This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

Diffraction problem in DMD

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: DLP4500

Hi,

I have bought the DLP4500 and i'm using a red laser as a light source. The problem is that there are diffraction just as seen in the "Using lasers w/ DLP DMD Technology". The result I want to have is to have only a single order illuminated the most so that at a considerable distance from the mirror only 1 laser dot is seen.

After reading that information and other stuff, i got some questions:

1) in reference to the Littrow configuration (alpha=beta=blazed angle) and having fixed grating pitch and mirror tilt, should I be choosing laser wavelength that is best for this mirror since the blaze angle is the mirror tilt angle? and will this do the job?

2) It was written in the earlier note that "it is possible to move the incident angle to arrange a blaze for a given (n,n) order." How is this optimal incident angle found (say for 1st order) knowing that mirrors tilts 12 degrees, given a particular wavelength ?

3) (cont in Q2) if incident light is at this particular angle where it's blaze is for a given order, will the diffraction at other oder not be seen at a close distance to the mirror OR will it be seen at close distance the mirror but not at further distance?

  • Hello Marco,

     Please find answers in blue:

    1) in reference to the Littrow configuration (alpha=beta=blazed angle) and having fixed grating pitch and mirror tilt, should I be choosing laser wavelength that is best for this mirror since the blaze angle is the mirror tilt angle? and will this do the job?

    If you use Littrow, you are correct that you will have to choose a laser wavelength tha is near a blaze for the Littrow condition for the pixel pitch and tilt of the device.

    2) It was written in the earlier note that "it is possible to move the incident angle to arrange a blaze for a given (n,n) order." How is this optimal incident angle found (say for 1st order) knowing that mirrors tilts 12 degrees, given a particular wavelength ?

    This is only within a limited range.  There is a 2 dimensional blazed grating equation that will predict where or if a blaze is possible for a given wavelenth, (n,n) order, pixel pitch and tilt angle. 

    3) (cont in Q2) if incident light is at this particular angle where it's blaze is for a given order, will the diffraction at other oder not be seen at a close distance to the mirror OR will it be seen at close distance the mirror but not at further distance?

    Diffraction is a far field effect, not a near field effect.  If you mean will the nearby orders be suppressed, the answer is yes.  All orders not blazed will be reduced significantly.  This is because the power is conserved.  If the blaze order receives let say 80% of the energy the other 20% must be in all the other orders combined.

    I hope this helps.

    Fizix

  • Recently, I've purchased a 4500 lightcrafter and I've removed the DMD from the light engine in order to use it for laser beam shaping application.

    However when I shine a red laser (650nm) onto it, the projection shows multiple beams instead of one beam. I guess this is because that DMD is essentially a 2D diffraction grating. 

    Is changing the incident angle to have one of the beams the brightest the only solution?

    Is there any optics or lens that could somehow merge those beams into one? 

  • Helloo DC,

    You are correct that this is a result of the DMD acting as a 2D grating.

    Merging the beams depends on the application.  If you are planning to re-image the DMD surface, then use ordinary optics that capture the multiple orders.  The beams will reconverge correctly at the image plane.  This is saying that diffraction does not make the beams extra-ordinary, it only restricts the energy to particular directions, but the orders still behave according to standard geometric optics with respect to lenses. 

    If you do not plan to re-image the DMD surface, then you will likel need to adjust the incident angle.  I cannot think of any other way short of polarizers and ciruclators.  Note:  In some cases it is not possible to reach a blaze condition even moving the incident angle.

    Fizix

  • Hi Fizix

    I get what you mean by using lenses to capture multiple orders and converge mutiple into a single one. 

    I'm using a low divergence laser to display some image in range of 0-500m so the distance of image plane would not be fixed and is unknown. Is it still achievable by using the first method?  

    I'm not sure what you mean by using polarizers and circulators to do a straight inverse transform from the diffraction.

    Could you briefly describe how that works? 

  • DC,

    Such a solution would be prohibitively expensive.  Actually it would be a component of a circulator, a Faraday rotator. 

    for each secondary beam (order) you would use a Faraday rotator to rotate the polarization 90 degrees and then use a polarization beam combiner to combine the orders.  This would need to be repeated for each order to be added back.  This is not a realistic solution.

    From your description it sounds like you may want to use a lens that makes all the orders parallel (i.e. collimated space) then use a final lens to reimage them from "infinity".  This is equivalent to cutting a lens in half and separating the two halves by whatever distance you need. 

    Fizix

  • Hi Fizix,
    Similar to DC above, I am using a laser to illuminate my DMD with the goal of imaging the DMD surface. After reading your answers in this and other threads I placed a lens in front of my DMD and was able to form an image from the diffraction pattern. However, there is some ghosting in the image I form (presumably due to non-perfect overlap of the diffracted light). The amount of ghosting at the image plane seems to be related to the distance from the lens to the DMD surface. This distance also affects the distance at which the image is formed behind the lens.
    My question is two-part:
    1) What is the optimal distance from the lens to the DMD? Is it the lens' focal length?
    2) At what distance from the lens is there the least amount of ghosting?
    I realize that these are more or less optics questions, but I would appreciate any insight you might have into this.
    Best,
    Julien
  • Hello Julien,

    My first question is what wavelength of laser light are you using and what are the lenses designed for.

    Ghosting is most likely from A/R coatings that are not optimized for the wavelength being used or lenses not designed for the wavelength.

    Fizix

  • Hi Fizix,
    I am using a 405 nm laser, and the lenses I have tried all have Thorlabs' A coating and are made of N-BK7 glass. Here is an example of a lens I have tried:
    www.thorlabs.com/thorproduct.cfm
    Julien
  • Hello Julien,

    Which side of the lens do you have facing the DMD? Also, is it possible to take a picture of what you are observing with the ghosting?
  • Hi Fizix,
    The ghosting occurs regardless of the directionality of the lens. I had it arranged with the flat side towards the lens, but reversed it and saw the same effect.
    However, I ended up solving my issue. It turns out that the ghosting effects resulted from using a spherical lens. When I switched to a 5x microscope objective, which has very good correction for spherical aberration, the ghost images went away entirely. The spherical lens could not focus the off-axis beams of diffracted light at the same spot as the on-axis beams.

    I did take a picture of the ghosting effect with the spherical lens in place, and can send it to you if you'd like. However I don't see a way to attach files in this forum, so let me know how to send it.
    Julien
  • Hi Julien,

    Outstanding sleuthing on your part! I accepted your answer.  It should be helpful to others that may be experiencing similar issues.

    P.S.  You should be able to use the "Insert/Edit Media" icon - looks like a screen with a little plus on the lower right.

    I don't think it is important since you solved the issue and uncovered the root cause.

    Fizix

  • Hello Marco,

    It is not possible to extinguish all but one order, even for a blaze condition.  You can get about 75 - 80 % of the overall energy there, but the remaining 20 -25 % will go into the other orders.  You could use a stop that only allows one order to exit the system.

    1.  Your understanding of 1. is basically correct.  For a given pixel pitch and mirror tilt, there are only certain wavelengths that will have a Littrow blaze.  So if say there is a first order Littrow blaze at X nm, then there will also be a second order Littrow blaze at X/2 nm, . . . and an nth order Littrow blaze at X/n nm.

    2.  The equation is basically as follows: Theta_inc(Theta_tilt, n) = Theta_tilt - acos[ (n*wavelength) / (d*sqrt(2)*sin(Theta_tilt))] where d is the pixel pitch and n is the blaze order.

    3. if the light is a collimated laser, the orders will have the same divergence as the original beam.  So the orders will not spread in area quickly if it incident beam is collimated.

    I hope this is helpful,

    Fizix