You can become a Supporting Member.
Souptree,
Have you tried the F04 on the Mule?
Ahh - are there plans to make any Mules with lambertian emitters? What are some lambertian emitters?
Sort of on topic and certainly appropriate for a non sales thread is a mod I did to a Ti PD a couple days ago. Another light package that is not new is one of combined emiters. The idea is for low level flood coupled with higher level concentrated light. Again, there are some new components to visit these older ideas with. This mod or proto used a couple Seoul brothers; a P4 and it's munchkin brother, the 1/2 watt Seoul. The 1/2watt is good for a bit in excess of 20 lumens when driven at 150 mA. I set one on a tiny pedestal next to the P4 which is behind a modified McR-16 reflector. The 1/2 watt is sans secondary optic and used for the flood beam.
The 1/2watt is driven by its own NexGen 100 and the P4 is driven by its own NexGen 300. The 1/2 watt is activated when Kilroy contacts the piston lip and the P4 comes on, in addition to the 1/2 watt, when the piston lip contacts the contact ring. I used a stripped x2 converter PCB strictly for the contact connections. The shallow McR-16 allowed the LED sink package as well as the two NexGen converters to be installed in the head in front of the x2 PCB.
I have been using the light the last couple nights and it suits my needs quite well even though it certainly is a compromise package. Of no real surprise is the fact that the spill beams are not concentric or overlapping due to the offset of die locations within the confines of the head. The 1/2 watt has a beam that is pure flood and without hot spot which spreads out from the light and has its "center of mass" on theother side of the Z axis from its location. If you look at its position in the head as shown, you can imagine that it will send out more light to the right. Now the direct light or spill portion from the P4 LED has its balance skewed to the left as shown. The bezel ring has an obvious effect and block on direct light coming from the LED's.
What you end up with is an asymetric beam that you want to orient the light to take advantage of. For walking outside for instance, you want the 1/2 watt LED to be at the top or 12 O'clock position. This gives you a spill beam that is weighted towards the foreground and usefull for seeing your path. When you hit the high beam it shows up closer to the horizon with spot and spill and yet you still have flood at your feet. It's a very ineresting light to play with but it also brings out the obvious losses due to obstructions of non reflective nature in the path of the light.
In most lights we use, a fair amount of the spill light is lost and wasted but our focus is on the collimated portion of the beam. In a light designed as a floodlight, it makes sense to pay more attention to the path and obstructions of the spill as this is the light you are after all planning to use!! Without some IS testing, I still don't have a feel for what these losses are but I do plan to investigate further. I am more than willing to accept losses but I want to recognize them for what they are first.
What happened to this design?
:wave:
Brilliant! Is there any reason to have the emitter close to the lens? I guess it means you get a wider flood (and lose fewer lumens) -- but you also lose the circular aperture, right? With the emitter set back in the head, you can restrict the light a bit. (Not "focus" it, per se, but keep it from blinding you.)