650 nm 200-250 mw Laser not work with 20M2

4jaba6

New Member
This laser will not work off a 20M2 pin. I shall call it Laser A. I also have a 50mw laser that does work; shall call it laser B.
Due to the 4-5 fold increased mw of A over B, I thought that the 20M2 could not supply the required mw. I thought that a transistor might assist with a separate 5 v power supply. I used a PNP transistor with a separate 5v and it still did not work. I used the B and it worked and concluded the PNP did not help. The laser specs for A include: 200-250mw/ 650 nm/ DC 3-5v/ 300 ma. Perhaps the problem is related to the 300 ma? A DOES WORK when directly connected to +5v. Any thots and guidance is appreciated.
 

4jaba6

New Member
To start, please share a schematic of your circuit diagram.
Thank you for your interest.
I can explain the circuit... not too complicated; I do not know how to share a circuit but shall attempt to draw it.


Ground
^
^ 1 k Resistor
^
Laser
l
C
20M2 pin ---^^^^^^^----- B PNP Transistor
1k Resistor E
l
l
+5v ( separate power )


Below is generic circuit from internet/ ignore the on and off part

PNP Transistor as a Switch
4. Circuit for PNP transistor as switch
 

4jaba6

New Member
This laser will not work off a 20M2 pin. I shall call it Laser A. I also have a 50mw laser that does work; shall call it laser B.
Due to the 4-5 fold increased mw of A over B, I thought that the 20M2 could not supply the required mw. I thought that a transistor might assist with a separate 5 v power supply. I used a PNP transistor with a separate 5v and it still did not work. I used the B and it worked and concluded the PNP did not help. The laser specs for A include: 200-250mw/ 650 nm/ DC 3-5v/ 300 ma. Perhaps the problem is related to the 300 ma? A DOES WORK when directly connected to +5v. Any thots and guidance is appreciated.
This may be a better depiction of the NPN 2N3906 transistor circuit...


Ground
l
l 1k Resistor
l
Laser
l
l
Collector
Base --- 1k Resistor -----20M2 pin
Emitter
l
l
+5v ( separate power )
 

AllyCat

Senior Member
Hi,
Perhaps the problem is related to the 300 ma?
Yes Absolutely. The PICaxe pin drivers are only rated to about 20 mA maximum. You haven't told us the type number of the "PNP" transistor, but even the 2N3906 colletor current is only rated to about 200 mA and its "Saturation" current (gain) with a 1k ohm base resistor will be about 50 mA.

But I'm not sure you should be using a 300 mW laser if you don't understand those fundamentals. :(

Cheers, Alan.
 

4jaba6

New Member
Alan, Thanks for your input. Your two thots were in back of my mind and now, no need to eventually bring them to surface.
Yes, I wonder at the wisdom of using such a powerful 200-250 mw laser. Maybe I shall use the 50 mw laser and attempt to increase the sensitivity of the receiving photo diode by using a separate 5v for its power supply with a transistor; although I do not believe this shall help much!?!?
If I did decide to use the 200 mw laser, I do not understand "those fundamentals"....the calculations for the two resistors anyway and would have to shotgun different attempts at finding resistors that would work. Seems haphazard at best. Any other suggestions by you or anyone regarding this? TIA
 

hippy

Technical Support
Staff member
I don't know much about analogue electronics but the problem I see, even if the transistor were acting to hard-short the 5V, through the load, through the 1K, to 0V, is that 1K will limit current to just 5mA. That's far short of the 300mA the load appears to require.

Both your lasers appear to be above the legally allowed limits in the UK so we strongly recommend against doing what you are doing, advise you not to.

If you could explain what issue you are trying to solve there may be better, safer, legal means to do that.
 

4jaba6

New Member
I don't know much about analogue electronics but the problem I see, even if the transistor were acting to hard-short the 5V, through the load, through the 1K, to 0V, is that 1K will limit current to just 5mA. That's far short of the 300mA the load appears to require.

Both your lasers appear to be above the legally allowed limits in the UK so we strongly recommend against doing what you are doing, advise you not to.

If you could explain what issue you are trying to solve there may be better, safer, legal means to do that.
Hippy, Thanks for the information. I could request to please explain what "appear to be" above the legal limits. It is probably irrelevant because I am in the U. S.; therefore shall skip this request. I am attempting for a photo diode to receive the 50 mW laser output. It doe this but at a shorter distance than I would like. The issue is to get a greater distance. The circuit receives the laser at about the same distance if I use the 20M2 pin or if I use the pin with a transistor and +5v from a separate power source to the transistor. Any suggestions on how to increase the com. range between the laser and the photo diode? TIA
 

Buzby

Senior Member
What sort of distances are you trying to cover ?.

I've used UK legal sub 5mw lasers to reach at least 15 metres ( 50 ft ). I didn't try any further, as that was all I needed.

The most important part of the system is the receiver.

You need one that is optimised for the wavelength of your laser, and shielded against ambient light.

Also, using a continuous wave is not the best solution. Much better to pulse the laser, and used a tuned amplifier. This gives a lot more range, as the modulated signal is easier to extract from the background noise.

Dis-regarding whether its legal or not, waving a 300mW laser around will definitely lead to a nasty accident !
 
Last edited:

4jaba6

New Member
What sort of distances are you trying to cover ?.

I've used UK legal sub 5mw lasers to reach at least 15 metres ( 50 ft ). I didn't try any further, as that was all I needed.

The most important part of the system is the receiver.

You need one that is optimised for the wavelength of your laser, and shielded against ambient light.

Also, using a continuous wave is not the best solution. Much better to pulse the laser, and used a tuned amplifier. This gives a lot more range, as the modulated signal is easier to extract from the background noise.

Dis-regarding whether its legal or not, waving a 300mW laser around will definitely lead to a nasty accident !
Great info! Thanks. Trying roughly for about 10 ft. Am definitely getting 4 ft. +. I can occasionally get beyond that, but the reception appears to be dependent upon a very focused laser and photo diode receptor. I should probably pay more attention to that.
I did use an NPN 3904 transistor with separate +5v power supply for the photo transistor and this appears to help ( I have not tested in detail yet ). Between the increased focus, transistor and your suggestion of a "pulsed" laser, I believe my issue is solved.
 

Buzby

Senior Member
If you are able to connect to both the laser and the detector from a single location, i.e not two totally seperate circuits, then the solution is simple !.

Hamamatsu make a range of devices which simultaneously drive the laser and read the sensor. Because the pulses are sychronised and correlated the performance is way beyond what you will ever achieve trying to 'roll your own'.

See this datasheet for examples : https://www.hamamatsu.com/content/dam/hamamatsu-photonics/sites/documents/99_SALES_LIBRARY/ssd/s4282-51_etc_kpic1002e.pdf

The device I used was the S6986, which now might be superceded, I built this 10 years ago !.

My device used the laser and sensor side-by-side, with a retro-reflective target to return the beam.
It easily worked over 10ft to the reflector, i.e a 20ft round-trip, and used a cheap 1mW 'pointer' laser.
I did not use any optics, like lenses or such, and the laser wavelength is not the optimum for the sensor, but it works fine.

If the laser was relocated to point directly at the sensor I would expect a range very much greater, as the biggest signal loss in my system was at the retro-reflector.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

4jaba6

New Member
What sort of distances are you trying to cover ?.

I've used UK legal sub 5mw lasers to reach at least 15 metres ( 50 ft ). I didn't try any further, as that was all I needed.

The most important part of the system is the receiver.

You need one that is optimised for the wavelength of your laser, and shielded against ambient light.

Also, using a continuous wave is not the best solution. Much better to pulse the laser, and used a tuned amplifier. This gives a lot more range, as the modulated signal is easier to extract from the background noise.

Dis-regarding whether its legal or not, waving a 300mW laser around will definitely lead to a nasty accident !
Buzby,

Thanks for the 2 suggestions!
1. "pulse the laser"
2. "tuned amplifier"

I struggle somewhat with software and circuits.
My knowledge is rudimentary but am mostly able to get projects accomplished.
Software background: COBOL language in 1960's and self taught Basic.
Circuits: "Heathkit" Electronics mail order courses in 1980's

Am therefore going to ask that if you have the time, can you please post code and circuits for your two suggestions?

TIA,

jb
 

AllyCat

Senior Member
Hi,
Trying roughly for about 10 ft. Am definitely getting 4 ft. +.
It's always difficult to recommend a "system" when there are no details of its purpose, but when you mentioned communications using a 300 mW laser, I assumed you were trying to communicate with the Moon, or at a multi-GHz bandwidth. :)

Optical "Communications" over 10 feet is easily achieved for example with a simple Infra-Red Remote Control (and you should never choose a PICaxe for Wide Bandwidth purposes) which happens to use modulated pulses. PICaxe even has dedicated commands for the purpose such as IROUT and IRIN , etc.. Radio systems can work at even lower power levels, also supported by PICaxe Basic. What are you actually trying to achieve?

Cheers, Alan.
 

4jaba6

New Member
Hi,

It's always difficult to recommend a "system" when there are no details of its purpose, but when you mentioned communications using a 300 mW laser, I assumed you were trying to communicate with the Moon, or at a multi-GHz bandwidth. :)

Optical "Communications" over 10 feet is easily achieved for example with a simple Infra-Red Remote Control (and you should never choose a PICaxe for Wide Bandwidth purposes) which happens to use modulated pulses. PICaxe even has dedicated commands for the purpose such as IROUT and IRIN , etc.. Radio systems can work at even lower power levels, also supported by PICaxe Basic. What are you actually trying to achieve?

Cheers, Alan.
AllyCat,

Thanks for your recommendation that I may want to use IR instead of lasers. I have used IR in the past and am now choosing to use lasers. I am uncertain why you choose to mention a 300 mW laser. I discussed a 200-250 mW laser but more importantly I believe I stated am using a 50mW; albeit my initial text is somewhat confusing. I also have a 5 mW and both the 5 and the 50 should get the job accomplished. I am still experimenting based on suggestions from this forum and suggestions from Dave at trainelectronics.com.
When I have run some more hardware and software scenarios, I hope to explain the results and request assistance where I still have issues later. My gut reaction is still that my probem is on the near perfect alignment that is required from laser to photodiode. I Am hoping that eclectics "magic tape" shall help with this as well as other solutions.

Thank you for your suggestions and all who have contributed. jb
 

Buzby

Senior Member
Buzby,

Thanks for the 2 suggestions!
1. "pulse the laser"
2. "tuned amplifier"

Am therefore going to ask that if you have the time, can you please post code and circuits for your two suggestions?
Pulsing the laser is just using a PWM output with a transistor to switch the laser at a fixed frequency.

A tuned amplifier is an analogue circuit, and I'm not an analogue guy !.
However, if I was try to design one, here is an idea I would try first ... https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lm567c.pdf

The LM567 is a chip designed to turn on an output when a specific frequency is input. It's been around for years, and there dozens of circuits on the web for it.

Reading the datasheet will tell me what the optimum input voltage is, which might mean I would need a simple amplifier to feed the chip. The datasheet also tells me how to set the frequency the chip will trigger at.

As I said, I'm not an analogue designer, so someone else might have a better idea.

As I also said, 'rolling your own' will never match the performance of a commercial solution. Through-beam TX/RX sets are available for $30 from reputable suppliers, even less from eBay etc.
 

4jaba6

New Member
Pulsing the laser is just using a PWM output with a transistor to switch the laser at a fixed frequency.

A tuned amplifier is an analogue circuit, and I'm not an analogue guy !.
However, if I was try to design one, here is an idea I would try first ... https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lm567c.pdf

The LM567 is a chip designed to turn on an output when a specific frequency is input. It's been around for years, and there dozens of circuits on the web for it.

Reading the datasheet will tell me what the optimum input voltage is, which might mean I would need a simple amplifier to feed the chip. The datasheet also tells me how to set the frequency the chip will trigger at.

As I said, I'm not an analogue designer, so someone else might have a better idea.

As I also said, 'rolling your own' will never match the performance of a commercial solution. Through-beam TX/RX sets are available for $30 from reputable suppliers, even less from eBay etc.
Buzby, I appreciate your detailed technical information. I shall study and attempt to apply it to my project. JB
 

eclectic

Moderator
John.

I guess it's train related, but

what are you trying to make?

Then some of the clever people here
could offer intelligent suggestions.

And I could help as well.
e
 

4jaba6

New Member
Eclectic, Thank you for your inquiry. Am attempting to get one protoboard with a laser and phototransistor to communicate with another identical board.
Am shotguning sensors to find best laser and phototransistor combo to do this. Some of the sensors being tried are: 1. Vishay Intertechnology BPW77NA Phototransistor Silicon Chip, NPN Transistor, Visible Light, 850 nm 3-Pin, ( rec. by Dave at trainelectronics.com ), ( from Amazon ), 2. 4 Pin Photodiode Sensor Controller Module Measure Module ( from Bangood ) 3. LM393 3-pin photoresistor light detection photosensitive sensor module, for DIY kit ( from Aliexpress ), 4. Qiaoba Laser Diode Module 650nm 5mw Red Laser Diodes 2Pack (Laser Dot) ( from Amazon ).
Apologize for the late reply.
 

Buzby

Senior Member
laser and phototransistor to communicate with another identical board ?

Do you mean these devices are sending and receiving data, not just on/off detection ?

Those simple 'laser pointer' gadgets will, when suitably driven, allow sending data across at least 20ft, not just on/off detection.
But that will be a quite a low speed, maybe as low as 1200 baud. ( I have got faster, and you will eventually. )

We have been on this thread for days now.

Please give us a full description of what is is you a trying to do.
Just saying you need a laser and a sensor is not enough.

Cheers,

Buzby
 

eclectic

Moderator
I have been working (playing) at this problem to resurrect my 2009 flash sensor.

I can now send PICAXE IROUT using a cheap laser module at n4800 .

The receiver is a
KY-022 Infrared Receiver Sensor Module Detector IR TSOP1838 (Ebay of course)
but I could have wired my own easily enough.

It also works with a Sony TV remote.

I'll do a better presentation tomorrow.

e

Addit picaxe_manual2 p128
 

Attachments

Last edited:

4jaba6

New Member
I have been working (playing) at this problem to resurrect my 2009 flash sensor.

I can now send PICAXE IROUT using a cheap laser module at n4800 .

The receiver is a
KY-022 Infrared Receiver Sensor Module Detector IR TSOP1838 (Ebay of course)
but I could have wired my own easily enough.

It also works with a Sony TV remote.

I'll do a better presentation tomorrow.

e

Addit picaxe_manual2 p128
Thanks for the info, shall attempt to incorporate it into my testing.

JB
 

4jaba6

New Member
laser and phototransistor to communicate with another identical board ?

Do you mean these devices are sending and receiving data, not just on/off detection ?

Those simple 'laser pointer' gadgets will, when suitably driven, allow sending data across at least 20ft, not just on/off detection.
But that will be a quite a low speed, maybe as low as 1200 baud. ( I have got faster, and you will eventually. )

We have been on this thread for days now.

Please give us a full description of what is is you a trying to do.
Just saying you need a laser and a sensor is not enough.

Cheers,

Buzby
Not trying to receive data; just on/off.
What to you mean by "suitably driven"?
"We have been on this thread for days now." ...Is there a time limit ( not aware of it )?
Simple description: ( I hope)....just trying to achieve best selection for a laser and photo diode ( photo transistor ?) and their schematics for circuitry to achieve greatest distance.
Maybe am too much of a perfectionist ( paralysis by analysis ).
Your advice is appreciated!
 

Buzby

Senior Member
Does your quest for greatest distance have a reason ?. Is it a project with a purpose, or just an experiment ?

The furthest I know of for a laser signal to be detected is about 750,000km, i.e. to the Moon and back, but I don't think this was done using bits off eBay. ( A while back I investigated using some seriously sensitive photoreceptors, but gave up when I found they needed a cryogenic cooling plant to work. )

So the solution to 'greatest distance' is unlikely to be found on a forum like this. You really need to be talking to companies who sell specialised laser systems, like SICK, IFM, or Baumer.

If, on the other hand, your 'greatest distance' is limited to, say, 30ft, then there are thousands of laser/optics/sensor/circuit combinations you could try. Just type 'laser sensor circuit diagram' into Google for a few.

Or just ask ChatGPT : https://chat.openai.com/share/2661ea62-c18a-4e1a-b5c0-5054cebd096c

Cheers,

Buzby
 
Last edited:

eclectic

Moderator
John

All the information you need has been supplied to you.

Buzby talked about pulsing and decoding. The PICAXE will take care of that.

Receiver will be either a BPW34 or the TSOP1838 type.

A few minutes breadboarding the circuit(s),
clamps and Blutack to hold the Laser

and it's done.

Over to you.

e
 

4jaba6

New Member
John

All the information you need has been supplied to you.

Buzby talked about pulsing and decoding. The PICAXE will take care of that.

Receiver will be either a BPW34 or the TSOP1838 type.

A few minutes breadboarding the circuit(s),
clamps and Blutack to hold the Laser

and it's done.

Over to you.

e
OK Eclectic, Lots of good info from you, Buzby and others. Thanks to All.
Was not familiar with BPW34 or TSOP1838, so shall ck. them out.
I suppose we can put this thread to sleep unless someone desires to provide more pertinent information.
I believe I now have enough recommendations to make my project work.
Probably the main issue is not hardware or software but focusing the laser beam on the receiving sensor accurately
at distances acceptable to my project.
jb
 

eclectic

Moderator
"someone desires to provide more pertinent information."

I sort of know what you are trying to do,
but what's it for?
That's the most pertinent at the moment.


e
 

hippy

Technical Support
Staff member
Probably the main issue is not hardware or software but focusing the laser beam on the receiving sensor accurately
at distances acceptable to my project.
Possibly. I would note, (1) that laser tags work over significant distances and don't use lasers of significant power, (2) don't require pin-pint accuracy and alignment or no one would ever score a hit, (3) even an IR LED can work over many yards. (4) a 50mW laser should be good for many more, 200mW good for hundreds.

That you can only get either to work at, I recall, 4 feet indicates to me there is some systemic issue or flaw with the configuration you have.

That you are even considering using a 50mW laser, let alone 200mW, is extremely worrying when it should all work at much lower powers.

One could presume that you aren't getting the distance because you aren't delivering full power. The danger is that once you do deliver full power you will be playing with something that is extremely hazardous to eyesight over the short distances you seem to be using it over, and that risk is compounded if using reflective tape and the like.

What you are trying to do is quite important in advising how best to do it, how to do that safely. As said; we do not recommend using 50mW or higher lasers.
 

4jaba6

New Member
Possibly. I would note, (1) that laser tags work over significant distances and don't use lasers of significant power, (2) don't require pin-pint accuracy and alignment or no one would ever score a hit, (3) even an IR LED can work over many yards. (4) a 50mW laser should be good for many more, 200mW good for hundreds.

That you can only get either to work at, I recall, 4 feet indicates to me there is some systemic issue or flaw with the configuration you have.

That you are even considering using a 50mW laser, let alone 200mW, is extremely worrying when it should all work at much lower powers.

One could presume that you aren't getting the distance because you aren't delivering full power. The danger is that once you do deliver full power you will be playing with something that is extremely hazardous to eyesight over the short distances you seem to be using it over, and that risk is compounded if using reflective tape and the like.

What you are trying to do is quite important in advising how best to do it, how to do that safely. As said; we do not recommend using 50mW or higher lasers.
Eclectic and Hippy, I appreciate the responses.
Am attempting to beam a laser on one protoboard to another board with a photodiode or phototransistor that will flash an led when the sensor receives the laser transmission. I hope this explains what am trying to do. It works at short to med. distances (4-6 ft.+ ) but seems to require pinpoint accuracy beyond that. For me now, this is ok because this forum has given me many suggestions. re different sensors ect. which I can now test. I have a few different phototransistor schematics but if anyone wants to provide another, that would be great. I could be wrong, but if using a photodiode instead of a phototransistor then it could probably have enhanced reception if it was used with a transistor!?!? I am currently using a 5mW laser with laser safety glasses. Am contemplating a 50mW but and unsure due to the various warning s on this thread. Also any idea of using the 200-250mW has been DITCHED! Am very appreciative of all the help offered on this forum. It would probably be very difficult to maximize use of the 20M2 without the guidance of folks on this Forum!
 

hippy

Technical Support
Staff member
Am attempting to beam a laser on one protoboard to another board with a photodiode or phototransistor that will flash an led when the sensor receives the laser transmission. I hope this explains what am trying to do.
I would say that was self-evident; the real question is why do you want to do that, to what end are you doing it ?

You are of course not obliged to answer but there's always concern when there are potential dangers involved, and there may be specific advice to be given for such situations.
 

4jaba6

New Member
I would say that was self-evident; the real question is why do you want to do that, to what end are you doing it ?

You are of course not obliged to answer but there's always concern when there are potential dangers involved, and there may be specific advice to be given for such situations.
Hippy,
Din realize it was such a mystery. Thot I had splained it Lucy in the last post.
"Am attempting to beam a laser on one protoboard to another board with a photodiode or phototransistor that will flash an led when the sensor receives the laser transmission. I hope this explains what am trying to do." Nothing nefarious...attempting to see if can establish laser com. between 2 different protoboards. Can you please elaborate on "potential dangers involved"? If it is regarding the 200-250mW laser, I have stated earlier that it has been ditched and am using 5mW with protective laser glasses. I appreciate your concern and efforts to help with an optimal system for communication.
There have been many suggestions re. hardware and sensors; am attempting to try these out over the next days. Already am satisfied enough with the distance to not seek any more assistance but welcome it if it arrives.
Thanks to all for their contributions...jb
 

Buzby

Senior Member
The device I built with the Hamamatsu S6986 did not need any lenses, focussing, or specific diffusion.

The beam returned from the retroreflector was about 20mm diameter, ( retro-reflectors are not perfect mirrors, they spread the beam a bit ), but the receiver device was only the size of a pinhead.

A beam this diffused would need a more complex circuit than if the receiver was 'simple' photodiode or transistor, as the received signal is a tiny fraction of the source. However, because the S6986 uses synchronised TX/RX circuits it is capable of detecting these very small signals.

If you are determined to stick with a photo-diode/transistor, then the first challenge is alignment. The two solutions are either use a lense, or use a diffuser.

If you use a lense you are effectively making the target bigger, without losing laser power at the photodiode, because the beam is deflected to a point. This means your sensor circuit can be quite simple, as it always gets the full power from the laser. However, optics are tricky to set up and need to be rigid end to end.

If you use a diffuser you are still making the target bigger, but the power of the laser is now 'spread' across a wide area, with the photdiode receiving a tiny fraction of the direct power. This means you need a more complex receiver.

So what is more desirable, a system that needs precision optical alignment but uses simple circuits, or a system that can tolerate misalignment but needs more complex circuitry ?
 

eclectic

Moderator
Buzby, your project has piqued my curiosity.

I've "done" TSOP... 38, BPW34, BPW34F with LASERS and IR
and now I see new toys to play with. :)

S6986, retroreflectors, and so on.

Please elucidate (feeble attempt at pun)

e
 
Last edited:

Buzby

Senior Member
The project was the sensor for a timing gate for a race.

The requirements were 1, fast response, 2, no wires across the track, 3, easy setup, i.e, no accurate alignment requirements, 4, must work outdoors.

Most off-the-shelf sensors, as used by the millions in the industrial world, have response times measured in 10's of mS. I needed millisecond response. An off-the-shelf industrial sensor with millisecond response would cost more than the whole budget for the project, by a factor of 10 !.

No wires across the track meant either seperate PSUs, or retro-reflectors, which also met requirement 3, no alignment needed.

Lots of Googling ( maybe it was Alta Vista, or Jeeves, it was back in the day ! ) and I found the S6986. It looked very attractive. It was originally designed for tasks like paper detection in printers, where it needed to detect anything from thin white paper to thick black postcard.

The technique it uses is to frequency drive the source, usually an IR LED, and simultaneously monitor the ( built in ) photosensor. Because the TX and RX are sychronised they can be correlated. Using these features, the S6986 it is able to detect weak reflections from black card, even when exposed to high ambient light. Requirement 4 - sorted !

Because the photo-diode in the S6986 is an IR device I was unsure how it would respond to a Red laser, or even if it could drive a laser.

So I bought a couple and started experimenting. ( Or should I call it evaluating. That sounds much more professional :) )

I found it could drive lasers easily, but the cheap 'pointer' lasers worked best. These have only a simple resistor to limit the current, but the more expensive lasers have a control IC which can't switch quickly enough.

Regarding the frequency mis-match between IR and Red light, I expect the S6986 it not working at its optimum, but its good enough for what I needed.

Retro-reflectors are on every car !.

The red reflectors are moulded with dozens of 'corner' mirrors. Three mirrors arranged as a 3D corner will reflect a light beam back to the source, usually the headlight of the car behind.

The number plate material is different in that the corner reflectors are tiny glass beads. A glass sphere on a reflective surface will do the same as corner mirrors. Similar material is available in sheets and rolls from the usual sources, and comes in a wide range of styles and colours, even black !

I tried the industrial versions of the corner reflectors, but found the laser beam just fragmented into a million sparkles. I think (a) they are optimised for IR, and (b) they are not designed for very narrow, high intensity beams like lasers.

However, the glass bead ( or probably plastic bead ) material worked perfectly, and that's what I used. A sheet 4in wide meant the alignment was not critical.

The finished sensor is pictured in post #12. This has the S6986 and the cheap laser, along with a 'normal' LED driven by a transistor to show when a signal is received.

Is that enough elucidation ?

Cheers,

Buzby
 
Last edited:

4jaba6

New Member
The project was the sensor for a timing gate for a race.

The requirements were 1, fast response, 2, no wires across the track, 3, easy setup, i.e, no accurate alignment requirements, 4, must work outdoors.

Most off-the-shelf sensors, as used by the millions in the industrial world, have response times measured in 10's of mS. I needed millisecond response. An off-the-shelf industrial sensor with millisecond response would cost more than the whole budget for the project, by a factor of 10 !.

No wires across the track meant either seperate PSUs, or retro-reflectors, which also met requirement 3, no alignment needed.

Lots of Googling ( maybe it was Alta Vista, or Jeeves, it was back in the day ! ) and I found the S6986. It looked very attractive. It was originally designed for tasks like paper detection in printers, where it needed to detect anything from thin white paper to thick black postcard.

The technique it uses is to frequency drive the source, usually an IR LED, and simultaneously monitor the ( built in ) photosensor. Because the TX and RX are sychronised they can be correlated. Using these features, the S6986 it is able to detect weak reflections from black card, even when exposed to high ambient light. Requirement 4 - sorted !

Because the photo-diode in the S6986 is an IR device I was unsure how it would respond to a Red laser, or even if it could drive a laser.

So I bought a couple and started experimenting. ( Or should I call it evaluating. That sounds much more professional :) )

I found it could drive lasers easily, but the cheap 'pointer' lasers worked best. These have only a simple resistor to limit the current, but the more expensive lasers have a control IC which can't switch quickly enough.

Regarding the frequency mis-match between IR and Red light, I expect the S6986 it not working at its optimum, but its good enough for what I needed.

Retro-reflectors are on every car !.

The red reflectors are moulded with dozens of 'corner' mirrors. Three mirrors arranged as a 3D corner will reflect a light beam back to the source, usually the headlight of the car behind.

The number plate material is different in that the corner reflectors are tiny glass beads. A glass sphere on a reflective surface will do the same as corner mirrors. Similar material is available in sheets and rolls from the usual sources, and comes in a wide range of styles and colours, even black !

I tried the industrial versions of the corner reflectors, but found the laser beam just fragmented into a million sparkles. I think (a) they are optimised for IR, and (b) they are not designed for very narrow, high intensity beams like lasers.

However, the glass bead ( or probably plastic bead ) material worked perfectly, and that's what I used. A sheet 4in wide meant the alignment was not critical.

The finished sensor is pictured in post #12. This has the S6986 and the cheap laser, along with a 'normal' LED driven by a transistor to show when a signal is received.

Is that enough elucidation ?

Cheers,

Buzby
Buzby, Great info. Thanks! Can you kindly post the diagram of the S6986 Circuit that you are using? If you can not because of proprietary or for some other reason, I understand. Been searching around and it looks like these are in the $20.00 +- range. May be looking wrong places
 
Top