luxlover
Banned
Ante,
Don't you just love Saturn's reference to his emitter picture, "my horrifying misalignment?" 😱 Very melodramatic. He must be a thespian! :thinking:
Ra Clicky Part 5
- Thread starter HDS_Systems
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
- Status
Don't you just love Saturn's reference to his emitter picture, "my horrifying misalignment?" 😱 Very melodramatic. He must be a thespian! :thinking:
thermal guy
Flashaholic
I have a very special technique to fix off center emitters.Anyone have one that is really bugging them just send it my way and i will take care of it for you.Mind you it might take two or three months😀 You just can't rush these things you know.But rest assured i will take good care of it.
luxlover
Banned
You are a gentleman and a scholar, Dan. Email me your laboratory address and I will put my Clicky on my fastest pony. You see, my six day old Clicky has a serious emitter/reflector centering problem, with a 0.0001" visible gap. I am afraid that it is affecting my light's dispersion pattern.
The two or three month downtime is of no consequence, since I can use my beloved 100TwTwisty during it's absence. Then when I receive back the Clicky, I can send you my Twisty. It has a 0.00001" visible gap, and needs dire care. No fee is too steep for this service. In fact, it's a bargain.
Jeff
Perfectionist
So, if a visibly brighter emitter comes out in the future, are you saying that an emitter swap wouldn't take advantage of the brighter LED due to the calibration of the power supply? If that's the case, what's the incentive to upgrade the LED? Why have we seen a number of Seoul upgrades to the HDS EDC lights ... wouldn't it be the same situation?
I guess I really don't understand. Can you provide some illumination (no pun intended)?:thinking:
Splunk_Au
Enlightened
If that's the case then i assume the incentive would obviously be longer runtimes.
StandardBattery
Flashlight Enthusiast
I think the basic deal here is the current is already set, for each level. So if the emitter is swapped the increase in output would only be based on the improved efficiency of the new emitter.
Thats the Theory, however I'm not sure if we know whether the calibration establishes a constant current regardless of load, or establishes a constant voltage that produces the desired current. Chances are that any LED with a lower Vf would produce a higher output, but it might draw more current, so runtime would be affected.
I guess the key is during the emmiter swap it's not really possible to adjust the drive for the specific emitter, you get what you get.
I would not worry about it. It seems the circuit design that is being used right now is really nice with 85lm lights... just get 85 or slightly better and buy a second light like one of the EagleTac for you're "HI". it's two lights, but right now it seems that NovaTac and Ra have a lot to offer under 100 lumens, but that's it. It's probably better, more reliable, and better engineering to use a two light solution at this time. Or live with 100 Lumens.
Thats the Theory, however I'm not sure if we know whether the calibration establishes a constant current regardless of load, or establishes a constant voltage that produces the desired current. Chances are that any LED with a lower Vf would produce a higher output, but it might draw more current, so runtime would be affected.
I guess the key is during the emmiter swap it's not really possible to adjust the drive for the specific emitter, you get what you get.
I would not worry about it. It seems the circuit design that is being used right now is really nice with 85lm lights... just get 85 or slightly better and buy a second light like one of the EagleTac for you're "HI". it's two lights, but right now it seems that NovaTac and Ra have a lot to offer under 100 lumens, but that's it. It's probably better, more reliable, and better engineering to use a two light solution at this time. Or live with 100 Lumens.
Last edited:
AFAIK, it's a constant power driver, so it will adjust both (or, rather, adjust the current to match the Vf).
Henry has stated that his lights are current controlled so a lower Vf will result in longer run times, not higher output. If one were two swap in an emitter with a higher flux bin it should produce more output proportional to the increase in flux per mA. At least that's my understanding.
That would work like that if it were recalibrated after the emitter swap (to the calibrated, i.e. "normal" output level). But i'm not sure it would if it weren't.
Henry?
tebore
Flashlight Enthusiast
From dealing with a number of the old EDC lights.
This is what will/can happen if you swap LEDs.
The runtime can only be the same or worse. If the VF is higher than stock it'll be less. If the VF is lower the light just be slightly brighter.
If a more efficient LED is used for the upgrade it will be brighter.
The converter used is constant power not just current.
This is what will/can happen if you swap LEDs.
The runtime can only be the same or worse. If the VF is higher than stock it'll be less. If the VF is lower the light just be slightly brighter.
If a more efficient LED is used for the upgrade it will be brighter.
The converter used is constant power not just current.
HDS_Systems
Enlightened
StandardBattery, Axion,
The power supply produces constant POWER, per the specifications. Our flashlights are the only flashlights in the industry to use constant power - in spite of what another manufacturer claims. Power is not the same as voltage or current. Each setting is calibrated based on power required to produce the required output flux (i.e., lumens). Using constant power automatically compensates for most of the die temperature issues - something that constant current and constant voltage cannot do.
If the new LED produces more light at the same power, you will receive benefit. The problem is, there is no way to know prior to the swap how much more efficient the new LED is relative to the old LED. The runtimes on each setting will stay mostly the same following an LED swap.
Bullfrog,
The beam pattern of the Ra-85-Tr and the Ra-140-Cn will be the same. The beam pattern of the Ra-100-T and the Ra-140-C will be the same. The Ra-85-Tr and the Ra-140-Cn beam patterns are narrower and have a longer throw than the Ra-100-T and the Ra-140-C beam patterns. The increase in throw distance is roughly 20%.
Henry.
The power supply produces constant POWER, per the specifications. Our flashlights are the only flashlights in the industry to use constant power - in spite of what another manufacturer claims. Power is not the same as voltage or current. Each setting is calibrated based on power required to produce the required output flux (i.e., lumens). Using constant power automatically compensates for most of the die temperature issues - something that constant current and constant voltage cannot do.
If the new LED produces more light at the same power, you will receive benefit. The problem is, there is no way to know prior to the swap how much more efficient the new LED is relative to the old LED. The runtimes on each setting will stay mostly the same following an LED swap.
Bullfrog,
The beam pattern of the Ra-85-Tr and the Ra-140-Cn will be the same. The beam pattern of the Ra-100-T and the Ra-140-C will be the same. The Ra-85-Tr and the Ra-140-Cn beam patterns are narrower and have a longer throw than the Ra-100-T and the Ra-140-C beam patterns. The increase in throw distance is roughly 20%.
Henry.
SaturnNyne
Enlightened
I already slipped in a response to you at the end of my post here, but you may have missed it amidst all the surrounding clutter that tends to accumulate when my fingers meet the keyboard, kicking up dust with a thousand practiced movements, with the pace and ferocity of a flamenco dancer after a super-sized siesta. Err.. ahem. Now that Henry has confirmed that the beam will be the same, we just have to wait and see if it will have the same range of typical tints. However, from what I've heard about the dragons, I'm not anticipating any change even if the emitter isn't exactly the same model. It will likely continue to be a slightly cool white, often with a refreshing hint of lavenderyness, sometimes a pleasant pinch of yellow in the corona. Also, I've found that they have surprisingly good color rendition for their cool tint. As for the difference in outputs, it kind of depends on your eyes and definition of noticeable. However, from a practical standpoint, yes it's true that 85 to 100 is not a noticeable increase.
Yup, good eye; bubble gummed the gaps, ripped off the gummy dome, and added a second die made of a cupcake sprinkle. I have a hunch this is the same method thermal guy is offering with his service, since moving the die itself probably isn't a good option in this case. I'm not sure why it takes him so long though. Perhaps he has to personally test and sort a lot of gum due to notoriously high confectionary manufacturing tolerances? Also I hear the manufacturer of the sprinkles will no longer be making them in the proper red, so better grab this delicious option while you can.You have certainly "pinkified" that shot to my dismay. I think that I know why, too. Since I don't see that eyesore of a 0.001" gap anymore, you probably filled it in with ABC bubble gum! (ABC = Already Been Chewed).
That's how i understood it too...
If the Vf is lower, the driver will probably actually increase the current, the output will go up a bit and the runtimes down.
The runtime will not be affected greatly by an emitter swap as per Henry's post. This is a direct consequence of the constant power design, since the power drain from the battery is the same (I * Vf = P).
Kamakazikev24
Enlightened
Why change what looks to be a perfectly made light!
An led matched to it's driver 🙂
Your not going to find better until Henry makes a new one LOL.
An led matched to it's driver 🙂
Your not going to find better until Henry makes a new one LOL.
Last edited:
luxlover
Banned
Just think, if you hadn't listened to the person in the thread asking that you post a macro of your light's emitter, then I would not be crying tears of joy (joyful laughter) after reading all of your profound posts. It just proves that flashlight collecting is not all about lights. It is also about the human/flashlight relationship and how it differs between people. People who are so serious about this hobby that they cannot have a jolly good time with others on CPF, are missing out on so much. The same applies to any hobby.
By the way, Saturn's emails are just as clever and entertaining.
Jeff
Philosophically Challenged Philosopher
Actually, there should be some runtime consequences, depending on the Vf of the emitter vs. battery voltage, because the efficiency of the driver will change depending on the Vout vs. Vin.
luxlover
Banned
I had modmeister milkyspit swap a Seoul P4 (not U2 bin) into my stock EDC U60 about 1.5 years ago. When he buys his supply of emitters, he presorts them in several categories with a Vf tester he made. When a customer has him do a swap, he asks if a greater output or a greater runtime is desired. From that reply, he picks an emitter that will do the job. I wanted his mod to give me maximum output. So he removed the stock Luxeon III TWOJ emitter (marked on the front end of the light module), chose a Seoul that had a lower Vf than the stock emitter and thermal epoxied it to the heatsink. Based on his calculations and my crude tests using my MeterMan LM-631 luxmeter and my other stock U60 as my benchmark, we estimate the output to be about 140lm, give or take!!!
Note that the efficiency of emitters improved nicely from the time Henry manufactured his U60s, to the time my mod was implimented. I have no idea how the runtime has changed from the before to the after condition, but since Henry's power supply is constant power regulated and not current or voltage regulated, it can be assumed that the runtime will be pretty much the same as before the mod. As has been discussed above, an emitter with a low Vf will yield greater output, as long as the stock vs replacement Vf's are not too close to each other.
For now, I think that it would be wise to leave our Clickys as is, until the Seoul or Osram emitters, for which the Clicky has been designed, show greater efficiencies. At that point, there will be some of us who can't resist doing an emitter swap, and we will surely hear about it "through the grapevine."
Jeff
Note that the efficiency of emitters improved nicely from the time Henry manufactured his U60s, to the time my mod was implimented. I have no idea how the runtime has changed from the before to the after condition, but since Henry's power supply is constant power regulated and not current or voltage regulated, it can be assumed that the runtime will be pretty much the same as before the mod. As has been discussed above, an emitter with a low Vf will yield greater output, as long as the stock vs replacement Vf's are not too close to each other.
For now, I think that it would be wise to leave our Clickys as is, until the Seoul or Osram emitters, for which the Clicky has been designed, show greater efficiencies. At that point, there will be some of us who can't resist doing an emitter swap, and we will surely hear about it "through the grapevine."
Jeff
- Status
