# Matt's Mega 445nm Laser



## matt304 (Jul 20, 2010)

Some of you may have been following the Arctic Spyder thread and saw my posts about building my own 445nm which I will begin producing. It is the 445nm to outdo all other 445s.

I am focusing on using a 3xCR123 or 2x18650 host for the highest power device, a 1x18650 medium power level device, as well as possibly a low-powered version in a 1x14500 host.

For the 3xCR123/2x18650 host, I use a Shark Buck 2A driver, for output of >1.5 watts.

For the 14500/1x18650, I would use a more common lower powered driver such as the Microflex V5.

I will be machining my heat sinks out of pure 101 grade copper.

Help is needed in selecting possible hosts to use. I am looking for light hosts that are more slender instead of bulky, hosts that look like they could be a laser. The cheaper the better.

I have one 3xCR123 light currently on the way which I am going to try and build a sink for: http://www1.dealextreme.com/productimages/sku_11919_1.jpg It is found at DealExtreme. I am keeping my fingers crossed, because that design really will be a tough one, having a light engine instead of pill.

As far as a 14500 host, I am not sure yet.

I am open to any suggestions for lights you may want me to look at for a possible host. I will post any more choices I come up with as well.

-Host Selections-

Low Power 14500: ?

Medium power 1x18650: Trustfire TR-801






High Power: ?


----------



## StarHalo (Jul 20, 2010)

What about a C cell Maglite? That would definitely simplify things and keep it cheap..


----------



## Advil (Jul 20, 2010)

would a 2x18650 be too big? could be very cool and wouldn't need recharging very often


----------



## matt304 (Jul 20, 2010)

I'd like to keep it into the small-medium size of light. A C-cell light gets on the big end for laser.

Not that it wouldn't work, I just think it would appeal to more people if left smaller. I noticed that some people were unhappy when they found out the size of WL Arctic. So I'm trying to stay out of that boat.

What I have considered doing is somehow using the light engine itself to act as a sled for the driver. I believe that if I turn the reflector down so it's almost gone, then use the lower brass portion to mount the driver on, and attach the copper sink, that could be a good design.

Here is about the largest size host I have considered. This is a 2x18650. That would provide some serious juice for a laser. http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.4314 Just ordered one to have a look at.

Edit: Advil, ironically I posted about the same thing not realizing your post. Yes, 2x18650 would be pretty neat I think!


----------



## Yavox (Jul 20, 2010)

Are you building one piece for yourself or this is supposed to be at last one batch of lasers available for purchase for the rest of us?

If the second option, when are you going to have a few first pieces ready?


----------



## matt304 (Jul 20, 2010)

I'm building one or two designs for myself to test, then I will be producing batches of them to sell.

Right now, here is what is being waited on.

I ordered the first host last night from Dealextreme in China. That will probably not show up until late next week I'm guessing.

Once the host shows up, I currently have 1" diameter copper stock to work with. If the host requires a larger size, which it just might, I will then need to order that larger copper stock. That will delay it another few business days.

I have everything else that's needed. Now, this is just the delay assuming I can theoretically make a design to replace a light engine. If there are problems where it just doesn't work the way I want it to, I will need to order more lights to try, further delaying by about 1.5-2 weeks.

Shipping from China is a pain!


----------



## Juggernaut (Jul 20, 2010)

A 14500 would be awesome! To bad I already bought The one from Wicked lasers. Any idea on the 14500’s power level?
 
Also, what takes up so much space in the WL’s one? It’s only a single 18650, how could you make a 2x 18650 any smaller?


----------



## jellydonut (Jul 20, 2010)

My fantasy 445nm laser is a P60-type laser module that goes into CR123-powered light hosts.

I don't even know if that would be possible though.


----------



## bshanahan14rulz (Jul 21, 2010)

Possible kit in development by JayRob for the Solarforce L2P.


----------



## Juggernaut (Jul 22, 2010)

Ok I canceled my order “hope I don’t regret it”, So I’m in on one of these:thumbsup:. The full power one that is:devil:.


----------



## matt304 (Jul 22, 2010)

The problem is that I haven't seen anyone who is making hosts fully accept the reality of power requirements yet. The reality is that we have the most power hungry diode on the market yet, and old methods of single 18650s just aren't good enough for extended run time. Will they work? Yes. But, when have we ever wanted to settle for less battery at this place?

I like to push a diode for what it's worth. If I can get 1.5W, I want 1.5W, not half that. Moore's law is a good thing for a reason, take advantage of it! I know everyone doesn't want that much power, though. That is why I am planning a 14500 configuration as well. I expect that to be about 300mW to save the battery.

My 2x18650 hosts are still slimmer than the WL Arctic, because WL used something they had already designed for another platform, ~DPSS green. They used the host to save new tooling costs of course, and it is a monster. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not flat out bashing them because it's big, it probably has good sinking. I simply have a different style in mind. The style I prefer is simply a slim battery tube, and just enough mass in the bezel area for good sinking.

I decided that I am going to buy a new lathe. Probably next week at the latest and get it crated in. If all goes well, the new lasers will be made on one of these: http://www.machinetoolonline.com/PM1440B.html

I have a different plan for my modules you will like, and I'm going to try and make it happen for production. The other modules or module/sinks that are being built are built very short. People typically build them just long enough so that the lens threads inside the module and meets the diode face. So you end up with a heat sink that is only as long as the diode stacked against the lens. I have an idea for my modules that is going to greatly defeat those limitations for heat sinking. The length limit will no longer exist if all goes well. 

Will you please post up the 14500 kit that you guys want to see. Curious how our opinions may differ. Thanks


----------



## StarHalo (Jul 22, 2010)

I'd want the 1x14500 300mW in green; that'd be almost exactly as visible as the 1W blue..


----------



## Raccoon (Jul 22, 2010)

I'm wondering what designs would be possible for cramming a 445nm + driver into an existing functioning flashlight for a dual light-laser combo.

Actually, with many of the [email protected] mods completely ditching the stock reflector, there's tons of room in a [email protected] head for a laser. isn't there?


----------



## Juggernaut (Jul 22, 2010)

I just want the 1.5 watt version, don’t have the money for both.
 
WL just posted some pictures of their Arctic’s being tested, in this photo the beams look anything but culminated, in fact I think my Tiablo A9 Aspheric has a tighter beam! That would lead me to believe that these have some sort of lens system to fix the beam, will Your laser have any such system?, because if not really these look more like flashlights then lasers…..



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
It could just be the camera, but they are quite square looking, and the other photo of them they look to have a huge hot spot.


----------



## matt304 (Jul 22, 2010)

StarHalo, 300mW in green is not possible in the 14500 host. The crystals alone would cost me close to $200. You'd be looking at a $1000 dollar laser.

There is no way to use a bloomed photo to get an idea of how the beam really looks. Lasers have too much collimated power in one spot. I have been researching cylindrical lens sources, and I will be testing them in a lab style laser. I had possibly planned to use an aperture with my lasers. Either way, a little bit of a loss will be incurred, and the cylindrical lens could create problems. It would take longer to integrate it into a design, too, but I am going to experiment the possibility.


----------



## Juggernaut (Jul 22, 2010)

Thanks for the heads up:thumbsup:.


----------



## StarHalo (Jul 22, 2010)

Juggernaut said:


> these look more like flashlights then lasers…..



You always get that giant lens flare effect from photographing lasers, Craig/LEDMuseum runs into this issue every time he reviews a laser; even the 5mw pointers look a few millimeters across when they're not.

What's telling in that photo is that the beams aren't visible, those lasers are turned down.


----------



## matt304 (Jul 23, 2010)

StarHalo,

WL was using tons of fog in their other videos. The fog was very visible, because you could see the stream of inconsistent fog drifting through the beam, which looked nothing like a beam in a normal room. And, a beam just isn't that bright to a camera, it's brighter to your eyes. They're pretty sneaky fellas when it comes to portraying things to the public.


----------



## matt304 (Jul 29, 2010)

Guys, I just wanted to post to inform you all that a small hiccup in the ordering process on my new equipment has occurred. For some reason, the bank on the receiving end put a hold until August 3 on the certified funds for the machinery supplier in Pennsylvania. The explanation from the bank didn't make much sense, but that's nothing new.

So, my machinery won't be shipping to me until next week now, and I can only hope that it is here by that weekend.

I appreciate your patience with me while I get this new shop up and running.

I have received the first batch of possible hosts. Currently, one host is a for sure go in the laser lineup--it is the Trustfire TR-801. The quality of this host stands out against other cheap hosts I have seen. So, it will take the position for a medium-power 18650 laser model.






The main host to be used for the high-power model is still up in the air. Though, my mind is getting closer to being made on the selection now that they are in my possession.


----------



## Juggernaut (Jul 29, 2010)

Thanks for the update.


----------



## Raccoon (Jul 30, 2010)

matt304 said:


> For some reason, the bank on the receiving end put a hold until August 3 on the certified funds for the machinery supplier in Pennsylvania. The explanation from the bank didn't make much sense, but that's nothing new.



Bank secrecy act. My bank did this to me, too. A sudden deposit of $4400 took almost 2 weeks to clear while the FBI or someone checked to make sure I wasn't laundering money.


----------



## Raccoon (Jul 30, 2010)

matt304 said:


> StarHalo,
> 
> WL was using tons of fog in their other videos. The fog was very visible, because you could see the stream of inconsistent fog drifting through the beam, which looked nothing like a beam in a normal room. And, a beam just isn't that bright to a camera, it's brighter to your eyes. They're pretty sneaky fellas when it comes to portraying things to the public.



I can say with pretty good certainty that no fog was used in any videos. Blue lasers have an extraordinary ability of illuminating dust because the refraction appears more white than blue. All houses, rooms, etc have a THICK ecosystem of dust circulating in the natural currents of air. Clean rooms are especially expensive to make for this very reason; they are almost impossible to maintain.

The reasons that some photos and videos see a beam or not is simply ISO (exposure). The images with no beam are under exposed to prevent lens flare, and the ones with very apparent beams are better exposed, use lower ambient lighting, etc. Both of WL's videos used pretty low ambient lighting so the camera automatically adjusted to a higher ISO.

Seriously, there is no fog used. The air is perfectly distributed, and consistent with average air pollution levels. Not to mention, these guys are in China where the air is twice to five-times as thick.


----------



## matt304 (Jul 30, 2010)

Raccoon,

I made the statement because if you check the video here at 46 seconds and forward, those air currents in the beam just do not look natural. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-SduY4A2kE

When I think about the consistency of standard particulate in air, I realize that it has smoke-like tendencies itself, but it is dispersed at a much more consistent level after days and days of movement and blending with the air around it. A room just purged with some particulate has a bit of inconsistency left in the air mixture, which often noticeably appears once a laser is turned on.

I filmed a 1.5 watt 445nm laser in a room with low ambient lighting myself, and the beam did not look close to what I was seeing in the WL video. My eyes saw the beam more vividly than the camera did, which was dimmer yet than the WL video. Their film results were simply no where near mine, and I felt it looked to me like there was some added particulate in the air.

Either way, at this point we will never know the true conditions, and our degrees of certainty will each be nullified by the fact that neither of us were there to know the circumstances. We will have to agree to disagree on this one, and leave this topic for another day.


----------



## Raccoon (Jul 30, 2010)

Perhaps.

But studying the second half of the video, I really don't observe anything that might resemble fluctuation in the density of pollution. In fact, you can occasionally see specs of larger dust that reflect very prominently, which I don't think would be nearly as bright relative to having smoke in the room.

I see what you're saying, but I could possibly write it off as poor encoding. Maybe a cigarette. And maybe a fog machine...

In any event, we've seen dozens of examples of home-made lasers from the same diode, and there's no question about the laser's brightness and ability to produce a visible beam. I think what the main attention should be focused on... focus. Or rather the lack of proper collimation.


----------



## DM51 (Aug 7, 2010)

3 posts have been deleted. There is to be no discussion of using lasers as weapons.


----------



## matt304 (Aug 8, 2010)

DM51 said:


> 3 posts have been deleted. There is to be no discussion of using lasers as weapons.



Were those from today? I didn't remember anyone discussing lasers as a weapon in here.

As far as the shop progress, this is taking longer than expected guys. This is a huge install, and much more planning is being required than I had expected.

Not only is a 1,300lb lathe being brought in, but also a 2,600lb 5-axis mill, and I also bought a pretty large 7x12" cooled band saw for cutting bar stock. I'm tossing around the idea of having riggers to come install this stuff, because I am a little nervous about moving this much top-heavy equipment without insurance. The mill is almost 7 feet tall, and that's what scares me. If one of them took a fall from the fork lift, it would not be good.

So, it's taking longer than I had wanted, but I'm working my best to get things going here without getting too far ahead of myself.


----------



## Raccoon (Aug 8, 2010)

Have you at least spoken to an architect or engineer about your slab, to assess its ability to support that permanent weight?


----------



## shintashi (Aug 2, 2011)

I was wondering how this project was panning out. I noticed it's amazingly similar to a project I'm planning myself - i.e. gutting some nice looking flashlight, sticking in a blue diode, and putting in the right amount of batteries and sinks to run past 1W for a decent duration.


----------



## bshanahan14rulz (Aug 2, 2011)

Matt, M.Orenberg had heatsinks for that host, he might still have some. He's quitting soon, though.


----------

