New High Power Red VSHIO HL63283HD LD

[CDBEAM777]

I have a project proposed....called ..." The Blue Katar ".....My hair starts to smoke even mentioning the name !!! See https://laserpointerforums.com/f42/blue-katar-project-100862.html

Basically....PBS combine two (2) 462NM diodes and two (2) 450nm diodes....Then stack the combined units...one atop the other...like a Double Decker bus !!

I have the very specialized Dichro mirror/filter for combining 462nm + 450nm....so...steer the beam up/down....and combine the 450nm with the 462nm...See the attached thread for more detail.....maybe get 19W out the front door !!

I just need a break....For the The Blue Katar project....is like 2X the Cyan Cannon in complexity....at least !!!!!. I have a interested customer....I just want to make a unit for myself....THEN....move on to another commission. !!!

Could we do two x 2 different colors....sure.....we can...See the attached drawing in the BK thread !!!.....I could also do a 4LD Cyan Cannon.....or a 2X Blue / Red.....or a 2X Green / Red......All Doable !!

I plan to continue my experiments for the Chartuse Corsucation Build....

The first step is to determine...what Red LD will combine with a N520 or a NDG7475 Green....Then launch from that point !!

Chris...Many things have yet to be tried !!! I just wish I could work on these projects...Full Time !!! Soon....Soon enough this will come to pass....yikes....by that time...I will have a dozen years worth of projects to complete !! We need more specialized builders !!!:tinfoil::tinfoil::tinfoil:

CDBEAM

 

[Benm]

It also depends a bit on what you think is an acceptable result.

If you do one of the simplest and oldest beam combination of just a 650-ish dvd diode with a 532 nm dpss green, you often already have a problem at longer distances.

For a laser show in a limited area this works just fine, say for scanning beams within 20 meters or so even projecting onto a screen.

But i wonder what the "dot" of those combined lasers looks like 100 or 1000 meters from the source. Even if you get the alignment -perfect- you'd still end up with a big red circle with a smaller green one inside of it (or perhaps the other way around), unless you go out of your way with beam expanders -before- the combining dichros to get matching diameters and divergences for each colour.

Then again it may not matter much with these multimode diodes, especially when you PBS-combine 2 of each and then run that through a dichro. The far-field pattern of that would be sort of a + shaped thing anyway, and with different colours to + shapes roughly overlapping.

So yeah, for laser shows i think it's all feasible and fine, but if you want to put down an even-coloured dot on something a kilometer away it will be -very- problematic.

 

[Alaskan]

Then again it may not matter much with these multimode diodes, especially when you PBS-combine 2 of each and then run that through a dichro. The far-field pattern of that would be sort of a + shaped thing anyway, and with different colours to + shapes roughly overlapping....

OptLasers has a RGB combined output which uses two red 638 nm MM diodes through a PBS cube, but has a waveplate on one side to match the shape of the red diodes together into a "-".

 

[CDBEAM777]

Well.....The Wonder of our Brain/Eye evolution is amazing. As to why our beam geometry gives us the perception that the beam is going out into space....like a needle into the Heavens... See this quote:

"Because the 'size' we see is the solid angle subtended by the body at our eye, and that's inversely proportional to the square of the distance. – Anurag Baundwal May 15"

As pulled from:

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/188070/why-do-objects-appear-smaller-when-farther-away

So....At 1 Click....or 1000 Clicks....or the orbit of Mars....the reality of the beam or beams Farfield is vastly different than what our sight would suggest !!! That s fine...

I have posted a few humorous threads covering the speculation of what is the size of a 1.0 mRad beam....on the surface of....Uranus haah...hah....Warped .....Whatever....IIRC....basically....the beam covered the entire Planet !!! WOW !!

Anyway.....SOoooo....the reality or desirability of...".but if you want to put down an even-coloured dot on something a kilometer away it will be -very- problematic" Yes....it will be problematic...or next to impossible....Dunno.....????

Somehow....I am content with my perception of reality....and find the Far Field beam geometry I can see...mmm....acceptable.

As an update...When one adds a Beam Expander to the optic train.....All artifacts disappear....and the over all beam gets very tight.....very tight indeed !!!

Sooo....the Chartreuse Coursication must have a BE !!!!!

Later, CDBEAM

Hmmm....found the almost 3 yr.old post:
https://laserpointerforums.com/f70/let-s-talk-about-divergence-mrad-95224.html

SO...Per the Alaskan's Scientific Calculations....a 1.0 mRad divergent beam would theoretically be 1.6 Million Miles in diameter...at the distance of Uranus. Well....Thank you "Professor A" !!!!

Just note...Professor A actually took the time to derive this Scientific Calculation...Not me...I am much too serious a Man of Science to trifle with such childish nonsense !!! HAHAHAHA

BTW...The Diameter of Uranus is ....31,518 miles...That's a BIG..................Planet !!!
" Back off man....I'm a Scientist " :san::san::san:

 

[Alaskan]

Ha, my calculations are very rough. For the moon, depends on whether at apogee furthest, or parigee closest to the earth. For the sun it's really more than 10%, I think my calculations were closer to 13%, but I did them so long ago I don't remember now. Was interesting to me tight DPSS laser pointer beams aimed at either the sun or moon expanded to a ball park ~10% diameter of either of them that far away. I thought 1 mRad was fairly tight to only cover that much of their diameters, but the reality is the beams are HUGE that far out. Good thing though, you wouldn't want to blind any unsuspecting aliens using the sun as a porthole. How'd you like it if you popped out of the sun from some other part of the universe and were shot in the eye, both eyes, maybe three, four, or more eyes?

That diode is getting cheaper now https://www.ebay.com/itm/USHIO-HL63283HD-638nm-1200mW-Laser-Diode/122464945962 - I'm considering it, but I am also drawn to that 2.5 watt tri-beam Mitsubishi diode too, I think PBS combining two with their beams 90 degrees from one another would make a weird pointer with six beams, I can appreciate strange pointers too.

 

[CDBEAM777]

Well.....Being...er....ah..hmmmm......Men Of Science....These diameter divergence calculations....are....ahhh....just scientific speculation.....for NO observational empirical evidence yet exists!!!....Yikes...What's next !!!

Anyway.....After tinkering around with this HL63283HD LD.....I am certain the emitter size is larger than that on the P73 or 63193.....SOooooo....whatever optical correction we apply....we will obtain more divergence and more aberration around the main geometry at the Far Field....Hmmmm ???? Not what I had hoped for !!

So....the trade off is more raw power.........less of a tight beam ...and more aberrations....Crap !!.


As of this time...I would say....this diode is the best choice....for a Lumia Projector...Not for a HH....Oh Well.........and....into a Lumia Machine...it will go !!!

CDBEAM

 

[Alaskan]

So, you are going to look for a different diode now? I take that to be your meaning, second choice already?

 

[paul1598419]

I have had reservations about that diode since CDBEAM777 posted about its horrible divergence. I don't need to see one for myself to believe it ain't worth it no matter what they want for it. Yes, I think it could make a great lumina projector diode.

 

[CDBEAM777]

I have had reservations about that diode since CDBEAM777 posted about its horrible divergence. I don't need to see one for myself to believe it ain't worth it no matter what they want for it. Yes, I think it could make a great lumina projector diode.

As you previously noted...You will have a wait for some of my projects...Such is the case with the " Solar Prominence " Lumia Project !!...I am now concurrently working on this project....along with the Chartruse Corrusication HH !!

The HL 63283 will find a home in the Solar Prominence unit ...yet another...Long build. :undecided::undecided::shhh::shhh:

Take solace in this fact....My projects take less time than (1) Orbital revolution around Sol of Uranus !!! ( 84 Earth years ) :eg::eg::eg:

Beam Out !!!

 

[paul1598419]

I just noticed you are getting very close to 1000 posts. Man, the jokes I could come up with from your line about Uranus. But, I just won't. :crackup:

 

[RA_pierce]

Cool project, CDBEAM.
I'm curious about your comment regarding reducing the artifacts by adjusting the pitch of the lens. In what direction (relative to the curved axis of the lens) does the pitch matter?
Your setup is different from mine but I wonder if the artifacts I am getting can be ameliorated by fine tuning one axis of the lens position that I've thus far ignored.
How exactly is it that these aberrations are introduced by the lens itself?

Also, where are you getting this diode? I want one.

 

[CDBEAM777]

Paul...Please....inject your humor ...always !!! LPF need a great deal more humor.
Sometimes....sometimes...I fear my " Humor "is....well...."Obtuse"...not relevant to today's younger crowd. Too Bad !!! Shut the Front Door !!...I remain content...that some members get it....and will continue on in my rowdy behavior !!

RA....I have noted some slight non-perpendicular geometry associated with the angle between the bottom of a rectangular C-lens.. and the beam path..can cause problems.

I cannot remember if it was the PCV or PCX lens. Then again....Perhaps my LD was less than parallel to the flat Ally plate to which the LD mount was attached ??? Dunno know !!

From this....I assumed that the Pitch angle of either of the C-lenses can have impact on the introduction of aberration's in the Far Field.

As you well know....the beam.... as it enters both C-lenses must also be centered. Any off centre condition again introduces aberrations.

C-Lens's are a great tool for one-axis correction to our higher power diodes...but....they are a demanding bitch !!

SOooo....with all that Blah, Blah said... Perhaps I was just compensating for a crooked LD mount. It can be stated....that the beam should enter the C-lens system....at a perpendicular angle to the lens plane axis....for minimal aberration's. That holds true for rectangular or circular C-Lenses !

Haha...just Dilly, Dilly with it.

The HL63283 source... as provided by the Alaskan is a good price. I got mine from my PL friend...Clickamouse... See below !!

https://www.ebay.com/itm/USHIO-HL63283HD-638nm-1200mW-Laser-Diode/122464945962

CDBEAM :san::san:

 

[RedCowboy]

Wow, it has a dozen bond wires.

 

[RA_pierce]

RA....I have noted some slight non-perpendicular geometry associated with the angle between the bottom of a rectangular C-lens.. and the beam path..can cause problems.

I cannot remember if it was the PCV or PCX lens. Then again....Perhaps my LD was less than parallel to the flat Ally plate to which the LD mount was attached ??? Dunno know !!

From this....I assumed that the Pitch angle of either of the C-lenses can have impact on the introduction of aberration's in the Far Field.

As you well know....the beam.... as it enters both C-lenses must also be centered. Any off centre condition again introduces aberrations.

C-Lens's are a great tool for one-axis correction to our higher power diodes...but....they are a demanding bitch !!

SOooo....with all that Blah, Blah said... Perhaps I was just compensating for a crooked LD mount. It can be stated....that the beam should enter the C-lens system....at a perpendicular angle to the lens plane axis....for minimal aberration's. That holds true for rectangular or circular C-Lenses !

Haha...just Dilly, Dilly with it.

The HL63283 source... as provided by the Alaskan is a good price. I got mine from my PL friend...Clickamouse... See below !!

https://www.ebay.com/itm/USHIO-HL63283HD-638nm-1200mW-Laser-Diode/122464945962

CDBEAM :san::san:

Thanks.

Yeah, I may try refining the setup to see if I can clean things up a bit but there are so many things that need to simultaneously be lined up perfectly. At least it's a fun challenge.
From my recent experience building lasers, I think some of the newer diode modules have poorer centering tolerances than older modules. I am finding it more difficult to achieve a "straight beam" with a regular ol' M9x0.5 lens.
In addition, I find that the copper modules are soft and squishy and will sometimes deform when pressing a diode. When this happens, the diode scrapes some metal from the module and it builds up in the mounting socket and results in an off-center or crooked diode. At that point I have to remove the diode and the module is trashed. :yabbem: So I switched back to the nickel-plated brass modules. I'm having fewer problems with those.

I'm rambling. The point is: I concur that how you set your diode is important and these little things may escape your notice at first... but the tiniest misalignment can give very disappointing results if you're an obsessive perfectionist like me.

It seems everyone linked the same eBay seller so I take it that's the best source for now.
These diodes look pretty cool. I want one so I can stick a cylinder for one axis and then an aspheric to get a blazing red squarish beam.
I really like the low Vf for these red diodes. Our violet to green diodes can't touch them in terms of efficiency which makes them great for compact hosts (that's how I like it). Below is a plot of efficiency (proportion of output power that is light) versus optical output power ( x-axis) with multiple diodes for comparison. Sample size is 1 for each diode so take that for what it's worth.
This plot is an updated version from my thread here: A Tale of Two Metrics

 

[CDBEAM777]

Thanks.

Yeah, I may try refining the setup to see if I can clean things up a bit but there are so many things that need to simultaneously be lined up perfectly. At least it's a fun challenge.
From my recent experience building lasers, I think some of the newer diode modules have poorer centering tolerances than older modules. I am finding it more difficult to achieve a "straight beam" with a regular ol' M9x0.5 lens.
In addition, I find that the copper modules are soft and squishy and will sometimes deform when pressing a diode. When this happens, the diode scrapes some metal from the module and it builds up in the mounting socket and results in an off-center or crooked diode. At that point I have to remove the diode and the module is trashed. :yabbem: So I switched back to the nickel-plated brass modules. I'm having fewer problems with those.

I'm rambling. The point is: I concur that how you set your diode is important and these little things may escape your notice at first... but the tiniest misalignment can give very disappointing results if you're an obsessive perfectionist like me.

It seems everyone linked the same eBay seller so I take it that's the best source for now.
These diodes look pretty cool. I want one so I can stick a cylinder for one axis and then an aspheric to get a blazing red squarish beam.
I really like the low Vf for these red diodes. Our violet to green diodes can't touch them in terms of efficiency which makes them great for compact hosts (that's how I like it). Below is a plot of efficiency (proportion of output power that is light) versus optical output power ( x-axis) with multiple diodes for comparison. Sample size is 1 for each diode so take that for what it's worth.
This plot is an updated version from my thread here: A Tale of Two Metrics

Nice Chart !!!!! Thanx !!! Well....Sounds like you completely understand the very demanding nature of near perfect alignment with these C-Lenses !!!

The alignment....is just a bitch....and....when you shrink the build down....you have even more a challenge !!!

Good luck !! I still say...throw a EFL2mm Coli in the pot !!! The closer to the junction....the quicker the optical correction occurs....and the better the final results....which....are far from perfect....but....acceptable !!

Oh...Yea...I have run into alignment problems with the Press Fit Module !!!..They are the smallest package....They are inexpensive.....They provide likely the best Thermal Transfer from LD to Module Case....BUT....4 alignment....they can suck !!!

RC.....TWELVE (12) Bond Wires !!!!! WOW !! That may be a record !!

Beam Out

 

[logsquared]

Has anybody done a optical power vs I graph for the HL63283HD yet? I'm curious where the knee is at.