Syntec Technologies: Pushing the Polymer Envelope HRDT™ and patent-pending High Refraction Diamond...
-
Upload
gwendolyn-cornick -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
2
Transcript of Syntec Technologies: Pushing the Polymer Envelope HRDT™ and patent-pending High Refraction Diamond...
Syntec Technologies: Pushing the Polymer Envelope
HRDT™ and patent-pending High Refraction Diamond Turning are trademarks of Syntec Technologies
2
Smaller, lighter packaging
Lower cost
Higher quality
Wider range of optical spectrums
(IR and UV)Stronger
environmental resistance
Applications are Driving Innovation
3
Keys to “Pushing the Envelope”
• Tolerances and costs established relative to need (proof-of-concept, prototype, low to high volume production)
• Designed to integrate into an assembly that meets all environmental constraints, not just size and weight, the inherent polymer advantages
• Highly repeatable; easily updated
Wide range of materials with suitable optics properties
Sophisticated manufacturing processes
• Withstanding extreme temperatures and chemical exposure is often critical, as are easy clean-up and resistance to damage
4
Material Trends: Accelerating Since 1990
• Higher flow rates• Better component design• Post processing
Improved optics overall
Common polymers available in optical grades
• Temperature ranges (below 0c to over 200c)• Transmission quality (390 to 1600 + nm)• Stability of index of refraction generally increasing
More ways to manage birefringence
5
Manufacturing Trends: Improving and Converging
• Extremely precise optical mold inserts– All geometries– Fully compensate for shrinkage
• Fast turnaround prototypes– No molds– Replicate production approach
• Finished optics, select polymers
Molding Single Point Diamond Turning
• Shorter lead time for molds– Average 6 to 8 weeks– As little as 2 to 4 weeks– Unitized designs
• Shorter processing times– More capable machines– Better technician controls
• Finished optics, all polymers
6
HRDT™ Processing Breakthrough
Consequence: Many applications not feasible (time and/or $)
• Virtually all low volume ones
• Most high volume innovations
• Some high volume proven ones
Hypothesis: Issue is a relievable surface energy problem
• Relieve material by annealing before diamond turning
• Customize amount of annealing plus machine settings, using repeatable formulas based on component geometry
Problem: Surface failures on PEI and PES make SPDT unusable
7
HRDT™ Results
Typical SPDT machining; 390 Å achieved
HRDT™ success; 60 Å achieved
Optically unacceptable
Fully repeatable and optically acceptable
8
Design phases Development phases Full productionBeta productionVolume QuantityInitial QuantityQuick PrototypeProof-of-concept
More Flexibility For More Applications — Faster
Requirements Distribution
Molded SPDT HRDT Molded SPDT HRDT Molded SPDT HRDT Molded SPDT HRDT
PMMA
Cyclic Olefin
Polystyrene
PEI
PES
– – – –– – – –
Alternative choices, sometimes desirable for unusual geometries or exceptionally tight schedulesUsually lowest total cost choice (over 95% of the time)
New flexibility
– Currently not possible
9
HRDT: Applications That Fit
High heat, high index of refraction
(e.g., datacom evanescent coupling)
Innovation ideas where R & D funds
are tight or short lead times vital
Generally proven design and packaging,
but inherently low volume
Newer designs and packaging, either
high or unknown volumes
Optics that can be mounted to a PC board before
wave reflow
10
Key Questions
Is overall application well under- stood or innovative?
Optimizing new functionality or interfaces takes more cycles
Are optical components low or high complexity?
What is the value of each week of development time saved?
How many proof-of-concept andprototype cycles make sense?
More changes earlier increases product quality at lower risk & cost
11
Low Optics Complexity High Optics ComplexityAssumptions
Key Assumptions
Cost of first mold
Savings for subsequent molds (both in time & $$)
Cycle time to make mold (in weeks)
HRDT weeks saved per cycle
Development savings per week
Beta Production Quantity
Volume Production Quantity
$12,000
10%
4
3
$10,000
0
1,000
$25,000
20%
8
7
$10,000
10
1,000
12
Proof-of-concept
Prototyping Cycles
Beta production cycle
Volume production
Total Hard Cost
Summary
Hard costs
Dev. time savings
Total HRDT Advantage
Bottom Line Impact
Cycles HRDTNo
HRDT Cycles HRDTNo
HRDT Cycles HRDTNo
HRDT Cycles HRDTNo
HRDT
Innovative ApplicationKnown ApplicationInnovative ApplicationKnown Application
Low Optics Complexity High Optics Complexity
0
1
0
1
–
14K
–
3K
17K
1
1
1
1
14K
12.8K
12.8K
3K
42.6K
0
2
0
1
–
49K
–
3K
52K
2
2
1
1
49K
44K
23K
3K
119K
–
2.5K
–
15K
17.5K
(.5K)
30K
29.5K
2.5K
2.5K
2.5K
15K
22.5K
20.1K
90K
110.1K
–
10K
–
30K
40K
12K
120K
132K
10K
10K
5K
30K
55K
64K
270K
334K
13
What’s Next? Materials operating in the 3–5 micron and 8–12 micron rangeMore thermally stable materials over wider range of temperaturesHigher temperature materials for the visible rangeHarder surface resistances for better scratch avoidance
Reduce non-technical barriers of awareness
and collaboration
Application demandsMaterial characteristicsManufacturing process
Continue tackling soluble
technical barriers
Keep design front and center