Page 1 of 1

KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:59 pm
by MalVeauX
Hey all,

I broke a KG3 today. Looking to replace it for a DIY kit (the Skybender) that I use to image in 393nm and 540nm. Dunno how I broke it, but when I was tilt-tuning with the Skybender I heard a sound and looked in there and found the IR filter (KG3) with a total crack down the center. Only looking for 1.25" size.

Is a KG3 IR absorption filter the same as an IR blocking filter? I can readily find IR blocking filters. But IR absorption, like the KG3, is different maybe? It's only purpose is to reject heat and allow 393nm and 500~540nm pass.

Thanks!

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:10 am
by Merlin66
If you check out the KG3 transmission curve, you'll see it acts as a UV-IR blocker.
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=Kg3+filter&rlz
It looks a good match for 393nm (whereas "normal" UV-IR filters cut at around 400nm and effectively block the CaK.)
You probably should replace like with like. Adding just an IR filter won't cut the UV side.

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:55 am
by marktownley
MalVeauX wrote: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:59 pm Is a KG3 IR absorption filter the same as an IR blocking filter? I can readily find IR blocking filters. But IR absorption, like the KG3, is different maybe?
Hi Marty, KG3 blocks a lot further into the IR than a IR Blocker filter. I use KG3 in my CaK filter, also in a skybender (thanks Apollo!) I find it helps increase contrast when imaging,

Mark

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:28 am
by MalVeauX
Thanks guys,

I just ordered a new KG3 from NewPort (same exact filter). Just was curious if there was a way to make it even better compared to absorption versus reflection, etc, regarding IR.

I'm mostly interested in 393nm with it, as an inexpensive way to play with near Calcium with a Skybender for now, rather than shell out for a Quark CA or Lunt CA (can't do the Lunt CA, if its limited to 100mm apertures, I don't want something that has a hard limit). Rarely see the Quark CA's used, or I'd get one. So until then, I'll fool with the Skybender. It does seem to work decently to show something significantly different from just white light. And I have a set of 532nm filters to use with it too, along with a 540nm filter, to play around in white light more and try to see if I can do better convection cells that way, as soon as the KG3 arrives to test it out.

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 1:41 pm
by Bob Yoesle
Remember that at 393 nm that 100 mm aperture is equivalent to about 166 mm of aperture at 656 nm. You can also go larger with more sophisticated ERF/blocking filter implementations.

viewtopic.php?t=16455

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 3:32 am
by MalVeauX
Thanks Bob,

Experimenting with some older tech and older information, simply new to me! :)

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:22 pm
by MalVeauX
Hey guys,

Can't find it in any of the documentation, but does it matter which side of the KG3 is facing the heat source (sun)? I got it in today, but it's just the glass, and I have to put it in filter cell which I have, but just wanted to make sure it's not directional. One side has the KG3 printed on it plainly to see. But again, the documentation on the filter, and on the website, doesn't really cover whether it matters what direction or face the filter is used.

Ideas?

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2018 4:52 pm
by marktownley
No it doesn't matter Marty

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:07 pm
by MalVeauX
Thanks! Did the trick and took care of the heat, back in business.

Image

Image

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2018 5:45 am
by marktownley
If you are using that with a 120mm scope on the nosepiece like that my money is that the heat will crack it.

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 3:55 pm
by MalVeauX
I've been imaging this way for months and so far, no cracking. Granted, I image for maybe 30 minutes in the morning. I don't go for hours and hours all day with it.

What would your recommend?

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Thu May 03, 2018 6:55 pm
by christian viladrich
A KG3 filter absorbs energy from the infrared.
In other words, the energy received is accumulated in the KG3. So the temperature of the filter increases untill an equilibrum is reached when the energy radiated by the filter equals the energy received.
But .. because an increase of temperature means dilation of the glass, and because the temperature is not uniform accros the filter, the dilations are not uniform accord the filter.... which means ... the filter breaks...

A dielectric (multicoated) IR blocking filter is a different beast. The substrate is transparent, which means it doesn't accumulate heat. This is the work of the coating to reflect IR. This is done with some energy losses, which means a very small amount of energy is transfered to the subtrate. This is very minimal. So, no dilation and no filter breaking (unless you use a large scope).

So, a dielectric filter is the way to go. But ... dielectric filters do not cut IR beyond about 1100 nm. This might be an issue or not, depending on the size of the scope.

Depending on the optical setup, the use of a red multicoated filter could also be a good option.

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sun May 06, 2018 8:52 pm
by christian viladrich
As you said, the Beloptik filter is a dielectric filter. The coating reduces the heat load on the substrate. That would be a different story with a KG3 with no coating.

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sat May 26, 2018 2:49 am
by MalVeauX
Thanks all,

I broke the KG3 already. It spent a lot of time in my 120mm refractor eating full sun and succame after a 3 hour session and broke.

So, that means I need to either look into this dielectric IR cut KG3 filter you're all mentioning, or I need to look into some kind of ERF. Gotta compare some stuff.

Would appreciate links to any of this stuff (USA here, if it matters). That link above to Beloptik is a filter that blocks UV, which means, it blocks the 393nm wavelength, and would not be useful for a Calcium set.... right?

I'm starting to really think about the Quark CaH and Lunt CaK at this point. Ugh.

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sat May 26, 2018 3:18 am
by Merlin66
I think you'll find the UV-IR cut excludes the 393nm.....
The Baader CCD Blue filter could be an alternative worth looking at. (# 2458470B)
I've just acquired one for testing on my Omega CaK stack.

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sat May 26, 2018 1:03 pm
by MalVeauX
TheSkyBurner wrote: Sat May 26, 2018 11:25 am Hey i was just looking at your other posts, you already have the erf filter you just got it placed in the wrong section of the skybender. That 395 filter is the erf and the kg3 is suppsed to go behind it. One of the 393filters go on the tilt module and the second one goes on your camera

That is a prefilter you got and the kg3 was the secondary, .
Interesting,

That's not what Apollo (the guy that made this) said to do... I have it in the configuration he said it was supposed to be in when he gave it to me. But, I don't know any better honestly, so for all I know maybe it is wrong.

I'm at the point where I need to just pony up on a Lunt Cak or Quark CaH. :(

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sat May 26, 2018 1:38 pm
by MalVeauX
Hrm,

So maybe, I could use something like this (2" to 1.25" adapter):

https://agenaastro.com/blue-fireball-m4 ... gJlDvD_BwE

Put the 395 filter I have on the nose of the extension tube, and put that into the focuser. Then, put the skybender (or any train with the 393nm filters) back towards the camera side.

I wonder if it would vignette big time.

Alternatively, I wonder if I can find a way to make an ERF for this in general, such as a 2" filter of some kind (like the blue filters?) and put that first, then the 395nm, then the 393nm?

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sat May 26, 2018 3:14 pm
by MalVeauX
Hrm, if that filter works (Baader 2458475B) as an ERF (blocking IR, and other wavelengths, but keeping UV), then further narrowing it with my 395nm filter, I could then use the two 393nm filters to further narrow it down maybe. The thing I have to figure out is just how to manage the heat from a 120mm aperture with this.

I look forwarding seeing how the baader blue filter works as an ERF. If it does, I'll have to consider it. If I can get away from using IR only blocking/absorbing filters, like the KG series, that would be good. I just need to be able to use it on large apertures. Even if I had to do the blue then an additional IR blocker/reflector, then the 395nm, then the 393nm, that would be fine.

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sat May 26, 2018 6:03 pm
by MalVeauX
The Quark manual (updated) states it can go up to 150mm with just the Quark Calcium & a UV/IR cut filter.

Lunt limited to 100mm makes sense, but over 100mm, an ERF could be employed (Aires?).

I'm very interested to see how a Baader Blue CCD filter -> UV/IR block -> paper burn goes.

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sat May 26, 2018 9:11 pm
by MalVeauX
Hrm,

I doubt the reflected heat is an issue. This is done with internal ERF's in some systems, and the Quark Chromosphere does it too, it reflects the heat back out. I don't get haze or anything in my Quark and I use the UV/IR cut filter. Other people using whatever etalon and internal ERF's are also reflecting heat back out.

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sun May 27, 2018 8:27 pm
by christian viladrich
I might be a little bit off topic, but as an information, I use a 50 mm Blue Astronomik filter placed 220 mm ahead of the focus for Ca K imaging with my TOA 150.
The filter is slighlty tilted to avoid reflections.

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Mon May 28, 2018 9:59 pm
by Merlin66
What aperture and focal length scope did you use????

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Wed May 30, 2018 1:13 am
by MalVeauX
Interesting,

As soon as the spin off storm from tropical storm Alberto rolls away from me, I'll test some things. When I have my 395nm filters and the two 393nm filters in line, I don't even get a light path on my hand behind it, it blocks so much. I don't even feel heat. But that KG3 before them sure did and cracked.

With my Baader UV/IR cut filter inline with my 120 F8.3, there's warmth in the light path, but it doesn't burn my hand. At least, not a few inches away for a few seconds. Maybe right on it, it will melt stuff. With nothing in the way, I've totally melted plastic caps and started some foam to smoke before...

It probably helps with heat, just enough to not melt the metal/glass/sensor. We're testing the heat on paper, leaves, plastic, etc. Things that will have a higher combustion point as it is. So maybe they're meant to take high temps and this gets it just low enough to not melt.

I'm curious how the blue blocking filter will handle things.

Soon as I get a clear day, I'll test some heat blocking. Wish I had a way to read it with an IR heat sensor or something...

Anything in the $500+ arena, I wouldn't consider, as at that point you can get a Lunt modul, or a smaller ERF made.

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Wed May 30, 2018 1:30 am
by Merlin66
Guys,
If you search the forum for "ERF temperature" you'll find some interesting data.....
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=5719&hilit=erf+temperature

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Wed May 30, 2018 1:52 am
by MalVeauX
Very interesting that red + UV/IR block filter. Especially considering the cost of a Lunt blocking or Coronado blocking filter of good diameter size.

Problem with UV/IR with near UV imaging is the UV kills the imaging. My badder UV/IR filter totally killed my ability to see anything when I put it inline with my Skybender loaded with 395nm pass and two 393nm pass filters. Was a grey wall. Pulled out the uv/ir filter and suddenly a disc was there.

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Wed May 30, 2018 7:32 pm
by christian viladrich
FYI, the Astronomik Blue filter cuts wavelength below about 370-390 nm. I'll try to post the curve this WE. This is a quite good ERF filter for Ca K.
Another good ERF for CaK, is the EO 390 nm filter FWHM 40 nm, but it is very expensive.

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Wed May 30, 2018 7:39 pm
by christian viladrich
An image is better than a thousand words ;-)
Here is an example of CaK image taken with the TOA 150 and B Astronomik (internal ERF in front of the FFC), K-line filtre (as additional filter after the FFC) and a Ca K filter :
Image
The K-line filter temperature rises to 35-40°C which is quite reasonable.

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Thu May 31, 2018 6:35 pm
by christian viladrich
Yes indeed. You have to think carrefully about where to position of the various filters.

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2018 2:22 pm
by MalVeauX
Welp, I'm proper undecided on what to do.

Any suggestions on how to proceed from this point? I want to use my 393nm stack and the 395nm cut filter, but I have to find a way to manage the heat. The KG3 popped with the 120mm aperture. Any definitive suggestion on what to put in front of the KG3 to lower the heat from the 120mm aperture?

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2018 9:52 pm
by MalVeauX
All I know is that the filter I have is a 380~395 filter that blocks everything but that little patch. And then the two 393nm filters. I'm wondering if I can put a blue filter, like the blue CCD filter (2") on an extension tube and insert that into the focuser well into the light cone. Behind it, the 380~395 filter. Then after that either a KG3 or some other IR blocking filter. Then a 393nm in the skybender. Then a 393nm on the camera nose.

I'm happy to try it out, but I need to get the blue filter or an ERF of some kind first, as I do not want to bust the 380~395nm filter as I cannot replace it.

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2018 11:19 pm
by Merlin66
Marty,
What you're proposing is exactly what I intend doing with my Omega CaK stack. A Baader CCD -B filter well in front of the stack.....

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2018 3:22 am
by MalVeauX
I just need to know it works, I can't keep popping KG3's! :) hah.

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:08 am
by Merlin66
"" I have the solar focus directly on the second erf filter..."
Why?
Surely if your imaging, this final filter would be at some distance in front of the camera?? In my case about 30mm.

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:34 am
by Merlin66
Hmmm Interesting arrangement!!
Have a filter element at a focus point is usually bad news in that every bit of dust etc. will be in focus.....

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:33 pm
by MalVeauX
Interesting,

I'm looking forward to your report, thank you for taking the time (and expense!) to share this info with everyone.

I'm very curious about -> B-CCD filter (ERF 1) -> 380~395 filter (cut) -> 393 filter (Skybender) -> 393nm filter (Camera nose).

I'm curious whether a KG3 needs to be inserted somewhere in there.

I know I can't use a UV/IR cut filter, because when I put my Baader UV/IR cut filter inline with my original setup, I couldn't see anything as the UV filter cut off chopped the wavelength so I saw nothing with the 393nm filters. So I may need to put a KG3 or other 2nd ERF in there. Just not sure yet.

Just trying to manage the cost. Too much extra stuff and I might as well buy a Lunt module or Quark CaH if it gets too close to those costs.

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 7:05 pm
by marktownley
Thanks for the K-line plot, I was looking for this the other day.

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:38 pm
by MalVeauX
TheSkyBurner wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 9:28 pm So today i let the baader planetarium b-ccd filter track direct solar focus for more than 4 hours, started at 1130pm. Just took it off. 100mm at f5 no other rejction filters added and it did not crack or break. This means it is rather enduring of heavy stress. I cannot measure glass expansion or optical performance characteristics but i can confidently say this filter will not break when it is close to the solar focus. I will stress test with an 8 inch f5 next.
That's great news. I suppose that's why others are using them in PST CaK mods over the years.

Was there anything in front of, or behind, the Baader B-CCD? Or was it just objective -> Baader B-CCD (in the focuser) -> something / Ca filters -> camera?

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 5:49 pm
by MalVeauX
Interesting, thanks for the update. I'll have to give it a try and see if I can use this in my focuser and then the skybender with the 393nm filters.

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2018 5:05 pm
by MalVeauX
Update:

With the Baader 2" B-CCD filter, with reflective surface and IR blocking, it serves great as a 2" ERF. I just used it all morning with a 120mm refractor and the heat was managed great. So I'm able to stuff the Skybender with 393nm filters and get back to it on a dime.

So now, I'm doing:

Baader 2" B-CCD Filter (ERF) -> 370~395nm Cut Filter -> 393nm Filter (in Skybender) -> 393nm Filter on nose of camera.

Heat is managed, works great. Transmission is great too.

It really does reflect light back out too, which keeps the heat out instead of trying to absorb it some where. I show the reflection by putting my hand in front of the OTA and you can see the wavelengths reflected back out of the scope. Also, showing the transmission at the camera end, basically nothing visible as it's fully blocked and we can't see UV, but the camera can. Managed around 1 hour without any issues with heat with a 120mm aperture.
Baader_Blue_ERF.jpg
Baader_Blue_ERF.jpg (197.08 KiB) Viewed 6094 times
ERF_Demo_Skybender.jpg
ERF_Demo_Skybender.jpg (125 KiB) Viewed 6094 times
Skybender_393nm_Demo.jpg
Skybender_393nm_Demo.jpg (171.96 KiB) Viewed 6094 times
reflecting_light_ERF_demo.jpg
reflecting_light_ERF_demo.jpg (79.79 KiB) Viewed 6094 times
Imagingsetup06192018.jpg
Imagingsetup06192018.jpg (224.16 KiB) Viewed 6094 times
Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:23 am
by MalVeauX
Dunno why I even did that, I always do the dumb thing and put my hand in the light path to see if it's hot. It's usually hot on the business end. Was my first time experimenting with reflections from the objective to see if the filters were doing their jobs. They were! Was nice. I'm happy to be able to track and image without cracking a filter again. I have little time to waste during the summer in Florida with non-stop storming, so an hour of fooling with a filter is not worth my time. This blue ERF filter has really helped alleviate that problem so far!

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Mon Aug 20, 2018 8:17 pm
by MalVeauX
Update,

Just wanted to update it's been a few months, and the baader blue CCD filter with IR block has still been a champ, handling thermal load in my now 150mm refractor no problem, with the 370~395nm pass filter. The combination results in removing all the heat and still letting me image in both white light and near calcium light, or anything in the blue spectrum basically, without any special big ERF so far.

Very best,

Re: KG3 IR Absorption vs IR Blocking filters? Same?

Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2018 12:00 pm
by krakatoa1883
Very interesting, Marty, thank you, I was looking for a blue ERF with the same purpose, the info you provided are very useful.