Q8, PMS SEND TO THOSE WITH ISSUES BLF soda can light

???

joeangi welcome to BLF!

OP updated

Couple of new videos, showing the new ThorFire BLF.

This shows the basic operation of Narsil v1.2 on the new ThorFire BLF Q8 prototype:

This shows wall beamshot comparisons between the ThorFire BLF Q8 on the left, and the 4X SRK clone, modified, on the right, both running Narsil v1.2:

Hey you mentioned it in an email but yeah that Q8 prototype reflector gives a very pretty beam
I think I like it more then the srk beam profile.

Yep, totally agree. It appears to be a tight beam for a flood light, but overall much better looking pattern than the SRK clone. I have to do some comparisons to better make a judgment on the width of the beam - will know better tonight. I though a video would show the differences much better than still shots.

I'm in the process of writing up a detailed post now on the prototype.

I like the SRK beam better myself, it appears to be a tighter hotspot. The rose peddle design is something that doesnā€™t bother me when actually using it outside.

Have you done a lux comparison?

I like the slightly larger hot spot of the Q8, as well as the absence of petals, whether rosy or not. :wink:

More tech details on the ThorFire BLF Q8 prototype

After taking some pictures and measurements, it was time to tear her down and found some interesting things. We are cautioning everyone not to rush to judgment. This is the first prototype and has several issues that will be addressed.

  • Has a real nice one piece DTP copper MCPCB, maybe a little on the thin side at 1.24mm thick, but nice 35.8mm diameter
  • the LED shelf is a solid 7.05mm thick and integrated with the head, but has an oversized center hole of 15.5mm
  • outer dimensions are dead-on with standard SRK's at 59.0mm head, 50.0 mm tube, 52.0mm at tailcap, 135.1mm length
  • LED wires are just two and are heavy gauge of 18 AWG - this is as we requested, and probably a good part of why it performs so well
  • driver was a surprise - they used our design, parts list, and firmware as a model to clone. So, they used a different MCU and FET. but still a FET+1 7135. This is not acceptable, and explains the issues I noticed in the operation of ramping, etc. We are working with them again to review our driver proposal.
  • it has an operational Indicator LED under the switch cover - we did not expect this and not sure if it will stay in the production run (but I do like it!)

So we had some good news, some bad news. There's been some re-org with the engineering team at ThorFire, so think we got a good foundation to continue with, and hoping the electronics is not as issue (may have been cost and availability of parts, not sure).

So we decided to swap out the ThorFire driver and install one of our own OSHPark drivers to better match up with the eventual production run. here' some pics:

Stock proto ThorFire driver, a bit messy:

Cleaned up:

The LED's/MCPCB:

Reflector base, showing the cutout for the wiring. Alignment pieces appear to be glued in and beat up - again, we are asking to get this fixed up because the LED's aren't properly being centered - alignment pieces are a little over sized:

Nice brass retaining ring for the driver:

The top stack: Bezel, glass and o-ring:

Tail PCB w/springs. PCB has wide traces on both sides which is good for lowering resistance, but those springs gotta go - hopefully better quality double springs will be used:

Just to show, the one cell is held in place well, so no problem running the light on 1 cell, up to all 4:

Showing the real copper of the MCPCB:

18 AWG wires:

Shelf the MCPCB sits on, all cleaned up (anodized, oversized hole that can be much smaller):

Closeup on the reflector:

Brass ring removed:

Cleaned up, and reflowed to the OSHPark driver using high temp hot air station:

The "real" BLF Q8 driver goin in :

I left in the LED's the prototype came with, though they are CW XPL's - should be NW 3D's. I'll be swapping in V6 3D's next, after this.

Good news after the driver swap, lumens at 30 secs bumped up from 5,320 to 5,624 - 5.7% gain

Could be within a margin of error, but made sure I used the same 30Q cells slightly lower @4.19V.

Also I found out the body threads match to other SRK clones I got (2 I tried), so I could swap in the spring bypassed battery tube base, and measured on the same slightly depleted cells: 6,018 lumens @30 secs, so another 7% bump, even with the cells at 4.15V.

I also measured parasitic drain on this new setup:

- with Indicator switch LED on: 0.22 mA, so 1 Ah drain in 6 months

- with indicator switch LED off (in lockout for example): 0.037 mA, so 1 Ah drain in about 3 years

Basically, even with the indicator LED on 24/7, it would take 6 years to fully drain a set of 3000 mAh cells, and the GREEN switch LED is pretty bright. Again though, can't guarantee the final version will have the LED installed.

Thanks for this great update Tom!

Yep there is still work to be done and Thorfire is very responsive, so for now we thnk th work can and shall be done.
Woowzers on the 6K lumens, 50% above specification, how is that :smiley:

Throw was slightly less than the 4X SRK clone, but so was the lumens with the ThorFire proto driver. Should be up now with our OSHPark driver, didn't measure yet though. The LED's are still not center aligned well though, so might be hurting throw.

Interesting, overall I would say it is a success for a first prototype. I would have been surprised if it was better then this honestly.

Are the LEDā€™s the same distance as your SRK clone? Is it possible to swap reflectors?

If they insist on the basic MCPCB and tailcap (although with a new guy to talk to maybe he would get the dual footprint MCPCB idea back on track?), then you could suggest that the entire tailcap PCB be a solid piece of copper on both sides with some vias to share the load. Same cost but more copper = win.

Interesting, when you have time I am curious what the results are now with the higher lumens.

Do you mean theyā€™re using a different Atmel MCU? Or they basically cloned the UI and wrote their own code for a PIC or something else?

Is that shelf hole the size of a 18650? Looks like maybe they drilled it with the same tool used to do the cell holder. Not that big an issue as far as Iā€™m concerned but unless thereā€™s a good reason for it (cost), itā€™s certainly worth fixing.

The whole thing looks really good already :slight_smile: Keep at it guys.

I think it is good that the center hole 15.5mm because it is convenient for the modification, we could insert a piece of copper or aluminum as heat sink.

True , but not so good for a stock light ā€¦

If the hole is reduced to 5mm it is approximately 1.2614cm3 more aluminum and I doubt that this will contribute to a better heat-sink stock light

I think the hole in the integrated shelf is actually an indication of the actual tube with thick walls that was used to make the head?

I donā€™t think the hole in the shelf is a problem personally. There is still thick shelf under the emitters, right? Choose your battles.

This is my thinking. I doubt it will make much of a difference in real world performance. Bring it up but if they do not readily want to fix it, I would not worry about pushing the point. Better to spend that effort on another item, such as the driver or dual footprint MCPCB.

yeah and a output drop to 5500-6000 lumens after 30 secs isā€¦wellā€¦respetable right?

Yeah, that is about right. The hole in the center will really have a small effect on the overall cooling. It is worth mentioning but not much more then that. If nothing else it will show that we are willing to give up things when needed if it is mentioned and not pushed.