I thought my M462 2.2 Watt 462mn laser was bright in the night sky !

[badboybilly]

I thought I would chuck this quick video here, this NUBMO8 is definitely one of my best burners, the distance here is only 3 metres but it burns very nicely even at 10m,

6w corrected beam is awesome and in a 2 piece small host even better!


https://youtu.be/AFpZ7i6tdB0

 

[Accutronitis]

With the 6X cyl lens pair I got the output beam down to 6mm X 3mm Plus I increased the input lens hole larger to 7.5mm but there is a slight amount of clipping of the square corners which in turned rounded the beam spot BUT if very low divergence is number one on your list then I don't think this approach can easily be improved on because at 60 paces the beam spot was very small AND fairly round with very little "splash"......

EDIT - This video is at 100 feet using the JL 10X BE and 6X Cyl lens pair

Check out how small all 4 burn marks are at 100 feet !

 

[badboybilly]

Yes this build was about smallest size possible firstly with average heat dissipation for the size, secondly divergence and beam power at distance, the burn mark might look a little round but it's thick plastic and melts to look that way, it's closer to rectangle 5mm by 4mm and the splash is obvious, but the splash can be reduced by blackening the reflection in the barrel on the beam exit, Adding a beam expander would dramatically increase its size witch wasn't my plan, The NUBMO8 was choice because I hadn't used this particular diode yet and brighter tint than 450. if divergence was first goal I would have used the NUBMO6,

6w out from the 08 with correction is impressive with power adjustment!

 

[Accutronitis]

Yes Adding a beam expander increase the beam size at the exit but it only gets smaller from that point on. I've never seen such a small spot size at 100 feet (that's 30 meters) AND coming from NUBM44 !

The video will be done uploading any time now.....

 

[badboybilly]

I mean the size of my custom host, again the build was about small compact size firstly and adding a beam expander to the host would make it a rediculace size portable,



Also at 30m it might as well be a table setup of large size since you need it to be compleatly still and need a full minute or more just to burn a spot, honestly I don't see the point unless it's 30w concentrated to a tiny spot.

 

[Accutronitis]

Yes beam expanders do that which is why I also have another correction tube with the 12X correction which make the 44's beam tight from start to finish and coming from the NUBM44 7+ Watt diode....

 

[badboybilly]

It won't be 7w + with all that correction and you won't be able to put it in your pocket.

But if the plan is to build a cannon with maybe a millimetre or 2 better beam spec then so be it!

 

[RedCowboy]

You notice smoke right away, the trick is getting enough energy in one spot to make the smoldering paper glow and exceed it's flashpoint, hard to help it along when you can't see it, I just have to hold steady and wait.

This is a NUBM44 with a G2 and 6X cyl pair followed by a sanwu 3X BE at 60 feet.

Target is a paper lunch bag stuffed with torn strips of cardboard from a boxes.

 

[Accutronitis]

I disagree "all that correction" has 99.8% efficiency and a very high quality AR coating which works out to about 84mW at 7 watts, And DTR said of this diode...

My meter does not read past 6.8W but this diode is clearly doing well over 7W but I will call it 6W till someone can show some testing further than I can with my meter. @ 4.5A it does 6.8W and I ran it for about two minutes @ 5.5A with the meter pegged at max the whole time never a drop in reading so there is a very good chance it is doing much more than that.

I never was concerned with putting something like this in my pocket, I mainly wanted the power it with 2ea 26650 Li-Ion batteries and a very long run time, I also went into this knowing that I would need to correct the fast axis so I bought the best Cyl Lenses I could find plus I'm using one of DTR's G2 so above all else I wanted the highest output single diode burner And "Thor's Hammer" has not disappointed me !

It won't be 7w + with all that correction and you won't be able to put it in your pocket.

But if the plan is to build a cannon with maybe a millimetre or 2 better beam spec then so be it!

 

[Alaskan]

A beam expander focused to infinity shouldn't make the size of the beam smaller at distance, it can only be larger because of the beam divergence, but if you set the focus so the beam goes to a point 100 feet away then yes, smaller, but it won't be at infinity focus then.

 

[Accutronitis]

A beam expander focused to infinity shouldn't make the size of the beam smaller at distance, it can only be larger because of the beam divergence, but if you set the focus so the beam goes to a point 100 feet away then yes, smaller, but it won't be at infinity focus then.

Doesn't it ? The beam starts out the width of the beam expander and it slowly gets smaller but because of beam divergence it starts to get bigger some distance away but since it's a large distance away it appears to keep getting smaller and smaller just like an airplane flying away from you appears to get smaller and smaller.

If you measure the beam as it leaves the beam expander and again down range it gets smaller down range, It appears to keep getting smaller because the beam divergence is less than it's shrinking profile due to the distance so it looks much like a needle.....

Or at least that's the way it seems to me ?

I actually like the beam better without the beam expander because the beam starts out much, much smaller and very slowly starts to diverge and at a rate that closely matches it's shrinking profile due to the distance traveled so the beam appears to stay the small size all along it's whole path and doesn't look like it's getting bigger or smaller, Since the beam is tighter it appears brighter from start to finish ! I like that !

 

[Alaskan]

You can have a waist a distance away, but from what I'm seeing here it appears to be focused to a point 100 feet away rather than at the waste.

 

[GSS]

I disagree "all that correction" has 99.8% efficiency and a very high quality AR coating which works out to about 84mW at 7 watts, And DTR said of this diode...



I never was concerned with putting something like this in my pocket, I mainly wanted the power it with 2ea 26650 Li-Ion batteries and a very long run time, I also went into this knowing that I would need to correct the fast axis so I bought the best Cyl Lenses I could find plus I'm using one of DTR's G2 so above all else I wanted the highest output single diode burner And "Thor's Hammer" has not disappointed me !

Are you sure all those added correction lenses still give a 99.8% efficiency?

 

[diachi]

Are you sure all those added correction lenses still give a 99.8% efficiency?

I wouldn't be so sure... 0.2% loss would be incredibly good.

 

[Accutronitis]

Ya I'm pretty sure....

We were testing some other lenses available on the market. And why we choose this shape not another, here are the answers:

1. 12x12 allows to use the same valley shaper t omover one lens versus another, you do nto need 12mm and then 8mm.
2. 12mm is smaller than any diode housing maybe despite soem 3,8mm didoes and big enough to hold in hands/fingers
3. Additional thickness do not affect efficiency and when the lens stand on the surface it is harder to make the mfall down, they are just much more stable
4. Total place needed for them to work is 42mm. It is possible to make this distance smaller with different curves but then setting the lens is much harder so we decide about this distance to be optimal.
5. Efficiency is around 99,8% for 450-650
__________________
Mateusz
OptLasers Team manager
Opt Lasers
Tomorrow's System LTD

http://laserpointerforums.com/f49/o...es-nubm44-beam-correction-tests-96445-11.html

 

[diachi]

Ya I'm pretty sure....

http://laserpointerforums.com/f49/o...es-nubm44-beam-correction-tests-96445-11.html

I believe they're definitely in the high 90s for the whole setup, but not quite 99.8% for the complete setup, i.e. both lenses together.

I disagree "all that correction" has 99.8% efficiency and a very high quality AR coating which works out to about 84mW at 7 watts, And DTR said of this diode...

84mW loss at 7W input is 1.2%... Still tiny amounts of loss when you have that much power, but there's some math going wrong somewhere.