1 / 13

Syntec Technologies: Pushing the Polymer Envelope

Syntec Technologies: Pushing the Polymer Envelope. HRDT™ and patent-pending High Refraction Diamond Turning are trademarks of Syntec Technologies. Applications are Driving Innovation. Wider range of optical spectrums (IR and UV). Lower cost. Smaller, lighter packaging. Stronger

aletta
Download Presentation

Syntec Technologies: Pushing the Polymer Envelope

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Syntec Technologies: Pushing the Polymer Envelope HRDT™ and patent-pending High Refraction Diamond Turning are trademarks of Syntec Technologies

  2. Applications are Driving Innovation Wider range of optical spectrums (IR and UV) Lower cost Smaller, lighter packaging Stronger environmental resistance Higher quality

  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 • Withstanding extreme temperatures and chemical exposure is often critical, as are easy clean-up and resistance to damage Sophisticated manufacturing processes

  4. Material Trends: Accelerating Since 1990 Improved optics overall • Temperature ranges (below 0c to over 200c) • Transmission quality (390 to 1600 + nm) • Stability of index of refraction generally increasing Common polymers available in optical grades More ways to manage birefringence • Higher flow rates • Better component design • Post processing

  5. Manufacturing Trends: Improving and Converging • 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 Molding Single Point Diamond Turning • Extremely precise optical mold inserts • All geometries • Fully compensate for shrinkage • Fast turnaround prototypes • No molds • Replicate production approach • Finished optics, select polymers

  6. Consequence: Many applications not feasible (time and/or $) Hypothesis: Issue is a relievable surface energy problem • Virtually all low volume ones • Most high volume innovations • Some high volume proven ones • Relieve material by annealing before diamond turning • Customize amount of annealing plus machine settings, using repeatable formulas based on component geometry HRDT™ Processing Breakthrough Problem: Surface failures on PEI and PES make SPDT unusable

  7. HRDT™ Results Typical SPDT machining; 390 Å achieved Optically unacceptable HRDT™ success; 60 Å achieved Fully repeatable and optically acceptable

  8. – – – – – – – – Alternative choices, sometimes desirable for unusual geometries or exceptionally tight schedules Currently not possible – More Flexibility For More Applications — Faster Requirements Distribution Design phases Development phases Beta production Full production Proof-of-concept Quick Prototype Initial Quantity Volume Quantity Molded SPDT HRDT Molded SPDT HRDT Molded SPDT HRDT Molded SPDT HRDT PMMA Cyclic Olefin Polystyrene PEI PES Usually lowest total cost choice (over 95% of the time) New flexibility

  9. HRDT: Applications That Fit Newer designs and packaging, either high or unknown volumes High heat, high index of refraction (e.g., datacom evanescent coupling) Optics that can be mounted to a PC board beforewave reflow Generally proven design and packaging, but inherently low volume Innovation ideas where R & D funds are tight or short lead times vital

  10. Key Questions Are optical components low or high complexity? • Is overall application well under- stood or innovative? • Optimizing new functionality or interfaces takes more cycles • How many proof-of-concept andprototype cycles make sense? • More changes earlier increases product quality at lower risk & cost What is the value of each week of development time saved?

  11. Key Assumptions Assumptions Low Optics Complexity High Optics Complexity 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. Bottom Line Impact Low Optics Complexity High Optics Complexity Known Application Innovative Application Known Application Innovative Application Cycles HRDT No HRDT Cycles HRDT No HRDT Cycles HRDT No HRDT Cycles HRDT No HRDT Proof-of-concept Prototyping Cycles Beta production cycle Volume production Total Hard Cost Summary Hard costs Dev. time savings Total HRDT Advantage 0 1 0 1 – 2.5K – 15K 17.5K (.5K) 30K 29.5K – 14K – 3K 17K 1 1 1 1 2.5K 2.5K 2.5K 15K 22.5K 20.1K 90K 110.1K 14K 12.8K 12.8K 3K 42.6K 0 2 0 1 – 10K – 30K 40K 12K 120K 132K – 49K – 3K 52K 2 2 1 1 10K 10K 5K 30K 55K 64K 270K 334K 49K 44K 23K 3K 119K

  13. What’s Next? Continue tackling solubletechnicalbarriers Materials operating in the 3–5 micron and 8–12 micron range More thermally stable materials over wider range of temperatures Higher temperature materials for the visible range Harder surface resistances for better scratch avoidance Reduce non-technical barriers of awareness and collaboration Keep design front and center Application demands Material characteristics Manufacturing process

More Related