Triple REFLECTOR for X6 or C8

So, what I’m thinking… use a hacksaw and cut the Noctigon 32mm at 3 points, dividing it into thirds. Done properly, the 3 pcs should now line up and allow use of this reflector. Traces can be rejoined across the gap with flat sheet material. :wink: Could either solder them back together or leave them apart, glue the individuals down to the emitter shelf using the reflector as a template to position them perfectly.

Probably as easy or almost as easy as fitting 3 16mm Noctigons and then messing with all the wiring.

(Cut on the downstroke only. Pulling a backstroke would lift traces off the mcpcb.A band saw would make this easy peasy.)

I paid KaiDomain $67.71 4 days ago, haven’t heard a word in confirmation from them whatsoever. No email at all. They got the funds, I so far have not one scrap of communication.

Similar boat here, DB. Put in a KD order today. Got a PayPal receipt, but no sign of an order confirmation. :question:

I think KD might still be out on CNY.

CNQG was the worst for that. I never recieved confirmation for any orders placed with them. Occasionally with a few others but KD was usually good about it.

The best mass produced connection set up I’ve seen is the through hole connection Cutter used on their 32mm boards. It allowed for very low profile since no wire was above the board.

I always drill out the Cutter via’s and user larger wires. :stuck_out_tongue:


Stock MCPCB

Noctigon vs Stock MCPCB

I have tried two different triple reflectors :

Fasttech (left) Kaidomain (right)

The layout and spacing of the emitter holes are almost identical, height is also nearly the same the KD one being 1mm taller.


Fasttech


Kaidomain

Here are some beam shots :

X6 Triple reflector with XP-G2 S4 3D (left) X6 LEDIL CUTE-3-SS with Nichia 219C D320 5000K (right)

The current triple spacer 8.6mm height for the X6 works fine with the reflector.

Neither of the reflectors are a perfect fit for the NOCTIGON XP32, depending on your OCD level it might be fine, to me they are to much off center :wink:

So even with off centered emitters it’s a bit tighter beam than with the cute-3. That’s what I expected to see since they are effectively ~3-4 mm deeper(focusing of the “tir” effect stops where the parabolic surface ends).

I got the fast tech one in the mail, now I just need to find a MCPCB board to match it.

TIRs tend to have larger hot spots than equivalent width reflectors because they capture some of the light that would be spill and focus it into the beam. So you lose spill width and gain in hot spot size.

Its not really a reflector by itself more like a twisty c8 triple. Looks like it could make a good host. Around $21 shipped with seller discount. I wanna get one eventually and see what db can do with it :slight_smile:

https://m.aliexpress.com/item/32338093102.html

For mtb I certainly appreciate the smoother overall beam from a tir. My curiousity compels me to compare them and sometimes I want something more in the center.

So I’ve actually made a triple reflector setup in an X6 using the Noctigon mcpcb. I used the ET D25A reflectors from KD with just a touch of file work on the rim flanges to make them mate and center over the LEDs. I’ll get a pic posted when I can but it’s a great beam. Reflector area is nearly 100% maximized while not having overlapping reflector wells which lead to the dreaded (at least for me) flower pedal spill beams.

Oh… I did have to put an additional spacer underneath the copper adapter that was made for the ledil optic. But that was easy too…

Not trying to dissuade you at all; the reflector beam is nice and better for some applications. But a reflector should throw only a bit better than a TIR. I measured the throw of an XPL HI in a narrow TIR and the SMO S2 reflector and the TIR measured about 87% of the SMO reflector intensity. The honeycomb pattern on the CUTE-3 SS also decreases throw by about 10% compared to a polished version.

Regarding the Ledil cute-3 SS that we usually use with this mcpb, can anyone look up the data sheet and tell me the pcd or the diameter of the inner holes? Is is diameter 17 3*120 degrees? Having trouble opening up PDF on my phone sorry. Help appreciated so I can ask another manufacturer what their triple pcd is.

The spacing for the emitter holes for the 40 mm reflector means that the pcb will have to be wider and therefore further forward, so you’ll have to make some sort of pill so that the emitters have proper thermal contact. Other than that and it almost definitely ending up head heavy, it sounds good.

I found some other reflectors so need the pcd to contact the manufacturer and check what their pcd is rather than buy and test

Yes, it’s 17 x 3*120 with 4.4 ID holes. Same size pcb would work with emitter foot prints nearer the edge. I think the 40 mm was made for an mcpcb using P4 emitters.