started with the end point and calculated backwards....

First of all, i realized i should not have used the last 50mA step for the slope efficiency average, as by then heat was probably a factor, resulting in a lower number. And indeed the last 50mW produced only a 76mW change in power.

I had two higher (83 and 87mW per 50mA) and three lower numbers (73, 75 and 76mW per 50mA) and they appeared mixed in this order: 73, 83, 75, 87, 76... They were mixed up in a weird way, and i used them all in the previous average calculation.

In this new one i only used the first four (discarding the last due to heat), resulting in an average slope of 79.5mW per 50mA or 1.59mW per mA...


Using this slope efficiency i calculated a starting point of 50mA, and i came up with 37mW... Then i kept adding 79.5mW to the previous power, until i got to the end, and made a new plot.

I was a little surprised, when i realized the new plot ended up lower than the first, at 514mW instead of the 519mW Dave measured... :thinking:


But the new graph has a more realistic Ith, noticable in the plot itself (before it was showing it below 25mA for some reason!), and i think it's getting quite accurate by now...


If Dave is sure he measured the last power and current correctly, i could make yet another adjustment, calculating the slope using the newly calculated starting point, and Dave's end point. Then it should be perfect..


But for now, this will have to do (first attachment)...
I'll reduce a few 8x plots to 50mA resolution, and add them into the mix for comparison i guess..


I just need to calculate the new Ith... Too bad it wasn't actually measured! Even if the efficiencies overlap, one indicator of a higher power is a higher threshold current...


I'll edit this post in a bit to include the third corrected plot (in case Dave is sure about the end current AND power), and to add the calculated Ith's for both plots....




EDIT: Ok, the second attachment is the final adjustment of the original data, using a calculated 50mA starting point and Dave's measured 350mA end point...

For the first attached plot Ith would be 26.7mA... For the second one it would be 27mA... Something is still wrong. :undecided:

Even 6x's have higher threshold currents than that.... 8x's even slightly higher... Perhaps i'm doing something wrong, i should probably recheck my calculations..


EDIT 2: Nah, it doesn't work.. Try as i might (now i used Dave's first and last numbers for slope efficiency calculation, assuming they are correct), i can't calculate a threshold current higher than 27.1mA.. And i do not recall seeing a single 6x with an Ith below 30mA.. With 8x's usually 33mA+...

I don't know what it is, but something is wrong with the numbers.. But except for the details, the last graph should be pretty close, so i'm just gonna give up, until someone measures Ith....

Tabish said:

You are right there. Paying 50$ extra can mean getting a 50 - 100mw higher diode. Definitely worth it.

And yes I was originally against the 8x murder haha, but changed my mind quickly when I realized the benefits.


If only I was totally confident I could build one (which I'm not atm) , I would order the 12x drive right away....

Click to expand...

.....Where do you see the 50-100mw increase? So far we've seen an 8x at 530mw tops, the 12x is still at 519.

Paying that much more to get 2% more efficiency then the average 8x will probably be worth it when these drives go down to $50

... there will surely be a new diode (450mw pulsed) in 12x 4 layer drives, a couple years down the road, and there will be several manufacturers come out with those at the same time, because all of them will have the same diode available, unlike this time where the intelligence (selecting good diodes) and mechanical advances have allowed Pioneer to make this jump.

Let's not forget that the same Pioneer says that these speeds are only achievable on "properly configured computers", and that they "can't guarantee 12x speed with all media" (they tested their own media and another major company's). This makes me pretty sure of the fact that they
"barely" achieved these writing speeds, maximizing efficiency of what they already had.

In the meantime some better testing should be done with 8x and 12x diodes side by side, using the same driver and the same lenses for both diodes, and measuring current, voltage, watts in and out.

hm....
I'm just going to give dave some time......he'll get that itch....and the pot will start turning!

Mohrenberg said:

hm....
I'm just going to give dave some time......he'll get that itch....and the pot will start turning!

Click to expand...

I think they make creams for that.

LuxIgnis said:

.. a couple years down the road ..

Click to expand...

haha, now youre being funny!


manuel

LuxIgnis said:

.....Where do you see the 50-100mw increase? So far we've seen an 8x at 530mw tops, the 12x is still at 519.

Paying that much more to get 2% more efficiency then the average 8x will probably be worth it when these drives go down to $50

Click to expand...

Hmm, i know what Tabish is talking about, but i don't understand what you are trying to say...

He was referring to something i said ("if 12x's are 'cherry-picked' (= only very high efficiency) 8x diodes, it might be worth paying the $50 more, to make sure you don't get a low efficiency one")...

Take a look at my comparison plot of just the first three 8x diodes i ever tested (soon i'll add 11 to that). You can see that two have a very high efficiency, almost overlapping, and very close to the 12x Dave measured, while one has a quite low efficiency. At the end of the plot, the lower efficiency one produces 60mW less than the two high efficiency ones..

And some 8x's may have an even lower efficiency than the lowest in this plot, while 12x's might only have the high efficiency and very high efficiency ones (IF it should be true, that they are same model as 8x, but "hand-picked" for their efficiency)... So 100mW more is maybe an exaggeration, but even these three display a 60mW difference, and i expect to see more, so he hit the right range.

LuxIgnis said:

... there will surely be a new diode (450mw pulsed) in 12x 4 layer drives, a couple years down the road, and there will be several manufacturers come out with those at the same time, because all of them will have the same diode available, unlike this time where the intelligence (selecting good diodes) and mechanical advances have allowed Pioneer to make this jump.

Click to expand...

You're too hung up on those vibrations..

I have 6x diodes, which when plotted using the same lens, would PERFECTČY overlap the high efficiency 8x's and the only 12x ever (insuficiently) tested so far..

Would you then say that 8x's are same as 6x's too, and start talkng about vibrations? One of the 6x's i mentioned is in my favorite personal laser. I can put the 405-G-1 lens in, and plot it right now!
I was actually considering doing it before, just to show you that one overlapping plot doesn't mean shit!


Look, they achieved a 50% higher writing speed. But not with a 50% more powerful diode!

8x's use a 125/250mW diode... The 12x's are supposed to use a 150/300mW diode. Sony is making a 160/320mW diode for 12x's but it's still under developement. Other manufacturers are most likelly already in full production for a while by now with their 300mW Pulsed diodes..

Anyway, they reached a 50% higher writing speed with only a 20% more powerful diode!
How, if they even used the same sled? (Never mind the same sled, they even used it without the beam circularizer!?!) Maybe by getting rid of those vibrations you so love to talk about? Now that would make more sense.

LuxIgnis said:

Let's not forget that the same Pioneer says that these speeds are only achievable on "properly configured computers", and that they "can't guarantee 12x speed with all media" (they tested their own media and another major company's). This makes me pretty sure of the fact that they
"barely" achieved these writing speeds, maximizing efficiency of what they already had.

Click to expand...

And let's not forget, that this doesn't mean or proove ANYTHING of the kind you are suggesting...

Properly configured computers? Yeah, they need the correct interface.
Special media? Yea, it has to have 12x marked on it! :thinking:


If this was about 10x's, the ones that appeared for a short time in obscure places and then dissapeared, i would sooner believe that the same diode was used..

But it's not..

LuxIgnis said:

In the meantime some better testing should be done with 8x and 12x diodes side by side, using the same driver and the same lenses for both diodes, and measuring current, voltage, watts in and out.

Click to expand...

Then either contribute and do it (or contribute to the murder fund if we decide to do it to a 12x as well), or wait until it's done, before you decide you are 100% correct..

Oh, and can you explain the reasoning behind "same driver" to me please? With most people it's the DMM that displays the current flowing through the diode. And DMMs are usually (like always) calibrated and very accurate. So if a DMM shows 300mA from one driver, and another DMM shows 300mA from another driver, i usually believe both.

If i was complaining about anything even remotelly related to this, it would be DMM accuracy. The driver doesn't matter, since the current is set according to the DMM.

I'm much more concerned about people comparing plots made on different LPMs, when i know that some show ~7% too much.



In any case, attached is the plot of three 8x's i was referring to. The two high efficiency ones almost overlap Dave's plot, altho i think i recall his meter shows 2% more than mine... When i combine this with the 12x plot, i'll make a direct comparison, and one where i'll correct the numbers by these 2%..

I do these plots on a special driver i built just for the purpose of testing diodes, and this driver has both a current and a forward voltage display mounted on it's enclosure. And you know why i'm not worried that it's a different driver from the one Dave uses? Beause it's the DPMs that have to be accurate in my case, and DMMs in his. And i checked the calibration of my DPMs against the best DMM i have in my workshop..


Take a look at the plot now, while i go combine it with the 12x one...



P.S. Oh and BTW, i'm NOT saying it's impossible that your hypothesis would be correct. But so far you have not provided any evidence or a good enough reason to believe it withot a doubt..

Dont waste your breath with these n00bs Igor. They just want to play with the big boys, but have nothing to bring to the table but empty opinions, and conjecture.

It's obvious that my observations have hurt somebody's expectations. I am a laser enthusiast myself, I'd love to see 1W diodes in those burners too....
I know that people want to have something to talk about... we'll see what the conclusion is. At the very best these are cherry-picked higher efficiency 8x diodes.
To me there is already a clear indication of this, some other people like to take a long time to let the truth slowly sink in.... I don't really care what other people believe or want to believe. I like to approach things in a scientific way.

About the driver question:
we know the ma going in the diode, but we don't know the voltage going in, so we don't know the total power in the diode.

5.7v at 300ma for example is different then 5.8v at 300ma or is it the same thing according to you?

If a diode is absorbing 300ma at 5.7v and another of the same kind is absorbing 5.8v at 300ma then the power going in the diode is different, and the power output, assuming the same efficiency would be different as well.
It is possible that some diodes like to work at a higher voltage compared to others and comparing the outputs based solely on ma going in isn't exactly fair, it would be best to compare the optical output levels at known watts IN the diode. That way we could even know the efficiency in percentage for every single diode.
Therefore if a driver is working at the limit, or above the indicated limit, it is possible that they can't supply the voltage that the diode would like to get in a reliable way.
Say a driver rated at max 5,5v could probably make it do up to 5,7v, and an Identical one could get up to 5,9v, it's within the tolerance of the resistors used.

Why not using a regular LM317T when making diode comparisons?
The voltage requirements of these diodes would be comfortably inside the IC's working range, and the results would be more reliable too.

Tech_Junkie said:

Dont waste your breath with these n00bs Igor. They just want to play with the big boys, but have nothing to bring to the table but empty opinions, and conjecture.

Click to expand...

Firstly I don't know you , and you don't know me.
I am 34 y.o. with a wife and 2 kids, and not a noob in life by any means.

Secondly you are being disrespectful when I have not been towards you at any time.

Thirdly, I am probably a noob in this forum....
but in the past 2 weeks I have built like 15 red lasers, 2 phrs, 4 IR 780nm at 370-380mah for burning,
built a ttl controller board to attach a laser to my self-built cnc milling machine, and got a 3.2W (yes 3.2 whatt) 808nm laser to attach to my CNC machine.

Yes I am new to lasers but it seems that I can contribute and am so active that I have already handled stronger lasers then the average guy on this forum.
Just because I live in Italy don't discount me, and discriminate with your close-mindedness. In fact I was born in Bethesda (MD) and have a US passport just like you.

There, i reduced the resolution of my 8x plots, and added them to the corrected 12x plot...


The two high efficiency 8x's are very close to the 12x. Much closer than they are to the third diode of the same model. I had to make one of them (the Pioneer BDR-203BK 8x) yellow so it would even be visible since it's overlapping with another line.. I didn't take the yellow plot beyond 290mA, but if i did, it would overlap with the blue line of LG #1 to the end....

The high efficiency 8x's i tested are at a slight disadvantage here compared to the 12x, because their plot is gently bending down towards the top of the plot. That's because the 12x has a calculated linear plot, while the 8x's were plotted in 10mA steps, so they warmed up before reaching the top...

If i were to calculate the slope efficiency from the first few steps, and then calculate the rest of the graph, the high efficiency 8x would be even closer than it already is.

It's funny how this comparison plot makes it seem as if the 8x's have a higher Ith than the 12x, but i already said there is something wrong with those numbers (either the first measurement is too high, or the last one too low), which is also the reason i had to calculate the averages and replace the original values wth calculated ones....

But it's good enough for some initial comparison.


In this plot i did not yet reduce Dave's numbers by 2%, besides i don't think there is a point... I know there are even higher efficiency 8x's than LG #1, just like there are lower efficiency ones than LG #2...


We will have to plot a certain number of 12x diodes, before we can start reaching any conclusions tho..