It is Here.!!!!! 300mW "635nm" Mitsubishi.....

InfinitusEquitas · Sep 9, 2011

Personally I find a 90 second duty cycle with maybe a 30 second margin to be perfectly acceptable. Even less is fine when you can feel the warmth and turn off the laser at that point... as I tend to do with the 445nm mini. IMHO that one warms up after ~35 seconds or so.

With this ld it looks like two minutes should not be a problem

lazeerer · Sep 9, 2011

Yes Even at the end of the 4 minutes it was not warm.

I just find that 1 minute is a good bass line and anything after that uses your Judgment.

Thats what i tell most people.

I do run my laser longer then 1 minute many times but i try to fallow the 1 minute ON/OFF duty cycle for the most part.

Elektrotechniker · Sep 9, 2011

Jesus! that beam is like a scanner

Someone needs to correct it NAO!!!!!!! DO ET NAO!!!!!!! That cheapy acrylic lens must be thrown in the trash

Great media here. Think i'll get one myself.

P.S What driver are you using anyway?

lazeerer · Sep 9, 2011

^^ That Acrylic lens is actually Battery IMO then the Aixiz Glass. Especial in Power.

The Aixiz Does have a little better divergence but not much.

I have not tried the 650/405- G1 lens or a G2. I dont have a free one available to me. 1 of them is fixed focused in my 2W arctic and iam not about to mess with it.

DTR · Sep 9, 2011

lazeerer said:
^^ That Acrylic lens is actually Battery IMO then the Aixiz Glass. Especial in Power.

The Aixiz Does have a little better divergence but not much.

I have not tried the 650/405- G1 lens or a G2. I dont have a free one available to me. 1 of them is fixed focused in my 2W arctic and iam not about to mess with it.

I am waiting on some lenses for mine which is why i have not posted any data yet but I did try it with one of my G-2 lenses thinking it may look better with a lens that gets closer to the diode. It did seem to remove a little of the splash I saw with a regular acrylic lens but it still has the small line through the dot. I did not test the power as it is coated for 405-445. I actually did not run it for very long either as I have heard bad things about back reflections and red diodes. Not sure if the 405-445 would actually have any dangerous back reflections but did not want to risk it.

lazeerer · Sep 9, 2011

The 405 G1/G2 lens will work just fine for Red laser diodes.

It lets more light through then any other lens Except the 650/G1 so there is less back reflections.

However trying to use a Red lens on a 445nm or 405nm your just asking for trouble.

All my High power red laser that are 400mW+ are with the 405-G1 lens.

Elektrotechniker · Sep 9, 2011

I did use my 660nm AR glass lens from aixiz to compare powers on my 1.1 W 445nm

You think I damaged the diode?

lazeerer · Sep 9, 2011

^Probebly Not. It could happen though. I would not try it again.

But 405-G1/G2 lenses are Just fine for Red.

650nm "lenses" on 405nm/445nm is not good... Will drop the power almost 150mW IIRC.

I dont think its enough to damage it right away but if you use it at a dedicated lens then most likely.

chipdouglas · Sep 9, 2011

congrats on the new laser man!!! this is very promising. i think im going to run 2 of these in my scanner with corrective optics.

michael.

lazeerer · Sep 9, 2011

^DO want to see.:drool:

I'll donate 20$ to the first person that can correct this Beam>

eexe · Sep 9, 2011

These 445s are exceptonally robust, I wouldn't worry.
These 635 nm dodes are a really awesome thing that hapenned to this hobby, but we need to find away to correct that divergence at last a little bit, though. Maybe a new type of focusing lenses would do this? Something that collimates one axis stronger than the other one and doesn't spin when you focus? Don't know if that could be easily done, though.

Cyparagon · Sep 10, 2011

We'll end up correcting them the same way we do the blues. What is divergence on the slow axis, mister lazeerer (be sure to use the long dimension at aperture, and the short dimension at a distance)

Helios · Sep 10, 2011

I cant believe I missed this! Very cool. Visually (non accurately) is it a very noticeable difference in brightness to a 300mW 658? I would assume so but I am having a hard time imagining how much.

lazeerer · Sep 10, 2011

Cyparagon said:
We'll end up correcting them the same way we do the blues. What is divergence on the slow axis, mister lazeerer (be sure to use the long dimension at aperture, and the short dimension at a distance)

Test was done with an AR Coated Acrylic lens.

At aperture - Fast Axis: 1.90mm, Slow Axis: 4.90mm

At 11 Feet - Fast Axis: 17.50mm, Slow Axis: 3.10mm

FA@ 4.65mRad < LOL

SA@ -.05mRad

As Close as I can Get.

PS:

Laser Hit 348mW.:wave: Iam not going any higher.

Fiddy · Sep 10, 2011

This is awesome!

I have a optinex 638nm 170mW diode and a 650-G-1 from jayrob and i can say that lens loves the 635nm wavelength! Expect a substantial gain from it if you get one!

This was my results:

167mW @ 300mA with AR Coated Acrylic

167mW Graph

213mW @ 300mA with 650-G-1

213mW Graph

(213 / 167) x 100 -100 = 27.544% increase!

Now if my math is correct, for this laser with a 650-G-1 lens i would expect this:

328mW / 100 x 27.54 = 90.33

328 + 90.33 = 418.33mW :drool:

jayrob · Sep 10, 2011

lazeerer said:
Opps Forgot to say. AR coated Acrylic Lens.

Man I got to get one of these diodes and try this now...

Nice job, thanks for showing this! :beer:

If your using an AR coated acrylic lens at 420mA's, and getting 285mW's, then you will have about 313mW's with a 650-G-1 glass lens...

(at least 10% increase in output power vs an AR coated acrylic)

It is Here.!!!!! 300mW "635nm" Mitsubishi.....

InfinitusEquitas

0

lazeerer

0

Elektrotechniker

0

lazeerer

0

DTR

0

lazeerer

0

Elektrotechniker

0

lazeerer

0

chipdouglas

0

lazeerer

0

eexe

0

Cyparagon

0

Helios

0

lazeerer

0

Fiddy

0

jayrob

0

Online statistics

Forum statistics

Share this page