[REVIEWED/TESTED] – Thirteen Different Optical Sensors For Measuring PWM With An Oscilloscope [WARNING, LONG POST]

26 posts / 0 new
Last post
Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 4 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 152
Location: Beaverton Oregon
[REVIEWED/TESTED] – Thirteen Different Optical Sensors For Measuring PWM With An Oscilloscope [WARNING, LONG POST]

NOTE, my original post was apparently too long, and gave errors when posted, I had to break it into four parts.

Edit:  turns out, one little smiley face at the bottom of the entire post gave errors and forced me to break the entire post into four parts.

 

For my first BFL review – I decided to try a niche that hasn’t been covered before; optical sensors.

 

A while back, I was intrigued by posts that showed oscilloscope screen captures of flashlight PWM. However, it was rather elusive finding specifics on what sensor was used and how it was setup. Therefore, I decided to test a variety of optical sensors to see which ones, if any, would work for measuring flashlight PWM with an oscilloscope (within a reasonable cost). I started out testing only two sensors, but had way too much fun, which then morphed into a two-month project.

 

The Types Of Optical Sensors Tested

  • photodiode
  • PIN photodiode
  • phototransistor
  • Adafruit breakout board

I opted not to test a photoresistor because of their reputation for being slower than a phototransistor or photodiode (as confirmed in this YouTube video).

 

The Twelve Sensors Tested

  • Adafruit analog light sensor ALS-PT19
  • AMS-TAOS TSL257 light-to-voltage-converter
  • Everlight PT334-6C phototransistor
  • OSRAM BPW34S PIN photodiode
  • Shine Gold Electronics SG-PT3NT phototransistor
  • Adafruit log-scale light sensor GA1A12S02 (ADA1384)
  • Adafruit phototransistor ADA2831
  • Shine Gold Electronics SG1133 photodiode
  • Shine Gold Electronics SG5051 photodiode
  • HAMAMATSU S1223 PIN Diode
  • HAMAMATSU S5973 PIN Diode
  • Thorlabs FDS100 PIN photodiode
  • Everlight PD438C-S46 PIN photodiode

The Cost

Eleven of the sensors can be purchased for under $20, one at $39 (all approximate prices). I’m sure there are hundreds of other good sensors, but there was only enough time/money to test a few, which has revealed a few excellent, inexpensive choices (as well as some failures).

 

The Four PWM Generators Used For Testing

  • Convoy S2+ (Biscotti firmware). The Convoy S2+ uses an increasingly high PWM frequency over several levels, which was extremely useful for testing a sensor’s fall times. When the Convoy’s PWM gets to 18Khz-36Khz, a sensor will need a fast fall time to capture a stable waveform without clipping.
  • J5 Tactical V1 Pro (solid PWM on low @ 238hz)
  • Nebo Armor 3 (to illustrate ramping PWM at 100Hz)
  • Home-built PWM light generator using a Koolertron signal generator (100Khz-400Khz)

 

 

This post is not about whether PWM is good or bad, but how to test for it with an oscilloscope and an inexpensive optical sensor.

Why not use a regular LED? Well, maybe, but those aren’t optimized for use as a photodiode. Using a regular LED may produce less than satisfactory results. If you’ve tested one that works as well as the recommended sensors at the end of this post, please provide specifics with testing results.  

 

Testing Notes

  1. A Siglent SDS1102CML+ oscilloscope was used (link). Just about any low-end scope should work for the frequencies were measuring.
  2. The photodiodes/transistors will need a biasing resistor to convert current to voltage (for viewing on an oscilloscope). The resistor values on my schematics can be taken with a grain-of-salt. My values are just a starting value. You may find lower/higher values work better in your circuit. Some of the photodiodes/transistors are more sensitive than others to the resistor value range. I would suggest a variable potentiometer (link) or maybe a programmable resister board (link) if you’re going to experiment. 
  3. If you’re going to handle these types of components, you should use a grounding strap (link), or use alternative ways to ground yourself.
  4. The biasing/load resistor for the photodiodes/transistors should only be attached to the side of the component shown on my schematics. If attached to the opposite side (+ power), unwanted filtering/attenuation across the resistor can occur, caused by a bench supply’s large output filtering caps. This is not a problem when using a battery as a supply, but is a problem with a bench supply (from personal experience).  
  5. Most sensors had good rise times. However, it was the fall time that determined whether a sensor was fast enough for successful PWM measurements.
  6. PWM frequencies used during testing were:

100Hz (Nebo Armor 3)

236Hz (J5 Tactical V1-PRO)

2Khz (Convoy S2+)

18Khz (Convoy S2+)

36Khz (Convoy S2+)

100Khz (home-built PWM generator)

200Khz (home-built PWM generator)

300Khz (home-built PWM generator)

400Khz (home-built PWM generator)

 

The four highly recommended sensors are listed at the end of this post if you don’t want to read through all the data.

 



   -- The First Sensor --



 

Adafruit analog light sensor ALS-PT19 (LINK)

 

 

The ALS-PT19 is a surface-mount sensor with a 10KΩ resistor mounted on a small breakout board (what Adafruit calls it). You will want to solder the supplied three-pin connector onto the PCB. FYI, if you’re not familiar with Adafruit, it’s one of, if not the most well-known electronics educational/kit companies. The story behind the woman who started the company in her dorm room is an interesting story YouTube.

 

After soldering the connector onto the PCB, the sensor’s 3-pin connector was plugged into an Elegoo solderless breadboard (link), and a 2X AA battery holder was used for a supply (two Energizer Ultimate Lithiums in series at approx 3.4V). No external biasing components are required. Supply voltage can be 2.5V-5.5V

 

 

The J5 V1-PRO on low, PWM at 236.4hz. Note the fall time of 150us, which is much slower than other sensors tested. At 236hz, the slower fall time is not a problem - yet.

 

J5 on low, triggered on the falling edge and zoomed in for an accurate fall time of 133.8us

 

The Convoy S2+ at .1% brightness, PWM increases to 2.27Khz (a much higher frequency than the J5). Here we see an obvious slope on the waveform’s falling edge - which can only get worse at higher frequencies.

 

Here’s where things go south. Because the Convoy increases the PWM frequency to 18.1Khz at 1% brightness, the sensor’s slower fall time causes severe clipping.

 

There’s no point in showing the Convoy’s waveform at 10% and 35% brightness levels because the clipping is much worse at 36Khz.

CONCLUSION: this sensor may serve well in other types of circuits, but it’s not fast enough for measuring PWM on flashlights that use a higher PWM frequency (like a Convoy S2+).

 



 

AMS-TAOS TSL257 light-to-voltage-converter LINK

 

The 3-pin TSL257 is a photodiode amplified through an onboard inverting op-amp. The block diagram is from the data sheet. The three pins are; Vdd, GND and Out.

The sensor was configured on a solderless breadboard, and a 2X AA battery holder was used for a supply (two Energizer Ultimate Lithiums in series at approx 3.4V). No external biasing components required. Supply can be 2.7V-5.5V

 

 

The J5 on low, PWM at 236Hz. Note there‘s an issue I didn’t catch initially. The duty-cycle (+Dut) is 180 degrees out-of-phase at 63.9%  This is because the photodiode output goes through an onboard inverting op-amp. The inverting op-amp is doing exactly what it's designed to do - invert the input. Therefore, the real duty cycle for the J5 is closer to 36%. You can also set your scope to -Duty to correct for this. More importantly, note the fall time of 144us. That’s slow compared to the other sensors tested and is about to become a problem with the Convoy S2+.

 

J5 on low, triggered on the falling edge and zoomed in for an accurate fall time.

 

The Convoy S2+ at .1% brightness, PWM at 2.27Khz. The ski slope on the waveform’s falling edge becomes more pronounced. 

 

 

Here’s where things fall apart. As the Convoy’s brightness increases to 1%, the PWM frequency increases to 18.2Khz. The sensor can’t keep up, and we see severe clipping. If we do some math:

1 divided by the Convoy’s PWM frequency 18.2Khz = 54us 

The sensor’s fall time needs to be significantly faster than 54us to avoid clipping on the falling edge. A sensor fall time of 140us is way too long. 

 

When the Convoy brightness level is at 10%, the PWM frequency increases even more to 36Khz. Another scope capture is pointless, because there’s no discernible waveform to show (the waveform is clipped beyond recognition).    

CONCLUSION: this sensor may serve well in other types of circuits, but it’s not fast enough for measuring PWM on flashlights that use a higher PWM frequency (like a Convoy S2+).

 



 

Everlight PT334-6C Phototransistor  LINK

 

This phototransistor will need a biasing resistor to convert current into voltage. In this case, approx 500Ω-600Ω.   

 
Again, a wireless breadboard was used for configuration. A rotating potentiometer (0-10K) was used to experiment with different resistor values. I temporarily pulled from storage my Tektronix 475A to see if it was still working, it was.

 

Back to the digital scope. The J5 on low, with PWM at 241hz. Note the sensor’s fall time is 20us, about seven times faster than the previously tested TSL257 (at 140us).

 

The J5 on low, triggered on the falling edge, zoomed in for an accurate fall time of 14.5us

 

The Convoy S2+ at .1% brightness (PWM at 18.2Khz).  Waveform still looks good.

 

The Convoy S2+ at 1% brightness, PWM at 18.2Khz.

 

The Convoy S2+ at 10% brightness, PWM at 36.3Khz.

 

Finally, the Convoy S2+ at 35% brightness, PWM at 36.4Khz. At this brightness level, the sensor saturates easily and the flashlight needed to be gradually pointed away from the sensor to display a stable waveform. Also note some minor clipping towards baseline.

 

To illustrate how this sensor can easily saturate, I recorded a short video. This phenomenon is not isolated to this sensor only, it was seen on others sensors as well. 

 

CONCLUSION: This sensor is marginally adequate for testing flashlight PWM. However, it’s more sensitive to the angle of light at higher brightness levels, and it’s a bit more difficult getting a well-defined waveform at 36Khz in comparison to the OSRAM photodiode (tested next) or the HAMAMATSU S1223 PIN photodiode (tested later). 

 



 

OSRAM BPW34S PIN Photodiode LINK

 

The OSRAM is a PIN photodiode (I = intrinsic semiconductor region). This was a surface-mount version, but there’s also a through-hole version (link). Note that both OSRAM and Vishay have licensing agreements, and you can find a similar device under the Vishay name (link). A biasing resistor will be needed to convert current into voltage. 8K-10KΩ is a good starting value. I used a rotating potentiometer for a resistor.

 

Wires were soldered onto both ends of the photodiode to accommodate testing. The data sheet wasn’t clear to me which end of the physical photodiode was the cathode or anode. Eventually I figured it out, so here’s my schematic (with photo) to clarify which end to hook up to ground and +supply. Remember, photodiodes are reverse biased. If your output seems stuck on high, you probably have it forward biased (incorrect), but it won’t hurt anything (unless you try). The resistor should only go on the anode side of the photodiode (reference “testing notes” on why).

 

 

The J5 on low, PWM at 242Hz. Note the excellent fall time of 4us.

 

J5 on low, triggered on falling edge and zoomed in for an accurate fall time of 3us (fast compared to some of the other sensors tested).

 

The Convoy S2+ at .1% output with a PWM of 2.27Khz. Fall time is still fast at 3.6us

 

The Convoy S2+ at 1% output with a PWM of 18.2Khz.

 

The Convoy S2+ at 10% brightness, PWM frequency increases to 36.3Khz. The OSRAM’s short fall time produces a stable waveform. Other sensors will struggle at this frequency. Doing the math;

 1 divided by the Convoy’s PWM frequency of 36,250 = 28us.

A sensor’s fall time needs to be significantly faster than 28us to avoid clipping on the falling edge.

 

The Convoy at 35% brightness, PWM at 36.4Khz. The OSRAM displays a stable, well-defined waveform with a fast fall time of 4us.

 

Since the OSRAM is working so well, I will use it as an opportunity to illustrate ramping PWM, using the Nebo Armor 3, a relatively new light by Nebo. Hold down the Nebo’s “on” button, and the output will ramp up, then back down (continuously). In this video, we see a ramping PWM frequency of 100hz across all duty cycles. 

 

To test the OSRAM further, I will do one more test. I used a Koolertron signal generator (link) to create my own home-built LED PWM generator where I could set the frequency much higher than the Convoy. Using a regular inexpensive off-the-shelf white LED (link), I applied a 0-5V square wave to the LED (with biasing resister), to create my own PWM light generator. In this photo, you see the white LED (driven by the signal generator) shining on the OSRAM photodiode. The following waveform captures from the OSRAM are at an applied PWM frequency of 100Khz, 200Khz, 300Khz, and 400Khz.

 

Koolertron signal generator output set to 100Khz, the OSRAM waveform still looks good. Fall time is fast at 1.2us

 

Koolertron signal generator output set to 200Khz. The OSRAM still keeps up.

 

Koolertron signal generator output set to 300Khz. Some very minor clipping towards baseline, and waveform slope becomes more noticeable.

 

Finally, at 400Khz, the waveform shows a small amount of clipping towards baseline. No need to try higher frequencies (it will only get worse). I don’t really know if we’re reaching the limit of the OSRAM sensor, or the limit of how quickly the test LED (PWM generator) can turn its light output ON/OFF.  There may be other factors as well. Either way, the OSRAM can respond to higher frequencies than you’ll see on a consumer flashlight.

 

And just for fun, I decided to shine my wife's OttLite task lamp (TrueColor fluorescent bulb) at the sensor. Note the expected frequency.

 

CONCLUSION: the OSRAM PIN photodiode is an awesome sensor (at less than $10) for testing flashlight PWM. The OSRAM handled all flashlight PWM frequencies with ease, including higher PWM frequencies you won’t see on a consumer flashlight.

 


 

CONTINUED

Edited by: Terry Oregon on 07/12/2018 - 23:12
Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 4 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 152
Location: Beaverton Oregon

PART 2  CONTINUED

 


Shine Gold Electronics SG-PT3NT Phototransistor (LINK)

 

As with all other photodiodes/transistors tested, it will need a biasing resistor to turn current into voltage. A value of 300Ω-400Ω is a good starting value.

 
 
This phototransistor was configured on a wireless breadboard with two AA’s in series for a power supply. 

 

J5 on low with a fall time of 16us (neither the fastest or slowest of all the sensors tested).

 

J5 on low, triggered on falling edge, zoomed in for accurate fall time of 13.2us

 

Convoy S2+ at .1% brightness, PWM at 2.27Khz

 

Convoy S2+ at 1% output, PWM at 18.2Khz. We start to see a noticeable slope on the waveform’s falling edge, caused by the sensor’s slightly slower fall time (compared to the fastest sensors tested).  

 

Convoy S2+ at 10%, PWM at 36.25Khz. Waveform not as well-defined as seen on the OSRAM.

 

The Convoy S2+ at 35% brightness, PWM at 36.2Khz. This sensor was more sensitive than others to the angle of light. Getting a stable waveform required shining the light at just the right angle away from the sensor, otherwise the sensor would saturate (producing a flat waveform) or disappear towards baseline. The waveform also looked more wonky (less like a square wave) than what I saw with the other recommended sensors, like the OSRAM. To illustrate wonky, here’s a dual channel/dual probe capture with the Convoy shining on both sensors simultaneously (Convoy at 35% brightness). Note the OSRAM’s more defined waveform pulse.

 

CONCLUSION: This sensor is marginally adequate for measuring flashlight PWM.  A well-defined waveform could not be obtained at higher PWM frequencies and the sensor was particularly fussy about the angle of light.

 



 

Adafruit log-scale analog light sensor GA1A12S02 (link)

 

This breakout board (what Adafruit calls it) has three components; sensor, resistor and cap. The block diagram is from the spec sheet. Apparently, the amplifier circuit is built into the sensor.

 

It’s advertised as “a true log-linear relationship with light levels”. You will want to solder the supplied 3-pin connector onto the breakout board, to attach stuff.

This device was very slow with a fall time over 9.6ms (note that’s milliseconds). This is the slowest fall time of all the sensors tested (by far). Because the fall times are so slow, it quickly becomes obvious this sensor is not adequate for measuring flashlight PWM. I chose to turn the J5 on STROBE (7.8hz), to get a stable waveform that doesn’t clip. I did remove the PCB’s surface-mount cap from the PCB (thinking it might help), but it didn’t. Clearly, the amplifier circuit contributes to its slow fall time.

 

 

J5 on strobe, triggered on failing edge, zoomed in for accurate fall time. Fall time is 9.2ms. That’s over 1,000 times slower than the OSRAM.

 

The slow fall times become even more evident on the Convoy S2+ at .1%, where the PWM frequency increases to 2.3Khz.  Even at the Convoy’s lower frequencies, there is severe clipping.

 

No further testing was necessary.

CONCLUSION: this sensor may serve well in other types of circuits, but it’s not fast enough for measuring PWM on flashlights that use a higher PWM frequency (like a Convoy S2+). It was the slowest of all sensors tested.

 



 

Adafruit PhotoTransistor ADA2831 (link)

 

The ADA2831 will need a biasing resistor to convert current into voltage (for measuring with an oscilloscope). An 8KΩ resistor (approx) on the emitter worked well for lower PWM frequencies. HOWEVER, for higher frequencies (like the Convoy at 36Khz), I discovered that 3KΩ worked better. I could not get a stable waveform across all PWM frequencies with just one resister value. We will see this dual resistor phenomenon with another sensor.

 

J5 on low, PWM at 241Hz, fall time 18us.

 

J5 on low, triggered on falling edge, zoomed in for accurate fall time. 14.6us is a bit slower than the fastest sensors tested.

 

ConvoyS2+ at .1% output with a PWM of 2.26Khz

 

Convoy S2+ at 1% output with a PWM of 18.2Khz. An obvious slope on the waveform’s falling edge.

 

J5 at 10% brightness, PWM at 36.3Khz. Here we see some minor clipping towards baseline.

 

Convoy at 35% brightness, PWM at 36.6Khz. There is more noticeable clipping towards baseline.

 

CONCLUSION: This sensor was marginally fast enough to measure the Convoy’s higher PWM frequency. There was some clipping towards baseline and the device required two resister values to achieve stable waveforms across all PWM frequencies.

 



 

Shine Gold Electronics SG1133 photodiode (link)

 

This will require a biasing resistor to convert current to voltage (4KΩ is a good starting point).  This photodiode has a small marking hole on the cathode side (not easy to see), where the +supply will be attached. Remember, photodiodes are reverse biased. As stated before, if your output seems stuck on high, you may have it forward biased (incorrect), but it shouldn’t hurt anything (unless you try).

 

J5 on low with a decent fall time of 5.6us.

 

J5 on low, triggered on falling edge, zoomed in for accurate fall time of 6.0us.

 

J5 at .1% brightness, PWM at 2.27Khz

 

J5 at 1% brightness, PWM at 18.2Khz

 

J5 at 10% brightness, PWM at 36.2Khz. Fall time looking good at 5.4us.

 

J5 at 35% brightness, PWM at 36.3Khz. Waveform is well-defined and the fall time still looks good. There is some very minor clipping towards baseline.

 

CONCLUSION: this sensor is adequate for measuring the Convoy’s higher PWM frequencies, although there is some minor clipping towards baseline.

 



 

Shine Gold Electronics SG5051 photodiode (link)

 

A biasing resister will be needed to convert current into voltage. 5K is a good starting point. The usual 2X AA in series power supply was used (3.4V).  I also used a bench supply and varied the supply voltage from 3.4-6V, just to see if it made any difference. There was no difference in fall time or waveform shape at 6V, it only affected the amplitude of the waveform.

 

J5 on low, PWM at 242hz. Note the fall time of 24us (neither the slowest or fastest of the sensors tested).

 

J5 low, triggered on falling edge, for a more accurate fall time.

 

J5 at .1% brightness, PWM at 2.3Khz.

 

J5 at 1% brightness, PWM at 18.2Khz. Note the ski slope on the falling edge, due to its slower fall time.

 

 

J5 at 10% brightness, PWM at 36.3Khz. Noticeable clipping towards baseline.

 

J5 at 35% brightness, PWM at 36.3Khz. There is significant clipping towards baseline and the waveform is not well-defined like the OSRAM.

 

CONCLUSION: This sensor is marginally fast enough to measure the Convoy’s higher PWM frequencies, but there is clipping and waveform distortion.

 



 

HAMAMATSU S1223 HIGH SPEED 30Mhz PIN photodiode (link)

 

 

This PIN photodiode needs a biasing resistor to turn current into voltage, 3K is a good starting value. 

 

J5 on low, PWM at 243Hz. We see a fall time of 14.8us (neither the fastest or slowest tested). HOWEVER, something interesting is going to happen; the fall time will get much faster as the PWM frequency increases.

 

J5 on low, triggered on falling edge, zoomed in for an accurate fall time of 11.7us.

 

J5 at .1% brightness, PWM at 2.3Khz. Note how the fall time became faster at 6us. It will get even faster.

 

Convoy at 1% brightness, PWM at 18.2Khz. The sensor’s fall time continues to get faster at 1.8us. 

 

Convoy at 10% brightness, PWM at 36.2Khz. With the Convoy at its maximum frequency, note how the fall time became much faster at 2.8us

 

Convoy at 35% brightness, PWM at 36.3Khz. Fall time remains fast at 3.3us. Waveform has a well-defined pulse, like the OSRAM.

 

Because this sensor is doing so well, I will also test this sensor with my home-built PWM generator using a Koolertron signal generator (see details and photo I took when testing the OSRAM). Applying a 0-5V square wave, I will light up the white test LED with the following PWM frequencies, 100Khz, 200Khz, 300Khz, 400Khz.

 

Koolertron output at 100Khz. Waveform looks good.

 

Koolertron output at 200Khz.

 

Koolertron output at 300Khz. Waveform looks similar to the OSRAM at the same frequency (excellent).

 

Koolertron output at 400Khz. We see some minor clipping towards baseline (as we did with the OSRAM). No need to try a higher frequency, it will only get worse. As stated before, I don’t know if we’re reaching the limit of the sensor, or the limit of how quickly the cheap white LED (PWM generator) can turn its light output ON/OFF.

 

Note the interesting characteristic of this sensor; the fall times became increasingly faster at the higher Convoy PWM frequencies. I believe this is an indication that the sensor was optimized for higher frequencies (my theory).

 

CONCLUSION: This is also an excellent sensor for measuring flashlight PWM, as good as the OSRAM (although more expensive).

 



 CONTINUED

 

 

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 4 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 152
Location: Beaverton Oregon

CONTINUED PART 3

 


 

HAMAMATSU S5973 HIGH SPEED 1Ghz PIN photodiode (link)

 

This was the most expensive sensor tested (approx $39). It’s expensive because of its 1GHz rated bandwidth. The data sheet says “suitable for optical communications and other high-speed photometry.  HOWEVER, that speed also creates a problem for our niche in measuring flashlight PWM. I was unable to find one biasing resister that worked across all the PWM frequencies. A value of 50K worked better for the Convoy’s higher frequencies, and 300K worked better for the J5’s lower PWM frequency. If I tried to use any one resister value, the waveforms would be highly unstable for either the lower or higher frequencies. My theory; this sensor was designed & optimized for high speed communications. Trying to optimize it for low and high frequencies doesn’t work so well. Well that’s my theory.    

 

J5 on low, PWM at 239Hz (biasing resister 300K). Note the fall time is rather long (28us) compared to other recommended sensors. However, with a different resister value, those fall times will become much faster with the Convoy’s higher PWM frequencies.

 

J5 on low, triggered on falling edge, zoomed in for accurate fall time (biasing resister is still at 300K). The fall time is a rather slow 23.5us but will get much faster with a lower resistor value, keep reading.

 

Convoy at .1% brightness, PWM at 2.3Khz (biasing resister is now a lower value, 50K). With the lower resistor value, the fall time is now much faster at 4-5us

 

 

Convoy at 1% brightness, PWM at 18.2Khz (biasing resister is now 50K). A very good fall time of 4us

 

Convoy brightness at 10%, PWM at 36.2Khz (biasing resister is now 50K).

 

Convoy at 35% brightness, PWM at 36.3Khz (biasing resister 50K). Fall time below 5us.  Waveform is well-defined, as was seen on the OSRAM.

 

CONCLUSION: This sensor is definitely fast enough. However, I can’t recommend it, due to its high cost and the nuisance of requiring two biasing resisters to achieve stable waveforms across all PWM frequencies.

 


 

CONTINUED

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 4 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 152
Location: Beaverton Oregon

PART 4  CONTINUED

 


 

Thorlabs FDS100 PIN Photodiode (Thorlabs link)

 

This is the same PIN photodiode (approx $15) used in Thorlabs DET36A2 biased photodetector ($124), link. The DET36A2 is similar to the one used by BLF member maukka.

 

This PIN photodiode comes with Thorlabs Lab Snacks.

 

 A biasing resistor of approx 3K is a good starting value. The third lead (case ground) can be left unattached. 

 

 J5 on low, fall time 5.6us

 

J5 waveform triggered on falling edge, zoomed in for accurate fall time of 6.4us

 

Convoy at .1% brightness, fall time 3us

 

Convoy at 1% brightness, PWM at 18.1Khz, fall time 2.5us

 

Convoy at 10% brightness, PWM at 36.2Khz, fall time 3.7us

 

Convoy at 35% brightness, no clipping and a stable waveform with a fall time of 3.3us

 

Since this sensor is also doing so well, I will once again use the Koolertron signal generator (and homemade PWM generator) and apply a PWM frequency of 100Khz.  The FDS100 handled it well (waveform still looks good).

 

 

And finally, I’m going to sneak something in. Here’s the oscillations on a Zebralight SC53Fc (medium brightness). These oscillations have been discussed in other threads. I’m not invested in whether this is or isn’t PWM, I’m just showing what the scope sees, because I find it interesting, and because I can now see it myself.

  

CONCLUSION: The FDS100 is also an excellent sensor for measuring flashlight PWM. It can easily track frequencies higher than you would see on a consumer flashlight. As a bonus, you get Thorlabs lab snacks. 

 



 

Everlight PD438C-S46 PIN Diode (Amazon link) (Digi-Key link)

 

 


This photodiode needs a biasing resistor to turn current into voltage. 10K is a good starting value. 

 

J5 on low, PWM at 243Hz. We see a fall time of 12us.

 

 

J5 on low, triggered on falling edge, zoomed in for an accurate fall time of 6us.

 

 

J5 at .1% brightness, PWM at 2.3Khz. Note the fall time is a little faster at 2.4us.

 

 

Convoy at 1% brightness, PWM at 18.2Khz. Fall time at 2.3us. 

 

 

Convoy at 10% brightness, PWM at 36.2Khz.  Fall time at 2.8us (good).

 

 

Convoy at 35% brightness, PWM at 36.3Khz. Fall time remains fast at 3.7us. Waveform has a well-defined pulse, like the OSRAM.

 

 

CONCLUSION: This is also an excellent sensor for measuring flashlight PWM, as good as the OSRAM. It's worth noting, that all four recommended sensors below are PIN photodiodes.

 



..FFINAL CONCLUSION... 

 

 In my opinion, any of the following four sensors would make excellent choices for measuring flashlight PWM:

  • OSRAM BPW34S PIN photodiode (approx $6-$8) link
  • HAMAMATSU S1223 30mhz PIN photodiode (approx $20) link
  • Thorlabs FDS100 PIN photodiode (approx $14) comes with lab snacks link
  • Everlight PD438C-S46 PIN photodiode (approx $4).  link1 link2

These recommended sensors have fast fall times, are easy to bias with one resister, produce stable waveforms across all PWM frequencies, and are relatively inexpensive. PIN photodiodes in particular appear to excel at measuring flashlight PWM. In general, a sensor’s actual measured fall time should be about 5us or less to be effective at measuring flashlight PWM at higher frequencies (18khz-36Khz). It was also noted that the best sensors in this review had large sensor areas. The duty cycle was also consistent across all four sensors.

 

Also, the speed of some of these sensors could possibly be improved with more sophisticated (read complex) biasing than what I used. I attempted to keep it as simple as possible. Therefore, if a sensor’s listed fall-time spec is 10ns (faster than anything I saw), that doesn’t mean you will see that speed measuring flashlight PWM. There are many factors that affect the measured fall time. A listed spec of 10ns may require a 50Ω BNC cable that’s impedance matched with a 50Ω terminating resistor (for example). For our purposes, that would require an extra level of complexity most people won’t bother with (nor was it necessary). The simple/normal way most people will use a scope – is with a 1meg scope probe that’s impedance matched with the scope’s 1meg input. On a couple of the sensors, I actually did try using a 50Ω BNC cable matched to a 50Ω inline terminating resistor (replacing the scope probe), which is more commonly used with high frequencies. Although I saw improved sensor fall times, it also caused overshoot, ringing and distorted waveforms.

 

Before ending, let me make a side note here, as to whether a multimeter can be used to measure PWM. As you can see in the next photo, yes it can, if your multimeter has a good frequency function. HOWEVER, there’s a possible problem with this. One thing I’ve learned; at higher brightness levels, sensors can become sensitive to the angle the light was pointed at the sensor. These sensors can saturate easily at higher brightness levels, creating a flat waveform that’s stuck somewhere near high, until the light is pointed partially away from the sensor. That’s easy to see with an oscilloscope. But with a multimeter, you’re blind, and you wouldn’t know if the sensor was saturated – and you might erroneously conclude there is no PWM, when in fact there was.

 

Finally, you might be interested to know . . . every sensor went through at least three rounds of testing over many days. With each round of testing, I became a little smarter on the best way to test/bias each sensor, and what data to compile.

 

After testing was completed, all sensors were stored & labeled in anti-static bags.

 

 

Stereodude
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 03/16/2013 - 21:14
Posts: 437
Location: US of A

If you have a scope, why use an optical sensor at all when you can just measure Vf with the scope and see the PWM directly? Or is the intent to have a way to measure without disassembling the light?

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 4 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 152
Location: Beaverton Oregon

Stereodude wrote:
If you have a scope, why use an optical sensor at all when you can just measure Vf with the scope and see the PWM directly? Or is the intent to have a way to measure without disassembling the light?

 

Yes, some of us won't want to disassemble a light (or don't know how). 

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 4 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 152
Location: Beaverton Oregon

Turns out, one little tiny smiley face towards the bottom of the entire/completed post kept me from posting the entire post, without breaking it up.

"unknown error"

DavidEF
DavidEF's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 15 min ago
Joined: 06/05/2014 - 06:00
Posts: 6086
Location: Salisbury, North Carolina, USA

Terry Oregon wrote:

Turns out, one little tiny smiley face towards the bottom of the post kept me from posting the entire post, without breaking it up.


“unknown error”


That’s hilarious! LOL

Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone.
-Ayn Rand

x8353
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 06/03/2018 - 21:05
Posts: 22
Location: United States

Nice – even if I scrolled pretty quickly through parts [no smiley face – they’re dangerous]. I will come back and spend more time on it. Ummm. When/if I get an oscilloscope.

“Oscilloscope” apps are available Android smartphones, and I believe for iPhones (provided they have a 3.5mm jack).

They are intended for analysis of audio input through the 3.5mm jack, and presumably are limited to audio frequencies (by software? by hardware?), but they do some clever o-scope stuff, and could do much of what you show, within the supported frequency range.

It has seemed to me that putting a photodiode pointing out the cord hole of a 3.5mm stereo plug, sort of a poor-man’s version of Ftlab/Smartlab’s series of Smart XX Checkers, and with the appropriate app, PWM clocking for the masses. And then I come to the never-get-around-to-it phase.

So since you actually seem to get things done, I thought maybe I’d pass the idea on to you to figure out the details and best options.

Looking at audio-frequency PWM might provide all the play-value I need, or it might turn out to be the entry-level drug toward getting a real oscilloscope. I’ve wanted an o-scope on and off for decades, but never quite built a business case while I was still working, and never quite built a play-value case then or now.

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 4 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 152
Location: Beaverton Oregon

Quote:
I thought maybe I’d pass the idea on to you to figure out the details and best options.

 

Thanks, my career background was in electronics (37yrs), so I stuck with what I know. A while back, I tried that Viso Flicker Tester on my iPhone. It's pretty crude, doesn't really tell me anything of value.  Here's what I got with the J5 Tactical V1 Pro.

 

 

 

maukka
maukka's picture
Online
Last seen: 24 sec ago
Joined: 12/31/2015 - 04:15
Posts: 1466
Location: Finland

Fantastic tests! I also used the nice OSRAM BPW34 before getting the Thorlabs.

For handling the sensitivity issues on very low moonlight modes with the Thorlabs, I skipped the expensive variable inline terminator they sell and just use a BNC T connector with one of these and a higher value resistor.

Btw, I don’t use the Thorlabs with the sphere. I just shine the light directly and adjust distance/angle in a dark room to handle the saturation on higher modes.

I’ve also had good results with just a small solar cell (from a garden light) and measuring over a resistor.

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 4 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 152
Location: Beaverton Oregon

Quote:
Btw, I don’t use the Thorlabs with the sphere. I just shine the light directly and adjust distance/angle in a dark room to handle the saturation on higher modes.

Post corrected. BTW, it's partially your fault for my long post. Those Rigol scope captures are what got me thinking.  Smile

Quote:
I’ve also had good results with just a small solar cell (from a garden light) and measuring over a resistor.

 

I would be interested to see that setup, how you attached the resistor, what value, and whether you got adequate speeds?

 

I didn't post this (but will now). I did test a Casio calculator solar cell, and the results were not good:

 

 

The calculator was disassembled (read destroyed). The solar cell was somehow sonic welded into the case, couldn't remove it with out a lot of cutting, so just left it in.  I did attach the rotating potentiometer to the solar cell, but regardless of whether the resistor value was 0 or 10K, the waveform was the same.

 

 

The J5 Tactical V1 Pro on low, DC coupled. The solar cell is very slow with a fall time of 1.2ms. In addition, the cell has a constant DC bias, which the waveform rides on. 

 

J5 on low, AC coupled.  Slow fall time of 1.5ms

 

Convoy S2+, at 10% brightness. DC coupled. Again, the solar cell has a DC bias, which the waveform rides on top.

 

Convoy S2+, at 10% brightness.  AC coupled

CONCLUSION.  Although technically you can measure the higher frequencies of a Convoy S2+, the duty cycle and waveform are highly skewed. 

 

Are there faster solar cells that might do better?

 

djozz
djozz's picture
Online
Last seen: 13 min 44 sec ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 13269
Location: Amsterdam

Very cool testing! I know nothing about this subject but it is relevant to the hobby. I’m inspired to make a PWM tester because of this test Smile

link to djozz tests 

“I used to think that top environmental problems were biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and climate change. I thought that thirty years of good science could address these problems. I was wrong. The top environmental problems are selfishness, greed and apathy, and to deal with these we need a cultural and spiritual transformation. And we scientists don’t know how to do that.”   (Gus Speth)

x8353
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 06/03/2018 - 21:05
Posts: 22
Location: United States
Terry Oregon wrote:

Quote:
I thought maybe I’d pass the idea on to you to figure out the details and best options.

 


Thanks, my career background was in electronics (37yrs), so I stuck with what I know. A while back, I tried that Viso Flicker Tester on my iPhone. It’s pretty crude, doesn’t really tell me anything of value.  Here’s what I got with the J5 Tactical V1 Pro.

Oy.

This is actually the kind of app I was thinking of : Oscilloscope (Android). There are at least a dozen more or less similar Android apps.

I also looked at this for iOS, but although I have an iPad mini and a few old iPhones, they’re not my go-to for this kind of stuff, so I don’t really know what else is out there. I know iOS security often doesn’t allow the kind of (sometimes risky) fun that Android does.

My own electronics design-level work more-or-less peaked in the 74LS74 era, and while I continued to carry and use soldering equipment and logic probes in the field for several more years, things tended more and more towards consulting. The background in software (since 1966) and electronics (a bit earlier) was vital, but less and less hands-on, until around the time I retired, I realized I knew hardly anything useful anymore, and didn’t mind at all. Last week it took me over an hour poking around the house to find a soldering iron for a flashlight repair. At least the soldering itself turned out quick and easy. Now I’m trying to remember where I saw either the soldering gun or the big iron to fix a crack in a carbide lamp, or maybe I can find a torch? That would be more fun.

I do want to try the Android version of the Viso Flicker app – though 2.3 stars and “25 trail uses” [sic] suggest it’s not going to be any better than the iOS version.

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 4 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 152
Location: Beaverton Oregon

..Open Request to Contribute To This Thread..

 

If anyone has tested something/anything that can measure flashlight PWM as well as my three recommended sensors (regardless of what type of device), please contribute to this thread with "how to" details on setup/configuration, device details, and results. Even if the device was a total failure, post that as well (as a warning). I would like to make this the go-to thread for different ways to measure PWM successfully. I may add more devices in the future.

 

 

maukka
maukka's picture
Online
Last seen: 24 sec ago
Joined: 12/31/2015 - 04:15
Posts: 1466
Location: Finland
Terry Oregon wrote:

I didn’t post this (but will now). I did test a Casio calculator solar cell, and the results were not good:

I will post some tests at some point. This was my first test a year or so ago with a H17f driver with just a DMM connected to the solar cell without any additional parts. It does require a good multimeter, which doesn’t require zero crossing to pick up the PWM, but shows that the signal is clear enough to be interpreted even when above the human threshold of noticing it. With a resistor the fall time improved significantly.

Flashy Mike
Flashy Mike's picture
Offline
Last seen: 26 min 15 sec ago
Joined: 01/14/2016 - 16:38
Posts: 1039
Location: Germany

@Terry:
Very useful information, thanks for the immense work!

May I add another cheap solution, all from the spare parts box:

1.) old MCPCB with LED, larger die preferred (here XM-L2, I guess),
2.) Resistor (here 4.7k)

… and a multimeter capable of frequency counting. Also works with oscilloscope, of course.

maukka
maukka's picture
Online
Last seen: 24 sec ago
Joined: 12/31/2015 - 04:15
Posts: 1466
Location: Finland

And the simplest method of them all is to take a photo while moving the camera or light and count the trails.

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 4 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 152
Location: Beaverton Oregon

Thanks for the contributions. There are some older posts on using a sound card input, then using some type of scope software to access the waveform. Anyone want to try this, with details?  

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 4 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 152
Location: Beaverton Oregon

Quote:
(maukka) - This was my first test a year or so ago with a H17f driver with just a DMM connected to the solar cell without any additional parts. It does require a good multimeter, which doesn’t require zero crossing to pick up the PWM, but shows that the signal is clear enough to be interpreted even when above the human threshold of noticing it. With a resistor the fall time improved significantly.

 

My suspicion is that different solar cells will have different biasing characteristics/response times. If we can get the details on a specific solar cell, then the results can be duplicated.

K. Meier
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 21 hours ago
Joined: 08/07/2018 - 14:32
Posts: 2
Location: Germany

I am very interested in measuring PWM, too. But not just flash lights but also regular lights and especially display PWM. Displays are not as bright as flash lights, especially on lower brightness levels.
Your thread greatly helped me in “building” my own biased BPW34 circuit, thank you for that! I just replaced your 8K resistor with a 100K resistor. I needed 100K because lower resistances would not display much detail on my oscilloscope due to low voltage. Now my voltage range is in between 20 mV (lowest display brightness) and 400 mV (full display brightness), which is great.
I just wonder if the 100K resistor as opposed to 8K makes the photodiode less responsive or introduces additional noise. Do you know about that?

You mentioned the Thorlabs DET36A2. Do you know if it has a similar output voltage when connected to an oscilloscope?
I am tempted to buy a Thorlabs detector in the hopes of getting less noise and more precise measurements. Maybe those devices are the ultimate PWM measurement tools. However, I do not know how much voltage they deliver. Maybe the biased ones would do, or maybe the more expensive amplified photo detectors are needed. Any ideas?

@maukka You were mentioned to own a device simliar to the DET36A2. What device are you using, and do the voltages differ to the do-it-yourself methods in this thread?

And finally, you asked for other devices that can measure PWM. There is the portable Fauser LiFli (https://www.fauser.biz/li/lifli_e.htm), which can detect flicker up to 400 kHz. A downside is it will not directly tell you the frequency. You can listen to the audio output to “hear” frequencies. Ultrasound is converted into audible sound. If there is flicker, the device tells you a rounded percentage on an LED scale. It even has an oscilloscope output. Sadly, the output of my device has a lot of noise, making it less useful for low brightness measurements. I believe it is usable for higher brightness as seen in flash lights or room lighting. The device itself will not tell you a percentage if the light is below 100 lux.

MRsDNF
MRsDNF's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 41 min ago
Joined: 12/22/2011 - 21:18
Posts: 12378
Location: A light beam away from the missus in the land of Aus.

I admire your skills Terry and thank you for all the testing. Thumbs Up
One question. You stored the sensors in anti static bags. Where were the lab Snacks stored? Smile

My current and or voltage measurements are only relevent to anything that I measure.

Budget light hobby proudly sponsored by my Mastercard and unknowingly paid for by a hard working wife. 

djozz said "it came with chinese lettering that is chinese to me".

old4570 said "I'm not an expert , so don't suffer from any such technical restrictions".

Old-Lumens. Highly admired and cherished member of Budget Light Forum. 11.5.2011 - 20.12.16. RIP.

 

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 4 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 152
Location: Beaverton Oregon

Quote:
K. Meier wrote: I just wonder if the 100K resistor as opposed to 8K makes the photodiode less responsive or introduces additional noise. Do you know about that?
 

I just tried a 100K resistor with the OSRAM.  The noise, amplitude and sensitivity didn't seem to change, but the fall time increased about 4X, causing clipping to occur sooner. However, whatever seems to work - which is why I said "the resistor values on my schematics can be taken with a grain-of-salt. My values are just a starting value. You may find lower/higher values work better in your circuit".  . Was your supply voltage the same as mine?

 

Quote:
K. Meier wrote: You mentioned the Thorlabs DET36A2. Do you know if it has a similar output voltage when connected to an oscilloscope? I am tempted to buy a Thorlabs detector in the hopes of getting less noise and more precise measurements. Maybe those devices are the ultimate PWM measurement tools. However, I do not know how much voltage they deliver.

 

The Thorlabs DET36A2 uses a 12V battery for biasing voltage (significantly higher than what I used), and they recommend a 50Ω BNC cable impedance matched to a 50Ω terminator. Can't say if this would give better results for measuring display PWM. If you decide to buy one, let us know the results.

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 4 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 152
Location: Beaverton Oregon

Quote:
Where were the lab Snacks stored?

 

There should be a good joke here, still trying to think of one . . .

 

MRsDNF
MRsDNF's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 41 min ago
Joined: 12/22/2011 - 21:18
Posts: 12378
Location: A light beam away from the missus in the land of Aus.

Someone’s belly? Smile

My current and or voltage measurements are only relevent to anything that I measure.

Budget light hobby proudly sponsored by my Mastercard and unknowingly paid for by a hard working wife. 

djozz said "it came with chinese lettering that is chinese to me".

old4570 said "I'm not an expert , so don't suffer from any such technical restrictions".

Old-Lumens. Highly admired and cherished member of Budget Light Forum. 11.5.2011 - 20.12.16. RIP.

 

K. Meier
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 21 hours ago
Joined: 08/07/2018 - 14:32
Posts: 2
Location: Germany

Terry Oregon wrote:

Was your supply voltage the same as mine?


I use a 9 V battery. Actually I do not know which manufacturer my BPW34 is from. I have read the Vishay manual which states a 10 V bias and 1K resistor give the diode 100 ns rise/fall time: https://www.vishay.com/docs/81521/bpw34.pdf. The OSRAM PDF differs and mentions 5 V, 50 Ohm, and 20 ns: https://www.osram.com/media/resource/hires/osram-dam-2495812/BPW%2034.pdf
It seems it is not a simple task to make the most out of one’s circuit.