Cool lightsaber build, should cut skin!!!

[ndrew2505]

thats not tyler... the sf diodes hes using were bought from me. if it was tyler he would have gotten his own..

 

[daguin]

thats not tyler... the sf diodes hes using were bought from me. if it was tyler he would have gotten his own..

Are you saying you know who this is?

Peace,
dave

 

[ndrew2505]

if i were to look through all my past orders i could give you his name since ive only had 1 order for 4 sf diodes in modules. i can tell from the baggies and writing on them that they were gotten from modwerx though..

 

[stealthop]

So Stealthop... you say you are willing to send this weirdo your spare LPM? Why would you do that?

well crazy jay , my "spare LPM" is nothing more than a led attached to a multimeter . as demonstrated by Firemylaser here
http://laserpointerforums.com/f48/green-laser-makes-leds-glow-33468.html

"When I built the BR I also built kindof a powermeter, the purpose was to document if the BR would get better or worse in time. It was basically made from a yelllow LED with a white paper diffuser and my DMM." quote by firemylaser

i would send him a cheap analog multimeter instead of a digital one.... AFTER i tested it against a single 405nm diode . which , depending on his photographed reading , we would be able to tell if his "lightgayber" actually had the output that he claimed it does . but that does not matter now.
it theory (even tho there are differences in power management and diode's)
this should of given us some insight. i too know what its like to be ridiculed and told that your methods are asinine, then prove everyone wrong. although i do side with the majority, i've learned to never judge a book by it's cover.

 

[lasersbee]

I don't believe an LED used as a photo detector could measure much over
150mW before saturating and heating up... If you use an ND filter then your
meter would need to be calibrated to that ND filter as well...
Don't forget... he was claiming 750mW with 3 lasers and 1000mW with 4..
Not to mention that 405nm and some Photo Detectors don't like each other..

Jerry

 

[stealthop]

Not to mention that 405nm and some Photo Detectors don't like each other..

i had not considered that. i suppose a small circuit with a cadmium sulfide photoresistor (range of 400 - 800nm) and filter would be best suited. if the circuit had a 100k potentiometer, it could be calibrated in conjunction with a meter in series.

thanks for the correction , i tend to get ahead of myself sometimes.

stealthop

 

[gotwake424]

Oh....

Well in that case, I've invented a device that reads my thoughts and translates them into text. So no need to be stationary at a keyboard.

The words don't move because of because!

You don't go just from thoughts to english text?!?!?
Whats wrong with you?
you NEED to go from "Thoughts To Elder Futhark then to Text geezzzzz"

haha

 

[Hansolo777]

Okay sorry about the whole me getting angry part. You all have aright to be skeptical so I am sorry for acting like a jerk (the more effective word is probably not allowed.)

I built it in sketch-up 7 before I made it so you can see what I did. Give me a few minutes to get home and upload it for you guys. The design in real life only differs on the outside of the "handle" aka pop-up drain valve. Since the plumbing parts were more readily available. My calculations on the output are based off of the milli-amp to milli-watt chart on this site. Taking into account the percent gain supposedly 25% from the 405-G-1 and some 5-10% loss as it passes through the d.c. lens and the defraction grating. Also I might upload a previously thought way of combining the beams but it proved to be more trouble than I wanted. Should be up within the hour. The lenses in sketch-up are not perfectly accurate when it comes to the curve I just guessed then so that's why it may seem odd.

 

[mfo]

Okay sorry about the whole me getting angry part. You all have aright to be skeptical so I am sorry for acting like a jerk (the more effective word is probably not allowed.)

I built it in sketch-up 7 before I made it so you can see what I did. Give me a few minutes to get home and upload it for you guys. The design in real life only differs on the outside of the "handle" aka pop-up drain valve. Since the plumbing parts were more readily available. My calculations on the output are based off of the milli-amp to milli-watt chart on this site. Taking into account the percent gain supposedly 25% from the 405-G-1 and some 5-10% loss as it passes through the d.c. lens and the defraction grating. Also I might upload a previously thought way of combining the beams but it proved to be more trouble than I wanted. Should be up within the hour. The lenses in sketch-up are not perfectly accurate when it comes to the curve I just guessed then so that's why it may seem odd.

Man, thank the heavens you were unbanned. I was seriously pissed off when I found out you were banned because I really wanted to build a lightsaber so this way I can go out and cut people with it.

 

[Hansolo777]

Heres a screen capture so all can see its the important parts (drivers and switch not shown.)

 

[Hansolo777]

Is that enough for those of you who wanted it explain because you couldn't figure it out? No disrespect is meant. Now someone can do the same and duplicate my results for you all...Anyone who has 4 SF's, a double convex lens, a deffraction grating, and a 405-g-1, oh and four glass colminating lenses for inside each module. Build it and then test it at 200ma for each and tell everyone what the output power is a LPM. Like I said should be ~1 Watt with no really tricky optics like i said. As long as the modules are equa distant from the center of the lens it should work great.

 

[ElektroFreak]

I don't believe that a diffraction grating will recollimate four diverging beams.. A set oif very carefully chosen and aligned lenses and other optics, maybe if everything was just right, but not a grating.

A beam entering a diffration grating will be diffracted again no matter the angle of incidence. While you can put one beam in and get multiple diverging beams out, you cannot just put multiple converging beams into it and get one beam out.. It doesn't work like that.. man I seem to be having deja vu. All of the incident beams will be diffracted and all you'll get out of the other side is a starburst of weaker beams. Clearly you have not built this device successfully, and if you just wanted people to point out ways to improve your design you'd have been better off just asking questions rather than making crap up, calling people names, and insulting our collective intelligence.

 

[Hansolo777]

The other way I did it I have 2 designs 2 builds. The other was more trouble but worth it. I removed the refraction grating and rplaced it with another much smaller double convex lens to straighten out the beam and then enter it into the colminating lens.

 

[ossumguywill]

The other way I did it I have 2 designs 2 builds. The other was more trouble but worth it. I removed the refraction grating and rplaced it with another much smaller double convex lens to straighten out the beam and then enter it into the colminating lens.

It seems like unless you were very careful that would give you such bad divergence/beam splitting the laser would be useless.... I'm not good with optics, but I don't think that would work.

 

[Hansolo777]

But yes it does make a SFM which is why I put the CL basically right on top of to try and straighten the beam for a split second. Just long enogh to have it enter the colminating lens. So thank you for thoughts but I do believe it works the way I have it since the focal point is the size of one culminated beam. So I would want to disagree but that is at the focal point after that it degrades relatively fast about 1.5x as fast as one.

 

[ossumguywill]

But yes it does make a SFM which is why I put the CL basically right on top of to try and straighten the beam for a split second. Just long enogh to have it enter the colminating lens. So thank you for thoughts but I do believe it works the way I have it since the focal point is the size of one culminated beam. So I would want to disagree but that is at the focal point after that it degrades relatively fast about 1.5x as fast as one.

So then it's not really a light saber at all..... it's the same affect as pointing four laser pointers at the same place.... lol.