help for optical table choice
Locked
 
|
Jean-Pierre CLAMME |
help for optical table choice
|
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Hi, I'm shopping for an optical table for a new confocal / 2photon microscope and FCS setup and I was wondering what kind of grade I need. Indeed for the 2 photon microscope that we have here ((the new one is for another place) , we have a TMC 784 series (maximum dry damping) table. I saw somewhere that this table is equivalent to the RS 4000 series from NEWPORT. So I was wondering if this grade is really necessary for a confocal microscope and FCS system. Or if as long as I have pneumatic legs, a RS2000 or 783 (standard damping) would be fine ? Thank you in advance, JP |
|
|
Craig Brideau |
Re: help for optical table choice
|
|
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
It really depends on where your microscope is going to be. If you are in a basement, away from major streets, you can probably get away with a TMC 770 Series or RS 2000 with fixed legs and 12" of thickness. On the other hand, if you are on a higher story of a building near a highway or heavy construction you might need to go as far as a 780 or RS 4000 with pneumatic isolators and a thicker table. Another factor is adjacent equipment. If your fridge/freezer/machine room is right next door you will probably need higher-end damping. Our lab is on an upper story in a building still under construction next to a major highway. We went with 18" thick TMC 780 tables and pneumatic gimbaled legs. We can see the difference in our images when the tables are floated vs when they are not. Generally, if you aren't too strapped for cash buy a bit better than you think you need just to play it safe. Thicker tables are generally always a good idea; more mass means it's less likely to move, even if you are in a basement. Another thing to consider is how you are going to get the table into the room you are going to use. In our case we had to open up the side of the building and have them lifted in with a mobile crane! @:-) Craig
|
|
|
Rietdorf, Jens |
Re: help for optical table choice
|
|
In reply to this post by Jean-Pierre CLAMME
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Hello Jean-Pierre, we got excellent results with the TS series tables from http://www.hwlscientific.com/ (no commercial interest) in an environment where all kinds of passive dumping have failed. You may want to include these into your evaluation. Best, jens -----Original Message----- From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jean-Pierre CLAMME Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 12:20 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: help for optical table choice Search the CONFOCAL archive at http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal Hi, I'm shopping for an optical table for a new confocal / 2photon microscope and FCS setup and I was wondering what kind of grade I need. Indeed for the 2 photon microscope that we have here ((the new one is for another place) , we have a TMC 784 series (maximum dry damping) table. I saw somewhere that this table is equivalent to the RS 4000 series from NEWPORT. So I was wondering if this grade is really necessary for a confocal microscope and FCS system. Or if as long as I have pneumatic legs, a RS2000 or 783 (standard damping) would be fine ? Thank you in advance, JP |
|
|
Craig Brideau |
Re: help for optical table choice
|
|
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
If I might ask, what application were you using that you required active damping? I haven't heard of this a whole lot outside of AFM and the semiconductor industry, although I see it is becoming more popular for highly sensitive applications.
Craig On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 5:05 AM, Rietdorf, Jens <[hidden email]> wrote: Hello Jean-Pierre, |
|
|
Rietdorf, Jens |
Re: help for optical table choice
|
|
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
Dear Craig, We use it for ‘simple’ confocal microscopy. We are
located in a city, close to a railway station, we have some centrifuges
running next door, our facility is on the 2nd floor (not my idea to
build it there), so we never reached anywhere near the resolution specs until
we switched to active dumping. jens From: Confocal Microscopy
List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Craig Brideau Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal If I might ask, what
application were you using that you required active damping? I haven't
heard of this a whole lot outside of AFM and the semiconductor industry,
although I see it is becoming more popular for highly sensitive applications. On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 5:05 AM, Rietdorf, Jens
<[hidden email]> wrote: Search the CONFOCAL archive at Hello Jean-Pierre,
|
|
|
Craig Brideau |
Re: help for optical table choice
|
|
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
Holy cow! That's a pretty extreme situation. You should be the company's 'poster child'! @:-)
Craig On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 12:06 AM, Rietdorf, Jens <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
|
|
J. Thomas Fisher |
Re: help for optical table choice
|
|
In reply to this post by Jean-Pierre CLAMME
In most MPM investigations, and typical laboratory environments, a Newport RS2000 series (same performance as TMC 784) would provide sufficient damping for the top surface and the requirements for isolation would depend upon the lab location. Choosing an air filled isolator will provide sufficient isolation performance in most environments. I would consider the Newport PL-2000 to start and if you have some extra $$ you can get an upgrade kit to install active leveling/auto filling to the legs. Call them and ask about it.
I would also recommend choosing damped optical posts for the components. I've seen several MPM set-ups where undamped posts were used which resulted in distorted images. The thickness of the table affects its static deflection more than the damping performance so choose a thickness based upon the weight placed on the table. Most MPM set-up won't weight more than 250lbs so an 8" thick table should be sufficient. I know that Olympus now specifies and sells RS2000 Newport tables with thier FlouView scopes so they must work for them. (http://www.olympusamerica.com/seg_section/product.asp?product=1020&p=-1)
|
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |