BlackShadow
Page 1 of 15 1234567811 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 445

Thread: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests - Updated 8/27/2010 (Newer Info Added)

  1. #1
    *Flashaholic* LuxLuthor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    10,288

    Default Destructive Incan Bulb Tests - Updated 8/27/2010 (Newer Info Added)

    6/28/09 Note: Ictorana's Graphs are now being presented in this other pinned thread.

    8/14/09: Shoutout to Drewfus2101 for doing destructive testing of most of the potted Maglite bulbs in charts linked here.

    I started testing bulbs after thinking about various ways to get some REAL bulb data, rather than everyone relying on AWR's Hotrater spreadsheet to predict overdriving Incandescent bulbs. I tried to control for as many variables as I can think of, and am showing photos of my setup. I have used two or more new bulbs for all tests listed below done on different nights to verify and correlate results. Complete testing method is listed below thumbnail images.






    Setup for potted bulbs:

    To eliminate resistance, I'll check it using a Magswitch bulb holder I just setup. Soldered 14AWG to parts as shown in these thumbnails:



    Martek 4509Q (Par36) Bulb Tested
    ---------------------------------------------------------


    ---------------------------------------------------------

    WA Bulbs Tested
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 1111

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 1274

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 1326

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 1331

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 1160

    --------------------------------------------------------

    • 1164

    --------------------------------------------------------

    • 1166

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 1185

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    MagCharger Bulb Tested
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • LR00001 (6V 10W)

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    Kaidomain Bulb Tested
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • KD-773U (6V 13.8W)

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    Carley Bulbs Tested
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • CL-809 (10.5V 12.6W)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • CL-1057 (6V 12W)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • CL-1794 (7V 21W) Custom made for FiveMega

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • CL-1794 (7V 21W) Revised Default Lumen Rating

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • CL-43 (14.8V 41W) Custom made for FiveMega

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • FM-1909 (11.4V 63W) Custom made for FiveMega
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    Philips Bulbs Tested
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • HPR71 (6V 10W Potted)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 5761 (6V Philips)

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    Westinghouse Bulb Tested
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 4743 (12V 20W)

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    GE Bulb Tested
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 347118 (6V GE)

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    AW (Generic Chinese) Bulb Tested
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 6V 30W 2000Hr Chinese Generic

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    ROP Pelican Big-D 3853 & 3854 Bulbs Tested
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 3853-L 7.2V 11W Pelican Big D Low (NiMH)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 3853-H 7.2V 24W Pelican Big D High(NiMH)

    -------------------------------------------------------

    • 3854-L 6V 11W Pelican Big D Low

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 3854-H 6V 24W Pelican Big D High

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    Hikari Bulbs Tested
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • JC-5033 (12V 35W)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • JC-5043 (12V 50W)
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • JC-5051 (12V 75W)
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • JC-5607 (6V 20W)
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    Osram Bulbs Tested
    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64250 (6V 20W)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64430 (6V 35W Osram Brand)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64430 (Tungsram 56580 version from Svetila)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64430 (Top Bulb Chinese Generic)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64275 (6V 35W)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64610 (12V 50W)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 62138 (12V 100W - USL)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64625 (12V 100W - USL)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64623 (12V 100W - Torch)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64458 (12V 90W)

    ---------------------------------------------------------


    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64432 IRC - 12V 35W

    ---------------------------------------------------------


    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64447 IRC - 12V 65W

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64633 (15V 150W)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64655 (24V 250W)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64657 (24V 250W)

    ---------------------------------------------------------

    • 64656 (24V 275W)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------

    Step One
    - I measure bulbs at increasing voltage steps, up to the point where they flash. Each voltage setting only stays long enough to get stable readings.

    Step Two - I will compare these measurements to the AWR Hotrater Spreadsheet (based upon WA website's default & predicted overdrive values) for correlation with my results among all the tested bulbs. This may lead to some adjustments being made on a revised Hotrater Spreadsheet.

    Step Three - I will pick what appears to be the two best predicted voltages that optimze lumens with bulb life in an 8-12 hr predicted range, and run the bulbs until they die. The brighter, lower life choice will be done first.

    Test Platform: I mounted a bare KIU to a block of wood, with 4" wires soldered to 20" 14 AWG test leads, plugged into a Mastech HY3020-D Linear current/voltage adjustable power supply. New bulbs are inserted in KIU & cleaned with Isopropyl alcohol.

    At the same height as the bulb, a black plastic (1" I.D. x 12" long) tube is placed in a horizontal vise position, aimed by looking from far end so bulb appears centered in tube. Inside of tube was abraded to avoid any spot reflections. At exactly 1 meter from bulb, Meterman LM631 light sensor is inserted in far end of tube that has a thin layer of black foam to seal around sensor and hold it in place.

    For Step One, a Fluke 179 using a thermistor probe positioned 4mm from bottom of bulb envelope to get relative bulb temps. A black blanket is positioned behind the bulb, and along one side to eliminate reflected light. The idea behind this test platform is to consider an incan bulb as a "point light source," and take Lux measurements with the tube to get a narrow cone of lumen output from the side of the filament.

    There is no way to use an Integrating Sphere on a practical basis for this many bulbs, and I am not using a reflector or measuring out the front of a bulb which may introduce hotspot variations. I am using the Amps displayed on the Mastech during this step which only displays 1 decimal.

    This platform will not correlate with "bulb lumens" from a manufacturer, in part because I am only measuring a narrow cone of light, and from a distance of 1 meter. However this step will be useful in providing more realistic comparisons between bulbs as long as the same test platform is used. The 1 meter distance helps eliminate bulb artifacts.

    Step Two will hopefully allow being able to revise a spreadsheet so it becomes an accurate tool. Right now, we know there are major errors that magnify as you get farther from the manufacturer default results. We may also be able to compare manufacturer claims against other bulbs to see if their default values give accurate Lux measurements when compared.

    Step Three will not require the Lux measuring setup, but I will verify the same Lux reading as I got in Step One when starting. This is basically a run time verification of the projected life. I will only be doing this in steps of 1-3 hours at a time, so I verify the bulb failure time at what looks like the best two voltages. I will also use my Fluke to measure the actual Vbulb and current during this step.

    I may also consider a Step Four of mounting Lux sensor on wall, and set it to record "Maximum" reading and shine bulb from a distance using a Maglight with adequate battery source and reflector to get a somewhat objective controlled "Torch" hot spot output between various lights. This would be ideal if I could supply regulated (and verified) Vbulb from best result of Step Three. It would very hard to control all the variations from light to light, but would still be some interesting data.
    Last edited by LuxLuthor; 08-27-2010 at 07:38 PM.

  2. #2
    Flashaholic* TorchBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,495

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Sounds like very useful tests. In step one are you ramping/stepping up the voltage or turning it on at each level from a cold filament? Both could be useful if you're doing soft starts.
    No, a torch does not always mean flames.
    Ian.
    LED Driver List - now database driven and with new search features.

  3. #3
    *Flashaholic* LuxLuthor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    10,288

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Quote Originally Posted by TorchBoy View Post
    Sounds like very useful tests. In step one are you ramping/stepping up the voltage or turning it on at each level from a cold filament? Both could be useful if you're doing soft starts.
    I am just stepping up voltage after I take my readings. I want to control and avoid any possibility of higher spiking voltage on startup (like turning off power supply then back on)...because I'm ultimately trying to assume using this information for soft starting setups. I also would have no idea of the comparison between this power supply starting up and a set of batteries in a non-soft starting setup. The issue you raise gets more into bulb life than it does stable lumen/lux output at a particular voltage....which we assume from the Hotrater.

    Gonna do one of my 35W 6V Osrams now just to see how that goes, and an 1166. I'm waiting for one of these bulbs to explode on me.

  4. #4
    Flashaholic* TorchBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,495

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Quote Originally Posted by LuxLuthor View Post
    I also would have no idea of the comparison between this power supply starting up and a set of batteries in a non-soft starting setup.
    Good point. Right on the limit where you're testing a subtle difference may have a significant effect.

    Quote Originally Posted by LuxLuthor View Post
    I'm waiting for one of these bulbs to explode on me.
    I hope you're wearing safety goggles etc.
    No, a torch does not always mean flames.
    Ian.
    LED Driver List - now database driven and with new search features.

  5. #5
    Super Moderator
    DM51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Borg cube #51
    Posts
    13,341

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    LL - this is excellent! Extremely valuable work - very useful indeed.

    STICKY !!!

    The figures for the WA 1185 are very interesting, and as you add others this will become a major reference resource - exactly what is needed.
    Resistance is futile...

  6. #6
    *Flashaholic* LuxLuthor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    10,288

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    I added 1166 & the Osram 64430 vs. the TopBulb (Chinese) 64430.

    You can start to see how the Hotrater is falling apart on its predictions. I can also see the need for visual reporting of beam color/shape & the Hotspot Lux from a distance I mentioned in Step 4. Right now I am putting these each in a separate Excel sheet, but it's going to be hard to combine all this information in one display.

  7. #7
    Flashaholic* karlthev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    4,736

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Lordy Lux, this otta be data you could SELL to the manufacturers!! Thanks!!! Rather incredible work here!!!


    Karl

  8. #8
    Flashaholic Valolammas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    62.2ºN, 25.7ºE
    Posts
    335

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Excellent! I'm looking forward to your test results.

    It just crossed my mind, that do you think the open air environment of the bulb in your setup vs. a small, enclosed space of a flashlight head will have any effect on bulb life? I know heat dissipation isn't much of an issue with incans, but since you are testing them to death, I just thought the filament might be able take a little bit more abuse in open air due to less heat build-up. I don't mean to criticize or anything, I think you are doing a great job! Just a thought.


  9. #9
    *Flashaholic* LuxLuthor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    10,288

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Thanks Karl. Well this is something I have always wanted to know...and at least there is some objective info now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Valolammas View Post
    Excellent! I'm looking forward to your test results.

    It just crossed my mind, that do you think the open air environment of the bulb in your setup vs. a small, enclosed space of a flashlight head will have any effect on bulb life? I know heat dissipation isn't much of an issue with incans, but since you are testing them to death, I just thought the filament might be able take a little bit more abuse in open air due to less heat build-up. I don't mean to criticize or anything, I think you are doing a great job! Just a thought.
    Yeah, I think it is only reasonable to suspect that contained Mag Head heat would affect bulb life somewhat. That's why this is all kind of relative to other comparisons I do with the same setup, and why my Step 3 will run two more of each bulbs at what looks to be the "sweet spot" (you can see my note on far right "pending" of the two voltages I'm intending to use)...and starting with the higher voltage.

    If my pending voltages don't last as long as they should, or even longer...you can still use that to extrapolate a bit above and lower voltage. It's pretty hard to figure out the life of bulbs in a battery powered setup...where you may not run it for more than 20-45 seconds, or where you are using a direct drive setup with startup spikes, battery drain, etc. I have no practical way to keep track of the total bulb life in a light...unless i only had 1 or 2 that I used all the time...so this will at least give us a "ballpark" real life vs. predicted values.

  10. #10
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Boston, MA, USA
    Posts
    2,782

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    The results from the 64458 testing will be really interesting.
    The hotrater had the bulb lumens over 11,000 at 20.4V. So the measurements Lux makes will be really eye-opening.
    Just be sure to move that black blanket nearest the bulb. It won't lasy long against the likes of the 655s and 458s.

  11. #11
    *Flashaholic* Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    10,291

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Quote Originally Posted by DM51 View Post
    LL - this is excellent! Extremely valuable work - very useful indeed.

    STICKY !!!

    The figures for the WA 1185 are very interesting, and as you add others this will become a major reference resource - exactly what is needed.

    Big time STICKY. This is really great work! Just think how long you guys have been modding and how nice this would have been to know all those years. Thanks to Lux, we'll finally have some very useful info.

    Nice work Lux

  12. #12
    Flashaholic* mudman cj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Where corn and pigs are grown unimpeded by trees
    Posts
    1,827

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Excellent work Lux! I am especially interested in the discrepancy you are measuring between predicted lumens and measured lux. This measurement may be good enough as it is, but I thought I would propose a couple of alternatives for discussion.

    The potential problem with lux measurements IMO is bulb artifacts, and from your post I think you would agree that this needs to be considered. I also agree with you that lux readings within a reflected (or refracted) beam are subject to a lot of variation and would make repeatable results very difficult to obtain. Your current method still seems subject to bulb artifacts though, since the meter long tube is effectively sampling the output at a small solid angle of the total output (aka lux when adjusted to the right units). What if there happens to be a bulb artifact projected right onto the light meter at the end of the tube?

    One way to deal with this is to sample at multiple solid angles and average the results, so you would just reorient the bulb or detector tube. This may be borderline practical.

    Another method would be to 'sample' a large solid angle with the help of a reflector and measure the light intensity at the end of your meter long tube through a frosted glass lens to diffuse the beam and obtain a more even light intensity reading. To make myself clear, the diffusing lens would be placed at the beginning of the tube and the meter would be at the end just like it is now. In this way, lux variations within the hotspot would be smoothed out.

    Thoughts?


  13. #13
    *Flashaholic* LuxLuthor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    10,288

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Mudman, the main reason of putting the sensor 1 meter away from the bulb, and position a side reading of bulb envelope was to avoid bulb artifacts. The tube is 12 inches and doesn't run the full meter. Just to see if there was a change in average peak lumens related to transverse filament being parallel or perpendicular to sensor, I rotated bulb block 90 degrees and found no difference (still within 1-2 Lux which I consider at least within the margin of error) after lining it up again. I will check that again with some of the "uglier" filament bulbs.

    I suspect that most artifacts we see are more related to output coming out the front of the bulb, and also from the reflection magnification picked up by the reflector. If you put most of the bulbs we use in candle mode and look for artifacts on a white wall perpendicular to bulb, and 1 meter away, they do look like a point light source.

    However, for Step 4, I think it would be most useful to have something like a sheet of tracing paper between bulb in reflector testing for torch mode...and the sensor to simulate a bounce test, but still reflect the hottest spot projected on the paper/screen.

  14. #14
    Flashaholic* petrev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    SW England
    Posts
    1,410

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests


  15. #15
    Flashaholic* JetskiMark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Near Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    567

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Quote Originally Posted by DM51 View Post
    LL - this is excellent! Extremely valuable work - very useful indeed.

    STICKY !!!

    The figures for the WA 1185 are very interesting, and as you add others this will become a major reference resource - exactly what is needed.
    I agree, outstanding work Lux. Thank you for your time, effort and testing expenses.

    Regards,
    Mark

    HyperBlitz Beam Shots: One, Two, Three

  16. #16
    Flashaholic* jimjones3630's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Northern Nv.
    Posts
    1,109

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Well done Lux, very well done. 2nd or 3rd the Sticky

  17. #17
    Flashaholic* TorchBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,495

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Measured life in hours for the top setting is zero - could be added to the spreadsheets.
    No, a torch does not always mean flames.
    Ian.
    LED Driver List - now database driven and with new search features.

  18. #18
    Flashaholic* Lips's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Louisiana - USA
    Posts
    1,193

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    $20 donation to help cover bulb expense/cost if you'll take it...







    This should give us some good voltage set-points for AW's new D regulator, will it not...
    Last edited by Lips; 11-10-2007 at 06:35 AM.

  19. #19
    *Flashaholic* LuxLuthor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    10,288

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Thanks Lip & everyone. Yeah, one of the main reason's I wanted to do this was the find "The Sweet Spot" for regulated drivers. I'm saving my tray of dead bulbs !!! I actually tested a couple of them twice tonight to verify correct numbers to see if there was a signifiicant variation in bulb quality control. I also made sure to make the transverse filaments perpendicular to tube, so it is looking at side of filament.

    My double runs of the 1185, 1164, 1166, 1331, 5761, C-43, 64625, 64623, 64458 were almost on the money...like mostly within 2 to 5% which is much better correlation than I hoped for. I redid the Osram 64430 because I realized I forgot to make sure it was centered in the tube...late last night, and results were better on repeat. There's some more tests I put up just now. It is getting pretty interesting comparing some of these now.

  20. #20
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The boat house in Hereford, UK
    Posts
    383

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Great work Lux - very useful indeed

    Look forward to seeing the GE34711, Osram 64250 and WA1274 soon!

  21. #21
    *Flashaholic* LuxLuthor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    10,288

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    I actually did two tests with every bulb so far, just to make sure I had correlated results....and to finish off the night, just posting an IRC 50W. I am not going to do run times on these beauties, but I did test it twice for correlation.

  22. #22
    Flashaholic* jimjones3630's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Northern Nv.
    Posts
    1,109

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    7.8vbulb to 5761. Wooo hooo, that is some tuff bulbs Lux.
    where did you get yours?

  23. #23
    Flashaholic DMC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    175

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    It's interesting that your current measurements for the 64623 and 64625 did not agree with the manufactures designed specifications. The rerate formula for current gives a much better prediction when using your measured currents at 12 volt.

    64623 (16.5V/12V)^.55 * 8.9 = 10.6A instead of 9.92A, LL measured 10.7A at 16.5V
    64625 (14V/12V)^.55 * 9.2 = 10.01A instead of 9.07A, LL measured 9.9A at 14V

    Any plans on testing the 62138?
    Last edited by DMC; 11-10-2007 at 11:53 PM.

  24. #24
    *Flashaholic* LuxLuthor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    10,288

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Plasmaman, all done! Thanks for that GE bulb

    JJ, I just ordered them from TopBulb. I did every bulb twice to verify that my tube alignment, voltage/amps/lumens were close...and was amazed at how tight all values were....including the two Philips. Remember, I'm stepping up the voltage after taking reading...so no spikes. This is a linear power supply (don't know if the more typical "switch" PS matters).

    DMC, that is actually a known issue primarily with Osram. I had some long discussions with AWR and he wanted me to specifically go back (with a 3rd bulb if I had one) and measure the default amp using my Fluke and a 100A=100mV shunt (in photo below), which I did tonight and revised images to indicate. All Hotrater predictions are based on the default values, so this was important. Now the challenge is to figure out the formulas to make spreadsheet reflect reality.

    But as of tonight, I have tested 19 unique bulbs...most of them had two runs done to flash...so that's about 35 bulbs....and none exploded on me. I reformatted the display organization on top so it easier to find results.

    I got this shunt from here.

    Last edited by LuxLuthor; 11-11-2007 at 04:02 AM.

  25. #25

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Lux You are absolutely crazy !

    Wonderful tests ! Keep it going
    Heaven must be full of Bullterriers and radishes :]

  26. #26
    Flashaholic DMC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    175

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    I don't think the vendors advertised current at 12V for either 64623 or the 64625 are right. Do both bulbs really have a current at 12V of exactly 8.33A?

    And if you use your measured current at 12V the Hotrate formula does a lot better predicting the measured current.



    Also, thanks for measurements on the 62138 and all the other bulbs.

    Awesome!
    Last edited by DMC; 11-11-2007 at 01:40 PM.

  27. #27
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The boat house in Hereford, UK
    Posts
    383

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    So the GE 34711 is a viable alternative to the 64430 - and it seems more resilient to voltage - in fact I saw 13v on one on my bench supply and it did not flash, but that must have been a freak!
    I just built a 3D with 3xemoli for this bulb, and its great!
    Great work Lux, and really useful info for later on when AW gets the reg switch finalised.
    I suppose in an ideal world, having established the 'flash point' of these bulbs on a stepped voltage basis, it would be great to know the cold start flash point for each bulb - in the real world that's what folks are going to be doing with their lights, and if AW's switch is not user configurable(?) and he has to set it, it would be good to know this so that the optimum voltage could be specified when ordering.
    Hey AW - send more bulbs to Lux!

  28. #28
    Flashaholic* jimjones3630's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Northern Nv.
    Posts
    1,109

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Lux, on the bench you won't get amp inrush at turn on assume your starting at 0.0v at turn on. You have a soft start method in your testing.

    I used the same method with a linear bence power and stated so in my posted results but very impressive 5761 7.8v not doubting you. Never heard of a 5761 going 7.8v soft start or not.

    I wonder if repeating the test twice with same type bulb could give the same results and still be off. I'm thinking an instrument out of calibration would give every measurement taken the same erroneous findings.


    Quote Originally Posted by LuxLuthor View Post
    Plasmaman, all done! Thanks for that GE bulb

    JJ, I just ordered them from TopBulb. I did every bulb twice to verify that my tube alignment, voltage/amps/lumens were close...and was amazed at how tight all values were....including the two Philips. Remember, I'm stepping up the voltage after taking reading...so no spikes. This is a linear power supply (don't know if the more typical "switch" PS matters).

    DMC, that is actually a known issue primarily with Osram. I had some long discussions with AWR and he wanted me to specifically go back (with a 3rd bulb if I had one) and measure the default amp using my Fluke and a 100A=100mV shunt (in photo below), which I did tonight and revised images to indicate. All Hotrater predictions are based on the default values, so this was important. Now the challenge is to figure out the formulas to make spreadsheet reflect reality.

    But as of tonight, I have tested 19 unique bulbs...most of them had two runs done to flash...so that's about 35 bulbs....and none exploded on me. I reformatted the display organization on top so it easier to find results.

    I got this shunt from here.


  29. #29
    *Flashaholic* LuxLuthor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    10,288

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    DMC, AWR reminded me that Osram didn't specify the amps at default voltage, we just divided Watts/Default Voltage and assumed...here is a typical link from them. So we could never have been accurate without knowing the measured default voltage amps.

    The "predicted" values of 100W/12V=8.3A, but you can see the 64625 has a measured of 9.1A and 64623 of 8.8A. Eventually a new Hotrater spreadsheet will include actual default values and more accurate formulas to reflect real overdrive results.

    Plasmaman, without a soft starting driver your cold start reality is accurate. However, trying to reproduce a realistic cold start seems very hard to control variables. You have issues of the test platform/switch resistance, battery factors (type/combination/manufacturer quality/age of cell/internal resistance/hookup resistance/level of charge), behaviour of bench power supply vs. batteries on startup...it just got too hard to make sense out of.

    I was also thinking of putting a couple bulbs in AW's D starting direct driver just to see how the lux measures at the same voltages, and on his low/med/high power settings. But, remember AW's (& AWR's) are soft starting, so these flash points should still be realistic. The more important issue is the tested run time...to see how that holds up.

    I think measuring 2 representative WA bulbs against their predicted life points would likely extrapolate well for all other WA's, since their numbers were in better correlation with their website rating predictor. Then I would likely just do two run times each of Osrams: 64430, 64275, & a couple of the 12V'ers. Will likely test predicted run times of 5761, C-43, and Tungsram 64430 (whenever I get them from Slovenia)!

    JJ, that is how I tested, turning dial from zero, and switching to fine tune dial when I was getting close to target voltage. Then I stepped up from tested voltage to higher levels in chart without going back to 0V each time.

    Any variation from readings you got with 5761 could have been from resistance differences between setups, and I tried to keep mine as simple as possible...14AWG wire soldered to test lead plugs, other end soldered to KIU bipin leads, & shrinkwrapped solder connections.

    I did verify the reported Amps on default and several other points for each bulb with my Fluke + 100A=100mV shunt, and Fluke tested voltage on a few bulbs with wires on bipins to make sure it correlated with the display I was reading on Power Supply...which it did.

    If there is a real difference (assuming both our test methods and measuring were the same and calibrated), it could always be a manufacturer QA issue from batches to batches. To prove that theory, we would have to exchange new bulbs and see if we each got different readings with other batches.

  30. #30
    Flashaholic* jimjones3630's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Northern Nv.
    Posts
    1,109

    Default Re: Destructive Incan Bulb Tests

    Lux Slovenia still subing last order anyway Tungsram 56580 for 64430. Be glad to send you couple 56580 if not get from them or if not ordered yet will send couple to you, just pm your address again.

    Your method of soldering all connection is what I didn't do and NL mentioned some time back he had a punny batch of 5761's flashing, forget exactly.

    Thanks for clearification on your methodology.

    jim

    Quote Originally Posted by LuxLuthor View Post
    Tungsram 64430 (whenever I get them from Slovenia)!

    JJ, that is how I tested, turning dial from zero, and switching to fine tune dial when I was getting close to target voltage. Then I stepped up from tested voltage to higher levels in chart without going back to 0V each time.

    Any variation from readings you got with 5761 could have been from resistance differences between setups, and I tried to keep mine as simple as possible...14AWG wire soldered to test lead plugs, other end soldered to KIU bipin leads, & shrinkwrapped solder connections.

    I did verify the reported Amps on default and several other points for each bulb with my Fluke + 100A=100mV shunt, and Fluke tested voltage on a few bulbs with wires on bipins to make sure it correlated with the display I was reading on Power Supply...which it did.

    If there is a real difference (assuming both our test methods and measuring were the same and calibrated), it could always be a manufacturer QA issue from batches to batches. To prove that theory, we would have to exchange new bulbs and see if we each got different readings with other batches.

Page 1 of 15 1234567811 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •