Home Made Tank Light - The Swan Blaster 260W Short Arc

[Mr. Tone]

Thanks!




Still a long way to go.

Mounting the lamp first w/o shorting out the leads
Wiring w/o soldering. need ceramic sleeve or high temp. sleeved wires better the Teflon
Fan cooling design & mount etc.

I am new to this short-arc stuff. What do you need a fan for, the ballast? How hot does that get and how quick at 260 watts output?

 

[ma_sha1]

Awesome! Can't wait to see this!

Thanks!

I am new to this short-arc stuff. What do you need a fan for, the ballast? How hot does that get and how quick at 260 watts output?

I don't know how hot the ballast get, but both the fan & the lamp requires active cooling. The bulb's arc chamber could get up to 2000F.

The UHP technology is slow warm up type, takes a full minute or so to reach full brightness.

 

[Mr. Tone]

That sounds like a good challenge to get the bulb/ballast cooled. It will be interesting to see how you pull it off.

 

[The_Driver]

Any updates?

 

[ma_sha1]

Any updates?

Not yet, It's been real busy lately, haven't got chance lately to research how to mount the lamp, hope to get back to it in an few weeks.

 

[yifu]

Looking foward to the beamshots! You mods never cease to amaze me!

 

[ma_sha1]

Thanks!

This project is getting very frustrating, being going at it for over a year, can't seem to finish it. Anyhow, here are some small progress.

Made a spacer High Temp material to mount the lamp. The material is beefed up Teflon, as see previously used by BVH in his Blitz 84W HID Mod. Good to 550 degree, I've been looking for a Electrical insulating material with Higher Temp. resistance & grindable, but have not been successful. I am still not sure if 550 is going to be sufficient, as the souce PVIP bulb will be about 2000 degrees.

Took about 2 hrs to grind the spacer to fit, it's very hard to grind for some reason:

Drill a hole between the ceramic lamp base & PTFE spacer, the lamp wire will be pulled through the hole & go out from the side of the mag tube to connect to a Electric Terminal.

Same picture except that I grind away the wall of mag tail cap, ligned with capone tape to give clearance & electrical insulation to the electrical lead at bottom of the lamp.

Next step, I'll need to mount two tiny electrical terminals, one on the side of the tube & one at bottom of the tail cap.

Question: Anyone know where to get them?
They need to be small, preferably 5mm diameter round that can be mounted to metal body with drilled hole, with heat resistant plastic body & metal screw. Bottom to connect the lamp wire & screw to connect to wires coming from Ballast.
The lamp wire need to be electrically insulated from the mag tube.

I might have to go to Radio Shack & see if I can find someting like that.

 

[LightSward]

Very nice work! :thumbsup:

 

[ma_sha1]

Thanks!

 

[get-lit]

I just noticed this thread. I modeled your configuration, but I since I don't have an AC P-VIP lamp luminance profile, I averaged the results of the DC lamp I profiled with anode in and then anode out, and I'm coming up with 63.5 MCP using a reflector with 90% reflectance, a lens with 90% light transmission, and estimating lamp lumen output at 18200 (70 L/W @ 260W). A forward-facing retro-reflector bumps it up to 86.5 MCP. Modeled at 2000 ft distance.


For reference, I also modeled the Maxablaster and came up with 45 MCP, again without considering it's luminance concentration toward the cathode since it's a DC lamp, which I estimate provides about a 25% boost, so somewhere around 56 MCP for the Maxablaster. I'm not sure what the Maxablaster's measured CP was, but it should be fairly close. For the Maxablaster, I entered: .5mm x .5mm gap, 3500 Lumen, 9.5" CA, 1.5" V.Dia, 1.3" FL, 70% Reflectance, 90% lens light transmission.


I included the retro-reflector in your configuration since you asked about one recently, but even without a retro-reflector, this should marginally exceed the MaxaBlaster in CP, and five fold in lumen output. Pretty sure you will be quite happy. The only thing I'm not sure of is the actual reflectance of your reflector coating and the actual lumen output of the lamp.

 

[ma_sha1]

I just noticed this thread. I modeled your configuration, but I since I don't have an AC P-VIP lamp luminance profile, I averaged the results of the DC lamp I profiled with anode in and then anode out, and I'm coming up with 63.5 MCP using a reflector with 90% reflectance, a lens with 90% light transmission, and estimating lamp lumen output at 18200 (70 L/W @ 260W). A forward-facing retro-reflector bumps it up to 86.5 MCP. Modeled at 2000 ft distance.


For reference, I also modeled the Maxablaster and came up with 45 MCP, again without considering it's luminance concentration toward the cathode since it's a DC lamp, which I estimate provides about a 25% boost, so somewhere around 56 MCP for the Maxablaster. I'm not sure what the Maxablaster's measured CP was, but it should be fairly close. For the Maxablaster, I entered: .5mm x .5mm gap, 3500 Lumen, 9.5" CA, 1.5" V.Dia, 1.3" FL, 70% Reflectance, 90% lens light transmission.


I included the retro-reflector in your configuration since you asked about one recently, but even without a retro-reflector, this should marginally exceed the MaxaBlaster in CP, and five fold in lumen output. Pretty sure you will be quite happy. The only thing I'm not sure of is the actual reflectance of your reflector coating and the actual lumen output of the lamp.

Get-lit, Thanks for modeling this! I like the encouraging numbers, motivate me to get this sucker done .

I've been targeting Maxa Blaster with this one last short arc mod. W/o modeling capabilities, I used farm boy crude methodologies:
Since my last short arc was done with 120W P-VIP, a 9" Blitz plastic reflector (full of imperfections) & measured out 16.1 cps. I figure that 2x the power w/o increasing the arc will get me into 30 Million range, then the High End reflector (same quality as Maxa Blaster but higher reflection) plus 0.6" larger reflector diameter together should send me into 50-60 million cp zone.

I believe maxa blaster measured out at 52 million cps. You are almost spot on! I think it's 9" reflector with 75% reflection.
Yes, similar cps but 5x the lumen in the beam, in real life, it should blow away the Maxa Blaster.
(Just like my first short arc, the Mega Blaster measured at 5 Million cps, with 5x the Lumens in the beam, it blew away both of my Maxa Beams.

FYI,

I had two Maxa Beams at the time, both were Gen II with mfg. rating of 6 million cps, they both read 2-3 million in my meter,
either mfg. rating was over stated or my meter was reading low, or perhaps, a combination of both?

 

[get-lit]

Some of the difference in readings could be accounted for with the distance the reading was taken. The greater the distance, the higher the reading, at least until atmospheric conditions begin to reduce lux at distance. The link on my last post explains what's occurring. Also might be lamp life? Some time ago I modeled the MaxaBeam and it came out just about correct after factoring the peak luminance point of the DC Xenon lamp. Keep in mind, that factor is a rough estimate. Calculations with the P-VIP lamp should be fairly close since it's an AC lamp without a single point of peak luminance, but then again, I don't have the illuminance distribution measured and profiled for this lamp.

 

[ma_sha1]

Calculations with the P-VIP lamp should be fairly close since it's an AC lamp without a single point of peak luminance, but then again, I don't have the illuminance distribution measured and profiled for this lamp.

Hi Get lit, can you calculate the CPs again with 60lm/watt instead of 70lm/watt? I believe 60 is closer to UHP/P-VIP lamp efficiency.

The 120 UHP/P-VIP lamps are 7000-7500 lumens, average out 60lm/watt

 

[get-lit]

120W is probably less efficient than what you're using. The higher the power, the more efficient. The lamp I'm using is nearly 90 L/W. I'd say you're at least 65 but I'm guessing 70.

Also, you can scale the estimated CP with the estimated Lumen output linearly...
70/60 = 63.5/x
x = 54.4

Also, I created this tool to compare relative outputs of different configurations, not specifically to predict CP. However, it has been consistent with measurements I've made. Nothing beats getting it done and taking measurements.

 

[ma_sha1]

Just found a new Osram catalog. Check out 69793. a new 230W bulb with only 0.8mm arc.
Previously 1mm arc is the smallest arc for UHP/P-VIP bulb, The 0.8mm arc is very new, some haven't gotten the catalog numbers yet . I am using the 180-230W bulb/1mm arc, over driving to 260W.

That's a 20% lux gain, an easy 10 million cp gain with bulb change on a 50million cp light.

 

[get-lit]

I'm coming up with 84 MCP with that lamp in your configuration with 14000 estimated lux; 116 MCP with forward-facing retro-reflector.

 

[ma_sha1]

I'm coming up with 84 MCP with that lamp in your configuration with 14000 estimated lux; 116 MCP with forward-facing retro-reflector.

Thanks for doing the modeling again!

It's incredible what the little reduction in arc gap could do to the cps.
Combine the 0.8mm arc with Epson's E-torl, which combines the UHP technology with a built-in retro-reflector would make a killer lamp.

E-Torl:

 

[get-lit]

There is a big difference. I did the first one with 1mm gap, should it have been .9mm?

How Epson recently patented the retro-reflector is beyond me since the retro-reflector's already been in use for decades.

 

[ma_sha1]

There is a big difference. I did the first one with 1mm gap, should it have been .9mm?

No, 1mm is correct, that's the spec on my lamp.

How Epson recently patented the retro-reflector is beyond me since the retro-reflector's already been in use for decades.

Same concept can get a patent on different applications. Not to brag, I have 5 patents, been through the process a few times, it's not that tight of a process.

Epson has the first patent on use in a lamp with UHP technology. However, an earlier Philips UHP paper already published a prototype with retro-reflector concept, not an actual reflector, but high temp. mirror coating on half of the arc chamber. This should be considered public info. prior art of extremely similar concept. Patent office probably would have turned the Epson patent down if they had diligently read all the UHP papers.

 

[get-lit]

I've drafted a few but never filed because I've changed my interests. I've read that with the new patent reform, the PTO is now going with the "first to file" system over the "first to invent" system in order to conserve resources in litigation of prior art, the America Invents Act. Before this act, the Epson patent could still be challenged with the Philips paper. Not sure I like it and I don't think there's any novelty when an age old concept is simply applied for another use. There's been retro-reflectors on all kinds of lights from search lights to automobile headlights.