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

ArcticMyst Security by Avery | Browser Hide by Avery

Two WL Spyder 3 Arctics Measured

plexus

plexus

0
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Messages
441
Points
28
Here are two graphs, each from two different arctics. These tests were done using the Kenometer Pro LPM:

- 5 min interval
- 200mW start threshold
- aperture to thermopile: 15cm
- no lens cap on the lasers
- freshly charged stock WL 18650's
- ambient air temp 25C

Also measured:

- with the pass-through cap on (coated flat glass), output went from 847 to 746 (-11.9%)

- with the "training lens" on (neutral density filter), output went from 842 to 195 (-76.9%)

- pass through the included WL safety glasses), output went from 950 to 20 (-97.9%)

so the goggles are still not eye-safe but with the training lens the output @ 950mW "bare" would be <5mW.


arctic34503-5min.png


arctic34573-5min.png


arctic-meter-1.JPG


arctic-meter-2.JPG
 
Last edited:





Thanks for that power meter check, great stuff.

I've removed the actual lens from my "training lens" cap so when I use that, instead of the "full power" one, the beam is unobstructed as in your tests, yet still protected and maintaining the original look of the unit.

The thought of ~100mW bouncing back into the diode worried me a bit, but no more :)
 
bbshamsa said:
Thanks for that power meter check, great stuff.

I've removed the actual lens from my "training lens" cap so when I use that, instead of the "full power" one, the beam is unobstructed as in your tests, yet still protected and maintaining the original look of the unit.

The thought of ~100mW bouncing back into the diode worried me a bit, but no more :)
Click to expand...

good idea. I think I'll do the same.
 
+1

It's easy, just unscrew the retainer ring holding the glass in, and you have some protection for the focusing lens with no power loss.
 
Good metering and units. I just ordered a LPM, will be interesting to see what mine does. I wonder what a better material could have been used for the front protective lens. Going to test with the lens off but play with and store it with lens on, dont think I would notice the extra 100mw.

Anyone know if the Spartan comes with a front protective lens or just hole straight to lens assembly?

Edit: Someone posted back to this direct question in 445nm topics that Spartans come with a no protective lens up front, hence apples to apples looks like they both have similar output.
 
Last edited:
That's great evidence. One Arctic plot I've seen over 1,000mW. That makes it about 2% of the figures I've seen posted.

Build your own. This was an early test plot. Further plots showed that even after 3 mins it was still above 1,000mW. After 6 minutes it only just dropped below. This for a host less than half the size of the Arctic.

1qsh3k.jpg


Hey ho. Arctic's are still cool I guess. Do I like them? Not at all.

M
:)
 
plexus said:
Here are two graphs, each from two different arctics. These tests were done using the Kenometer Pro LPM:

- 5 min interval
- 200mW start threshold
- aperture to thermopile: 15cm
- no lens cap on the lasers
- freshly charged stock WL 18650's
- ambient air temp 25C

Also measured:

- with the pass-through cap on (coated flat glass), output went from 847 to 746 (-11.9%)

- with the "training lens" on (neutral density filter), output went from 842 to 195 (-76.9%)

- pass through the included WL safety glasses), output went from 950 to 20 (-97.9%)

so the goggles are still not eye-safe but with the training lens the output @ 950mW "bare" would be <5mW.
Click to expand...

More lies from WL that these goggles offer suitable protection then?


That's great evidence though. One Arctic plot I've seen over 1,000mW. That makes it about 2% of the figures I've seen posted that actually meet the stated output.

Build your own. Here is an early test plot. Further plots showed that even after 3 mins it was still above 1,000mW. After 6 minutes it only just dropped below. This for a host less than half the size of the Arctic.

1qsh3k.jpg


Hey ho. Arctic's are still cool I guess. Do I like them and the quality? Not at all.

M
:)
 
Morgan said:
More lies from WL that these goggles offer suitable protection then?


That's great evidence though. One Arctic plot I've seen over 1,000mW. That makes it about 2% of the figures I've seen posted that actually meet the stated output.

Build your own. Here is an early test plot. Further plots showed that even after 3 mins it was still above 1,000mW. After 6 minutes it only just dropped below. This for a host less than half the size of the Arctic.



Hey ho. Arctic's are still cool I guess. Do I like them and the quality? Not at all.

M
:)
Click to expand...

HOLY DOUBLE POST BATMAN!

Just for apples to apples sake, how many metered Arctic post have you seen (have you seen 50, 1/50=2%), were the other 49 out of 50 Arctics metered with the protective lens (not trainer) in the cap or no?

The Arctic comes with both training and protective lens and one is easily removable. Do you really knock WL for shipping their laser with the extra protection that if used reduces output?

Build your own laser.. Do you cook there own pizzas for scratch, homemade is a lot better than delivered? It's real easy, but so is calling Papa Johns. I'm happy to see your DIY laser is uber fantastic but I prefer commercially available lasers at this time.

I don’t poo poo on your pizza before it's delivered, please don’t poo poo on the Arctic.

Oh, as underspec as the WL shades are, DIY lasers do not come with any.
 
Last edited:
ppctx said:
*Something about the Spartan being sent without training lens*
Click to expand...

CNI didn't cut costs at all. If the person wants a lower power they could just buy the 400mW model Spartan or the 200mW 'pen' style.

On topic: Nice graphs, Plexus.
 
ppctx said:
HOLY DOUBLE POST BATMAN!

Just for apples to apples sake, how many metered Arctic post have you seen (have you seen 50, 1/50=2%), were the other 49 out of 50 Arctics metered with the protective lens (not trainer) in the cap or no?

The Arctic comes with both training and protective lens and one is easily removable. Do you really knock WL for shipping their laser with the extra protection that if used reduces output?

Build your own laser.. Do you cook there own pizzas for scratch, homemade is a lot better than delivered? It's real easy, but so is calling Papa Johns. I'm happy to see your DIY laser is uber fantastic but I prefer commercially available lasers at this time.

I don’t poo poo on your pizza before it's delivered, please don’t poo poo on the Arctic.

Oh, as underspec as the WL shades are, DIY lasers do not come with any.
Click to expand...

DIY laser cost: $105
DL goggles that actually work: $24
Total: $129

Artic cost $200

Math fail.

Your pizza analogy is also incorrect, maybe if some of those pizza's were delivered without any cheese, base or toppings and just a box, it would equate to an Arctic, since pizza's can't not work.
 
Since the review thread originally posted by Daguin of my Arctic is now deleted, I figured I'd post my readings of my arctic in here as well. This is without the front lens (they call it full power)

Arctic%20Graph%20no%20lens.jpg
 
I got 850mw with no front glass and WL supplied 18650's. Still trying to figure out how to log. One battery with some time on it output higher than a freash charged one? Will like to get some quality batteries and see what it does.
 
i've personally noticed no difference between the output on quality batteries vs. the supplied battery. I'd like to say that this is a linear driver inside this thing but I'm not too sure that it's not heat causing the output to drop down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.





Back
Top