[1] R. M. Wood, Optics and Laser Tech.29, 517 (1997). [2] Roger M. Wood, Laser-Induced Damage of Optical Materials (Institute of Physics Publishing, Philadelphia, PA, 2003). [3] C. W. Carr et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 127402 (2003). [4] N. Bloembergen, Appl. Opt. 12, 661 (1973).
Sebastian Fava
 (posted 2019-11-29 15:11:26.923)
From what I see, you only have coatings which are reflecting s-polirized light and the transmitting p-polirized.
In our setup, we combine two beams with different polirizations (around 1.5 um, 100 fs pulses, 100 kHz repetition rate), and to do so we need to reflect the p-polirized coming from the left and transmit the s-porized.
We can rotate the beam with half wave plates, but this reduces the intensity, and if we rotate the cube we reflect the beam in the direction perpendicular to the plane instead.
Do you have cubes with coatings reflecting the p-polirized light instead? Or can you suggest similar products?
nbayconich
 (posted 2019-12-05 03:09:06.0)
Thank you for contacting Thorlabs. At the moment we do not have polarizing beamsplitters designed to reflect the P polarization state. Our quartz waveplates however can achieve close to >99% transmission which would be the simplest alternative to searching for this particular type of polarizing beamsplitter.
David R
 (posted 2019-09-30 16:54:36.593)
Hello. I am interested in knowing the phase that the PBS252 introduces on vertically polarized light, which is reflected on the PBS, relative to the horizontally polarized component, which is transmitted. Have you measured it? If yes, could you provide me with that data? If no, do you know if it is possible to measure it?
nbayconich
 (posted 2019-10-10 09:17:00.0)
Thank you for contacting Thorlabs. Unfortunately we do not have this information at the moment regarding the effective phase shift of a reflected or transmitted beam. The phase change can be measured with an ellipsometer.
amihaybazak
 (posted 2018-11-26 12:59:37.68)
I am interested in below product. Please send me incident angle dependency of the Polarization transmission and reflection. We need upto +/- 25 degree incident angle. PBS251 25.4 mm Polarizing Beamsplitter Cube, 420 - 680 nm
YLohia
 (posted 2018-11-27 08:32:24.0)
Hello, thank you for contacting Thorlabs. I have reached out to you directly with this information.
yongqi.shi
 (posted 2018-11-16 13:25:46.467)
Hey, why there are some line diffracted pattern after the PBS cube when a gaussian beam penetrating through?
nbayconich
 (posted 2018-11-19 02:13:31.0)
Thank you for contacting Thorlabs. Would it be possible to provide more details about your current setup such as operating wavelength, any additional optics used, etc? If there are any backreflections re-entering either face of the beamsplitter this could cause an interference pattern. I will contact you directly to help troubleshoot this problem you are seeing.
Hello, thank you for contacting Thorlabs. Based on some scans we have performed, we expect the following out-of-band performance with these units:
532nm -> R: 68.44% (s-Pol) 0.28% (p-Pol); T: 8.41% (s-Pol) 80.15% (p-Pol)
1064nm -> R: 96.32% (s-Pol) 0.59% (p-Pol); T: 0.32% (s-Pol) 95.81% (p-Pol)
Mark.O.Brown
 (posted 2018-04-19 20:13:49.47)
Hello,
Your page on Glan-Taylor polarizers inlcudes a helpful "field-of-view" discussion & plot. I assume that there's some dependence for these PBSs as well? In which case it would be nice to have this info here.
All the best,
Mark
nbayconich
 (posted 2018-04-23 09:33:15.0)
Thank you for contacting Thorlabs. Yes the transmission and reflectance performance of the PBS cubes will have a dependence on the angle of incident on the beamsplitter coating. I'll reach out to you directly with additional data regarding the performance at various AOI's.
ksuwer
 (posted 2018-04-12 18:24:13.403)
I'm using 780nm LASER and i mistakenly bought PBS253, not buying PBS252. can i use PBS253 with 780nm LASER? can i know the spec of PBS253 at 780nm wavelength?
YLohia
 (posted 2018-04-16 03:37:05.0)
Hello, thank you for contacting Thorlabs. Unfortunately, we don't have a spec for PBS253 at 780nm since this is outside the beamsplitter coating range. The split ratio will not be ideal and the will also be loss in transmission due to the difference in AR coating range. I will reach out to you directly to look into the possibility of a return in exchange for PBS252.
Hallo,
could I heat the PBS104 upto 90°C for several minutes?
YLohia
 (posted 2018-04-03 09:38:11.0)
Hello, thank you for contacting Thorlabs. Heating the PBS104 up to 90°C will be fine. Please note that you should not exceed 100°C for any duration of time.
eilon.poem
 (posted 2018-02-13 03:52:27.707)
Dear Thorlabs,
We're interested in a PBS with the same spectral transmission/reflection as the PBS051 (specifically, good performance at both 404 nm and 808 nm), just made of fused silica, as the N-SF1 glass fluoresces quite badly when excited by 404 nm light. Any other glass with suppressed fluorescence (at least 50 fold suppression with respect to N-SF1) would also do.
Would you be able to find us such a product?
Thanks,
Eilon and Xin-Bing
YLohia
 (posted 2018-03-29 02:05:50.0)
Dear Eilon and Xin-Bing, thank you for contacting Thorlabs. We will reach out to you directly regarding the possibility of offering this custom item. If simultaneous use of 404nm and 808nm light is not required, you can look into our "High Power Laser Line Polarizing Beamsplitter Cubes" that can be found on this page: https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=6055. These are made of UV Fused Silica.
jysohn
 (posted 2018-01-23 08:26:57.54)
I am interested in below two products.
Please send me incident angle dependency of the Polarization transmission and reflection.
We need upto +/- 15 degree incident angle.
Jin
PBS101 10 mm Polarizing Beamsplitter Cube, 420 - 680 nm
PBS201 20 mm Polarizing Beamsplitter Cube, 420 - 680 nm
nbayconich
 (posted 2018-01-25 09:57:01.0)
Thank you for contacting Thorlabs. I will contact you directly with additional AOI data for the PBS101 & PBS201.
cohennc
 (posted 2017-08-16 16:26:12.217)
can you send me data on the 900-1300
what is the Transmission and reflectibity in 650nm+635nm
thanks
Nissim
tfrisch
 (posted 2017-08-30 03:01:19.0)
Hello, thank you for contacting Thorlabs. Unfortunately, the cubes designed at 900-1300nm will not be suitable around 650nm. The exact transmissions for S and P states will vary from one lot to another. I will reach out to you directly to discuss your application.
vksaini
 (posted 2017-07-21 11:27:14.56)
Dear Sir/Madam
My laser beam is exactly two inch diameter in round shape and i have to use the polariser intra-cavity for that i need Polarising cube beam splitter of size slightly more than (2"). Could you supply the same, if yes at what cost. Do you any have indian agent.
03 Nos is required in 500-600 nm wavelength range with Tp:Ts extintion ratio at least 1000:1
tfrisch
 (posted 2017-07-26 01:16:23.0)
Hello, thank you for contacting Thorlabs. I will reach out to you directly regarding a quote for these.
user
 (posted 2017-06-20 09:53:56.503)
Hello,
In the product overview section, you write:
"Light can be input into any of the polished faces to separate the s- and p-polarizations. However, for best performance, the light should enter through one of the entrance faces of the coated prism, which are indicated by a dot."
However, it is unclear what is meant by "for best performance". I am sending laser light on two cascaded PBSs. On the first PBS the light is incident on the dotted prism, so the transmitted light is p-polarized with high purity. On the second PBS, the light is incident on the non-dotted prism, and ~10% of the light is reflected, despite the high purity. Is this normal behavior? Can it still be claimed that either facet can be used to separate polarizations?
I am trying to combine two beams of orthogonal polarization into a single beam. In this case it is inevitable that one beam will enter the non-dotted prism. I don't want to lose 10% of the light. Can you recommend a different product?
I am using 1550nm light.
Thank you very much.
tfrisch
 (posted 2017-06-27 10:19:59.0)
Hello, thank you for contacting Thorlabs. There are two different effects happening here. First, the not about optimal performance concerns the manufacturing method. At the beamsplitting interface, there is a beamsplitter coating as well as cement that holds the two halves together. They are designed such that the light should be reflected off of the coating before passing through the cement, but this is negligible in most applications. As for the 10% reflectance, that is normal. The high purity of the transmitted beam is achieved by maximizing the reflectance of the S state. This minimizes the transmission of the S state so that the transmission is almost entirely P- polarized. However, the reflected state has a significant reflectance for the P state (about 10% as you note). Please reach out to TechSupport@Thorlabs.com to further discuss your application and the sources you are looking to combine.
Hello,
I am wondering if the 420-680 nm cube will also reflect light at 785 nm. The graph shows still relatively decent beam splitting at 785 nm, so while the P polarized light is transmitted, I am wondering if the S-polarized light is reflected at 785nm. Thanks.
tfrisch
 (posted 2017-05-19 02:07:08.0)
Hello, thank you for contacting Thorlabs. As seen on the Graphs tab, there is a significant transmission bump in the S state in the NIR. Because of this the PER will be greatly reduced. However, absorption would be low, so the non-transmitted component of the S state would be reflected, yes. I will reach out to you directly to discuss your application.
kc636
 (posted 2016-03-24 09:28:52.423)
Do you have a beamsplitter that would work in the 1600-2200nm range?
Alternatively, what is the performance of PBS124 at 1800nm?
besembeson
 (posted 2016-03-24 02:35:47.0)
Response from Bweh at Thorlabs USA: You may want to consider the Glan-Taylor (http://www.thorlabs.us/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=816) or Glan-Laser (http://www.thorlabs.us/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=815) polarizers, whose un-coated versions can be used over a broader spectrum. The polarizing beam splitter coatings generally perform poorly outside the designed spectral range so the PBS124 will not be suitable around 1800nm.
Dear Thorlabs team,
do you have (numerical) data for phase vs. wavelength of the reflected beam available? That would be very interesting for me. I'm especially interested in the PBS121.
Joe
besembeson
 (posted 2015-03-27 10:46:04.0)
Response from Bweh at Thorlabs USA: We do not have this data at this time.
y.jin
 (posted 2014-10-24 14:54:12.527)
I would like to ask if I could also use PBS102 as a beam combiner? What about the polarization states of two beams at the output?
Thanks
Yuwei
besembeson
 (posted 2014-10-30 05:18:07.0)
Response from Bweh at Thorlabs USA: Yes you could use this as a beam combiner although we don't have test data yet for this orientation. We expect the polarization states of both beams to stay the same during and after combination. In terms of the expected output power, note that the transmission efficiency of the beamsplitter coating for the p-polarized state is >90% and the reflection efficiency for s-polarized light is >99.5%.
dmahler
 (posted 2014-04-07 15:07:44.713)
What spec (if any) is there for the amount of wedge in the glue used to hold the two prisms together? I am measuring an optical path difference of around 10 microns for two beams entering the beamsplitter about 2mm apart, and am trying to rule out wedge in the beamsplitter.
Thanks,
cdaly
 (posted 2014-04-09 04:19:18.0)
Response from Chris at Thorlabs: We do not have a specification for the wedge angle created by the epoxied surfaced between the prisms. We do however specify a transmitted beam deviated spec to be <5armin. Depending on the deviation along with the incident angle of the beam, this could account for the observed path length difference.
leaf
 (posted 2014-01-21 09:50:36.73)
I am looking for a PBS for both 1064 and 1550 nm wavelengths. Which coating would work better, the 900-1300 nm or the 1200-1600 nm. Spectral plots for both coatings at 1064 and 1550 nm would be very useful.
jlow
 (posted 2014-01-27 01:56:59.0)
Response from Jeremy at Thorlabs: Neither polarizing beamsplitter cube would work at both 1064 and 1550nm. The performance of these beamsplitter cube falls off rapidly outside the specified range. We might have an alternative for you depending on your requirements. I will contact you directly to discuss about your application,.
anton.tau
 (posted 2014-01-14 15:18:52.86)
We bought Polarizing Beamsplitter Cube (PBS054) at Thorlabs 18 Sep 2013 web order acknowledgement WEB N6W421935. Number on the package W006430.
We have installed it into the optical scheme and discovered some strange behavior. The beam that passes through the cube deviates greatly in the plane parallel to the base of the cube. We estimate the deviation to be ~11 degrees, too far from the quoted (<5 arcmin) value. What could be the reason for this?
Best regards,
Anton Tausenev.
Atseva LLC
950 52 ave ct T-4
Greeley, CO, 80634
tel: 970-396-6189
fax: 877-656-6643
www.atseva.com
jlow
 (posted 2014-01-15 08:23:09.0)
Response from Jeremy at Thorlabs: We will contact you directly to troubleshoot this.
user
 (posted 2013-11-07 19:31:17.093)
According to specs tab, PBS can withstand 10,000 W/cm.
It seems quite high damage threshold.
Is it true?
tcohen
 (posted 2013-11-07 03:53:53.0)
Response from Tim at Thorlabs: With a focused spot diameter of 18um, the PBS053 showed no damage with an exposure duration of a minute on 20 separate sites with a power exceeding 10000 W/cm at 1064 nm, Ø0.018 mm. Although we would expect this linear power density to remain constant for an increased beam size, a larger beam is more likely to land on a damage precursor (such as a surface defect), and thus cause damage.
ajh
 (posted 2013-10-30 17:29:04.08)
Could you give a number for the percentage of reflectivity of the AR-coatings at 632nm? In other words, how much ghost reflections does one get at 90degree incidence?
tcohen
 (posted 2013-11-07 03:43:35.0)
Response from Tim at Thorlabs: Each outer optical surface is BBAR coated. The spec within the coating region is Ravg<0.5% at normal angle of incidence. Each surface will have this spec and so you can use this to calculate first back reflection and any ghost reflections after splitting for an approximation of ghost beams.
asvaghos.a
 (posted 2013-08-09 06:34:11.04)
I happened to drop my PBS253 cube to ground. I check it and the beam splitting coating surface doesnt seem to blur or turn intransparent. But however if there is an SOP to check if It still work at least as good as before?
jlow
 (posted 2013-08-14 14:01:00.0)
Response from Jeremy at Thorlabs: We will contact you directly to check the condition of your PBS253.
jlow
 (posted 2012-08-08 16:50:00.0)
Response from Jeremy at Thorlabs: The difference between the beamsplitters for different wavelength ranges are mainly the AR coating and the beamsplitter coating. The performance for out-of-band wavelength cannot be guaranteed.
Is the difference between the wavelength ranges on the polarizing beam splitters only the AR coatings on the cube faces? If the 1200-1600 nm splitter were used at ~900 nm, would the transmission extinction ratio still be Tp:Ts > 1000:1?
tcohen
 (posted 2012-07-03 10:37:00.0)
Response from Tim at Thorlabs: Thank you for your inquiry. The design wavelength of the PBS051 is 420nm-680nm. Even with an AR coating of 400nm-700nm, the beamsplitter coating would be out of the specified band. To change the design wavelength would involve creating a custom coating, which would include engineering costs and coating production costs. We offer N-BK7, UVFS, CAF2, ZnSe and Ge right angle prisms. I would like to discuss with you the requirements of your system to provide the best options for your application and I will contact you directly to continue this conversation.
joekkrause
 (posted 2012-06-28 23:39:17.0)
How much would it cost for you to make a custom cube of N-SF1 with an AR coating for the 400-700 nm range? Also do you offer any right angle prisms made of N-SF1?
tcohen
 (posted 2012-05-16 16:43:00.0)
Response from Tim at Thorlabs: Thank you for your feedback! The wavefront distortion is for both the transmitted and reflected beam. We will update our web presentation with this information.
ahambi
 (posted 2012-05-15 03:51:16.0)
Is the wavefront distortion $ \lambda/4 $ also for the reflected beam?
tcohen
 (posted 2012-03-01 10:54:00.0)
Response from Tim at Thorlabs: Thank you for your feedback on the PBS251. It is difficult to produce exact damage thresholds because of the many variables involved. For CW, usually damage occurs first in the substrate. However, surface irregularities in the optic can also play a role. The intensity profile of your beam will also have an influence on a CW LIDT. As an estimate, we advise not using over 13W/cm^2 CW for this product. However, because LIDT decreases with an increase in frequency, the threshold will be lower for your lower wavelength. I have contacted you directly to find out more information on your setup.
Hi, I would like to know the damage threshold for the PBS251 product used with blue light (464 nm, CW).
bdada
 (posted 2011-10-06 20:21:00.0)
Response from Buki at Thorlabs:
Thank you for your feedback. What you may be experiencing is the magneto optical Kerr effect - where the polarization of light changes when it interacts with magnetized media. We think the coating and not the material is what is being magnetized and causing the reflected/transmitted beams to be altered. This magnetization will change as the external magnetic field changes, explaining why the unbalance changes at the same frequency as the rotation of the magnetic field.
Please contact TechSupport@thorlabs.com if you want to discuss this further.
nmandal
 (posted 2011-09-28 15:56:42.0)
Should the intensities of the two beams coming out of the PBS change in presence of magnetic field?
I balance the two beams coming out of the PBS and bring a rotating magnetic field closer to the PBS and I see that the beams are not balanced anymore and the unbalance has the same frequency as the magnetic field. I know the PBS contains SF2 which is polar, could this be the cause or something else.
jjurado
 (posted 2011-06-22 12:50:00.0)
Response from Javier at Thorlabs to Mikhail.Levin: Thank you very much for contacting us with your request. We currently do not have information regarding the dependence of the extinction ratio upon the angle of incidence for these polarizing beamsplitters. However, as a guideline, increasing the AOI beyond +/- 2 degrees from the normal of the front surface of the PBS will most likely negatively affect the resultant extinction ratio between the s and p polarizations. I will contact you directly for further support.
Mikhail.Levin
 (posted 2011-06-21 16:00:08.0)
Please inform about the angular sensitivity of your product
Other words:
show the andle( +/- N degrees) in which the extinction parameter (~30dB) is valid Customer Email: Mikhail.Levin@amo.abbott.com This customer would like to be contacted.
jjurado
 (posted 2011-03-18 11:14:00.0)
Response from Javier at Thorlabs to drdougsnyder: Thank you for contacting us with your inquiry. Intrinsic variations in the beamsplitter coating result in different retardance values for both s and p components. For the passing beam (this would be Tp, and Rs), you can expect a retardance on the order of 0.01 waves (worst case), and 0.00 waves in the best case. For the rejected beam (Ts and Rp), the phase change can range from 0.00 to 0.125 waves.
jjurado
 (posted 2011-03-15 11:55:00.0)
Response from Javier at Thorlabs to last poster: Thank you for submitting your inquiry. The refractive index of SF2 at 1064 nm is 1.62758. Please contact us at techsupport@thorlabs.com if you have any further questions.
user
 (posted 2011-03-15 16:21:10.0)
What is the refracted index of SF2 at 1064nm? We inted to tilt the beam splitter a little bit and Id like to compute the lateral displacement of the beam.
Thank you
drdougsnyder
 (posted 2011-03-09 13:52:35.0)
I did not see any information regarding phase change to s and p components due to interaction of light with polarizing beamsplitter cube. You may want to add that information, and I would not mind knowing it.
jjurado
 (posted 2011-03-03 10:31:00.0)
Response from Javier at Thorlabs to Christian Roedel: Thank you for contacting us with your request. Although is is unlikely that the AR coating on the cubes will considerably affect contrast, we can certainly offer these polarizing cubes uncoated. Keep in mind, however, that the cement used to bond the two prisms together limits the damage threshold of the cube to ~2J/cm^2 (810nm, 10Hz PRF, 10ns pulse width).
Dear Sir or Madam,
we would like to use polarizing beamsplitters in our high intensity laser. For this purpose we need an excellent AR coating in the cube sides to improve our contrast.
I would like to purchase several beamsplitters without the AR coating to see if this has any effect. Would it be possible to buy polarizing beamsplitter cubes without any AR coating?
Thanks in advance
Sincerely,
Christian Rödel
jjurado
 (posted 2011-02-07 18:01:00.0)
Response from Javier at Thorlabs to Tmel630: Thank you very much for contacting us with your request. Our beamsplitters are comprised of two separate prisms. We apply a dielectric coating to the hypotenuse side of one of the two prisms, and then we use cememt to bond the two prisms together. In order to achieve the desired 50:50 split ratio, it is recommended for the light to enter through one of the faces of the coated prism, which is indicated by a dot. We have updated our Overview Tab with this information.
Tmel630
 (posted 2011-02-04 23:18:42.0)
Which face is the input face?
Thorlabs
 (posted 2010-09-13 16:00:38.0)
Response from Javier at Thorlabs to Luis: the recommend maximum energy density for the polarizing beamsplitters coated for 1200-1600 nm (PBS054, PBS104, PBS204, and PBS254) is 5 J/cm^2 (tested at 1542 nm, 10 ns pulse). We currently do not have CW damage threshold information for these cubes.
luis.dussan
 (posted 2010-09-13 14:15:17.0)
what is the damage threshold for the 1550 wavelength for cw and fluence.
Thorlabs
 (posted 2010-09-10 17:18:24.0)
Response from Javier at Thorlabs to Melanie: The wavefront distortion will not vary with size. All of our PBS series beamsplitters have a wavefront distorion spec of < lambda/4 at 633 nm.
melanieadams
 (posted 2010-09-09 15:11:48.0)
I like the idea of mounting the PBS in a cube, but notice you only do these for a 1" PBS cube.
I have a small beam ~ 2 mm across.
How will the wavefront distortion across my beam, vary with the size of the PBS ?
Is it better or worse with a larger PBS ?
thanks,
Melanie
vladimirlee
 (posted 2010-08-10 15:46:35.0)
Does the extinction ratio of the transmitted beam depend on the input polarization? It seems to me that this PBS yields very bad polarization(low extinction ratio) if the input polarization is almost horizontal.
user
 (posted 2010-08-10 18:23:31.0)
Can I cascade two PBSs to get a higher extinction ratio? (>1000:1)
user
 (posted 2010-06-01 18:57:56.0)
Response from Javier at Thorlabs to guille2306: we do not offer any solutions at the moment. However, we are currently evaluating the possibility of expanding the coating into the UV range. I can keep you updated on the progress of this project. Also, we can discuss your application internally in case you have any additional questions.
guille2306
 (posted 2010-06-01 17:41:27.0)
I would be interested in this product, but for the UV range (roughly 230-370nm). Do you have something along this line?
jens
 (posted 2010-03-29 12:55:39.0)
A reply from Jens at Thorlabs to Vladimir: yes, the beamsplitter coating is the reason for the lower extinction ratio of the reflected beam. A dielectric coating is used for these cubes.
vladimirlee
 (posted 2010-03-28 19:21:25.0)
As a follow-up question regarding the extinction ratio: what makes the reflected beam having a lower extinction ratio than the transmitted beam? Is it the beamsplitting coating that makes this difference? And what kind of beamsplitting coating is used in the cubes? Appreciate for your help.
Adam
 (posted 2010-03-17 18:07:38.0)
A response from Adam at Thorlabs to jwoillez: We do have a %T curve and will send this data out to you. Please note that any behaviors outside the designated coating range will vary with every coating run. One run may provide a %T for the P polarization of 65%, while another run may provide a T% for P polarization of 75%. The %T is only optomized for the designated coating range of each product.
jwoillez
 (posted 2010-03-16 21:36:40.0)
What is the behavior of at 600~700 nm of the 900-1300 nm polarizing beamsplitter cube? Practically I would like to combine a 1319 nm p polarization with a red laser (tbd 633, 658, or 690) that would be reflected off the cube. If you had a %T curve for p and s polarizations extending to the visible for the 900-1300 nm, that would help.
apalmentieri
 (posted 2010-03-11 13:37:28.0)
A response from Adam at Thorlabs to vladimirlee: The extinction ratio for the reflected beam is not the same as the transmitted extinction ratio of 1000:1. The reflected beams extinction ratio is 100:1. If you need higher purity polarization, we would suggest using the transmitted beam.
vladimirlee
 (posted 2010-03-10 16:20:12.0)
I wonder whether the extinction ratio is also 1000 to 1 for Ts:Tp for reflected beam? In other words, which beam (reflected or transmitted) do you think should be used for having higher purity polarization? Thanks.
apalmentieri
 (posted 2010-03-01 17:09:06.0)
A response from Adam at Thorlabs: We have not yet sent this optic our for damage threshold testing. We will be sending this optic out in the near future and hope to have more information then. In the meantime, I did not see any contact information. If you could, please send us your information to techsupport@thorlabs.com so we can respond direclty to you when we get the information. The information will also be added to the website, but we would like to ensure you get a proper response.
user
 (posted 2010-03-01 14:21:58.0)
Has the damage threshold data come back yet? If you were to provide this data, I could purchase this product immediately.
apalmentieri
 (posted 2009-11-20 11:09:53.0)
A response from Adam at Thorlabs: The cement used is the epoxy Norland 61. Unfortunately, we do not have damage threshold information for this cement.
apalmentieri
 (posted 2009-11-20 10:06:37.0)
A response from Adam at Thorlabs: Currently, we do not have a specification on how the separation ratio will change with incident angle. Please note we are looking into this. We also do not have an exact fs damage threshold for the beamsplitters, but we do know that the cement is the limiting factor. I am currently looking into the cement material.
tiwari.dhir
 (posted 2009-11-19 15:32:43.0)
Is there any angle of incidence dependence on seperation ratio of polarizations?
I would like to know about power ratings for e.g. for pulsed laser (any standard like 1064 nm @ frequency) and continuous laser. Or what kind of cementing material is used it these polarizing beam splitters. I am interested in using it with 1050 nm Femtosecond laser.
Dhirendra
herman
 (posted 2009-11-17 21:40:36.0)
What is an angular dependence of the polarization ratio?
Thanks, Petr H.
jens
 (posted 2009-06-11 16:17:00.0)
A reply from Jens at Thorlabs: the item has not specifically designed for femtosecond lasers, so I currently do not have for example dispersion data for the product. There is no inherent feature which would prevent using this item with femtosecond lasers. I would suggest to go ahead and test the device in your setup. Certainly we could take the item back if any unforseen effect prevents you from using the item.
Dgmoses
 (posted 2009-06-11 16:12:02.0)
Are there any special issues with this product and use of ultrashort laser pulses.
ghegenbart
 (posted 2008-12-02 04:02:12.0)
Response from Gerald (Tech Support Thorlabs Germany): Thank you very much for your interest in our polarizing beam splitters. The product PBS3 is specifically desigend for application in the telecom wavelength range from about 1525 to 1610 nm. It comes with an AR coating for these wavelengths. Using it for the visible part of the spectrum is not possible. We do not offer other polarizing beam splitters yet, but we will introduce them shortly. The family will consist of products covering 4 different wavelength ranges, one of it being 420 to 680 nm. Sizes range from 5 to 25.4 mm. The products are planned to be released by mid to end of January 2009 and will be featured on our web site as soon as they are available. You may also use our RSS feeds service to get notified when the products are introduced.
patrickm
 (posted 2008-12-01 14:53:42.0)
To what extent is this product designed for 1525-1610nm. Is there an antireflection coating?
I would need a polarizing beam splitter for an application at 532nm - would PBS3 also work at this wavelength? Do you have polarizing beam splitters (with AR coating) specifically designed for visible wave lengths?
Best wishes,
Patrick Maletinsky
Laurie
 (posted 2008-10-03 09:09:21.0)
Response from Laurie at Thorlabs to ADudley: Thank you for your interest in our polarizing beamsplitters. Currently, we cannot provide custom beamsplitters due to the expense of the coating. However, if size is not of primary concern, we are currently in the process of fabricating a 10 mm polarizing beamsplitter for the 400 - 700 nm range.
If you are just looking to split the S and P states of light, you may want to try a glan laser polarizer. These can be found on the following website:
http://www.thorlabs.com/NewGroupPage9.cfm?ObjectGroup_ID=815&pn=GL5-A&CFID=24982801&CFTOKEN=29910522. However, these do not work as well as the PBS3, and you may receive some wavefront errors from the extraordinary ray, as this side does not have a good polish. If we can be of further assistance, please let us know.
ADudley
 (posted 2008-10-02 03:41:49.0)
I am interested in this product, but for the visible wavelength (400-700nm). How do I go about ordering it? And what is an estimated cost for it? As well as delivery time? I am based in South Africa.