One thing to keep in mind is that the 4× 18650 tube is already on the edge of comfortable for smaller hands (several people that have used my SRK’s have mentioned as much). Since this light needs to be able to be used by anyone, any larger then a 4× 18650 tube will start quickly reducing the comfort for more and more users. Particularly when you factor in the weight.
It is significantly harder to hold onto a larger bar then a smaller one all else being the same. Even very small differences can have large effects.
Didn’t know that, dont have a SRK like flashlight here to know how it feels.
So what about the little smaller side by side setup?
The only problem that I see is that the balance might not be optimal.
mdeni wrote:
2х2 18650 8mm thinner tube. Plastic insert, cheap aluminium tube. No problems with carriers and connections.
How would you make the connection?
If you have one cell with the anode to the driver and the other with the cathode to the driver you’ll need separate contact areas on the driver contact side. (and maybe a spring?)
But if you turn the tailcap on the tube there is a possibility that they dont line up anymore, also increasing the possibility of making a short. Which you dont want with a 4s setup.
By using a carrier, which could be made out of plastic, with an contact board on one end that has 2 contact rings you dont have that problem.
Or am I missing something?
(weird, was editing my post but apparently I made a new one..)
I have never been a fan of the massive heads with toothpicks for bodies myself.
mdeni wrote:
.
We do not want to make it like this:
I totally agree, a light such as this has zero appeal to me visually.
I know it is not supposed to be about looks, but I just can’t help it; lights like this just looks goofy to me. .
But hey, that is just my opinion…. (pretty shallow & petty one at that > < ) ; but it is what it is.
—
You never know how a horse will pull until you hook him up to a heavy load./"Bear" Bryant
.................................. "Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast" ...................................
Tony Stark works at Wuben right
Nothing wrong with brainstorming IMHO when something is decided it should be a real group thing.
This is what makes this GT so early already (and the Q8 as well) so cool of a project!
Indeed the last few ideas have actually been things that could be used, if it was deemed necessary.
Although before we try to change things, I am still at a loss for what is wrong with the 4/8× 18650 tube? What doesn’t it do that these other ideas would?
Basically, what is better about the latest round of ideas? All I see is the inability to use 8X cells if someone so desired. Why not simply only run 4 cells in the 8 cell tube?
Just to throw some Idea’s (these idea’s where already suggested I think), 4 26650’s in a 2 row 2s side bij side config is not really a bad idea.
You’ll have a carrier with on the left side 2 26650’s in series and on the right side the same, together they form a 4s setup.
Because you use a carrier the tube doesn’t have to be that thick, however using 26650’s in this config will increase the diameter by 8mm. (measured at the batteries)
Or if you use 18650’s instead of 26650’s in the same config the diameter will decrease by 8 mm.
The balance will be slightly worse. 5ar should be able to see where the Center of gravity is in his design software.
4× 18650 in a 2×2 configuranion is good. It can be made from a tube, and plastic insert. Bypassing the need of a carriers and bringing the price down. Excellent idea. Or even better, it can be made for 4×26650 with one plastic insert, and for 4×18650 with another plastic insert. Same tube, same everything just a piece of plastic. No need of complicated carriers, no danger of mixed cells. Any 4 cells will do the job at 3.5A drain.
How? lengthwise wont fit. The length of the tube is still 2 cells.
Or do you mean, make at wide enough for the 26650 setup but use a plastic insert to bring it down to a 18650 setup?
Better Idea, using a carrier like this:
Can use both 26650’s as 18650’s.
A carrier is easier or necessary to make contact with the driver contacts (2 rings).
Although before we try to change things, I am still at a loss for what is wrong with the 4/8× 18650 tube? What doesn’t it do that these other ideas would?
Basically, what is better about the latest round of ideas? All I see is the inability to use 8X cells if someone so desired. Why not simply only run 4 cells in the 8 cell tube?
To me the 4/8× 18650 tube makes the most sense, period.
In addition, as far as I am concerned; it would be ridiculous to “change things” or even think about “changing things” unless the questions Texas_Ace asked above are answered in a ‘reasonable’ way that would appeal to the masses.
—
You never know how a horse will pull until you hook him up to a heavy load./"Bear" Bryant
.................................. "Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast" ...................................
To me the 4/8× 18650 tube makes the most sense, period.
In addition, as far as I am concerned; it would be ridiculous to “change things” or even think about “changing things” unless the questions Texas_Ace asked above are answered in a ‘reasonable’ way that would appeal to the masses.
Although before we try to change things, I am still at a loss for what is wrong with the 4/8× 18650 tube? What doesn’t it do that these other ideas would?
Basically, what is better about the latest round of ideas? All I see is the inability to use 8X cells if someone so desired. Why not simply only run 4 cells in the 8 cell tube?
To me the 4/8× 18650 tube makes the most sense, period.
In addition, as far as I am concerned; it would be ridiculous to “change things” or even think about “changing things” unless the questions Texas_Ace asked above are answered in a ‘reasonable’ way that would appeal to the masses.
All the ideas are meant to reduce cost of the light, and keep it simpler. If it can be made with the carriers for a low price than that is fine of course. They seem pricey and complicated to the casual observer.
Well, 4/8× 18650 design compared to new 4×18650 design.
4/8x tube:
Advantage: more runtime with 8 cells.
Disadvantage: more total weight (if used with 8cells), thicker.
4x tube:
Advantage: smaller, less total weight (compared to 8 cell setup)
Disadvantage: not being able to run it with 8 cells thus having less runtime (compared to 8 cell setup).
What doesn’t change:
Runtime when 8 cell tube is used with only 4 cells.
Weight when 8 cell tube is used with only 4 cells. (oke, weight is reduced slightly)
For me, personally, I don’t see why we don’t just have a dedicated 8 cells. It’s a search light, it’s gonna need run time to be used as it’s designed. There are perfectly adequate cells available for very cheap monies, no more than $40 for 8 really good high capacity cells can be found easily. This would have the absolute maximum effects, delivering BRP without a hiccup. (Balance, Runtime, Power). I bought the extension set for the TK61, ran 8 cells, didn’t have a problem with it. That was a much higher current light and it worked out fine.
As a comparison factor, the battery tube with proprietary cells for the TN42 is about $70, for the proprietary battery pack alone (4 cells)
While I do like the IDEA of everyone contributing on the making of a light from the ground up, I’ve seen repeatedly where it’s not sound business practice. A team should get together, decide the parameters, have the light made, then offer it for sale. To me that ensures optimization, without long delays in argument while ideas get tossed around like a beach volleyball. I’ve seen the open thread idea hold up multiple lights and even kill off a couple entirely. Seems funny that people are willing to get upset because they didn’t get what they wanted, but Nitecore, Fenix, Surefire, MagLite, Thrunite, Solarforce, EagTac, ArmyTek, SupFire, Olight, 4Sevens…. they build what they want and offer the lights for sale, they don’t take stinking polls! And most of us here have those brands, never had a single bit of input on how they built the light.
Diversity can build strength and character, it can also break the core, polluting the purity of the concept. Field of Dreams said it , “if you build it, they will come…”
The head of this light would weigh over 1.5lb, needless to say it can absorb and dissipate a LOT of heat.
the issue with adding more fins is it would add even more weight.
Absorbing a lot of heat is right but only until the material is thermaly saturated then only the surface will help dissipating the heat.
Making the finns smaler (~1,8-2,2mm thick and a bit higher ~10mm) would help. The distance between the finns should be ~2,5-3mm.
Making them even smaler would help with the heat but they would be to fragile. Not something you would want on your high quality flashlight.
And the further you get away from the led less heat will be dissipating. So the finns can get smaller and smaller. So that the head will not get bigger.
To abandon the finns on the GT is not wise (or to use the 5-6mm thick only 5-6mm high finns that you can see on the prototype picture). They look good but will not help much with the heat.
Here a small example:
on the left i have a 10*10cm alu plate. Put a LED on one side and use the back for heat dissipating. You get a surface amount of 100cm². On the right side i put only 5 10mm high finns on the plate. Now you got 200cm² of heat dissipating surface. If you increase the amount of finns to 10 the surface area increase to 300cm².
Now do that on your flashlight base where most of the heat is generated. And you will increase the surface amount by 100-300% and you will be prepared for new more powerfull LED´s.
yah I started googling too
LOL it exist:
http://reflector-design.com/ with free trial (could we play nough in 10 days?)
Why not contact them and explain what we are doing, and get them on this “quest” with us for reaching (1mcd with a decent/usable beam, hopefully) our goal?
The Miller wrote:
Googling pointed me to this software on so many pages, I highly doubt they are interested in doing something, but what the heck, I just send the the following mail via their online form:
_Hi there,
Is there somebody who really likes/loves flashlights working at your company?
If so could you give me the phone number and/or email so i can get in touch?
Thanks and regards_
.
.
.
Did someone answer you?
..so we can bring the reflector in the dicussion again….feel bored about the battery case…
Post 1 =
Driver design
………….. Tom E Electronic switch driver for Narsil firmware
………….. Very low parasitic drain
………….. Able to run 4 and/or 8 button top 18650 cell(s)
—
"Do to others, what you would like others do to you.."
Take a read of this, it shows the maximum fin optimization for heat transfer in natural convection which I mentioned somewhere earlier in this thread: https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0ahUK...
You could make the fins thick for durability like you wanted but space them out according to the most heat dissipation shown in this peer reviewed article
TLDR: 8mm spacing is best, but you should read the article for learning purpouses
4 series it is, was and will be
I kind of thought Thijsco was trying to dobit with 26650 cells and if that would still be nice to hold I do not have an issue with doing that (a slightly fatter tube probably looks better too) now I see it was about 2 series, sorry, simple no
So this is a moment for a decision, a long 4×2 18650 tube it is, just as in the renders, compatible with Q8 tube and a 46mm driver done.
I saw 4 3400 Panasonic’s for $11,11 at Gearbest some time ago, so 8 cells should not be expensive of using notebookpulls free.
At this stage, without manufacturer even without led brainstorming is nice. Decisions will be made and if not all are happy about outcome so be it
More then seriously taking everything in and debate sometimes cannot be done and seeing how it went with the Q8 I have faith in BLF.
I know other groupbuys went different and I did what I think is constructive, doing it the way I thought it would be better.
Haven’t heared back from the software guys, haven’t headed back from the IM reflector guys. It seems a holiday in the US so I am not going to pursue it before Tuesday
So in the mean time, mind if I call the LED chosen and maybe talk a bit about cooling (since a good render is needed next week (I have a high end manufacturer who is willing to listen, the more concrete it is the better. And no I will not disclose name you have to wait a few weeks for that.
Badaboom what a long post
Oh and I will update list later
Absorbing a lot of heat is right but only until the material is thermaly saturated then only the surface will help dissipating the heat. Snip…..
The issue with fins is weight, I wanted more fins at first as well. Till I realized it was already a 3.3lb light as it was and adding fins would further increase that.
A 5lb light while it sounds good is simply not practical to use in the real world.
Plus the L6 handles the power surprisingly well, this light will have about the same surface area I figure and in stock form anyways put out a LOT less power.
For raw output and power dissipation we would really need to go with djozz box idea with a fan on a heat sink for the ultimate cooling (something I would love to work on after this).
No big fins please, no need when driving an XHP35 HI at 2,5A+.
This light will have more then enough mass to absorb the majority of the heat produced.
.
Big fins are needed only when multiple emitters are driven hard and we are not going that way, right?
.
Grtz
Nico
No big fins please, no need when driving an XHP35 HI at 2,5A+.
This light will have more then enough mass to absorb the majority of the heat produced.
.
Big fins are needed only when multiple emitters are driven hard and we are not going that way, right?
.
Grtz
Nico
An XHP35 at about 3A will be producing over 40W of heat,
The “mass” of aluminum in the body does not magically “absorb” heat and make it disappear.
You cannot destroy energy like that.
A piece of metal is what contacts air and transfers heat away by convection.
Fins speed up this process, otherwise with enough heat the flashlight body will just keep getting hotter and hotter until you cannot hold it anymore.
Also, LEDs output more light at lower temperatures.
For raw output and power dissipation we would really need to go with djozz box idea with a fan on a heat sink for the ultimate cooling (something I would love to work on after this).
When the time comes, please put me on that list. ☺
Teacher you forget the price. It can’t be astronomical like the TN42 which is the main problem of that flashlight.
mdeni wrote:
teacher wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
Although before we try to change things, I am still at a loss for what is wrong with the 4/8× 18650 tube? What doesn’t it do that these other ideas would?
Basically, what is better about the latest round of ideas? All I see is the inability to use 8X cells if someone so desired. Why not simply only run 4 cells in the 8 cell tube?
To me the 4/8× 18650 tube makes the most sense, period.
In addition, as far as I am concerned; it would be ridiculous to “change things” or even think about “changing things” unless the questions Texas_Ace asked above are answered in a ‘reasonable’ way that would appeal to the masses.
All the ideas are meant to reduce cost of the light, and keep it simpler. If it can be made with the carriers for a low price than that is fine of course. They seem pricey and complicated to the casual observer.
Hi ‘mdeni’. I’m really not “forgetting the price”, I am just not hung up on cheap & absolute lowest price at all cost. I think there needs to be a strong balance between price & value.
If the cheaper price is the best value, go with it. However, IF; it is not…. go with the next price up that is the best value.
Sure, I realize that these light are trying to be built on a budget…. no problem there.
But I for one would much rather pay a bit more and have a very nice value priced light than end up with a cheap piece of crap light because it was the lower price & “I” was to dumb to realize the difference between the two.
It is as simple as that for me……
And forgive me in advance, but if a “battery carrier” seems, “complicated to the casual observer”; as you mentioned above….. they probably do not need to be giving too much input on this light at this point in their “flashaholic” journey anyway.
~~~~~~ EDIT: When I wrote this above ( “& “I” was to dumb to realize “) it was and is a personal reference to myself… no one else.
—
You never know how a horse will pull until you hook him up to a heavy load./"Bear" Bryant
.................................. "Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast" ...................................
For raw output and power dissipation we would really need to go with djozz box idea with a fan on a heat sink for the ultimate cooling (something I would love to work on after this).
When the time comes, please put me on that list. ☺
Me too………
—
You never know how a horse will pull until you hook him up to a heavy load./"Bear" Bryant
.................................. "Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast" ...................................
4 series it is, was and will be
I kind of thought Thijsco was trying to dobit with 26650 cells and if that would still be nice to hold I do not have an issue with doing that (a slightly fatter tube probably looks better too) now I see it was about 2 series, sorry, simple no
Correction, idea was still 4S but just 1 pair of 4 batteries in series instead of 2 while maintaining the original length.
Instead of the 4 batteries side by side I was thinking putting them in sets of 2 × 2. Point is that when using only 18650’s the tube can be made a little smaller (approximately 8mm) to handle it better, with a disadvantage that it is only 4 18650’s instead of 8 so decreased runtime (if you would use 8 18650’s).
Looking like this:
[+_________-][+__________-]
[-_________+][-__________+]
Hhmm. You can clean dedome an XHP35? Suspect it would throw better than a XHP35 HI? Does anyone know? Would be nice…
Yes Tom the de-domed XHP35HD in my TN42 crash test dummy gained 56kcd on average over the box stock CW TN42 that I tested it against of unknown bin. Both test measurements were taken at 2M indoors, just to compare. Only difference between the lights, were the 20awg. leads that replaced the 24awg. stock leads. The same bypassed carrier and batteries were used in both lights. The tint shift of the high bin E41D 5000k shifted close to 4500 compared to my other 5000k lights to my eyes. Personally I think that it’s a significant gain over the HI if one chooses to invest the time de-doming. Since we conversed yesterday evening I figured I would make it public to the community!
Anybody know were I can purchase a few XHP35 E4 1A’s? I have a XHP35 HD E2 1A 6500k de-domed and I plan on re-flowing that onto the TN42 board and take measurements. I would like to test the higher bin E4 too.
Funny nobody seems to have picked up my long post, so here goes:
OK I need a good render as close to what it will be next week.
Decided are TUBE: 2 * 4 18650 / LED XHP35hi (bin etc to be discussed)
Because US holidays, both companies needed for more in depth reflector design are to be contacted Tuesday.
Till then, would the smaller finning of the Q8 around the switch not look a bit better and cool a lot better, while not adding costs nor weight? This could be implemented in the render then right?
Also a few fins hgher up the head are needed, since we need anto rolling anyways, I can live with the fin design of 5ar, but maybe it could be done in such a way less material is used there.
e10sno wrote:
please added me in.. by the way any timeline plan?
Done, and well it is almost like a mantra: “it is done when it is done”
thesciencenut wrote:
How can I get into this buy?
Welcome to BLF!
You are on the list now, when time comes youĺl receive a PM with details (but surely most details will be in the thread by then ;))
No big fins please, no need when driving an XHP35 HI at 2,5A+.
This light will have more then enough mass to absorb the majority of the heat produced.
.
Big fins are needed only when multiple emitters are driven hard and we are not going that way, right?
.
Grtz
Nico
An XHP35 at about 3A will be producing over 40W of heat,
The “mass” of aluminum in the body does not magically “absorb” heat and make it disappear.
You cannot destroy energy like that.
A piece of metal is what contacts air and transfers heat away by convection.
Fins speed up this process, otherwise with enough heat the flashlight body will just keep getting hotter and hotter until you cannot hold it anymore.
Also, LEDs output more light at lower temperatures.
Care te explain?
The XHP35 HI is a 12 V emitter, that will operate at around 2,5A.
Doesnt that mean 12*2,5= 36Watts in total, a part of which is being convcerted into light?
Lets be generous and suppose the Led has a 15% efficiency, that would leave 30,6 watts of generated heat.
No big fins please, no need when driving an XHP35 HI at 2,5A+.
This light will have more then enough mass to absorb the majority of the heat produced.
.
Big fins are needed only when multiple emitters are driven hard and we are not going that way, right?
.
Grtz
Nico
An XHP35 at about 3A will be producing over 40W of heat,
The “mass” of aluminum in the body does not magically “absorb” heat and make it disappear.
You cannot destroy energy like that.
A piece of metal is what contacts air and transfers heat away by convection.
Fins speed up this process, otherwise with enough heat the flashlight body will just keep getting hotter and hotter until you cannot hold it anymore.
Also, LEDs output more light at lower temperatures.
Care te explain?
The XHP35 HI is a 12 V emitter, that will operate at around 2,5A.
Doesnt that mean 12*2,5= 36Watts in total, a part of which is being convcerted into light?
Lets be generous and suppose the Led has a 15% efficiency, that would leave 30,6 watts of generated heat.
Didn’t know that, dont have a SRK like flashlight here to know how it feels.
So what about the little smaller side by side setup?
The only problem that I see is that the balance might not be optimal.
How would you make the connection?
If you have one cell with the anode to the driver and the other with the cathode to the driver you’ll need separate contact areas on the driver contact side. (and maybe a spring?)
But if you turn the tailcap on the tube there is a possibility that they dont line up anymore, also increasing the possibility of making a short. Which you dont want with a 4s setup.
By using a carrier, which could be made out of plastic, with an contact board on one end that has 2 contact rings you dont have that problem.
Or am I missing something?
(weird, was editing my post but apparently I made a new one..)
I know it is not supposed to be about looks, but I just can’t help it; lights like this just looks goofy to me.
But hey, that is just my opinion…. (pretty shallow & petty one at that >
You never know how a horse will pull until you hook him up to a heavy load./"Bear" Bryant
.................................. "Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast" ...................................
Texas Lumens Flashlights / M4D M4X Deals : sign up - save $$$$
Rudeness Level _ mΩ _ {width:70%} _ LightWiki _ LED Tint Chart
Xlamp size chart _ BatteryU _ Flashaholic? Need Professional Help??? TheOriginal _ TAB _ LightSearch _ BatterySearch _ 14500's _ DiCal
Tony Stark works at Wuben right
Nothing wrong with brainstorming IMHO when something is decided it should be a real group thing.
This is what makes this GT so early already (and the Q8 as well) so cool of a project!
It is done when it is done
How my BLF Specials generally work, please read before asking Qs
The Q8, Exciting a groupbuy for a Premium BLF special high lumens soda can light!
The GT, A BLF special GIGA thrower
The FW3A, a TLF BLF special small, elegant, powerful triple
Lithium Ion safety 101 important read
Sorry grammarlovers, I am a real King Typo.
Indeed the last few ideas have actually been things that could be used, if it was deemed necessary.
Although before we try to change things, I am still at a loss for what is wrong with the 4/8× 18650 tube? What doesn’t it do that these other ideas would?
Basically, what is better about the latest round of ideas? All I see is the inability to use 8X cells if someone so desired. Why not simply only run 4 cells in the 8 cell tube?
Texas Avenger Driver Series
My LED Test series - XP-L2 V5 - Nichia 219C 90+ CRI - Latticebright "XM-L" - XHP35 & PWM efficiency - XHP50 - XP-L V5 - XM-L2 U2 - XP-G3 S5 - XP-L HI V2 - Oslon Square & direct comparison to Djozz tests - Nichia 319A - Nichia 219B 9080 CRI - Nichia 219C D320 - Nichia 229AT - XHP70.2 P2 - XHP50.2 J4 - Samsung LH351D
Easy comparison tool for all my LED tests
acutally I Like this idea, 2s2p should be using, so that we can have either using 18650 or 26550, or both
2s 18650 is able to drive xhp 35
Forgot my pen
In addition, as far as I am concerned; it would be ridiculous to “change things” or even think about “changing things” unless the questions Texas_Ace asked above are answered in a ‘reasonable’ way that would appeal to the masses.
You never know how a horse will pull until you hook him up to a heavy load./"Bear" Bryant
.................................. "Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast" ...................................
Texas Lumens Flashlights / M4D M4X Deals : sign up - save $$$$
Rudeness Level _ mΩ _ {width:70%} _ LightWiki _ LED Tint Chart
Xlamp size chart _ BatteryU _ Flashaholic? Need Professional Help??? TheOriginal _ TAB _ LightSearch _ BatterySearch _ 14500's _ DiCal
2S will not drive a XHP35 without a boost driver. We need 4S, this is non-negotiable since we can not afford a boost driver for the goal budget.
Texas Avenger Driver Series
My LED Test series - XP-L2 V5 - Nichia 219C 90+ CRI - Latticebright "XM-L" - XHP35 & PWM efficiency - XHP50 - XP-L V5 - XM-L2 U2 - XP-G3 S5 - XP-L HI V2 - Oslon Square & direct comparison to Djozz tests - Nichia 319A - Nichia 219B 9080 CRI - Nichia 219C D320 - Nichia 229AT - XHP70.2 P2 - XHP50.2 J4 - Samsung LH351D
Easy comparison tool for all my LED tests
+1
Cheers David
Nothing to see here folks, move along...
All the ideas are meant to reduce cost of the light, and keep it simpler. If it can be made with the carriers for a low price than that is fine of course. They seem pricey and complicated to the casual observer.
Well, 4/8× 18650 design compared to new 4×18650 design.
4/8x tube:
Advantage: more runtime with 8 cells.
Disadvantage: more total weight (if used with 8cells), thicker.
4x tube:
Advantage: smaller, less total weight (compared to 8 cell setup)
Disadvantage: not being able to run it with 8 cells thus having less runtime (compared to 8 cell setup).
What doesn’t change:
Runtime when 8 cell tube is used with only 4 cells.
Weight when 8 cell tube is used with only 4 cells. (oke, weight is reduced slightly)
Personally, I dont care, just throwing out ideas.
How can I get into this buy?
Why not?!
This is a nice “Bimmelglocke”: http://www.taschenlampen-forum.de/threads/der-bimmelglocken-thread.45470/
Two 4 series carriers makes the most sense.
For me, personally, I don’t see why we don’t just have a dedicated 8 cells. It’s a search light, it’s gonna need run time to be used as it’s designed. There are perfectly adequate cells available for very cheap monies, no more than $40 for 8 really good high capacity cells can be found easily. This would have the absolute maximum effects, delivering BRP without a hiccup. (Balance, Runtime, Power). I bought the extension set for the TK61, ran 8 cells, didn’t have a problem with it. That was a much higher current light and it worked out fine.
As a comparison factor, the battery tube with proprietary cells for the TN42 is about $70, for the proprietary battery pack alone (4 cells)
While I do like the IDEA of everyone contributing on the making of a light from the ground up, I’ve seen repeatedly where it’s not sound business practice. A team should get together, decide the parameters, have the light made, then offer it for sale. To me that ensures optimization, without long delays in argument while ideas get tossed around like a beach volleyball. I’ve seen the open thread idea hold up multiple lights and even kill off a couple entirely. Seems funny that people are willing to get upset because they didn’t get what they wanted, but Nitecore, Fenix, Surefire, MagLite, Thrunite, Solarforce, EagTac, ArmyTek, SupFire, Olight, 4Sevens…. they build what they want and offer the lights for sale, they don’t take stinking polls! And most of us here have those brands, never had a single bit of input on how they built the light.
Diversity can build strength and character, it can also break the core, polluting the purity of the concept. Field of Dreams said it , “if you build it, they will come…”
If you build it right, they will come in droves!
Absorbing a lot of heat is right but only until the material is thermaly saturated then only the surface will help dissipating the heat.
Making the finns smaler (~1,8-2,2mm thick and a bit higher ~10mm) would help. The distance between the finns should be ~2,5-3mm.
Making them even smaler would help with the heat but they would be to fragile. Not something you would want on your high quality flashlight.
And the further you get away from the led less heat will be dissipating. So the finns can get smaller and smaller. So that the head will not get bigger.
To abandon the finns on the GT is not wise (or to use the 5-6mm thick only 5-6mm high finns that you can see on the prototype picture). They look good but will not help much with the heat.
Here a small example:
on the left i have a 10*10cm alu plate. Put a LED on one side and use the back for heat dissipating. You get a surface amount of 100cm². On the right side i put only 5 10mm high finns on the plate. Now you got 200cm² of heat dissipating surface. If you increase the amount of finns to 10 the surface area increase to 300cm².
Now do that on your flashlight base where most of the heat is generated. And you will increase the surface amount by 100-300% and you will be prepared for new more powerfull LED´s.
New WildTrail (former LuckySun) D80v2 Sale has Started http://budgetlightforum.com/node/66255
.
.
.
Did someone answer you?
..so we can bring the reflector in the dicussion again….feel bored about the battery case…
Post 1 =
Driver design
………….. Tom E Electronic switch driver for Narsil firmware
………….. Very low parasitic drain
………….. Able to run 4 and/or 8 button top 18650 cell(s)
"Do to others, what you would like others do to you.."
-MortyDuck-
Take a read of this, it shows the maximum fin optimization for heat transfer in natural convection which I mentioned somewhere earlier in this thread:
https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0ahUK...
You could make the fins thick for durability like you wanted but space them out according to the most heat dissipation shown in this peer reviewed article
TLDR: 8mm spacing is best, but you should read the article for learning purpouses
The OPTOFIRE - 4.63Mcd aspheric LED flashlight The SYNIOSBEAM - 10Mcd recoil LED flashlight List of the farthest throwing flashlights
OK
4 series it is, was and will be
I kind of thought Thijsco was trying to dobit with 26650 cells and if that would still be nice to hold I do not have an issue with doing that (a slightly fatter tube probably looks better too) now I see it was about 2 series, sorry, simple no
So this is a moment for a decision, a long 4×2 18650 tube it is, just as in the renders, compatible with Q8 tube and a 46mm driver
done.
I saw 4 3400 Panasonic’s for $11,11 at Gearbest some time ago, so 8 cells should not be expensive of using notebookpulls free.
At this stage, without manufacturer even without led brainstorming is nice. Decisions will be made and if not all are happy about outcome so be it
More then seriously taking everything in and debate sometimes cannot be done and seeing how it went with the Q8 I have faith in BLF.
I know other groupbuys went different and I did what I think is constructive, doing it the way I thought it would be better.
Haven’t heared back from the software guys, haven’t headed back from the IM reflector guys. It seems a holiday in the US so I am not going to pursue it before Tuesday
So in the mean time, mind if I call the LED chosen and maybe talk a bit about cooling (since a good render is needed next week (I have a high end manufacturer who is willing to listen, the more concrete it is the better. And no I will not disclose name you have to wait a few weeks for that.
Badaboom what a long post
Oh and I will update list later
It is done when it is done
How my BLF Specials generally work, please read before asking Qs
The Q8, Exciting a groupbuy for a Premium BLF special high lumens soda can light!
The GT, A BLF special GIGA thrower
The FW3A, a TLF BLF special small, elegant, powerful triple
Lithium Ion safety 101 important read
Sorry grammarlovers, I am a real King Typo.
That fined design is hidieous. 13cm head 1kg aluminium needs fins? No freaking way. It will make it even heavier and way uglier.
The issue with fins is weight, I wanted more fins at first as well. Till I realized it was already a 3.3lb light as it was and adding fins would further increase that.
A 5lb light while it sounds good is simply not practical to use in the real world.
Plus the L6 handles the power surprisingly well, this light will have about the same surface area I figure and in stock form anyways put out a LOT less power.
For raw output and power dissipation we would really need to go with djozz box idea with a fan on a heat sink for the ultimate cooling (something I would love to work on after this).
Texas Avenger Driver Series
My LED Test series - XP-L2 V5 - Nichia 219C 90+ CRI - Latticebright "XM-L" - XHP35 & PWM efficiency - XHP50 - XP-L V5 - XM-L2 U2 - XP-G3 S5 - XP-L HI V2 - Oslon Square & direct comparison to Djozz tests - Nichia 319A - Nichia 219B 9080 CRI - Nichia 219C D320 - Nichia 229AT - XHP70.2 P2 - XHP50.2 J4 - Samsung LH351D
Easy comparison tool for all my LED tests
No big fins please, no need when driving an XHP35 HI at 2,5A+.
This light will have more then enough mass to absorb the majority of the heat produced.
.
Big fins are needed only when multiple emitters are driven hard and we are not going that way, right?
.
Grtz
Nico
An XHP35 at about 3A will be producing over 40W of heat,
The “mass” of aluminum in the body does not magically “absorb” heat and make it disappear.
You cannot destroy energy like that.
A piece of metal is what contacts air and transfers heat away by convection.
Fins speed up this process, otherwise with enough heat the flashlight body will just keep getting hotter and hotter until you cannot hold it anymore.
Also, LEDs output more light at lower temperatures.
The OPTOFIRE - 4.63Mcd aspheric LED flashlight The SYNIOSBEAM - 10Mcd recoil LED flashlight List of the farthest throwing flashlights
When the time comes, please put me on that list. ☺
If the cheaper price is the best value, go with it. However, IF; it is not…. go with the next price up that is the best value.
Sure, I realize that these light are trying to be built on a budget…. no problem there.
But I for one would much rather pay a bit more and have a very nice value priced light than end up with a cheap piece of crap light because it was the lower price & “I” was to dumb to realize the difference between the two.
It is as simple as that for me……
And forgive me in advance, but if a “battery carrier” seems, “complicated to the casual observer”; as you mentioned above….. they probably do not need to be giving too much input on this light at this point in their “flashaholic” journey anyway.
~~~~~~
EDIT: When I wrote this above ( “& “I” was to dumb to realize “) it was and is a personal reference to myself… no one else.
You never know how a horse will pull until you hook him up to a heavy load./"Bear" Bryant
.................................. "Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast" ...................................
Texas Lumens Flashlights / M4D M4X Deals : sign up - save $$$$
Rudeness Level _ mΩ _ {width:70%} _ LightWiki _ LED Tint Chart
Xlamp size chart _ BatteryU _ Flashaholic? Need Professional Help??? TheOriginal _ TAB _ LightSearch _ BatterySearch _ 14500's _ DiCal
You never know how a horse will pull until you hook him up to a heavy load./"Bear" Bryant
.................................. "Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast" ...................................
Texas Lumens Flashlights / M4D M4X Deals : sign up - save $$$$
Rudeness Level _ mΩ _ {width:70%} _ LightWiki _ LED Tint Chart
Xlamp size chart _ BatteryU _ Flashaholic? Need Professional Help??? TheOriginal _ TAB _ LightSearch _ BatterySearch _ 14500's _ DiCal
Correction, idea was still 4S but just 1 pair of 4 batteries in series instead of 2 while maintaining the original length.
Instead of the 4 batteries side by side I was thinking putting them in sets of 2 × 2. Point is that when using only 18650’s the tube can be made a little smaller (approximately 8mm) to handle it better, with a disadvantage that it is only 4 18650’s instead of 8 so decreased runtime (if you would use 8 18650’s).
Looking like this:
[+_________-][+__________-]
[-_________+][-__________+]
Or look at this pic.
The top is the ‘front’.
Yes Tom the de-domed XHP35HD in my TN42 crash test dummy gained 56kcd on average over the box stock CW TN42 that I tested it against of unknown bin. Both test measurements were taken at 2M indoors, just to compare. Only difference between the lights, were the 20awg. leads that replaced the 24awg. stock leads. The same bypassed carrier and batteries were used in both lights. The tint shift of the high bin E41D 5000k shifted close to 4500 compared to my other 5000k lights to my eyes. Personally I think that it’s a significant gain over the HI if one chooses to invest the time de-doming. Since we conversed yesterday evening I figured I would make it public to the community!
Anybody know were I can purchase a few XHP35 E4 1A’s? I have a XHP35 HD E2 1A 6500k de-domed and I plan on re-flowing that onto the TN42 board and take measurements. I would like to test the higher bin E4 too.
KB1428 “Live Life WOT”
Funny nobody seems to have picked up my long post, so here goes:
OK I need a good render as close to what it will be next week.
Decided are TUBE: 2 * 4 18650 / LED XHP35hi (bin etc to be discussed)
Because US holidays, both companies needed for more in depth reflector design are to be contacted Tuesday.
Till then, would the smaller finning of the Q8 around the switch not look a bit better and cool a lot better, while not adding costs nor weight? This could be implemented in the render then right?
Also a few fins hgher up the head are needed, since we need anto rolling anyways, I can live with the fin design of 5ar, but maybe it could be done in such a way less material is used there.
Done, and well it is almost like a mantra: “it is done when it is done”
Welcome to BLF!
You are on the list now, when time comes youĺl receive a PM with details (but surely most details will be in the thread by then ;))
It is done when it is done
How my BLF Specials generally work, please read before asking Qs
The Q8, Exciting a groupbuy for a Premium BLF special high lumens soda can light!
The GT, A BLF special GIGA thrower
The FW3A, a TLF BLF special small, elegant, powerful triple
Lithium Ion safety 101 important read
Sorry grammarlovers, I am a real King Typo.
Ah got it Thijsco, well yeah I like the idea, but 2 * 4 cells it is
XHP35hi it is.
Maybe tweaking of the outside design.
then:
manufacturer
reflector
driver! YAY!
It is done when it is done
How my BLF Specials generally work, please read before asking Qs
The Q8, Exciting a groupbuy for a Premium BLF special high lumens soda can light!
The GT, A BLF special GIGA thrower
The FW3A, a TLF BLF special small, elegant, powerful triple
Lithium Ion safety 101 important read
Sorry grammarlovers, I am a real King Typo.
Care te explain?
The XHP35 HI is a 12 V emitter, that will operate at around 2,5A.
Doesnt that mean 12*2,5= 36Watts in total, a part of which is being convcerted into light?
Lets be generous and suppose the Led has a 15% efficiency, that would leave 30,6 watts of generated heat.
Or do I calculate this wrong?
Grtz
Nico
http://www.ledsmagazine.com/articles/2005/05/fact-or-fiction-leds-don-t-...
Pages