Actual Lumen Readings in 10.5in Sphere.

[Locoboy5150]

Where did those so-called 630 OTF lumens claimed by the Fenix go?

That 630 lumen rating is a factory rating from Fenix and, as with most factory light output ratings, is generally marketing over-hype. Thus, that's why I basically ignore all factory provided ratings. That goes for my Fenix TK40 too, which was the one that was tested for this thread last week. When I was shopping for it I pretty much ignored the 630 lumen spec.

That brings up the point of whether it *really* matters or not. I've been using my TK40 for about five months now and not once have I ever thought, "gee I wish that this was brighter" during use. So, whether it actually puts out 630 lumens as stated boldly by Fenix or 550 lumens as measured by Bigchelis last week, does it really matter in real world use? To me, not really because the light works very well for my personal use. In an ideal world, the flashlight manufacturers would have an independent certified lab do all their light output measurements. That seems to be an impossibility though.

Thank you Bigchelis for being a warm host last week. Your tests are a *HUGE* eye opener for me in terms of how much these manufacturers over-hype their light specs. They really should get their act in gear.

Also, on the subject of Arctic Silver 5, I bought a tube of it for my 4D cell Maglite with the Terralux TLE-300M-EX that you tested. Without the thermal compound, the body of the light did not get warm at all when using it on high mode. With it, the body does get quite warm after a few minutes of use, so it does work and work well at dissipating heat. The tests that you did last week were with the Arctic Silver 5.

I bought the same size tube that you did but I got mine at Radio Shack. It also was $9.50:

http://www.radioshack.com/product/in...ductId=2216879

[jirik_cz]

Locoboy: just wondering how old is your TK40? Is it from the early batches with K-bin or newer with M-bin?

[Justin Case]

I doubt that Arctic Silver 5 is really necessary. You can save your money and use Arctic Alumina compound or Ceramique.

I tabulated thermal conductivities of the various Arctic XX products here.

Arctic Silver 5, 8.89 W/m-K
Arctic Alumina compound, >4W/m-K
Ceramique, >5.08 W/m-K

Thermal resistance is given by bond line thickness/(thermal conductivity * effective contact area).

I did a back of the envelope calculation for an LED turbo tower in a KT1. The contact area is an annulus (a ring) with OD ~0.8" and ID ~0.6". Thus, the contact area is pi*(0.8^2 - 0.6^2) = 0.88 sq in = 0.00057m^2. If we use Arctic Silver 5 compound, we have a thermal conductivity of 8.89 W/m-K. If we assume a bond line of 5 mil (0.000127 m), we get a thermal resistance of 0.025 C/W. So it looks like the thermal resistance is essentially nil, meaning you should get good heat flow from the tower to the TH and thus good heat sinking by the TH.

The 5 mil bond line assumed above is probably larger than actual since the LED tower is pressed tightly against the under surface of the TH. However, you could have 5 mil slop in the threads of your pill and in the fit between the TH and the flashlight neck. Regardless, the thermal resistance isn't overly sensitive to the bond line thickness (linear dependence). We could double the bond line (and 10 mils is a big gap) and the thermal resistance will become 0.05 C/W for the above turbo tower calculation. Still negligible.

The thermal resistances for the other compounds scales with their thermal conductivity. Thus, for AA compound, the thermal resistance is <0.056 C/W. For Ceramique, it is <0.044 C/W.

BigC, your setups most definitely will have far more contact area than what I've used here for an LED turbo tower in a KT1. Probably orders of magnitude more. Any minor differences in thermal conductivity for Arctic Silver 5 vs some other magic goop is completely swamped by the huge contact area.

Keep the bond line thin and the contact area large and you probably can use toothpaste.

[MrGman]

Is the Alumina and Ceramique thermal compounds electrically conductive? Aren't these both insulators? Putting them on the threads of the pill might make for a very resistive path. In other places it may not matter but the way big C slathers it on he may find he has an open or highly resistive circuit and a very dim light using these, yes?

[Justin Case]

The pill's electrical contact to the TH reflector is irrelevant. That's not part of the flashlight circuit path. The ground path is pill shell to flashlight tube neck. You are right regarding avoidance of using electrically insulating goops elsewhere, such as on the outside of the TH and pill where they may contact the flashlight neck.

Still, IMO it is overkill and unnecessary to slather the head all over with thermal compound. Even for what I would guess to be a large bond line, you need only a square inch or so of contact area to reduce thermal resistance to a negligible level. Thus, I'd put thermal compound only on the TH threads that connect to the rest of the flashlight. I'd leave the remainder of the TH clean. All of that excessive compound is just a mess that is going to cause other problems.

It would be interesting to test for any lumens output difference when using Arctic Silver 5 vs AA compound.

[recDNA]

So the Mini on High with an IMR 16340 would run about 15 min total? (I know not to run it for 15 min straight. I mean the total of let's say 5 three minute runs)?

Is there any clue when the IMR is getting too low? I noticed mine is at 3.7 v yet high is still maximum brightness.

I assume on a conventional RCR123 it wouldn't be discernably brighter than with a primary?

[psychbeat]

no its waaay brighter on high with a regular rcr than with a primary.
15min or so sounds about right runtime wise. Ive had mine on for about that
long using on my bike but was mooooving and I sprayed water on it

my NB sst50 is showing up today I think so Im gonna stop by rat shack
n get sum AS5. Ill try not to slather it toooooo much but I know it will
be tempting!!

[ky70]

Am I reading this right? On a cr123, the Romisen RC-N3 pushes out more lume than a qmini 123 (150 v. 142)? I wonder what the Romisen would do on a rcr123?

[psychbeat]

silly ? but do u guys think AS 5 would do anything for a qmini123?
I use mine with 16340 pretty much exclusively
a little on the threads might help transfer heat to the body?
or maybe just make a mess....

[Locoboy5150]

Locoboy: just wondering how old is your TK40? Is it from the early batches with K-bin or newer with M-bin?

Gee, I don't know. I bought it in October 2009. It is serial number 1N7J5A00407 if that helps.

[daimleramg]

2D Mag w/ROP__________ROP 3853H _________2 IMR 26650 AW cells w/3.34A__379.2____1 sec
2D Mag w/ROP____________ROP 3853H ___________2 IMR 26650 AW cells w/3.34A_____349.2_____30 sec
2D Mag w/ROP____________ROP 3853H ___________2 IMR 26650 AW cells w/3.34A_____339.2_____1 min
2D Mag w/ROP____________ROP 3853H ___________2 IMR 26650 AW cells w/3.34A_____315.4_____2 min
2D Mag w/ROP____________ROP 3853H ___________2 IMR 26650 AW cells w/3.34A_____304.6_____3 min
2D Mag w/ROP__________ROP 3854H _________2 IMR 26650 AW cells w/4.33A__710.0____1 sec
2D Mag w/ROP____________ROP 3854H ___________2 IMR 26650 AW cells w/4.33A_____658.5_____30 sec
2D Mag w/ROP____________ROP 3854H ___________2 IMR 26650 AW cells w/4.33A_____617.7_____1 min
2D Mag w/ROP____________ROP 3854H ___________2 IMR 26650 AW cells w/4.33A_____563.8_____2 min
2D Mag w/ROP____________ROP 3854H ___________2 IMR 26650 AW cells w/4.33A_____538.5_____3 min

Did AW finally get some 26650 in production? or is this just a typo

[bigchelis]

Did AW finally get some 26650 in production? or is this just a typo

its a typo..


the AW IMR 26500 were used and IMR 26650's.

Thanks,
bigC

[kramer5150]

Am I reading this right? On a cr123, the Romisen RC-N3 pushes out more lume than a qmini 123 (150 v. 142)? I wonder what the Romisen would do on a rcr123?

No BC forgot an "R". The RC-N3-Q5 did those numbers with an Ultrafire blue RCR123. Its not very bright with a primary CR123, maybe 85 Lumens ballpark.

[csshih]

oops, is it just me or did you lost some readings in the first post?

[bigchelis]

oops, is it just me or did you lost some readings in the first post?

I saw that last night, I didn't do anything on my end.

It would really be a pain if I have to re-type all those lights

[joshconsulting]

I saw that last night, I didn't do anything on my end.

It would really be a pain if I have to re-type all those lights

*cough*

http://docs.google.com

[ky70]

No BC forgot an "R". The RC-N3-Q5 did those numbers with an Ultrafire blue RCR123. Its not very bright with a primary CR123, maybe 85 Lumens ballpark.

OK, thanks for clearing that up. I have the mini 123 and have been tempted to get the rc-n3 (in part because of your great review) and 150 lumens on primary would have made that a must buy.

[ma_sha1]

I saw that last night, I didn't do anything on my end.

It would really be a pain if I have to re-type all those lights

Perhaps save a copy in MS word as back-up, Cut & paste back in if things like this happen again?

[csshih]

I prefer to use various bbcode writers found on the web, but if this situation is not resolved and you have to type it up, I'll make a backup on my site.

[Justin Case]

IMO, entering the data in Excel makes much more sense. That will allow you to do any sort of calculations on the data, such as inverse square law extrapolations and curve fitting of any lux data. Word is not a database or a spreadsheet, while Excel can do both adequately enough.

It's easy enough to take the Excel cells and post them to CPF as a jpeg or gif.

[joshconsulting]

Actually, it's maddeningly hard to post a table. Using either a screenshot or print to image means you print the image, crop it, save it, upload it to imageshack, and hotlink it. It's not *that* long, but having to repeat it every time you make a change gets old fast.

And the worst part? No text search. That pretty much kills it, with a decent number of lights it would quickly get very frusturating to find a specific one, compared to text where you can simply hit ctrl+f.

[Justin Case]

It's easy to add an Excel table. You run MWSnap, crop the area of interest, and save it to a file. Upload it to a photo hosting site and link it. It's not a one-step process of cut-and-paste, but it isn't "maddingly hard" either. It's up to bigC how frequently he wants to update the data. If he does it once or twice a week, I hardly see what the big deal is.

It get's more complicated when the table starts to get big and exceeds the size of one screen. I'd probably post the Excel sheet in sections, a la what Lux Luthor does with his destructive incan tables. You could also link the Excel data to a Word file. Thus, the data is always entered into Excel to take advantage of Excel's calculating and database functions, while it gets tabulated in Word for listing on CPF.

You can add a link to download the spreadsheet file itself. Easily searchable and sortable and extendable. Let's you do all sorts of calculations on the data. Add your own columns, such as head diam, type of optical system (e.g., reflector or TIR), etc.

[csshih]

you can convert the excel table to HTML and host it on a website.

I can do that

[joshconsulting]

The above two posts combined essentially describe Google Docs, which I and (mostly) Jose are currently trying to get working.

[Justin Case]

you can convert the excel table to HTML and host it on a website.

I can do that

It's easy. Excel 2007 has various Save As... file formats for the web.

[dirtech]

This is a great reference, and just wanted to say thanks for your efforts in providing it.

[bigchelis]

It's easy. Excel 2007 has various Save As... file formats for the web.

I have Excel 2007, but when I click on save-as all my options are excel type files. None are for web based save-as formats

PM me the steps for MWcrop you mentioned please.

bigC

[joshconsulting]

I have Excel 2007, but when I click on save-as all my options are excel type files. None are for web based save-as formats

PM me the steps for MWcrop you mentioned please.

bigC

That's not really a good option. You have to find a file hosting site, then save upload and re-link every time you change something. If your hosting it on a CPFers website, they either have to give you the password or you have to pm them to update the site each time you want to change something. Google docs is a much better option; just post the link you pmed me in the first post.

[bigchelis]

That's not really a good option. You have to find a file hosting site, then save upload and re-link every time you change something. If your hosting it on a CPFers website, they either have to give you the password or you have to pm them to update the site each time you want to change something. Google docs is a much better option; just post the link you pmed me in the first post.

I want to post the actual spreadsheet on this site, not the link.

[wapkil]

I want to post the actual spreadsheet on this site, not the link.

Yup, I agree that google docs may be handy here.

I believe everyone with google e-mail account also has an google docs one. You simply go to http://docs.google.com, log in with your e-mail account login and password, select upload button of the left to upload your excel file, select it from the files list and finally chose "get the link to share" from the share button on top. It works like any other file-sharing website and does a pretty decent job converting various formats to something readable with a browser.

With default options, if you post the link, people will have read only access to it. It should look like this random .xls that I uploaded a few minutes ago.