A small 123/LS light (Long/pics)

Candle Power Flashlight Forum

Help Support CPF:

I guess the OD is ok. I see the Surefire E1/E2 is smaller in OD than the LS. In fact I don't see why Arc made the LS so thick. On a slightly different note, I'm actually not in too much of a hurry to see these produced, and I hope tvodrd's retiring director gets his light pretty soon, so at least for a while, he'll have a unique item. I want one for myself too, but I don't mind waiting for a while. Higher flux Luxeons will be more plentiful in a few months anyway ;-).
 
By the way folks,

There is a design/tolerancing issue with adapting this thing to a "sandwich" from Wayne/dat2zip: The heatsinking requires the emitter board of the "sandwich" bear against the inside of the copper center section like it does against the shoulder at the front of a MiniM.. tube. This means that the optic cannot be loaded against the LS as it is in the current design! The optic will have to be mechanically located in the front under the lens and bezel, with some tolerance for the height of the LS under its dome. The optics work best when they are all the way down, and against the LS. Curiouser and curiuoser, the more I look into what would otherwise be a pretty cool design (If I say so myself /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif )

Larry
 
BTW,

There is a fairly easy solution- Have the "builder" file as required, the bottom of the optic so it *just* doesn't touch when the "sandwich" is fully forward against the 'sink. Somebody, I forget who, did some experiments with moving the emitter forward within an NX-05. I don't recall the results.

Larry
 
I still say lose the optics altogether. I don't remember what percentage of the light you lose when using the acrylic optics but I think it's between 5% and 10%(??). The Cu or Al slug would be a bit more difficult to machine I guess, but just put a lip inside the slug to mimic a mini-m@gs and then another lip beyond that with a ID just a bit wider than a HD emitter's lens. Then, come in from the other side of the slug and machine in a reflector down to 1/32 of this lip so that just the lens is poking through the small lip.

OK, I'm not an engineer - I admit it /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif - please forgive me... But dern this is fun.

Jon
 
[ QUOTE ]
LEDmodMan said:
This is getting interesting...

Now, where did I stash that $120 bucks I was saving...?

:goes to dig for money:

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
LEDmodMan said:
I was hoping that my $120 would get me TWO of these! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
shiftd said:
i thought you are planning to get LS4? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yellowlaugh.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

That money is in a different coffee can... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif
 
Re: THE small 123/LS light (Long/pics)

Heheheheh ...

Is anyone else amused by the praise heaped upon this brilliant design, people asking, no, pleading, to get one, then when that just might become a possibility asking that everything except the outside be changed?

My vote: The original design is what got us all excited - we liked it and it works - don't make any changes in the first run if it goes into limited production.

Yes, there can be changes in fabrication, of course (a cast optic, for example, or a different lens or front gasket, or a slight change in machining or finish), if it makes manufacture/assembly easier or less costly, but what I want to see (and hold in my hand as my own) is a light based on the original design, not some fourth generation hybrid that only shares the same battery ...

It seems that each and every suggestion for a change is taking away some of what made the original design brilliant: Simplicity based on the function of each part.

For example, the LS needs to be heat sinked, so directly attach it to a solid heat sink and go from there. As much as I truly like the Sandwich Shop drop-ins (in my opinion the best designs on the market), they complicate the straightforward heat path of the original design, and make the resulting product a different light.

The turned-down optic functions to form the beam, provide a good seal at the front of the head, and ensure good contact of the LS with it's heat sink. Dropping the optic changes every one of those functions.

Please, folks, the original design is well thought out and its form is based on function. That original design is what excited us because we could see it's excellence. It was a well though out complete engineering job. Any change to any tiny bit of it forces a re-examination of the entire design, and is NOT as simple as it might seem. The design is a unified whole.

Change is good, but the first run should be THIS light.

I'll shut up now. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

tomsig03.gif
 
Re: THE small 123/LS light (Long/pics)

Tomas, I couldn't agree more. The orginal design is very intriguing and appealing.
 
Thanks again everybody,

Stuffing micropucks in these things was a PITA, though the output/runtime/heat may be more favorable (to some) to, say, a Badboy. I've had a chance to look (a little) at a design for a "kit" to use Wayne/dat2zip's drop-in modules, and surprisingly, it would reduce the O.A.L. from 2.80" to 2.60!" (What's a few thou between friends? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif ) A custom, "short stack" "sandwich" knocks-off another .10 to give 2 1/2" long, including lanyard attach! (But that's another story.) Hopefully, I'll get some time on the board (literally- my SolidWorks died with my hdd) this weekend to reallocate the axial real estate. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Larry
 
2 1/2" long?!! wow, thats how long the arc AAA is.

I agree with Tomas that keeping the orginal design will make this light unique and appealing. If it ever makes is to production, I may suggest to use Al instead of Cu for the midsection, for two 2 reasons: (1) reduce cost (2) Copper tends to tarnish easily, especially when it's exposed like that. Shiny aluminum looks better than brown copper. Just my 2¢...
 
Yeah, you guys are right. Since I pushed the reflector idea I'm obviously one of the ones to blame here. I need to spend more time at work actually working and less time being an armchair engineer in these blasted forums. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Jon
 
[ QUOTE ]
tvodrd said:
N162E,

If I understand your question, there is no insert. Screwing the bezel down loads the lens gasket against the lens against the optic against the LS itself. The copper doesn't touch the optic, and was polished to help bounce a few more photons out the front. There are 5 machined parts: the bezel, the optic, the copper center section, the + bat contact, and the bat case.

Larry



[/ QUOTE ]

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/help.gifHi Larry,

At risk of repeating myself I am going to rephrase an earlier question. In the pictures with your first post there is a picture of three center (Copper) pieces. One of the center pieces has the Luxeon emitter installed. I am not real clear from the picture how the emitter is sitting in the slug. Is it sitting down in a secondary step? Are the ends of the center section different from each other? At first I thought there might have been a collar pressed in around it, you earlier stated this was not the case. What confuses me is the perfect circle around the emitter that appears to be a slightly different color. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

I may have the ability to have a few of these made so I am trying to be real clear on what that picture is showing. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif

This is the picture I find confusing,
site1010.JPG

....I am confused by the piece above HERE^
 
Re: THE small 123/LS light (Long/pics)

[ QUOTE ]
Tomas said:

Please, folks, the original design is well thought out and its form is based on function. That original design is what excited us because we could see it's excellence. It was a well though out complete engineering job. Any change to any tiny bit of it forces a re-examination of the entire design, and is NOT as simple as it might seem. The design is a unified whole.

Change is good, but the first run should be THIS light.


[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. Certainly there is room for change on subsequent runs. Also, though a kit is fine idea for some folks, I prefer a complete light that proves the harmony between design elements, power components and photon management. "The design is a unified whole"
 
N162E,

I should have included a view of the LS-end of the slug. It consists of a 7/16" counterbore about .35" deep, followed by a 5/16 c-bore about .010 deep to center the LS. Then We bored a 58deg "cone" to clear the sides of the optic. I polished the conical section, and the "slightly different color" is a reflection of the LS. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Larry
 
Re: THE small 123/LS light (Long/pics)

[ QUOTE ]
tvodrd said:
N162E,

I should have included a view of the LS-end of the slug. It consists of a 7/16" counterbore about .35" deep, followed by a 5/16 c-bore about .010 deep to center the LS. Then We bored a 58deg "cone" to clear the sides of the optic. I polished the conical section, and the "slightly different color" is a reflection of the LS. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Larry

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank You Larry,

Makes a lot more sense now!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Re: THE small 123/LS light (Long/pics)

I worried about the practicality of turning the NX05's down in any quantity on a lathe (it sounds like that's what you had done). But take a look at Bucken's "Pocket Penny" (a much less sophisticated design than yours, but I like it a lot in its own way because it can be built with simple tools). He simply sanded down his NX05 on a Dremel belt sander using a wooden dowel to hold the NX05. It looks like that could be done pretty quickly.


Pocket Penny:
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB14&Number=221283&page=0&view=&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=

Both these lights convince me that keeping the head end the same size as the (minimal) 123 or CR2 tube is the way to go. The Arc LS and SF KL1 both seem oversized to me now.

I gotta say again, nice work!
 
Re: THE small 123/LS light (Long/pics)

I particularly like the offset, angled rib for the lanyard hole. Sexy. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/buttrock.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
shankus said:
I particularly like the offset, angled rib for the lanyard hole. Sexy. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/buttrock.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

shankus,

Thank you very much! It was an added PITA to machine, but well worth it. I even considered (replaceable) bushing them with a stainless steel insert.

Larry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top