Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers



3.5W P / 2.5W CW 638nm HL63520HD

Exerd

Active member
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
448
Points
28
Searched forum, no mention of this diode yet--which surprised me. It is not a triple beam, rather a double diode/beam multi-mode in 9mm package made by Ushio.

Here is the spec sheet PDF link from Ushio:

HL63520HD.pdf

Enjoy :)
 



Alaskan

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
12,330
Points
113
Lifetime17 made a host from one of those. I prefer the triple beam though, just due to its wierdness.
 

paul1598419

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
17,467
Points
113
Both of those are weird! The beams diverge badly and cannot be made parallel.
 

Alaskan

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
12,330
Points
113
Kinda like my personality, I like it :)
 

Lifetime17

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Dec 15, 2014
Messages
6,058
Points
113
Hi,
The twin beam diode is definitely a strange one. Thats why I purchased the diodes , there are a few left online see time to time. I purchased them out of curiosity . But they are cool.
Rich:)
 

Exerd

Active member
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
448
Points
28
Hi,
The twin beam diode is definitely a strange one. Thats why I purchased the diodes , there are a few left online see time to time. I purchased them out of curiosity . But they are cool.
Rich:)
I noticed people talking about the xxxxxG84 638nm, then saw them talking about 3W of pulsed 638nm coming next like it was (exciting). Stumbled on this and thought I was bringing something special or new to the table on that notion. Whoops! Pardon me.

I hadn't realized they arrange these as fast-axis against fast-axis until, well, recently. It may have to due with the lasing substrate and the way lasing occurs physically from the substrate--or I would think they would stack beams upon slow-axis proximity to bring divergence closer to ~X°=Y° of photonic distribution. I believe that would take a truly mirrored internal structure costing closer to 2 diodes rather than 2 beams, with opposed substrates and components split at the Z axis plane of diode. --Usually if it makes too much sense for you to not understand why the opposite is used, there's important physical reasons contributing, and even more important economic reasons dictating why. ;)

Rich,
did you try doing anything with the beams, for correction? Have link to any data acquired in overdriven testing or other links to using the diode that you can provide? I must have used the incorrect diode code format since forum search returned no results the same way I typed it in OP title. :unsure:

Here's one for you guys:

If multiple beams travel away from an alike plane, is their angle of separation, which remains relative with divergence, is it a value strictly designed by mfgr or inherent?

If two beams started from two parallel origination points on chip substrate that are only say 50um apart, ideally at infinity they are still 50um offset beams but with apparent total overlap to human eye--even after mere millimeters of travel distance.

Are the modes occurring within the cavity quantitatively field reacting under excitation, leading to electromagnetically squeezed/pressured states that cause axis non-parallelism?

Sorry to use so many words, I am attempting to describe my misunderstanding fully. ;)

To further the issue even moreso, couldn't one of two beams be knife-edged out, reflected via mirrors to then enter a PBS cube that the other beam entered with correct polarization, and beams be stacked very closely to form a single beam 638nm?
 

Lifetime17

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Dec 15, 2014
Messages
6,058
Points
113
Hi ,
Not didn't try to correct the beam , I don't really know if a beam expander would work either. Personally I just think its a cool diode the way it is. If a 520 or a 450nm twin would come out I would buy it just out of curiosity .
Old saying Curiosity killed the cat, But satisfaction brought him back.
Rich:)
 

logsquared

Active member
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
217
Points
28
Here's one for you guys:

If multiple beams travel away from an alike plane, is their angle of separation, which remains relative with divergence, is it a value strictly designed by mfgr or inherent?
The raw divergence from the emitter is due to the geometry of the cavity, wavelength, etc.

If two beams started from two parallel origination points on chip substrate that are only say 50um apart, ideally at infinity they are still 50um offset beams but with apparent total overlap to human eye--even after mere millimeters of travel distance.
This is true, but only before you collimate the multiple beams. After collimation the far field is just an image of the emitters including the space between them.

Are the modes occurring within the cavity quantitatively field reacting under excitation, leading to electromagnetically squeezed/pressured states that cause axis non-parallelism?
No clue?

To further the issue even moreso, couldn't one of two beams be knife-edged out, reflected via mirrors to then enter a PBS cube that the other beam entered with correct polarization, and beams be stacked very closely to form a single beam 638nm?
Yes.
 

Exerd

Active member
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
448
Points
28
The raw divergence from the emitter is due to the geometry of the cavity, wavelength, etc.


This is true, but only before you collimate the multiple beams. After collimation the far field is just an image of the emitters including the space between them.


No clue?



Yes.
So someone should be knife edging single diodes by now! :D
 

aaronnoraa

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
163
Points
43
So someone should be knife edging single diodes by now! :D

Or PBS combined as mentioned above.. which seems like a great idea as one diode can manage 2.5W using passive cooling, running rated output (more if overdriven) in to a 2.5 watt single axis, overlapped NON knife edged beam if a wave rotator and PBS cube are used.. something just not possible with P73's without active cooling (if two p73's could manage even 2.5W at all in a portable setup).

Passively cooled, it would take 4 P73's to get that amount of output at rated power PLUS require the two PBS combined beams to be knife edged.


If you take correction in to account, using a single HL63520 combined would only require 2 c-lens pairs to correct the output, whereas the P73 setup would require 4 (and still be knife edged).

If just two HL63520 diodes were used, each with a wave rotator/PBS, with all 4 beams c-lens corrected and the combined pair after PBS were knife edged, 5+ watts of non overdriven, corrected 635nm would be possible from just two knife edged beams from only two diodes.
 

CDBEAM777

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2010
Messages
1,637
Points
113
Now...THIS gets my Hair On Fire !!! 5 Watts 'O' Red ???? I dunno....The HL63193 can be pushed some to yield 1 W....so 4 in an over/under knife edge...4W..Well....probably less to loss....Crap...I got enough projects to last to 2025 !!!
 

Attachments

Exerd

Active member
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
448
Points
28
Or PBS combined as mentioned above.. which seems like a great idea as one diode can manage 2.5W using passive cooling, running rated output (more if overdriven) in to a 2.5 watt single axis, overlapped NON knife edged beam if a wave rotator and PBS cube are used.. something just not possible with P73's without active cooling (if two p73's could manage even 2.5W at all in a portable setup).

Passively cooled, it would take 4 P73's to get that amount of output at rated power PLUS require the two PBS combined beams to be knife edged.

If you take correction in to account, using a single HL63520 combined would only require 2 c-lens pairs to correct the output, whereas the P73 setup would require 4 (and still be knife edged).


If just two HL63520 diodes were used, each with a wave rotator/PBS, with all 4 beams c-lens corrected and the combined pair after PBS were knife edged, 5+ watts of non overdriven, corrected 635nm would be possible from just two knife edged beams from only two diodes.
For sake of simplicity, let's talk about 1 diode. I understand that 2 cylindrical lenses are required as it's essentially 2 individually emitted beams which need correcting, but I'm trying to visualize where you would place any common-size cylindrical lenses in your proposed arrangement. Could you possibly provide a simple drawing, with some respect given to component scale, so I could attempt to imagine such a setup in something semi-portable? Thanks

I just had 6 pieces of 60mm diameter copper CNC machined at each end to thread into quite large hosts. I need to finish them by cutting them in half, facing, then creating a bolt pattern on the face to mount the laser/optical components on these very heavy pieces of copper--the 6 pieces will become 12 for a run I'm doing of just 12 laser-injected phosphor flashlights. I tested a large array of LED flashlights, about 15 potential candidates, and there was one host which absolutely destroyed all others as far as passive cooling goes. The host is called a Trustfire J-20 or TR J20. The head is over 90mm in diameter, and when I removed the factory LED mounting plate by rotating it in a vertical rotary table and milling a circle around the plate (the plate is originally for 12x 10W LEDs) I was able to obtain a massive internal cavity to fit the laser injection assembly along with my custom optics + crystal phosphor plates. I had a run of custom drivers built which can supply 9A of power, in the case 2 diodes are used for injection, and I included a pass-through power port in the case any more amperage or laser drivers need to be piggy-backed on. I was left with a 7th piece of copper too short to obtain 2 heatsinks from, so only one side was threaded to fit the J20 host. This piece of copper weighs 977g unfinished, and could easily cool a large array of laser diodes. So I believe I will get to make 1 unit which houses lasers only and no phosphor, within it there is plenty of room for knife edging, PBS cubes, corrective optics and an expander. I'm definitely not wasting all the potential on red diodes only, but possibly an array of NUBM07Es combined with red for a bright pink output.

Laser Injected Phosphor Flashlight Build
 

CDBEAM777

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2010
Messages
1,637
Points
113
For sake of simplicity, let's talk about 1 diode. I understand that 2 cylindrical lenses are required as it's essentially 2 individually emitted beams which need correcting, but I'm trying to visualize where you would place any common-size cylindrical lenses in your proposed arrangement. Could you possibly provide a simple drawing, with some respect given to component scale, so I could attempt to imagine such a setup in something semi-portable? Thanks

I just had 6 pieces of 60mm diameter copper CNC machined at each end to thread into quite large hosts. I need to finish them by cutting them in half, facing, then creating a bolt pattern on the face to mount the laser/optical components on these very heavy pieces of copper--the 6 pieces will become 12 for a run I'm doing of just 12 laser-injected phosphor flashlights. I tested a large array of LED flashlights, about 15 potential candidates, and there was one host which absolutely destroyed all others as far as passive cooling goes. The host is called a Trustfire J-20 or TR J20. The head is over 90mm in diameter, and when I removed the factory LED mounting plate by rotating it in a vertical rotary table and milling a circle around the plate (the plate is originally for 12x 10W LEDs) I was able to obtain a massive internal cavity to fit the laser injection assembly along with my custom optics + crystal phosphor plates. I had a run of custom drivers built which can supply 9A of power, in the case 2 diodes are used for injection, and I included a pass-through power port in the case any more amperage or laser drivers need to be piggy-backed on. I was left with a 7th piece of copper too short to obtain 2 heatsinks from, so only one side was threaded to fit the J20 host. This piece of copper weighs 977g unfinished, and could easily cool a large array of laser diodes. So I believe I will get to make 1 unit which houses lasers only and no phosphor, within it there is plenty of room for knife edging, PBS cubes, corrective optics and an expander. I'm definitely not wasting all the potential on red diodes only, but possibly an array of NUBM07Es combined with red for a bright pink output.

Laser Injected Phosphor Flashlight Build
Outstanding !!!!!!!!!!!! Push that envelope ALL the way !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I will buy one of your Phos units !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Incomming PM !!
 

aaronnoraa

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
163
Points
43
For sake of simplicity, let's talk about 1 diode. I understand that 2 cylindrical lenses are required as it's essentially 2 individually emitted beams which need correcting, but I'm trying to visualize where you would place any common-size cylindrical lenses in your proposed arrangement. Could you possibly provide a simple drawing, with some respect given to component scale, so I could attempt to imagine such a setup in something semi-portable? Thanks
Forget about anything semi portable. I was thinking as application for projector systems. Due to the required 90 degree alignment offset required to feed a PBS cube (and the real estate needed for setting up bounce mirrors to achieve that 90 degree offset) you're going to be hard pressed to craft together anything that doesn't require two hands to hold if you're going for a portable unit. This isn't something that could be packaged as tightly as CDBEAM's combiner creations.

Without a drawing should be enough to picture what to do. Diode->collimator->C-lens pairs as close to the collimator as possible, ideally the first lens of the pair will be touching the first lens of the other pair and they will be offset in their angle at the same angle the beams are offset from one another emitting from the diode. That is, each beam from the diode will be entering the first c-lens with the lenses angled such that the beams will be entering the lens straight, just as you would on a normal, single beam diode. Imaging the hands of a clock at say, 9:20. Except the hour and minute hands are the same size and they're not hands on a clock at all.. instead they are the top surface of the C-lenses that you are looking directly down on. 9:20 was just to visualize those lenses as a slight angle offset to match what the angular offset of the beams themselves might be. In this example, the diode itself would be somewhere in the 7:00 region firing upwards towards 1:00. The laser diode itself is located as far away as necessary from the center of the clock's hands to allow the center of each beam to strike the center of each lens, and the angle of the lenses to one another in this example matches the offset of each beam such that the beams are entering their respective lenses square to each lens.

The rest of the C-lens setup is as normal, so now you have corrected beams at a slight offset, the same angle they've been to one another as always. Pick one of the two beams and have it enter a PBS cube a short distance away, perhaps 8 inches of travel from the output of the c-lens, to give you some room to work on the other beam. Now you must use bounce mirrors on the other beam to set it up such that will enter the other side of the PBS cube, so this will likely require the first mirror to deflect the beam in a way that it increases the angle the two beams are relative to one another, then a second bounce mirror angled and positioned so it's aligned with the input of the PBS cube. Before entering the PBS cube, one of the two beams will need to pass through t wave rotator plate to change the polarity of beams relative to one another so the PBS can do it's job. Otherwise, if you don't use a wave rotator, you would need to rotate one of the entire beams to achieve the needed polarity angle to required by the PBS cube.

Not only is this not possible without separate diodes (usually one diode module is rotated in it's heat sink to achieve 90 degree rotation if a wave rotator is not available) it would also result in a "+" shaped output which, of course would.. suck. The wave rotator allows the beams to enter the PBS cube and overlap one another so the output is the two beams combined and perfectly overlapped. So now you have your corrected beam which is actually both beams overlapped and almost twice as bright as each of the beams before they were combined.

Now you have defeated the dual beam nuisance and forced it to be a single beam, and corrected it to boot.

This means that what will happen is a few days after finishing this project, a new red diode will be released that has a single emitter with a higher output than your corrected combined beams. This new diode will cost the same or less than your dual beam diode and won't require the $120 in two c lens sets, $ in front surface bounce mirros, $ in PBS cube and $$$ in wave rotator costs.

Thank your for your contribution! This is the driving force behind all new diodes and we're glad you took one for the team. The diode puppeteers are sick, sick people indeed, and watching you sink all that effort and money and time in to achieving a decent high output was the perfect moment to release the 4 watt single emitter they've had behind their backs this whole time, simply so they could watch your spirits be crushed and love for life be dissolved.

Damnit, it would have been easier to draw the thing :) I'll draw it sometime in the next hour or two. I've spent enough time writing this and I have things on my mind that are more interesting to do for the moment :)
 
Last edited:




Top