Syntec Technologies: Pushing the Polymer Envelope

HRDT™ and patent-pending High Refraction Diamond Turning are trademarks of Syntec Technologies

2

Smaller, lighter packaging

Lower cost

Higher quality

Wider range of optical spectrums

(IR and UV)Stronger

environmental resistance

Applications are Driving Innovation

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

Sophisticated manufacturing processes

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

4

Material Trends: Accelerating Since 1990

• Higher flow rates• Better component design• Post processing

Improved optics overall

Common polymers available in optical grades

• Temperature ranges (below 0c to over 200c)• Transmission quality (390 to 1600 + nm)• Stability of index of refraction generally increasing

More ways to manage birefringence

5

Manufacturing Trends: Improving and Converging

• Extremely precise optical mold inserts– All geometries– Fully compensate for shrinkage

• Fast turnaround prototypes– No molds– Replicate production approach

• Finished optics, select polymers

Molding Single Point Diamond Turning

• 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

6

HRDT™ Processing Breakthrough

Consequence: Many applications not feasible (time and/or $)

• Virtually all low volume ones

• Most high volume innovations

• Some high volume proven ones

Hypothesis: Issue is a relievable surface energy problem

• Relieve material by annealing before diamond turning

• Customize amount of annealing plus machine settings, using repeatable formulas based on component geometry

Problem: Surface failures on PEI and PES make SPDT unusable

7

HRDT™ Results

Typical SPDT machining; 390 Å achieved

HRDT™ success; 60 Å achieved

Optically unacceptable

Fully repeatable and optically acceptable

8

Design phases Development phases Full productionBeta productionVolume QuantityInitial QuantityQuick PrototypeProof-of-concept

More Flexibility For More Applications — Faster

Requirements Distribution

Molded SPDT HRDT Molded SPDT HRDT Molded SPDT HRDT Molded SPDT HRDT

PMMA

Cyclic Olefin

Polystyrene

PEI

PES

– – – –– – – –

Alternative choices, sometimes desirable for unusual geometries or exceptionally tight schedulesUsually lowest total cost choice (over 95% of the time)

New flexibility

– Currently not possible

9

HRDT: Applications That Fit

High heat, high index of refraction

(e.g., datacom evanescent coupling)

Innovation ideas where R & D funds

are tight or short lead times vital

Generally proven design and packaging,

but inherently low volume

Newer designs and packaging, either

high or unknown volumes

Optics that can be mounted to a PC board before

wave reflow

10

Key Questions

Is overall application well under- stood or innovative?

Optimizing new functionality or interfaces takes more cycles

Are optical components low or high complexity?

What is the value of each week of development time saved?

How many proof-of-concept andprototype cycles make sense?

More changes earlier increases product quality at lower risk & cost

11

Low Optics Complexity High Optics ComplexityAssumptions

Key Assumptions

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

Proof-of-concept

Prototyping Cycles

Beta production cycle

Volume production

Total Hard Cost

Summary

Hard costs

Dev. time savings

Total HRDT Advantage

Bottom Line Impact

Cycles HRDTNo

HRDT Cycles HRDTNo

HRDT Cycles HRDTNo

HRDT Cycles HRDTNo

HRDT

Innovative ApplicationKnown ApplicationInnovative ApplicationKnown Application

Low Optics Complexity High Optics Complexity

0

1

0

1

–

14K

–

3K

17K

1

1

1

1

14K

12.8K

12.8K

3K

42.6K

0

2

0

1

–

49K

–

3K

52K

2

2

1

1

49K

44K

23K

3K

119K

–

2.5K

–

15K

17.5K

(.5K)

30K

29.5K

2.5K

2.5K

2.5K

15K

22.5K

20.1K

90K

110.1K

–

10K

–

30K

40K

12K

120K

132K

10K

10K

5K

30K

55K

64K

270K

334K

13

What’s Next? Materials operating in the 3–5 micron and 8–12 micron rangeMore thermally stable materials over wider range of temperaturesHigher temperature materials for the visible rangeHarder surface resistances for better scratch avoidance

Reduce non-technical barriers of awareness

and collaboration

Application demandsMaterial characteristicsManufacturing process

Continue tackling soluble

technical barriers

Keep design front and center