NUBM07E 465nm 2.9W Diode Test

[polishedball]

so who sells the 6X lens I am getting nowhere near the results with 4x.

[MIIKKKLLLL]

I have still a few sets of 6x cyl. lenses, with broadband AR coating.

Send you a PM with more information .

[CDBEAM]

OK.....I have done some experiments with the 2mm EFL lens from LSP. I my opinion, this lens does not perform as well as the G2 lens. Best obtainable Farfield divergence was 9.95 mm at the beam target distance of 28' ( 8.534M ). And...there was much more spill shadow above and below the main beam. IMNSHO...the 2mm is a No Go.

I returned to using the G2 collimation lens and spent time carefully adjusting the 6X Cylindrical lenses to obtain a minimum divergence. These cylindrical lenses were obtained from Edison. At 8.534M, the slow axis presented a geometry of just 7.77 mm. This calculates to a divergence of just 0.676 mRad. This is outstanding. See the attached pic. In my opinion, this LD is Tamed !

Let's dive into the fascinating topic of 6X Cylindrical lenses ! I have been a fan of the 6X version....er...ah....for years....way back into the day of the early optical experiments in the Holy Grail thread !! Now...theory sez that one should just be able to obtain more magnification by increasing the lens to lens distance....well...all I know is that I have typically been able to obtain better results with the 6X than 4X. Please do not try to convince me otherwise. Experience trumps the book !

Now...for those of you who have not fallen asleep...Not only do I prefer 6X Cylindricals...but...I like'em bigger and of equal height ( until recently ).
First...I like'em bigger....because the smaller ones are harder to hold on to...and seem to jump outa my fingers !

Second.... If you may recall...at one time my method was to physically clamp the Cylindrical lenses into position by using a top plate piece to apply downward pressure with four (4) bolts to hold /clamp the lenses down. Well....I have abandoned that method in place of 1 Hr set Epoxy. The secret to using epoxy is...less is Best !!!....and with a 1 Hr set, one has time to move the glass around to the optimal position....and walk away !! As any of you who use Cylindrical lenses...a 0.05mm does make a difference. Since I have recently made a change to my method of mounting Cylindrical lenses ... the clamping method has gone the way of the Dodo....I no longer demand lenses of equal height... but I still have'em in stock.

Third...IMNSHO...the larger glass delivers more of an area for the Sweet spot to exist....maybe this is baloney...but it sure seem a less arduous a task to align the larger Cylindericals...vs. the smaller version of the same magnification.

Dancing with the Glass...is getting...tedious ! I must obtain some miniature translation units....like the big guys !!! Oh...and the distance from the G2 to the first Plano Concave is 10 mm. This distance delivers a 3.5mm x 3.5mm geometry at the Nearfield plane. Good to fit on the scanner mirrors. So...there you have it.

As to power....well of course this depends on what you Amp you feed it. At 5A....I am getting about
4.9W after optics...Good to GO !!!....and a real beauty of a color line to boot !!! This LD is a real keeper !! Beam Out=======>

[logsquared]

Dancing with the Glass...is getting...tedious ! I must obtain some miniature translation units....like the big guys !!! Oh...and the distance from the G2 to the first Plano Concave is 15mm. This distance delivers a 3.5mm x 3.5mm geometry at the Nearfield plane. Good to fit on the scanner mirrors. So...there you have it.

I have found that a making a "c" channel helps tremendously. It works well with the Edison lenses because the optical axis is close to a perfect 90 from the edges. Other lenses I have tried are not usually as "square" and I use a slip fit barrel in a slotted holder to get the rotation/focus correct.

[planters]

I think two of these on a good heat sink without a TEC and combined using a PBS and a 1/2 wave plate. is a really good balance. I would add the telescope and a spatial filter to allow the spherical aberration correction as well. Without knife edging, lenses work better and with the telescope, even an increase to 5mm x 5mm or even 10mm x 10mm will mean a substantially better far field beam. I think this is now within reach:
https://www.laserworld.us/laser-show...s/outdoor.html

[logsquared]

Where to find a suitable waveplate? Plus the problem of the drastic wavelength shift with current. I was thinking of skipping the waveplate and correcting each diode independently, then hitting the cube. I can expand to 9mm if I use my big aperture scanners. I know I will have a slight "+ sign" effect in the far field. I am wondering how it would effect brightness considering the divergence will be so low with a 9mm aperture?

[CDBEAM]

Yea....Thanx LS I just dug out my optical table.....and a single Axis translation stage I had !!! The stage is on the larger size ( 5" x 5" x 2 1/4" !!!....but free !!!....Maybe I will pop for a few smaller ones !!! Yikes...I gotta at least try to keep up !!!! Danc'in around with lenses works....but...what a PITA !!

Planters....I know you are now on the trail of Big Sky displays....and this diode...as a single....plus two 1.25W of 520's will kick ass....but the bottleneck in high relief is now really ...RED !!! MMMMmmm...5W @ 470, 2.5W @ 520....and Red.....Balance at 10W of Red ????? Balance based on the old ratio of 10:5:2.5 R:B:G That would put out....17 1/2 W...Respectable for an outdoor venue....IIRC Where do we get 10W O'Red ???? That's a lot of P-73's !!! and a great number of single mode !!!!!! Well....if others can do it....so can we.....Full Speed Ahead....Damn the Photon Torpedo's !!!

Anyway....the 07E is tamed.....when are we gona get a big red bad boy LD ????

[drm916]

I have found that a making a "c" channel helps tremendously. It works well with the Edison lenses because the optical axis is close to a perfect 90 from the edges. Other lenses I have tried are not usually as "square" and I use a slip fit barrel in a slotted holder to get the rotation/focus correct.

Man. That quad red mount with C groove lens holder is pretty nice. I wish a quad build kit was available (for those of us with little milling skills) for the 638s. That thing looks tiny! Good work.

[swamidog]

i love the fact that you're no longer bothering to measure the actual spot... just the burn spot on the wall.

OK.....I have done some experiments with the 2mm EFL lens from LSP. I my opinion, this lens does not perform as well as the G2 lens. Best obtainable Farfield divergence was 9.95 mm at the beam target distance of 28' ( 8.534M ). And...there was much more spill shadow above and below the main beam. IMNSHO...the 2mm is a No Go.

I returned to using the G2 collimation lens and spent time carefully adjusting the 6X Cylindrical lenses to obtain a minimum divergence. These cylindrical lenses were obtained from Edison. At 8.534M, the slow axis presented a geometry of just 7.77 mm. This calculates to a divergence of just 0.676 mRad. This is outstanding. See the attached pic. In my opinion, this LD is Tamed !

Let's dive into the fascinating topic of 6X Cylindrical lenses ! I have been a fan of the 6X version....er...ah....for years....way back into the day of the early optical experiments in the Holy Grail thread !! Now...theory sez that one should just be able to obtain more magnification by increasing the lens to lens distance....well...all I know is that I have typically been able to obtain better results with the 6X than 4X. Please do not try to convince me otherwise. Experience trumps the book !

Now...for those of you who have not fallen asleep...Not only do I prefer 6X Cylindricals...but...I like'em bigger and of equal height ( until recently ).
First...I like'em bigger....because the smaller ones are harder to hold on to...and seem to jump outa my fingers !

Second.... If you may recall...at one time my method was to physically clamp the Cylindrical lenses into position by using a top plate piece to apply downward pressure with four (4) bolts to hold /clamp the lenses down. Well....I have abandoned that method in place of 1 Hr set Epoxy. The secret to using epoxy is...less is Best !!!....and with a 1 Hr set, one has time to move the glass around to the optimal position....and walk away !! As any of you who use Cylindrical lenses...a 0.05mm does make a difference. Since I have recently made a change to my method of mounting Cylindrical lenses ... the clamping method has gone the way of the Dodo....I no longer demand lenses of equal height... but I still have'em in stock.

Third...IMNSHO...the larger glass delivers more of an area for the Sweet spot to exist....maybe this is baloney...but it sure seem a less arduous a task to align the larger Cylindericals...vs. the smaller version of the same magnification.

Dancing with the Glass...is getting...tedious ! I must obtain some miniature translation units....like the big guys !!! Oh...and the distance from the G2 to the first Plano Concave is 10 mm. This distance delivers a 3.5mm x 3.5mm geometry at the Nearfield plane. Good to fit on the scanner mirrors. So...there you have it.

As to power....well of course this depends on what you Amp you feed it. At 5A....I am getting about
4.9W after optics...Good to GO !!!....and a real beauty of a color line to boot !!! This LD is a real keeper !! Beam Out=======>

[drm916]

i love the fact that you're no longer bothering to measure the actual spot... just the burn spot on the wall.

I was thinking the same thing. Probably much easier to measure. Sometimes those spots are so bright they are hard to measure.