Scannermax 506s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by planters

I am excited about this progress, but frustrated by the one off nature of these systems. Until the Pangolin amps can be provided with these systems this seems almost amateurish. As much as I like the cutting edge of these scanner motors, I do appreciate that as long as I don't need documentation or a well constructed web site, if I want an EMS 8000 I can just buy it...now.

---

I understand what you're saying but I respectfully disagree. In the gaming world, I don't know of many companies that don't do beta testing. You can build and test your product as much as you like to bring it to perfection but if you really want to break it, you need to send it out to a handful of people and let them have at it. You'll get honest feedback of what worked, what didn't and why it did or didn't. You'll get feedback on what they liked, didn't like and what they would like to see on the product. Maybe this comes down to the status of availability which, I will say, does seem to be in flux but I honestly see these as still in the beta testing phase and to me, it seems professional enough.

Just my .02

Abosolom,

Your point is a good one. These are still beta phase, but my frustration is that I don't know what is the status of the full product? If the drivers were being sent with the motors and the system was going through a beta phase then that seems reasonable and I would expect that. But, this seems less useful if the interested user finds some drivers (is there a short list of appropriate choices?), sends them off to Bill for a few modifications and then receives the hybrid system back for testing. What is being tested? Pangolin can and might have run these motors (I suspect they are making thousands) with a few candidate driver sets and if they want to get a few options out to end users for marketing/testing then this I would understand as well. But,the current approach actually does seems amateurish.

I would like to get my hands on a pair or these and see how well they do, but as much as I criticize Tom for EMS's lack of documentation, this is in some ways worse. Will mine work as yours or will differences in our selection of drivers cause one to way outperform the other? And with Pangolin stating that they plan to provide drivers for these motors will these differences between yours and mine prove moot to other potential users? With all the focus on the motors, the drivers seem less evolved. Bill has said they will have some pretty impressive drivers for these motors as in the small "credit card" driver for the 506 and the digital tuning for the Saturn.

So, not a big deal. I'll just continue to wait and when there is something close to the complete package then I'll try to get a pair.

I think part of the amp development problem is probably the sheer scanner numbers needed for OEM production.

Bill said elsewhere about having orders for 25,000 in addition to the original 200,000 per year order (that has to be filled under contract). To go from zero production to 225,000 per year, with probably at least 50,000 of those in demand immediately (the additional 25K + probably 25K of the contract order), is a big demand.

When the CEO of the company is hand soldering these to make production numbers up then it gives you a pretty good picture of the current supply bottleneck.

Whereas I too am wanting to see the new digital amps in the hands of us all, sales of complete systems to a few hundred to enthusiasts pale in comparison to 225,000 firm orders. So it's entirely understandable that until OEM bare demand eases or production is ramped, that luxuries such as amp development / production and sale of retail packaged systems are going to take a back seat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stiffler

Do you have any power supply recommendations?

---

Today I will be shipping systems to The Doctor and also Absolom. It was Absolom who graciously provided amplifiers for The Doctor. These amplifiers are PT20 -- same ones surprisingly used by an industrial client. Also, Absolom provided power supplies for both systems. Both of them were low-cost Chinese types -- I think around 70 watts. In the case of the power supply for The Doctor, it was only a +/-18V supply. Maybe 60 watts. But in any event the performance is good and solid. So, really, no super-special supplies are needed for these scanners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WolfMax

But if there are 2 types with differing performance (and no doubt different price), how are we to know what we can expect if we buy a set when we don't know which set people are talking about?

---

WolfMax, so far everyone is getting the economy version. The PRO version is not compatible with Chinese amps and such but the Economy version is. So it's easy to get the Economy one working with other people's amps.

However, with that being said, the position sensor performance is better than all other galvos that I have seen up until now -- in terms of signal to noise ratio, and better than most in terms of drift and linearity. So far only a few industrial clients have needed something better.

And the speed is exactly the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by planters

For large mirrors and slow scan speeds I understand the 506 is actually better than the Saturn due to the torsional stiffness of its thick and short rotor shaft.

---

Not necessarily true. One of my favorite sayings these days is "A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing"... It's true that the 506 has the shortest shaft, and has very high torsional stiffness and bending-mode stiffness. But this doesn't mean 506 would be "actually better than Saturn" for any particular purpose other than economy. In the case of Saturn, the torque-to-inertia ratio is higher, so so it means patterns can be projected larger at the same speed, or faster at the same angle. The Compact 506 is a great inexpensive scanner which can drive unusually large mirrors with no notch filter. This means that even the servo driver (scanner amp) can be simplified, further helping to reduce cost. But if someone is looking for better performance than Saturn would always be the best choice. A notch filter *may* (or may not) be needed, but our amplifiers have two of them build in, which can be enabled or disabled as needed. (FWIW: we did not use a notch filter to get to 90K on Saturn!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by norty303

and can now get the 506's up to 50k with the standard mirrors!

---

Correct. And what Norty means by "standard mirrors" is our 3mm mirror set. HOWEVER, I could also tune up to 50K even with Norty's large mirrors, and could tune past 60K with our small mirrors. The problem is what's called a dichotomy between small-signal and large-signal performance. As you tune faster and faster, Physics dictates that the "small signal" gets smaller and smaller. This is why higher tuning always requires a smaller scan angle.

Norty sent four sets of amps and so I have tuned two of his sets to 50K and two of them to around 36K (just to edge-out 30K scanners and help things to look a bit sharper). So Norty will be able to try both -- even side by side -- and then choose the one he wants with nearly zero effort on his part. I am sure Norty will report back his findings on what he likes and why. This may serve as a guide for future orders.

With the DT-40 amps we could easily get 50K on the 506. On PT-20 amps we could easily get to 36K. In fact the pair I will be sending to Absolom is tuned to 36K. I am sure folks will be making videos and sharing their findings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by norty303

Other improvements/changes are that the mounting block now has M3 threads in the bottom, and some holes repositioned slightly. So the user feedback does work! :)

---

Correct! The very first change we made was to put M3 screws on the bottom. Plus, all of our engineering drawings have "dual dimensions" (both English and Metric).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by planters

Until the Pangolin amps can be provided with these systems this seems almost amateurish.

---

Well, see, one thing to realize and it is a constant in the Pangolin universe. We try to spend our time where it will do the maximum amount of good for the maximum number of people.

If we didn't deliver anything until our amps were ready, then nobody would benefit (until our amps were ready). Scanner amps have existed for eons. I made two award-winning servos in 1992 and 1995, and people have been making their own (mostly copies of what I did back in 1992) ever since. So there are amplifiers to be found all over. Kvant, HB, Laserworld, SwissLas, and other projector manufacturers make their own amps. So it means that these are instant customers for our scanners (who have all placed orders).

Also, folks here on PL who have amps to spare have been sending them and then receiving back scanners better than they ever had, even when driven by their old amps.

So by doing it our way, we started helping people immediately.

Sure, not every single person in the world can fully benefit immediately, but that should not take away from the many who can, and who have up until now.

Because of the approach we've taken, we have received orders for 25,000 pieces of Compact 506. So we're helping a whole lot of people! Now the main challenge is manufacturing that many. We're hiring production people if you know of people in the Orlando area...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by planters

if I want an EMS 8000 I can just buy it...now.

---

Sure you can. No question!

I have said it before and will continue to say it -- kind of a mantra. We're not trying to be all things to all people. We're trying to be a certain thing to a certain group of people. If 8000s will do what you want and you can afford them, then GREAT! Go for it! We're not going to feel bad about other companies selling things.

What I don't like is the misrepresentations on the part of EMS -- saying that they can hit certain speeds at certain angles and with certain beam diameters, but when physics and geometry alone dictate are impossible. (For example the advertisement that has existed on their web site for years that states they are using 6.8 by x 12mm mirrors for 5mm beams, when a 5mm beam won't even fit onto a 6.8mm mirror at the nominal 45-degree angle of incidence, let alone allow you to scan a 5mm beam with that size mirror...)

Bill

Don't get me wrong. I think your willingness to extend yourself to provide these customized, early systems is great. For my own part I am happy to wait for a system that is close to what you plan to provide when your drivers are ready as well. I wish more companies were willing to serve the needs of all their relationships and not just the few, big contracts. Kudos.

Regarding EMS, there is very little documentation. If you want to know how well these will work you only need to buy these and test them yourself. This reminds me a little of Nancy Pelosi. Anyway, that is at least better than Nutfield that does provide more extensive documentation. It's just made up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by planters

Don't get me wrong. I think your willingness to extend yourself to provide these customized, early systems is great.

---

In the case of Steve Roberts and Norty, those were "early systems" -- made from the original batch of 20 prototypes, including circuit boards made on our milling machine. But in the case of the next batch sent to Norty, Stiffler, Doctor, Absolom, Kecked and a few others, these are pulled from the last production run, so they're not really "early units" but rather production units.

Modifying the amps has proven an interesting exercise as well. I'll be making a kind of manual to detail what to do with the DT40 and PT20 amps to get them to work with our scanners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by planters

For my own part I am happy to wait for a system that is close to what you plan to provide when your drivers are ready as well.

---

Well see, Planters, you're a special customer with special needs. Simply grabbing existing amps and pairing them with our '506 scanners could be done very quickly and inexpensively. But this wouldn't really get you where you and I both want you to go.

And the problem isn't delivery, or delivery with "our amps". We'll be delivering 75 Saturn 1 systems to a large theme park client, so production is not a problem. But the '506 and Saturn 1 isn't quite going to do it for you either. You want really big beams to move really quickly. The '506 will move really big beams, but not really quickly. The Saturn 1 will move small beams really quickly, but not big beams.

To get you where we both want you to go, it might actually take a scanner that is initially customized -- something whose physical size between Saturn 3 and Saturn 5 with custom-made mirrors. I am interested in that development, and excited to get started on that because of what it should be able to do, and because something that satisfies you should also satisfy other customers too. The only problem is, with the large orders for '506 that have come in since the last two trade shows, I really don't have any spare time to do the experimentations necessary to get you where you are going.

Another problem is that you've also played with EMS scanners and made a video. Why is this a problem? Because on the video you didn't say that Tom's mirrors are not fully sufficient to do what you want either (probably because you didn't realize it at the time). You also said you were very impressed with the EMS scanners. So now recorded history has these comments forever.

Again, why is this a problem? Well, if we put Tom's mirrors on our Saturn 1 scanners they would deliver better performance than what you have seen with EMS. BUT, those mirrors are completely inappropriate for Saturn 1 and I would also make the argument that they are completely inappropriate for EMS as well. (I have contemplated removing Tom's mirrors, putting them on our Saturn 1 and sending you the system just so you can see this for yourself, see the difference, and especially see the difference in heat, both at the scanner and at the amp...)

But there are real lessons here. Are completely inappropriate mirrors really acceptable to the marketplace? Would even astute and observant folks like Planters be fooled by sub-standard engineering? And if this is indeed the case, what are the marketing implications of all of this? These are some of the questions we're asking ourselves right now...

The mirrors are the most important part of the scanning system. It all starts with the mirrors, because the mirrors must be moved by the motor, so you need to know what needs to be reflected, before figuring out how to reflect it. So if you use sub-standard mirrors whose inertia is really around 1/3 what it needs to be, and length 1/2 of what it would really need to be to get the job done, then sure, such mirrors can be driven faster. No question. But if they really won't do what the customer said they want done (moving big beams over large angles) then what have we really accomplished, other than fooling or cheating the clients?

But again, if these sub-standard mirrors are really acceptable, then we'll simply place similar mirrors on our Saturn 1 and be done with it... But if that is really the case, then we'll be faced with a dichotomy. Do we exaggerate our capability to customers as EMS has, and claim that this is a 5mm system, or do we tell the truth and say that these are really probably 3.5mm mirrors over narrow angle?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by planters

Regarding EMS, there is very little documentation.

---

For sure. Through customers, we have acquired everything Tom sells (and continue to do that).

Before people accuse me of being motivated to "copy EMS technology", just go to our web site, download one of our data sheets, and look at the list of patents on the final page. The patents listed have a complete description of what we do including engineering drawings. They are public information and can be viewed by anyone. And if anyone wants to come to Pangolin I'll be happy to show them exactly how we build scanners and what's inside our scanners and also what's inside all competitor scanners for comparison. (Steve Roberts has done this and we'll be happy to have others as well.)

Most companies get versions of their competitors' products for comparison. We've never been interested in doing this in the software realm of things, but for scanners we've been very interested in learning how our competitors treat their clients and potential clients (email communication and the like) and also to verify that the companies can actually do what they say they can do.

In the case of Cambridge, their specs are right on. In the case of EMS, there are no specifications at all (it makes me wonder if Tom knows how to quantify the specs in the first place) aside from blustery remarks like "5mm 60K" and most recently "90K" with nothing more than their word to back it up. So far we have not been able to get EMS scanners to do what Tom says they do...

But regarding lack of documentation, I don't even think there was a single sheet of paper that came with the EMS scanners... I hope the customer know what they're doing!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by planters

If you want to know how well these will work you only need to buy these and test them yourself. This reminds me a little of Nancy Pelosi.

---

I had to read this a few times before I completely understood where you were coming from. You're not saying that *I* Bill Benner, need to buy EMS (you already knew I had from previous conversations) but rather that -- since Tom doesn't really have a web site with specs on a data sheet, a customer would have to buy the scanners just to see what they did.

My response to you is -- well, yes and no. Literally for years EMS has had a marketing document on their web site that is full of exaggerations and marketing hyperbole. I already pointed out the clear and obvious exaggeration about the 5mm mirror, and there are others as well -- like how this is the most efficient. Problem is, EMS apparently doesn't know how to rate motor efficiency (hint: KT/ (R)^0.5 ), but the bigger problem is that scanning is really pretty complicated and technical, and so people who are not fully up to the tech will be easily fooled. That's a real problem for us! Do we start exaggerating as well, or do we stick with the truth and try to point out when competitors are exaggerating? (So far we've opted for the latter, but if the marketplace continues to be fooled and continues to believe exaggerated claims, then we'll be forced to adapt our marketing as well -- just as laser manufacturers have had to do in light of laser power specifications of certain manufacturers...)

I'd love to help you Planters! But I'm a real perfectionist as I think you are too. I'd want to deliver a system that is really engineered to do what you need done and right now, I don't have time to do that engineering. But if something sub-standard will really do it for you, then hey we can deliver that pretty quickly ;-)

Give Tom's mirrors another look and report back whether they're adequate or not. (Just doing hand calculations I can tell that you'll start over-filling the Y mirror at +10 degrees optical, and overfill the X mirror at +17 degrees optical.) If these sub-standard mirrors will really do what you need done, then we'll simply un-mount ours, mount them on a pair of Saturn 1 and ship. But honestly, I really don't think these mirrors do what you say you want to do -- unless it will turn out that your beams are really substantially smaller than 5mm!

Bill

PS: Sorry for the long post -- I normally try to keep them short ;-)

Quote:

---

To get you where we both want you to go, it might actually take a scanner that is initially customized -- something whose physical size between Saturn 3 and Saturn 5 with custom-made mirrors. I am interested in that development, and excited to get started on that because of what it should be able to do, and because something that satisfies you should also satisfy other customers too.

---

I agree. Although this might take some time the compliment to a better, faster and smaller scanner system with the 506 will be a scanner system that will excel at around the 5mm square beam dimensions. With the current state of the art in all solid state RGB laser systems, low cost 10 W sources are easily available and with 25 W systems within a year, each into low divergence 5mm beams, there will be a big market for this capability. If there will be a wait, that's OK. In the meantime I can throw a pair of PT 40's in the "Saturn" projector for the LEM in Boston.

Quote:

---

You also said you were very impressed with the EMS scanners. So now recorded history has these comments forever.

---

I agree. And I still am when comparing these with the 4000 series I own and the PT 40 scanners in my other projectors. Imagine my ECSTASY with what we both hope you can provide. Seriously though, one of the reasons these undersized mirrors can appear to operate "tolerably" well is just how complex the science of the entire projection process is. You are so right when you say that the scanning process is not trivial. For example, the projection screen I use for testing these machines was prepared by my local crew with 6 coats of a thin reflective "paint" called "magic mud" In the AVS community it is an accepted treatment to produce a highly reflective surface with close to a neutral color response and a low gain near 1.0. As the scan angle begins to exceed the limits you cite, the effect is a progressive drop off in the brightness of an image that is already dimming as the angle of incidence on the screen increases. This is with a room devoid of haze (at this time) and so the beam itself is not being even more selectively attenuated by having to pass through more atmosphere on its way the the screen. Imagine an even less optimal, asymmetric, club environment.

This is not an excuse to stop perusing excellence, but an attempt to explain how low quality can compete.

Quote:

---

But if something sub-standard will really do it for you, then hey we can deliver that pretty quickly ;-)

---

No comment.

I am glad you took the time to reread my other comment. You got it right. And regarding honesty...you got that right as well. When there are alternatives out there that can be tested by anyone who wants to then any misrepresentations will soon be widely known. The PT scanners are as good as the DT scanners and cost 1/2 as much.

So, take the time you need, and good luck!

Hi all,

I just prepared a document that details what I do with DT-40 and PT-20 amps. This document can also serve as principals for modifying other drivers. You can find the document here:
http://www.pangolin.com/_Files/C506_AmpMods.pdf

We'll be shipping to a bunch of PL members tomorrow, so many will receive over the weekend. I am hoping that there will be some quick comments. I'm certainly happy with the performance we're seeing out of these scanners.

@Planters, if you've got some PT amps that you'd be willing to part with, send them to me and I'll mod it and pair it with a pair of our Compact 506 with our current mirrors made for 5mm square laser beams. We can easily achieve 30K and, as an experiment, I tuned Norty's up to 50K. So it's possible to get to 50K even with these large mirrors. The problem is that, although it's 50K for small angles (probably 3 degrees for those large mirrors) it's not 50K for large angles. Nevertheless, large-angle performance will remain at around 30K and the amp naturally down-gears as it needs to. Things are never uncontrolled. Certainly for beam shows this size scanner and this size mirror and this level of performance would be more than acceptable.

Bill

Might be worth adding the amp mods required for Kvant LM scanners as well Bill as quite a few people have Kvants with LM's.