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



Laser Pointer Store

LPF community dual 44 project, Share your ideas.

RedCowboy

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,028
Likes
1,762
Points
113
The center would be fixed and all 3 on the same plane, that would be adjusted and set, only the horizontal convergence would be controlled by the servo/mirrors for the outer 2 or 4 if a 5 beamer. Yes outer most in a 5 beam would be a different ratio.

The longer the arm attached to the articulated mirror the shorter the mirrors range but the finer the control and I am only looking to play at 10 meters or so, the 6X corrected with 3.3XBE will reach out further and project a spot better in the far field, this converged concept is just a short range burner although if using ndb7875's could reach 25 meters pretty well if using 2X or 3X c-lens pairs.
 
Last edited:

hakzaw1

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
9,358
Likes
1,431
Points
113
OPT (Poland) has a nice e-store-- I could not find any data there on power handling capability on 'blue' cube. The price is fair @ $47 .. but the tax is a killer and I must 'join-up' in order to see the $hip costs from Poland to Texas.
at $24 they offer a swell cube mount..
 

hakzaw1

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
9,358
Likes
1,431
Points
113
^^^
Okay- that would not be good.:yabbem:

no sir.. :mad:not a good thing..

WE wont go that way..:whistle:.................... we WILL test the Techhood cubes ourselves tho-:tsk: to the death I tell you!!

:na::gun:

:beer:
 

RedCowboy

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,028
Likes
1,762
Points
113
Duty cycle wont be all that long. I have been doing some testing with different copper modules and heat fade is a real factor the way we overdrive the 44 @ 4.5a and with 2 of them I think we are looking at 30 - 45 seconds max with a beefy heat sink.

So the cube is not going to catch hell like in a projector, it's just going to get a short burst in most cases of 5 to 30 seconds, so consider that the rating is likely a continuous use rating, really we just need to test the cubes and see, but as efficient as some I see are rated it may not be a problem for our short duty cycle use.

Also it may be a good idea to use 2 sets of 6X C-lenses and correct each laser before the cube, it will reduce the energy density problem at the cube and improve the expanded beams fit on to the BE's output lens.
 
Last edited:

RedCowboy

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,028
Likes
1,762
Points
113
----EDITED----

I want a lot more than 2 x 44's, I would like to converge 5 or 7 corrected 44's each with active cooling.

With a G2 and 6X pair I can burn at 30 feet nicely, adding the BE lets me reach out further but it's not something I have much use for although it is nice to be able to get a tighter glowing hot spot where I want it, however for the cost of doing a 2 x 44 with correction and a BE I could have 5 x 44's with correction built to be converged at my target, and with the extra brute force would have added effective range as well, also I love the look of multiple beams, or I could have a couple dozen pltb450B's and correction won't be needed, just the right pair or lenses perhaps.

I would really love to build a " death star " build like the kid in that video, it's a matter of finding the correct lenses and actually as you asked me before I think with a wide enough home made BE he could have gotten his bundle of beams into a tighter far field spot.

After watching that video again I have renewed interest and pltb450B diodes are not that expensive, I can make a few linear drivers for dirt cheap and converge a couple dozen, I would like to put them into a double ring and use a pair of sliding lenses to set the bundle width and convergence point, the device will be long but that's ok, I would angle all the lasers inward to reduce the dia of the lens needed, probably use G7 rather than G2 primaries, and I can skip the cubes if going this route.



 
Last edited:

RedCowboy

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,028
Likes
1,762
Points
113
His beam cluster looks to be diverging, I would use a much more ridged frame with screw adjustment to hold the position, the square module in a thick fork that attaches at the center of the fork would work to adjust X and Y, I would use a hand made square heat sink that holds a 12mm module, maybe put some fins on top but still duty cycle would be 30-45 seconds depending.


Imagine a steel hoop maybe a foot across with 24 1 inch square aluminum blocks holding 12mm modules with pltb450b diodes set in a U shaped fork only the U has a flat bottom with 1 center screw so it turns, a wing nut underneath tightens to hold it's position and the block can tip up/down in the fork, another wing nut holds the position.

Then a center stalk mounts the sliding lenses, the lasers are angled inward so the lenses don't have to be a foot wide, maybe 4 inches or so ??




---edit---

Yea, could knife edge and stack 16 x pltb450B in a 4 x 4 and use a telescopic reducer or run the bundle of 16 into a large home made BE, there will be some uneven divergence but the pltb450b is the least of the MM blue offenders over 1w output.

I have seen diodes for 18.00 each so 16 diodes are no more than a pair of 44's and 6X c-lenses. Trade the KE set up for the cube, mirror, rotator, ect... I bought a few 7875's from Rickerz, I wish I had bought them all. 9 x 7875's in a KE 3 x 3 would be cool, would look pretty neat too.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

RedCowboy

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,028
Likes
1,762
Points
113
I have done this before I just don't have many pics, this was an old cell phone pic and you can see my array of beams comes to an intersection then the 1st lens expands them and the 2nd sets a very good bundle that I could converge at distance.

Unfortunately my lens arrangement was trial and error as I am not yet an expert, however I know it can be done, it's a matter of focal length and the length of the device as to how far and tight I can converge all the beams, also MM beams suck compared to Gaussian beams or decent single mode beams.

I think minimoto is planning to converge his 9 x 44's in this fashion, he is talking to a major optics company about the lenses.

 

Attachments

Last edited:

paul1598419

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2013
Messages
13,874
Likes
2,001
Points
113
I guess this thread took another turn to now use multiple blue diodes instead of two 44s. I hope you are just hashing out new ideas and not going in a different direction because the cube can't take the power density of two 44s into it. I really don't have anything to add here as I'm not sure how this will end up now. Good luck on whatever project you decide on next.
 

RedCowboy

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,028
Likes
1,762
Points
113
I'm just talking concepts while we wait to test parts, nothing is nailed down, however I suggest we remember the 7 P's

Proper prior planning prevents piss poor performance.

So lets solve as many of the problems as we can think of before having a ( strike a insert several ) host's built, normally I would build a test setup on a square of aluminum and see it work but all I have on hand is a cheap Chinese PBS for 450nm, so until we clear this hurdle we are just talking.

---EDIT---

I do have 44's and drivers but no rotator, I just ordered half a dozen of the square copper modules that have a good friction fit.....we still need to think about beam alignment and heat transfer, I think the square mounts will transfer heat well enough, but I think we should attach them to a copper footing with mounting slots, remember the beam height must match the beam expander center so this has to be decided before machining hosts.
 
Last edited:

RedCowboy

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,028
Likes
1,762
Points
113
I think we should test some affordable cubes 1st, also we have a line on some that should work so really we are on hold until there in hand, remember as the beam expander attaches at the output our beam height must match the BE's centerline, also both diodes must be aligned and are we using 2 sets of 6X C-lenses or just 1 ?
 

RedCowboy

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,028
Likes
1,762
Points
113
We have a line on a cube so logic dictates that we either:

( A ) Get the cube in hand, test it, then decide if 1 6X pair or two 6X pairs and have the host built accordingly...........or.........

( B ) Make a decision now and have the host built, however we risk either making it bigger without saving much or having a problem with the energy density at the cube.

So the safer way to decide before we have the cube in hand ( if that's the path you take ) would be to use two 6X pairs and have the host built accordingly, also what module are we going to use and what is the beam height ? We have room with the C-lenses as far as beam height, but based on the host dia. and the beam expanders center line the mount/module /beam height must match or you create an angle and a skewed spot.

It would seem we need to sort out the cube and the ( adjustable ?? ) mounts/modules before designing the hosts, although if you have a prototype coming that's just fine, as you said it will likely be modified.

I would wait on ordering the whole batch of hosts until we have exact specifics as far as the design and it's measurements which will be based on the parts we don't yet have and have not decided on yet. :)
 
Last edited:

RedCowboy

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,028
Likes
1,762
Points
113
Sounds good, do some testing then we can move ahead with a solid plan. :beer:
 

RedCowboy

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,028
Likes
1,762
Points
113
If you used 2 mirrors in front of the laser module then both mirrors would have to adjust for left/right and up/down and the final mirror would have to have the beam running straight from the mirror into the center of the beam expander so the 6X pair could be set along the straight and level beam path, and both C-lens would be set for position ( distance between ) and rotation, we do not want to have to tip the lenses so the beam path from either the laser module to the BE or the final adjustment mirror to the BE must be both straight and level.

In effect the 2 mirrors would be making a compound adjustment and we would have to offset the lasers to make room to work in the 1st place, what we want is the ability to make fine adjustments so a mount/module with the ability to make fine adjustments should be used, mirrors would mean a redesign all together.

So it looks like the question is do we set and compound adjust 4 more mirrors or use adjustable mounts ? My vote is for adjustable mounts unless someone knows a better way.




 

Attachments

Last edited:

RedCowboy

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,028
Likes
1,762
Points
113
I would much rather use the adjustable mount, I think it would be much easier.

Also I and you could as well, build sub assemblies on aluminum bar stock and align them in a square head attached to a battery tubs, sort of like my " security camera " 6X corrected W/3XBE build but with easier diode replacement and re adjustment, the aesthetics won't be as nice as a round head build, but attaching a TEC pad and scavenged fins with a fan would be easy if I wanted to do that later.
 
Last edited:

RedCowboy

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,028
Likes
1,762
Points
113
Yes it will be much easier to make alignment adjustments with the BE in place and the top panel removed so we can adjust it hot, with the round design it would require taking the optics shelf in and out to align the adjustable mount or multiple mirrors so the beam is aligned with the BE, then setting the C-lenses and hoping we are not out of alignment, with the square head the sub module with laser and 6X pair is already aligned and we set the sub module to align with the mounted BE, it will be much better to do it that way, also the heat sink will be very good.

Actually in this 2 x 44 build the sub plate would have both lasers and all the optics with the corrected/combined beam exiting at the center of the sub assembly plate, then that plate would be aligned with the mounted BE hot and running.

The 2nd laser and it's 6X pair would have to be a sub-sub assembly unless square mounts would do the job of aligning the beams, I suspect they would, but I still like the square head design.

 

Attachments

Last edited:

RedCowboy

Well-known member
LPF Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,028
Likes
1,762
Points
113
If using two sets of 6x C-lenses it wont make any real difference in that short of distance, but it will come out really close anyway, keeping the size of the device manageable will mean making some compromises, such as 2 additional bounce mirrors to center the beam on the main sub assembly plate, otherwise it makes everything wider.

This method will work just fine for correcting 1 nubm44 and using a beam expander, for combining two 44's if not using adjustable mounts then a sub-sub assembly will be needed to align the 2nd laser and it's 6X pair built on a separate smaller plate and aligned the same way into the main sub assembly.

Actually I missed something here, this set up will work just fine for aligning 1 laser sub assembly, but in this 2 x 44 build the second laser sub-sub assembly would be higher and that would mean elevating the other parts on the main sub assembly an equal amount, so I am going to say we need adjustable mounts for the 2 x 44 build, for the single 6x corrected with beam expander this sub assembly idea will work but it gets too involved for the 2 x 44 as the additional height the main sub assembly parts would need is based on the amount the 1st laser assembly is out of vertical alignment plus the dead space, so scratch this for the 2 x 44 build and lets think about adjustable mounts.





It would be a good idea to have the beam expander attach at the end of the optics shelf when building a round head, that way we can align hot without taking the optics shelf in and out, then the ribbed heat sink/cover could screw on over everything with the beam expander attached to the optics shelf, that would save a lot of trouble, so the optics shelf would screw onto the center knuckle and we wont need the extra springboard set up either, we can align everything hot with the BE in place, this design change would help a lot, and maybe we could just use the square copper mounts with a foot plate attached for slotted mounting holes reachable from the top side.


 

Attachments

Last edited:




Top