*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****
Hi Yuval:
I agree that Argon gas lasers (458, 488, 514 nm lines) are by far the least expensive route and least costly to maintain. As mentioned , You add in solid state lasers for 405, 442, 561, 640 nm lines as needed. All but the 405 nm can be selected and controlled by an AOTF. We bypass the AOTF with the 405 laser and add it in prior to the FO. Krypton-Argon mixed gas lasers are short lived with the red line fading early on.
To prolong the multi-line Argon lasers life span you do need to pay attention to the Current: power ratio and try to run it at as low a currrent as possible. Heat, room noise and size are the down side to any gas laser, but an Argon will last 4 to 7 years in my experience and are very inexpensive to retube.
We use Dynamic Laser in Salt Lake (contact Amir Behjani <[log in to unmask]> )to repair all Argon and Krypton-Argon lasers that we run across (not only their own laser models but others as well). New tubes are done usually within the same week and costs are quite low.
Best regards,
George
George Peeters, M.D., M.S.
Pres. Solamere Technology Group inc.
1427 Perry Ave
Salt Lake City, UT. 84103
office 801 322-2645
cell 801 232-6911
On May 25, 2011, at 2:24 PM, Lloyd Donaldson wrote:
> Hi Yuval
>
> We had used Melles Griot Omnichrome Kr/Ar lasers on a Leica TCS/NT. We averaged 1 per year over the 14 years or so but some failed within months of installation. Typically the 647 line fades within 12 months. This laser is air cooled. A surge protected power supply is essential with batteries to run the fans to cool the laser if the power fails. Laser failures were typically at turn off with a loud bang so a bit startling for users. This technology is obsolete. The additional expense of solid state will be offset by longer service times and by the time you need to replace it the cost will have declined considerably. However you could consider an Ar laser - I understand the typical lifetime is 10,000 hours by which time a solid state replacement should be very affordable.
>
> Regards
>
> Dr Lloyd Donaldson
>
> Senior Scientist, Project Leader - Microscopy/Wood Identification
> Scion - Next Generation Biomaterials
> Private Bag 3020, Rotorua
> New Zealand 3010
>
> Ph: 64 7 343 5581
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Baddeley
> Sent: Wednesday, 25 May 2011 6:20 p.m.
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: which multiline gas laser should I buy
>
> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
>
> I can't remember the exact model of Ar/Kr - it was the stock laser in a Leica
> TCS NT and was air cooled. It was probably being used ~15-20 hrs/week so a bit
> over 1000 hrs would be about right. We also had a couple of pure Ar and a pure
> Kr large/medium frame lasers (Spectra Physics, Lexel), and these fared a lot
> better although they still gave us a few headaches with tube replacements.
>
> As to tips on prolonging tube life, the commonly accepted ones are:
> - don't run at full power - I have heard that ~20% and below is pretty good for
> longevity
> - don't switch on and off more than you have to (ie leaving the laser running at
> low power all day is better than turning it on for an hour or two 2-3 times a
> day). Exactly where the turn on /runtime balance lies is the subject of much
> debate.
> - let laser cool properly before switching on again
> - make sure you're cooling water setup is absolutely bombproof. Important things
> to watch here are:
> - interruptions/ pressure variations (we think we lost a tube to a
> water-hammer type effect)
> - calcification - if you've got hard water, you'll get a build up of
> calcification in the tube - this stops it being cooled effectively, and, if the
> calcification starts to flake, allows water to be trapped next to the tube and
> boil (we definitely lost one tube this way). If you're stuck with hard water,
> you can do a bit of preventative maintenance by rinsing the laser with a dilute
> solution of a weak acid (eg. acetic) every 6 months to a year. This is however a
> half solution at best as there are also metal parts in the cooling loop that you
> don't want to corrode.
> - leaks - the required flow rates are such that any leak in the cooling
> circuit will quickly flood your lab. Combined with 3 phase laser power supplies,
> this is not a particularly comforting prospect.
>
> In general solid state lasers are much less hassle, and a lot safer. I'm not
> sure what the current prices are, but would guess that either of the lasers you
> are looking at would probably set you back somewhere in the vicinity of $50-70k.
> You should be able to get solid state lasers at the desired powers for much less
> than that ($1-5k each at your powers, if you're a bit flexible with your
> wavelengths. If you want to exactly match the Ar/Kr lines, in particular 488 and
> 514 you will need to fork out a little more). You might not be paying directly
> for your power / cooling water, but gas lasers are also horribly inefficient -
> the Innova 70 draws up to 25KW -> ~ $12K/year power and cooling costs
> (calculated at 1000hrs/year, 20c/kwh[nz prices], cooling power at 1.5x
> electrical[optimistic]). Maybe you can use this as a bargaining point to get
> your institute to chip in a few extra dollars for a solid state solution.
>
> cheers,
> David
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Yuval Ebenstein <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Wed, 25 May, 2011 3:58:18 PM
> Subject: Re: which multiline gas laser should I buy
>
> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> *****
>
> Hi David and Martin,
> Thanks for your comment. I'm curios to know which Ar/Kr you were using.
> I know at least two Coherent heads that are running on the same tube for several
> thousands of hours and for over 10 years.
> I totally would prefer solid state but I need 4-5 lines with high power
> (150-250mw) and the solid state at these intensities are super expensive.
> Overall I will be paying about double for a solid state set and I just can't
> afford it.
> Would love to hear more and get tips for extending their life...
> Yuval
>
> On 5/24/2011 8:21 PM, Martin Wessendorf wrote:
>> Deare Yuval--
>>
>> I second David Baddeley's comments. Kr/Ar's were a great idea at the time
>> (1993) but are obsolete for exactly the reason he mentioned: they tend to die
>> young. We always figured on 1000 hours out of ours.
>>
>> Good luck!
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> On 5/24/2011 7:28 PM, Yuval Ebenstein wrote:
>>> *****
>>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>>> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
>>> *****
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>> I'm looking for a cheaper alternative for a high power solid-state laser
>>> combiner.
>>> I'm thinking of buying an Ar/Kr (which gives almost every excitation
>>> line I can think of) and I can't decide between the Innova 70c-spectrum
>>> from Coherent and the Stabilite 2018-RM from Spectra-physics. They are
>>> quite similar on paper but the spectra one is cheaper. I heard much
>>> about the robustness of the Coherent model.
>>> Anyone has experience with one of these? Anything special I should look
>>> for?
>>> Many thanks
>>> Yuval
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> -- --------------------------------------
> Yuval Ebenstein
> Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, UCLA
> Young Hall-2002, 607 Charles E. Young Drive East
> Los Angeles, CA 90095-1569
> Ph: (310) 794-6685; Fax: (310) 267-4672
>
>
>
>
> This e-mail and any attachments may contain information which is confidential or subject to copyright. If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it.
> Scion does not accept responsibility for anything in this e-mail which is not provided in the course of Scion’s usual business or for any computer virus, data corruption, interference or delay arising from this e-mail.
|
