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



Laser Pointer Store

B&W-tech Spectrometer & 473 module: Setup+Mods+Info

Civitus

Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
69
Points
8
Sorry for my question, what did you mean please, you have done it ? You changed the grating?
I want to change the grating, and i was asking if some one has done it before, and with which thikness he used (3mm or 6 mm) for the grating.
As the one installed has 3mm, and those available in the market are 6mm.
 

chloderic

Active member
Joined
Jan 21, 2018
Messages
302
Points
43
Hi, what do you think, does it makes sense to try to tune the resolution of this spec below the reached 0.8nm , what could i do ... ? I have no additional idea without bigger changes ...
 

paul1598419

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
14,601
Points
113
I suppose you could change the grating to 600 l/mm. But, with this spectrometer, I can't say how well that might work for you. It isn't worth it to me to even try, so good luck with whatever you decide to do.
 

chloderic

Active member
Joined
Jan 21, 2018
Messages
302
Points
43
I suppose you could change the grating to 600 l/mm. But, with this spectrometer, I can't say how well that might work for you. It isn't worth it to me to even try, so good luck with whatever you decide to do.
I do not want a bigger spectral range , for the usage in this case 150nm may be enough. But i am searching a way to realize a better FWHM than the actual 0.8 nm. With a grating 600\mm IT would be only about 2nm. I have a concave toroid grating 44.7 x 44.7 mm with a focus of 100mm , but to use this i have to rebuild a complete new optimal bench. Therefor i asked for an other solution.
 

paul1598419

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
14,601
Points
113
I do not want a bigger spectral range , for the usage in this case 150nm may be enough. But i am searching a way to realize a better FWHM than the actual 0.8 nm. With a grating 600\mm IT would be only about 2nm. I have a concave toroid grating 44.7 x 44.7 mm with a focus of 100mm , but to use this i have to rebuild a complete new optimal bench. Therefor i asked for an other solution.
Sorry. I misunderstood your intent here. Possibly because the post before yours was about extending the range of this spectrometer and both avatars are just the letter "C". It would be a challenge, indeed, to rebuild the optical bench of this spectrometer and probably not worth the effort. I can't imagine the alignment nightmare using a totally different grating would cause you. You could end up with an astigmatism that can't be managed at all.
 

kecked

Active member
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
310
Points
28
why are you trying to go below 0.2nm? Not much point unless your doing really close in raman. I tried 600 grating stock and it worked but it was only good in a very small window of angles and it really didn't help much. I ended up dumping this stuff for ocean optics. Just too much work. Looks like these units dried up on ebay too.
 

paul1598419

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
14,601
Points
113
It depends on which one you get and what grating it has. Mine is limited to 0.27nm, but I know you can get others that are much tighter. I am hoping to get an HR4000 in the future as it has a thousand more pixels than my USB2000. But, they are currently too expensive for me right now.
 

kecked

Active member
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
310
Points
28
Mine is hr2000 and does 0.2nm but more like 0.3-0.4. Very stable. I paid 1k off eBay. It sure grating. The seller is in Florida. I’ll look for his name. Also bought calibration source.

Spectrophoton is the seller. Contact him. His son also sells.

spec
 

Civitus

Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
69
Points
8
Hi Every one.

Chloderic, as for the resolution, I think that you can not get more than that with the unit. I tried myself changing the slit and putting a thiner with no results.
I contacted the guy of Science-Surplus if they can do some thing, he answered that they tried and it is the best that they can do.

Strange thing, as i know that the ILX511 is used by Avantes in their spectrometer and they can go lower in resolution.
Please, if some one get some good results, sahre it with us as this issue is important for some of us.

C
 

chloderic

Active member
Joined
Jan 21, 2018
Messages
302
Points
43
Hello,

First of all, I am very pleased that here is a little movement again. So such communication is very constrictive and helpful to all.

It depends on which one you get and what grating it has. Mine is limited to 0.27nm, but I know you can get others that are much tighter. I am hoping to get an HR4000 in the future as it has a thousand more pixels than my USB2000. But, they are currently too expensive for me right now.
Mine has a 25 micron slit with a 600 l/mm grating. It measures from 350nm to 850nm
Hi Paul, here you describe the diffractive resolution of the very good USB2000.
Dividing the spectral width of a system by the number of pixels reproducing the image results in the maximum spectral width that can be represented per pixel, means optical resolution.

Now you've awakened again my interest in this USB2000 and I've looked at oceanoptics, what your constellation means in FWHM.

Link: https://oceanoptics.com/knowledge-support/formula-calculating-optical-resolution/

Now I do not want to put the text in my own words, so here is a quote:
......

Formula for Calculating Optical Resolution
How to Calculate Optical Resolution

Optical resolution of a spectrometer, measured as Full Width Half Maximum (FWHM), depends on the groove density (mm-1) of the grating and the diameter of the entrance optics (optical fiber or slit).

Formula for Calculating Optical Resolution
1. Determine the spectral range of the grating. Look at the grating charts and note the value in the spectral range column in the chart.
For example, Grating #3 has a spectral range of ~650 nm.
Please note that the spectral range can vary by starting wavelength, which is why 650 nm is an approximation.
2. Determine the number of pixel elements in the spectrometer’s detector.
For a USB2000+ spectrometer, the number is 2048.
Divide the grating spectral range by the number of pixel elements in the detector.
This is your dispersion value. For our example, 650 nm/2048 pixels = 0.32 nm/pixel.
3. Choose a slit width. Each slit has a pixel resolution value.
For a USB2000+ with a 10 µm slit, this value is ~3.2 pixels.
You can lookup the pixel resolution for common spectrometer and slit combinations here.
Optical Resolution = Dispersion x Pixel resolution

In our example, the dispersion equals to 0.32 nm/pixel.
Multiply it by 3.2 of pixel resolution, and you get that the optical resolution of USB2000+ spectrometer with 10 µm slit is 1.02 nm."


......

Here in your concrete case that means in sum 500nm / 2048 = 2.44nm per pixel, as described by you.
this approx. 2.44nm per pixel multiplied by your dispersion factor of 4.2 gives approx. 1.025 nm FWHM.

Link: https://oceanoptics.com/faq/choice-slit-size-affect-resolution/#pixel_resolution

Does that fit into something, can you confirm that?

Mine is hr2000 and does 0.2nm but more like 0.3-0.4. Very stable. I paid 1k off eBay. It sure grating. The seller is in Florida. I’ll look for his name. Also bought calibration source.

Spectrophoton is the seller. Contact him. His son also sells.spec
Hello kecked, what does that mean for your constellation, what do you have in your device?


This calculation can be found in the other spectrometer manufacturers in other expressions with approximately the same final result.
At B & W-TEK you can find this here:

Link: http://bwtek.com/spectrometer-part-5-spectral-resolution/

Quote:
......
Calculating Spectral Resolution
When calculating the spectral resolution (δλ) of a spectrometer, there are four values you will need to know:
the slit width (Ws), the spectral range of the spectrometer (Δλ), the pixel width (Wp), and the number of pixels in the detector (n).
It is also important to remember that spectral resolution is defined as the FWHM.
One very common mistake when calculating spectral resolution is to overlook the fact that in order to determine the FWHM of a peak,
a minimum of three pixels is required, therefore the spectral resolution (assuming the Ws = Wp) is equal to three times the pixel resolution (Δλ/n). This relationship can be expanded on to create a value known as resolution factor (RF), which is determined by the relationship between the slit width and the pixel width.
As would be expected, when Ws ≈ Wp the resolution factor is 3. When Ws ≈ 2Wp the resolution factor drops to 2.5, and continues to drop until Ws > 4Wp when the resolution factor levels out to 1.5.

All of this information can be summarized by the following equation,

speres.jpg

For example, if a spectrometer uses a 25µm slit, a 14µm 2048 pixel detector and a wavelength range from 350nm – 1050nm, the calculated resolution will be 1.53nm.

.......


Here in my case that means:
Δλ =648 - 391 = 257 nm
Ws = 50 µm
Wp= 14 µm
n = 2048 pix
RF = 50/14*f(x) = ~ 1.8
  • (δλ) = (1.8 x 257 x 50) / (2048*14) = 0.807 nm FWHM
That fits with the reality and my measures, and therefor ..... end of the possibilities of this device.


Ok, as you can see, in this constellation here you have a better FWHM than the above mentioned ocean optics configuration, but by far a considerable span spectral coverage of only about 250nm.
So you always have to decide what you want, either spectral resolution, or spectral coverage.
 

Richard A

New member
Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
22
Points
3
I finally received the PCBs and found some time to install a few components.
I'm happy the mounting holes line up perfectly.
Hopefully I'll have a working unit eventually.


IMG_0629s.JPG
 

chloderic

Active member
Joined
Jan 21, 2018
Messages
302
Points
43
Hi Richard! Thanks for sharing with us, interesting.......great ....realy great
 
Last edited:

Richard A

New member
Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
22
Points
3
Hi Richard! Thanks for sharing with us, interesting.......great ....realy great
Hi Chloderic,

No problem.
If you're wondering, I'm using a PIC24EP128GP202 for the MCU.
Considering the 8051 is 8 bits at 25 MIPS, and the PIC24 is 16 bits at 70 MIPS, there should be quite a noticeable difference in processing time, especially for short integration times.
There's plenty of ram for internal averaging and the data rate can be set above 115200 baud.
It may be a month or more before my next update as I'm quite busy with things of higher priority.
 




Top