- Joined
- Oct 11, 2008
- Messages
- 150
- Points
- 0
Just to let u know my freind has the 200 and it pulls about 620ma
Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers
Buy Site Supporter Role (remove some ads) | LPF Donations
Links below open in new window
FrozenGate by Avery
New DX Green MODULES
- Thread starter nikokapo
- Start date
Reply to #173 -
Alx:
Agreed - some of my tests that would endanger the module were done on my lower-power one, for that reason!
Yes, I am familiar with that model - I reviewed it earlier this year, when I was looking at different LPMs.
I don't think you still fully understand what I was trying to explain about your meter -
All of your measurements that you highlighted red, when they are taken WITHOUT a filter, are going to be WAY off!
The reason is that, when set to measure 532nm, the meter will read the green correctly, but because your LaserCheck sensor is much more sensitive to 808, when set at 532 it will display the 808 IR at 13x the real value!
For example, if you had a combined beam of 50mw 532nm green plus 20mw 808nm IR. If the meter is set to measure 532nm, then the green part will be measured correctly (50mw), but the IR part will be too high (20 x 13 = 260mw). So instead of the correct combined value (70mw), your meter will display 50+260 = 310mw!
Things get even more messed-up because the meter is also picking-up and mis-reading 1064nm in that same beam as well!
So like I said earlier, the only valid readings would be WITH a filter, set to 532nm.
It works stable for me, at the correct 3V, and 530ma!
And it also works stable for another member, at 610ma!
But according to your posts, you never tested yours at 3V and 570ma! Your pot was set at the factory too low, that might have been the cause of your problem?
Other possible causes for your problem -
1) Some ppl in another thread have been reporting that the drivers on some of these modules are "messed-up" and don't regulate properly - you could have had one of these bad drivers on yours.
2) I also know from my own testing that you need at least new AA alkalines to run these high-power models, alkaline AAA's (or even carbon AA's) cannot provide enough current. So for example, if the True 100 uses the 100mw module in a pen host that holds 2xAAA's, it will never run right at full power, because the batteries are not strong enough!
But if you ran it at the proper voltage, and used the current adjustment pot that is provided on the board for that reason, you could maybe get 160mw of green like Hemlock_Mike is getting, instead of only 50 or 75!
I understand you already sold this one, so you can't fix it, but at least you will now know better for next time!
Alx:
Agreed - some of my tests that would endanger the module were done on my lower-power one, for that reason!
Yes, I am familiar with that model - I reviewed it earlier this year, when I was looking at different LPMs.
I don't think you still fully understand what I was trying to explain about your meter -
All of your measurements that you highlighted red, when they are taken WITHOUT a filter, are going to be WAY off!
The reason is that, when set to measure 532nm, the meter will read the green correctly, but because your LaserCheck sensor is much more sensitive to 808, when set at 532 it will display the 808 IR at 13x the real value!
For example, if you had a combined beam of 50mw 532nm green plus 20mw 808nm IR. If the meter is set to measure 532nm, then the green part will be measured correctly (50mw), but the IR part will be too high (20 x 13 = 260mw). So instead of the correct combined value (70mw), your meter will display 50+260 = 310mw!
Things get even more messed-up because the meter is also picking-up and mis-reading 1064nm in that same beam as well!
So like I said earlier, the only valid readings would be WITH a filter, set to 532nm.
but definitely, module/driver IS NOT STABLE if set to 570mA and 3V is used as max input voltage (REGULATED CURRENT WILL NEVER BE/BECOME STABLE). USE YOUR MODULE AND TEST IT. DON'T TRUST ME)
It works stable for me, at the correct 3V, and 530ma!
And it also works stable for another member, at 610ma!But according to your posts, you never tested yours at 3V and 570ma! Your pot was set at the factory too low, that might have been the cause of your problem?
Other possible causes for your problem -
1) Some ppl in another thread have been reporting that the drivers on some of these modules are "messed-up" and don't regulate properly - you could have had one of these bad drivers on yours.
2) I also know from my own testing that you need at least new AA alkalines to run these high-power models, alkaline AAA's (or even carbon AA's) cannot provide enough current. So for example, if the True 100 uses the 100mw module in a pen host that holds 2xAAA's, it will never run right at full power, because the batteries are not strong enough!
But if you ran it at the proper voltage, and used the current adjustment pot that is provided on the board for that reason, you could maybe get 160mw of green like Hemlock_Mike is getting, instead of only 50 or 75!
I understand you already sold this one, so you can't fix it, but at least you will now know better for next time!
Reply to #174 -
Alx:
I understood, what you asked before was -
What I was pointing-out was that the lens CANNOT be screwed inside - it is sitting on top of a piece of metal that is preventing it from going in any more!
If you look inside of that part (#3), you can see the piece I was talking about!
Reply to #175 -
Alx:
I do not think even they could tell you. I believe that those #'s are set for your specific sensor, and are burned-in to memory for your unit when it is calibrated at the factory.
Actually, almost impossible with your meter, for reasons I will discuss shortly.
I would agree with that. But if you had set it properly, you could be getting perhaps 160mw of true green out of that module instead!
Alx:
I understood, what you asked before was -
What I was pointing-out was that the lens CANNOT be screwed inside - it is sitting on top of a piece of metal that is preventing it from going in any more!
If you look inside of that part (#3), you can see the piece I was talking about!
Reply to #175 -
Alx:
I do not think even they could tell you. I believe that those #'s are set for your specific sensor, and are burned-in to memory for your unit when it is calibrated at the factory.
Actually, almost impossible with your meter, for reasons I will discuss shortly.
I would agree with that. But if you had set it properly, you could be getting perhaps 160mw of true green out of that module instead!
Reply to #176 -
Alx:
I had also considered that earlier, using something like anti-green goggles in front of the laser to block-out the green. Unfortunately, after giving it further thought, I realized it won't work!
The problem is that in a green DPSS laser, you have TWO different types of IR radiation, which are about as far away from each other in wavelength as a red laser is from Blu-Ray! -
660nm (red) - 405nm (Blu-Ray) = 255nm difference
1064nm (IR) - 808nm (IR) = 256nm difference!
Because of this, the sensor in your meter is much more sensitive to 808 than it is to 1064. So if you have a combined beam, your meter will not give an accurate reading for the IR! Here's why -
If you set the meter for 808nm, then the 1064nm part of the beam will be mis-read, and the displayed power will be too LOW...
But if you set the meter for 1064nm, then the 808nm part of the beam will be mis-read, and the displayed power will be WAY to HIGH!
The only thing you can tell, is that the actual combined IR is probably SOMEWHERE between these two values.
I was actually going to suggest that same idea when I was writing post #172, but then I realized the problem above!
That is why I said earlier -
If you had the right filters, you could measure each IR wavelength by itself accurately, and then add the two #'s to get the combined IR power.
You might also be able to use a optical spectrum analyzer (that also included the IR range to at least 1064nm), and measure the intensity at the appropriate sensor position inside the device, to measure either the 808nm, or the 1064nm.
With a thermal meter, this is not a problem - it is only a problem with an optical meter.
Alx:
Oh... now I realized that instead of trying to distinguish complicated LaserCheck formula (for varying wavelength), the easiest way is to USE A GREEN FILTER in front of module and perform measurements like I've done with IR filters...
I had also considered that earlier, using something like anti-green goggles in front of the laser to block-out the green. Unfortunately, after giving it further thought, I realized it won't work!
The problem is that in a green DPSS laser, you have TWO different types of IR radiation, which are about as far away from each other in wavelength as a red laser is from Blu-Ray! -
660nm (red) - 405nm (Blu-Ray) = 255nm difference
1064nm (IR) - 808nm (IR) = 256nm difference!
Because of this, the sensor in your meter is much more sensitive to 808 than it is to 1064. So if you have a combined beam, your meter will not give an accurate reading for the IR! Here's why -
If you set the meter for 808nm, then the 1064nm part of the beam will be mis-read, and the displayed power will be too LOW...
But if you set the meter for 1064nm, then the 808nm part of the beam will be mis-read, and the displayed power will be WAY to HIGH!
The only thing you can tell, is that the actual combined IR is probably SOMEWHERE between these two values.
I was actually going to suggest that same idea when I was writing post #172, but then I realized the problem above!
That is why I said earlier -
If you had the right filters, you could measure each IR wavelength by itself accurately, and then add the two #'s to get the combined IR power.
You might also be able to use a optical spectrum analyzer (that also included the IR range to at least 1064nm), and measure the intensity at the appropriate sensor position inside the device, to measure either the 808nm, or the 1064nm.
With a thermal meter, this is not a problem - it is only a problem with an optical meter.
@laserman55:
Thanks for the info, laserman! :yh: I just added that to my chart!
Was that (620ma) the factory setting? Or was that what your friend pot-modded it to?
That is VERY close to the optimum value Hemlock_Mike got for his pot-modded DX 200mw module! (610ma)
On his, any more than that, and the output started dropping, due to the LD over-heating, and drifting out of the optimum 808nm wavelength. But each laser diode may be a little bit different.
He was getting 160mw of just green at that setting - does your friend have an LPM, and does he know how much power his is putting-out?
Thanks for the info, laserman! :yh: I just added that to my chart!
Was that (620ma) the factory setting? Or was that what your friend pot-modded it to?
That is VERY close to the optimum value Hemlock_Mike got for his pot-modded DX 200mw module! (610ma)
On his, any more than that, and the output started dropping, due to the LD over-heating, and drifting out of the optimum 808nm wavelength. But each laser diode may be a little bit different.
He was getting 160mw of just green at that setting - does your friend have an LPM, and does he know how much power his is putting-out?
I already concluded on my post #176 that a green filter will solve LPM readings! Forget about my LPM and this problem.
Seoguy, can you do something constructive rather than comment my posts and do a lot of (wrong) suppositions or elaborating "solar storms theories"?
Did you have a LPM, a multimeter and a power bench supply? Do some measurements using your 100mw module and after that, come back here and post your results!
If you can't, sit back and relax, and wait my next set of measurements, next month...
... rest of crap deleted
It works stable for me, at the correct 3V, and 530ma!
No, I don't think so! And this information is incomplete (missing input voltage, type of, and many more..)
Because is not necessary! Not yet and not before to know how things are going with (and what are) default settings! Now I know that 3.5V is an optimal input value and produce a stable current around 570mA. I will decide next month (when new module will arrive) if I'll increase it or not!
Really, my impression is that you don't understand much more from my post #165 and probably only basic things about electronics. In this case, is normal to don't know how to interpret it and continue to post here a lot of crap!
... another long crap deleted
read again my post #165! I used a controlled power supply, NOT TOYS (like your AA alkalines)!
Voltage has been set at 3V (catalog data value) and powered up module. In this case, I have no problem related to current (can be anything up to 5A). So, module can sag as much as it need (if not exceed 5A). But as you can see, never saturate the current! Only at 3.5V all parameters become stable (U, I, Po)... I saw other stupid postings here saying that 200mw driver is not a regulator, or not a current regulator, or not perform like a regulator!!! It is and as I tested, is working well.
But if you ran it at the proper voltage, and used the current adjustment pot that is provided on the board for that reason, you could maybe get 160mw of green like Hemlock_Mike is getting, instead of only 50 or 75!
Not necessary to adjust current before to know how things are working and conclude that something is wrong or not enough ...
please, speak and teach others, things about you are sure... stop trolling ...
Last edited:
can you unscrew it? Yes or no!
Last edited:
lazerov
0
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2009
- Messages
- 145
- Points
- 0
I took detailed measurements of the input voltage and current of my 100mW module. Tested input voltage is from 2,0V to 4,0V. Current is set at 570mA (factory setting was 560). I used variable power supply and two DMMs.
Uin (V) Iin (A)
2,0 0,06
2,1 0,18
2,2 0,32
2,3 0,50
2,4 0,52
2,5 0,54
2,6 0,56
2,7 0,57
2,8 0,57
2,9 0,57
3,0 0,57
There is no point in writing all the way to 4V, current stays the same. In the 2,7-3,0V range the driver is relatively cool. Maybe it is worth mentioning that I didn't use the DMMs stock leads but instead I replaced them with thicker wires. The resistance of the leads is 0,5Ohms which at 570mA current results in 0,285V drop.
I wonder what is the reason for the large differences between the operating voltage of these modules :thinking:
Uin (V) Iin (A)
2,0 0,06
2,1 0,18
2,2 0,32
2,3 0,50
2,4 0,52
2,5 0,54
2,6 0,56
2,7 0,57
2,8 0,57
2,9 0,57
3,0 0,57
There is no point in writing all the way to 4V, current stays the same. In the 2,7-3,0V range the driver is relatively cool. Maybe it is worth mentioning that I didn't use the DMMs stock leads but instead I replaced them with thicker wires. The resistance of the leads is 0,5Ohms which at 570mA current results in 0,285V drop.
I wonder what is the reason for the large differences between the operating voltage of these modules :thinking:
Hi lazerov,
super very good. that's the info we need. more measurements, more substance, more conclusions ...
DMMs? What does it mean? Wires?
From your above measurements, no doubt: optimal input voltage for your 100mW module is 2.7V!
lazerov, really we can't conclude yet... before your post, I thought that 100 and 200mw modules are identical (just current set at different values), but now, I am reserved about that. From what I read here, driver is identical in all ways, case identical, so remain just 2 variables:
- diode inside
- current settings
As time as current for your 100mW module has been set at the same value like on my 200mW module, I guess that diode inside... is different (even in booth cases, we have a TO-5 diode), because you have a low dropout than me.
To be sure about that and seeing your results, I ordered few moments ago one 100mW module too...
By the way, did you have a LPM?
Regards,
Alx
super very good. that's the info we need. more measurements, more substance, more conclusions ...
DMMs? What does it mean? Wires?
From your above measurements, no doubt: optimal input voltage for your 100mW module is 2.7V!
lazerov, really we can't conclude yet... before your post, I thought that 100 and 200mw modules are identical (just current set at different values), but now, I am reserved about that. From what I read here, driver is identical in all ways, case identical, so remain just 2 variables:
- diode inside
- current settings
As time as current for your 100mW module has been set at the same value like on my 200mW module, I guess that diode inside... is different (even in booth cases, we have a TO-5 diode), because you have a low dropout than me.
To be sure about that and seeing your results, I ordered few moments ago one 100mW module too...
By the way, did you have a LPM?
Regards,
Alx
Last edited:
lazerov
0
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2009
- Messages
- 145
- Points
- 0
Hi alx,
The driver on all modules looks the same but there is possibility that some of the resistors are different (R1, R2, R3). Can you measure them on your driver? I posted the schematic of this driver along with component values on the previous page.
http://laserpointerforums.com/f42/diy-laser-power-gauge-26332.html
While it is not exceptionally accurate it gives idea of the output power. I'll check this too.
EDIT: Voltage drop over the IR diode is 1,916V. Approximate combined (IR+green) power output is 90mW. IR is less than 10mW.
Digital MultiMeter. One of them measuring the current and the other one - voltage.
This was the reason I bought a 100mW module instead of 200mW one.
The driver on all modules looks the same but there is possibility that some of the resistors are different (R1, R2, R3). Can you measure them on your driver? I posted the schematic of this driver along with component values on the previous page.
I'll measure the voltage across the IR diode at 570mA. Will post the results later.
I don't have a real LPM. But I've made this circuit proposed by Benm:
http://laserpointerforums.com/f42/diy-laser-power-gauge-26332.html
While it is not exceptionally accurate it gives idea of the output power. I'll check this too.
EDIT: Voltage drop over the IR diode is 1,916V. Approximate combined (IR+green) power output is 90mW. IR is less than 10mW.
Last edited:
Hello lazerov,
Good info, we are making progress ...
No, I can't because I sold it. Maybe next month when I'll receive booth modules (I ordered booth: 100 and 200mw version)!
Ahhh... reading your post I realized that I missed something which in our case is important. To extract voltage drop across wires/equipment used in my test to connect green module! Good point! I will do it soon... make sense, really make sense because we are operating over 0.5A!
Taking in consideration voltage drop across wires (0.3V in your case) and the max efficience input voltage (2.7V) which has been determined by your above measurements it mean only 2.4V at module input! All right. In this case, optimal input voltage for your 100mw module is 2.4V and not 2.7V! I noted this value (very important) and I'll compare with my results after necessary data adjustments!
Substracting 1.916V (diode) from 2.4V (as you have at module input) remain around 0.5V loss in this driver which is a very good value! So here, we should have minimal heat! Anything over 2.4V input will cause more heat in this driver and not a stronger laser beam! Give me a little time to adjust my measurements. I am very curious if we can match it!
How did you determined IR? did you used a green filter or an IR filter?
Regards,
Alx
Good info, we are making progress ...
No, I can't because I sold it. Maybe next month when I'll receive booth modules (I ordered booth: 100 and 200mw version)!
Ahhh... reading your post I realized that I missed something which in our case is important. To extract voltage drop across wires/equipment used in my test to connect green module! Good point! I will do it soon... make sense, really make sense because we are operating over 0.5A!
Taking in consideration voltage drop across wires (0.3V in your case) and the max efficience input voltage (2.7V) which has been determined by your above measurements it mean only 2.4V at module input! All right. In this case, optimal input voltage for your 100mw module is 2.4V and not 2.7V! I noted this value (very important) and I'll compare with my results after necessary data adjustments!
Substracting 1.916V (diode) from 2.4V (as you have at module input) remain around 0.5V loss in this driver which is a very good value! So here, we should have minimal heat! Anything over 2.4V input will cause more heat in this driver and not a stronger laser beam! Give me a little time to adjust my measurements. I am very curious if we can match it!
How did you determined IR? did you used a green filter or an IR filter?
Regards,
Alx
Last edited:
lazerov
0
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2009
- Messages
- 145
- Points
- 0
Hi alx,
This module actually outputs relatively small quantities of IR. It is close to the infrared output of a 30mW module (the one found in Romisen L-C030).
I can say I'm quite surprised how good this driver performs. Maybe I'll start making my own drivers with similar design but for driving my red diodes. A cheap driver capable of driving a red LD from single Li-ion will be nice.
No, I didn't use the original wires of the meter. I used thicker, shorter wires with less resistance. So, there is no need to subtract 0,3V from the numbers. Too bad I forgot to measure the voltage drop over the power transistor.
I used a filter which stops green and lets through IR.
This module actually outputs relatively small quantities of IR. It is close to the infrared output of a 30mW module (the one found in Romisen L-C030).
I can say I'm quite surprised how good this driver performs. Maybe I'll start making my own drivers with similar design but for driving my red diodes. A cheap driver capable of driving a red LD from single Li-ion will be nice.
Last edited:
All right,
I measured equivalent resistance of circuit used in my test at post #165. It is 1.4Ohm so, data values posted there about input module voltage must be adjusted substracting some fractions of volts (0.3-0.8V). Below comes adjusted data (200mw module).
Uin(V) at PS| Ild(mA) |PO(mW) | Real Uin Module (V)|
3.0___________508_____97________2.3
3.1___________518____105________2.35
3.2___________536____122________2.45
3.3___________555____136________2.5
3.4___________568____153________2.6
3.5___________570____141________2.7
3.6___________572____140________2.8
3.7___________572____142________2.9
3.8___________572____142________3
3.9___________572____142________3.1
4.0___________572____140________3.2
4.1___________572____140________3.3
4.2___________572____137________3.4
So, what I said on post #165 remain valid but some conclusions should be reformulated as following:
- working voltage: over 2.3V up to 3.4V
- ideal input voltage is 2.7V (will not produce unuseful heat)
- could work with 18640 LI-Ion (better to use in series with one diode to limit voltage at max 3.5-3.6V when battery is fully charged). you may consider here 2 X NI-MH accumulators too (bigger capacity)
I'm remember that after I finished my tests using power bench supply, I powered up my 200mw module using one 18640 cell charged at 4V... Module works without any problem!
Regards,
Alx
Last edited:
This is a good news from your side... So, we have a match! At your 100mW module, optimal input voltage has been 2.7V for 570mA! If you look above to my corrected voltage data, I have the same value on my 200mW version! We found the first march!
On the other part: if voltage and current and driver are the same, and diodes are TO-5, we can say almost sure, that diodes inside are the same!
So, the only one difference between 100mw and 200mw modules (excepting price) subsist in optics... Now, I can bet about that and I can say that instead to try to modify current on 100mw version, better try to correct optical problems existing in this modules! And this problems could be also extended to 200mw version too! Theory existing here about these modules and DX rejects seems to be real. I also can bet that 200mW green module, will never go near 200mW (true green) and maybe not higher than 150mW as is delivered! But with some modifications I think that output could (is possible to) be improved....
To bad that I don't have my 200mW module here to measure IR radiation too ... The only thing which not match... No..wait... it match! My results related to green radiation match with yours (see my post #173). On my measurements with IR filters I got 70-75mw True Green! You got 80mw Green and 10mW IR for a total of 90mW mixed output power! Again we have a match, the second one: 70-80mw TRUE GREEN!
I have no doubt that will works on the fly with red diodes and one LI-ION cell (fully charged)!
Last edited:
lazerov
0
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2009
- Messages
- 145
- Points
- 0
That's almost exact match! I'm surprised how much effect the wires in the measuring equipment can have.
I'm going to use one 18650 battery to power my module in the RGV build. A 1N400x diode should do a good job lowering the voltage a bit ... 0,9V I think.
Oh, indeed. Reading your post #184, I've remembered that few days ago, I corrected another member with similar problem...
See post #164 in this thread: http://laserpointerforums.com/f45/dx-true-5-a-42294-7.html
"sometimes you can't see the forest for the trees"...
... and keep your module safe in case you are powering it in reverse polarity ;-)
Regards,
Alx