Cylindrical Correction optics from Dr.Lava

[Morgan]

Hey All,

I had the opportunity to play with my corrective optics from Dr.Lava last weekend. With all the cool stuff available from him I am a little embarrassed to say these have not knocked my socks off.

Following the instructions supplied was not difficult but the results were disappointing. The exit beam after the optics was far too wide to fit onto any galvo mirrors if used in a scanner although the dot at distance was more acceptable than no optics, (once time was spent getting alignment just so...),. Also tested that day on the same laser was a pair of prisms and these did, what I would say was, a much better job. Even with the potential for more losses, they were much easier to set up and the results were better.

Has anyone else had similar, or, more to the point, much better results than this? It was my first time using corrective optics but there were experts on hand and there are only so many things you can get wrong!

Yes, the diode was in the correct orientation and collimated as best as possible over about 40 feet or so.

Your input is welcome.

M

 

[lasersbee]

Hmmm... I haven't played with my lenses from drlava yet...
A little disappointing if your setup was correct...

Jerry

 

[Bionic-Badger]

Can you take some pictures of your setup?

 

[JLSE]

I havent used mine yet, but I would suggest trying the lenses with
the glass aspheric, if you already have not..

If you use a 405-g1, the width of the beam is smaller, but diverges
rapidly. Using this with the lava optics may balance nicely and fit your galvos.

Just guessing as I have not tried this...

What lenses have you tried so far?

 

[Morgan]

Just the Aixis 3 element glass ones. It was not my setup but if it wasn't the Aixiz lens, it was an equivalent. I'm not saying I got it right but it was hard to see how to improve them.

@ Bionic-Badger - I wish I had taken a pic but I didn't have the setup here so will have to repeat it. It was done at a UKLEM with someone else's equipment. When I have some shots, I'll post them here.

@ wannaburn - I take your point that maybe a 405-G-1 may have given different results. I should incorporate that into any future comparisons. Maybe the 405-G-1 is the lens these were meant for. If so, it's relevant info as it didn't seem to work with the Aixiz that well.

I look forward to your experiments too Jerry!

M

 

[JLSE]

Just the Aixis 3 element glass ones. It was not my setup but if it wasn't the Aixiz lens, it was an equivalent. I'm not saying I got it right but it was hard to see how to improve them.

I take your point that maybe a 405-G-1 may have given different results. I should incorporate that into any future comparisons. Maybe the 405-G-1 is the lens these were meant for. If so, it's relevant info as it didn't seem to work with the Aixiz that well.


M

IIRC the original test in Lavas thread was
performed with the aspherics..

The beam exiting the aixiz glass are approx 2-3mm wider,
perhaps this caused the issues.

I was playing with these optics today, but still have to
mill a mount. I was just getting the dimensions figured out,
But will try both sets of lenses to see if I get similar results.

Im hopeful that the results with these lenses will be better than
a prism pair for my 3.2W labby. The way the prisms expand the
two beams makes for a really wide beam at the aperture.
This also may indicate the the prism pair will produce a
better divergence, but again, just a guess.

Ive already noticed that this is not the case with Lavas optics,
but cant say 100% until everything is mounted properly..

 

[Crazy Jay]

Just the Aixis 3 element glass ones.

Like everyone else says... bad lens to use.

I noticed that the aixiz 445nm lens I recently bought has a much much much smaller beam at a long distance. You might want to get one and try it with that as well.

 

[Morgan]

I could see that the smaller exit beam from a lens like Jayrob's would be handled differently. I'm interested to see your results wannaburn. Whilst I was playing at the UKLEM, another setup was using prisms but they were not expanding the slow axiz. Definitely reducing the fast axiz. Nice results too.

Like everyone else says... bad lens to use.

I noticed that the aixiz 445nm lens I recently bought has a much much much smaller beam at a long distance. You might want to get one and try it with that as well.

Sorry Jay, but isn't that the same glass here? the only difference between the old glass lenses, (405 coated), and the new ones is the coating I thought.

When you say smaller beam at a distance, is that because the lenses are actually different or because the beam is clipped by the assembly?

Apologies if I'm confused here...

M

 

[JLSE]

The only difference ive seen physically with the aixiz lenses are they
are still 3 element, but the top 2 lenses are bonded... Have not taken
measurements either..

Im working on 10 different things at a time, but will get my results posted
here when I get the chance.

By the looks of it, Lavas lenses only have to be 6-10mm apart, so they
are already a plus as far as fitting them for a handheld.

I hope they work better with the dual beam setup, better than the prisms,
or im gonna have to rip out the mirror mounts and completely re align.
There is a .5mm gap between the two output beams, and because the prism
pair works as an expander, it also expands the gap between the beams :banghead:

Im looking to get my arrays as tight as possible..

I could see that the smaller exit beam from a lens like Jayrob's would be handled differently. I'm interested to see your results wannaburn. Whilst I was playing at the UKLEM, another setup was using prisms but they were not expanding the slow axiz. Definitely reducing the fast axiz. Nice results too.



Sorry Jay, but isn't that the same glass here? the only difference between the old glass lenses, (405 coated), and the new ones is the coating I thought.

When you say smaller beam at a distance, is that because the lenses are actually different or because the beam is clipped by the assembly?

Apologies if I'm confused here...

M

 

[mojo_1234]

Still working on the alignment - it's so damned tricky! My best result have been achived using a simple single lens instead of the Aixiz triplet...

BUT - THESE LENSES WORK QUITE WELL!!!

Interesting hint: I'm using the "Dragonlasers" broadband IR glasses - they also cut everything what's below 450nm


Smallest profile without DrLava optics:



and now the result with the :bowdown: lenses:



After fixing the diode angle even the "small wings" are no longer visible...

More to come...

 

[JLSE]

Nice setup you got there :beer:

If you find that minor bumps are shifting you lens out of place,
you can put a small piece of thin double sided tape on the bottom
of the second lens and 'walk' it into position. When you find the
spot with the best results, drop the epoxy on it.

You may want to 'fix' the first lens into place before mounting the
second, and watch the epoxy as it will move lenses out of place
to a degree when it completely cures (shrinks).

Still working on the alignment - it's so damned tricky! My best result have been achived using a simple single lens instead of the Aixiz triplet...

BUT - THESE LENSES WORK QUITE WELL!!!

Interesting hint: I'm using the "Dragonlasers" broadband IR glasses - they also cut everything what's below 450nm


Smallest profile without DrLava optics:

View attachment 29954

and now the result with the :bowdown: lenses:

View attachment 29955

After fixing the diode angle even the "small wings" are no longer visible...

More to come...

 

[mojo_1234]

I've tested the cylindrical optics with the G-2 lens (eBay - G-2 lens ) and yes, it's possible to easily get a 3x3mm beam diameter with low divergence...

will add pictures as soon as possible!