ArmyTek        
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Domes of the XT-E vs the XP-G, strength of each

  1. #1
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    623

    Default Domes of the XT-E vs the XP-G, strength of each

    So this might sound a bit weird, but i'm trying to determine if the domes of the XT-E are softer / more fragile / easier to damage then the XP-G's. The reason i ask is because i sell a product that requires the LED's to be mounted in a small area and oftem times the LED's get jostled around a bit.

    I have never had problems with the XP-G LED's but since switching to the XT-E's customers complain that the domes are getting ripped off much to easily. I'm wondering if anyone else had heard of something similar to this. Thanks for the help!

  2. #2
    Flashaholic* bshanahan14rulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,789

    Default Re: Domes of the XT-E vs the XP-G, strength of each

    Tell the people to stop jostling them around so much!

    XP handling guide: http://www.cree.com/~/media/Files/Cr...XLampXP_SH.pdf
    XT handling guide: http://www.cree.com/~/media/Files/Cr...Lamp_XT_SH.pdf

    Both state some of the same chemical incompatibilities and shear force.

    Logically, you'd expect them to be different. You talking color LEDs? Perhaps the extraction texture on the XP-G is better at keeping stuck to the dome than the very crisp, smooth looking light extraction buildup of the XT-E.

    Perhaps you can design something to protect the LED during installation and can be removed afterwards, once the LED is about to be sealed up in its final mounting place?

  3. #3
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    623

    Default Re: Domes of the XT-E vs the XP-G, strength of each

    These are both White LED's. The reason the LED's get hit is because they are getting installed in a way where its not possible to see and you have to feel around as to where the LED and fixture go. Theres no way to avoid that part. Sure adding some protection would be useful but finding a material thats less fragile then glass but able to withstand the temperature would be difficult and expensive as well.
    I would need to find a 3/4 hollow tube about 1.5 inches long that would 4-8 LED's mounted inside of it. The heat would be quite intense at such a close range

  4. #4
    Flashaholic* AnAppleSnail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    South Hill, VA
    Posts
    4,200

    Default Re: Domes of the XT-E vs the XP-G, strength of each

    Whether the dome is silicone or glass, it's attached with optical silicone instead of glue. Some people use a conformal coating on these, others put up a shroud. I think the height of the dome leads to a mechanical (dis)advantage in prying up taller domes, though.
    My biggest light-hog is my camera.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,899

    Default Re: Domes of the XT-E vs the XP-G, strength of each

    Quote Originally Posted by mds82 View Post
    So this might sound a bit weird, but i'm trying to determine if the domes of the XT-E are softer / more fragile / easier to damage then the XP-G's. The reason i ask is because i sell a product that requires the LED's to be mounted in a small area and oftem times the LED's get jostled around a bit.

    I have never had problems with the XP-G LED's but since switching to the XT-E's customers complain that the domes are getting ripped off much to easily. I'm wondering if anyone else had heard of something similar to this. Thanks for the help!

    Have you considered adding a simple plastic (or metal plate) with holes in it where the LEDS are and enough clearance not to impact the output of the LED? That should allow fingers to glide over the top as opposed to "grabbing" the dome.

    Semiman

  6. #6
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    623

    Default Re: Domes of the XT-E vs the XP-G, strength of each



    This is a small picture of the light that i'm talking about. a simple plastic would get too hot and melt or get damaged too quickly. there wer 2 more LED's on the other side of this as well

  7. #7
    Flashaholic* uk_caver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Central UK
    Posts
    1,381

    Default Re: Domes of the XT-E vs the XP-G, strength of each

    Would it be possible to build up the cylinder structure closer to the LED domes to make them more recessed, or would that get in the way of things optically-speaking?

    Some high temperature epoxies would be happy at LED temperatures.
    Last edited by uk_caver; 04-10-2013 at 09:21 AM.

  8. #8
    Flashaholic* bshanahan14rulz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,789

    Default Re: Domes of the XT-E vs the XP-G, strength of each

    glass tubing would affect output, but not that much. Might cut down a few percent of light output. You can even find fused quartz tubing if you want to use that for marketing the heat resistance or strength of the materials used. It would also make cleaning the things easier, because I imagine the environment that they are housed in is supposed to be sealed from the outside air, but still might have dust or vapors in there.

Posting Permissions

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