Testing a Cree XHP50.2 J4 3A led

235 posts / 0 new
Last post
djozz
djozz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 21 min ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 16120
Location: Amsterdam


This should solve that, but it is not how it looks, I soldered the led the wrong way around on this board Facepalm

So I say the round dot is + and the square dot is -

khas
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 21 hours ago
Joined: 08/08/2014 - 07:20
Posts: 919
Location: Denmark
Tom_182 wrote:
I have a dumb question about the LED. I want to reflow one and can’t figure out where is + and – Facepalm

If you look at picture in the OP, the side with the square is the cathode (-) side and the side with the circle is the anode (+) side.

EDIT : beaten by djozz Facepalm

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Online
Last seen: 12 min 45 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20367
Location: Heart of Texas

Put the two dots on the bottom, plus is on the right. Wink

This is on the XHP-50.2 ONLY! Most modern Cree emitters have the plus on the side of the bond wires. The XHP series makes it more difficult to tell but of course you can always check the data sheet, way at the bottom end.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 8 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11874
Location: Houston Texas

I have a xhp50.2 on the way. I will do a direct comparison of beam size and shape with my sliced xhp70 in my L6 with SMO reflector.

I’m curious which will be the better thrower.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

TheOnlyDocc
TheOnlyDocc's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 06/26/2015 - 05:17
Posts: 949
Location: Mönchengladbach /Germany

I have a question. I have a TN31 modded with a K40M driver (+resistor mod) and a dedomed MT-G2 + Copper added to the LED side and driver cavity + spring baypass. Would a XHP50.2 be an upgrade (throw or total output)?

New WildTrail (former LuckySun) D80v2 Sale has Started http://budgetlightforum.com/node/66255

mrheosuper
Offline
Last seen: 4 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 09/30/2016 - 12:44
Posts: 1494
Location: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

XHP50.2 is on the way, can’t wait to mod it to my nitecore EC4

Forgot my pen

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 8 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11874
Location: Houston Texas

TheOnlyDocc wrote:
I have a question. I have a TN31 modded with a K40M driver (+resistor mod) and a dedomed MT-G2 + Copper added to the LED side and driver cavity + spring baypass. Would a XHP50.2 be an upgrade (throw or total output)?

The more amps those 2 see the more the 50.2 pulls away. At 5 amps for instance, the MG-T2 does about 2800 lumen and the 50.2 does 3500. So I’m sure you would gain brightness.

Since the 50.2 is a smaller die, you would probably gain throw as well.

In the areas of tint, my 5700k 50.2 has a pretty noticable yellow corona (looks square shaped as well). I just installed it though, so I’ll need to try it out at night and see how it looks. In my Convoy L6 with lowered smooth reflector I do see a slightly dark center. No where near as bad as my sliced dome xhp70, though. Reflector height plays a large factor here.

So yeah, I would think it is a good upgrade to the MG-T2.

The jury is still out whether it’s better or not than my sliced dome xhp70. I’ll post up hot spot size comparisons tonight.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 8 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11874
Location: Houston Texas

Here is my light. A Convoy L6 with an SMO reflector that has the bottom removed. This drops the reflector down just under a millimeter (roughly). I use very thin copper shims to raise the emitter to fine tune the focus. Right now I’m using 2 shims. I reduced the camera ISO to better see the beam shape.

Here are the shots all from the same distance.

Now here is the same with me raising the reflector slightly. This would be closer to a stock SMO.

You can see that the first pic has a less defined edge on the hot spot, a smaller corona and a slight donut hole shape.

The second pic has a more defined edge, larger corona and less donut shape. This looks better in real life, but does not deliver the highest lux. If your chasing lux then the first picture will give you the highest readings.

Here are the same basic pictures as above taken with a more realistic ISO setting.

In real life the donut hole in the first pic is quite subdued, but you kind of notice it a little as you move the light around. The second pic it’s less noticable and a nicer looking beam in general.

I will compare this xhp50.2 to my sliced dome xhp70 in just a little while. One interesting thing is that the corona on the xhp50.2 is noticably square shaped at close range. It’s kinda odd. Lol

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 8 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11874
Location: Houston Texas

Here is a pic of the same light with the CW xhp70 in it.

You can see the left pic has a smaller hotspot. I’m not sure if that’s due to the reflector going closer or the dome being sliced off. Maybe the dome. It looks pretty much the same size as the 50.2 with its dome on. The dome off xhp70 might be a tad smaller.

The left pic usually has a very noticable donut hole, but I’m using a trick to reduce it. I moved the emitter slightly off center to the reflector. It doesn’t eliminate it, but it helps reduce it.

One other difference between the xhp70 and the xhp50.2 is that the 50.2 gets noticable hotter. I haven’t had a chance to take tail cap amp readings, but I’m thinking it’s higher than the 70. I’m using an FX-30 driver with a wire over the sense resistors and liitokala batteries.

Overall brightness between the sliced dome CW 70 and stock 5700k 50.2 is pretty close. I don’t have my meter right now, but i can tell the 50.2 is a bit weaker.

I was quite let down with the reduced lumens after cutting the dome off my xhp70. I’m probably going to go back to a domed xhp70. I might wait for a 70.2, but which ever I choose, I want a 6500k version.

About color, I’ve had the xhp70 N4 1A and N4 1C, both were about the same to my eyes. A bit on the nuetral side to me. I don’t care for it. I’d rather have a cooler white. This new xhp50.2 in 5700k is noticably more yellow. The corona is definitely more yellow, but the hotspot is only slightly more yellow. Combined together they create a more yellow overall looking beam compared to the CW xhp70.

I hope this helps someone.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 8 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11874
Location: Houston Texas

At the beginning of this night I had fully charged batteries and my light got hot at just 20 to 30 seconds, which is definetly faster than the xhp70. After using it throughout the night I noticed it wasn’t getting hot anymore.

I did a timed run to 5 minutes and it only got a little warm. I checked the battery voltage and it’s down to 3.6v. Normally I can go 3 full nights with the xhp70 and end up with 3.7 or so volts, but this emitter sucker them down in one night. Wow! I’m not liking this new 50.2 at all. The 70.2 will probably be the same.

I’m gonna keep using it a little while longer to verify my initial impressions then I’ll probably skip the 70.2 and go back to the regular xhp70.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 8 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11874
Location: Houston Texas

Djozz, how do you think the lower voltage of the xhp50.2 would do with a boost driver?

I might pair it up with Kaidomains H1-A 3 amp boost driver.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

djozz
djozz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 21 min ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 16120
Location: Amsterdam

JasonWW wrote:
Djozz, how do you think the lower voltage of the xhp50.2 would do with a boost driver?

I might pair it up with Kaidomains H1-A 3 amp boost driver.


I think it will be a pretty good match, I have one on order for that reason, and khas akready did a mod with that combination (in an EE X7). The lineair drivers that burn up overvoltage are getting pretty inefficient with these new leds, a boost or buck driver may just be the better choice nowadays.
Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 17 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8566
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

JasonWW wrote:
At the beginning of this night I had fully charged batteries and my light got hot at just 20 to 30 seconds, which is definetly faster than the xhp70. After using it throughout the night I noticed it wasn’t getting hot anymore.

I did a timed run to 5 minutes and it only got a little warm. I checked the battery voltage and it’s down to 3.6v. Normally I can go 3 full nights with the xhp70 and end up with 3.7 or so volts, but this emitter sucker them down in one night. Wow! I’m not liking this new 50.2 at all. The 70.2 will probably be the same.

I’m gonna keep using it a little while longer to verify my initial impressions then I’ll probably skip the 70.2 and go back to the regular xhp70.

There is a very simple fix to the battery life, simply reinstall a sense resistor to limit current. The XHP50.2 has such a low Vf I would not be surprised if you are running 12A+.

If you install a sense resistor to limit power to around 6-7A the batteries will last about the same or possibly longer then the xhp70. Although most likely with a bit less lumens naturally.

I want to swap to an XHP50.2 or 70.2 in my L6 and swap back to the stock driver with the sense setup to limit it to 7-8A.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 8 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11874
Location: Houston Texas

A better choice would probably be for Cree to not use this new lower voltage. Smile

I can see people hoarding the older designs already. Lol

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 8 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11874
Location: Houston Texas

Texas_Ace wrote:
JasonWW wrote:
At the beginning of this night I had fully charged batteries and my light got hot at just 20 to 30 seconds, which is definetly faster than the xhp70. After using it throughout the night I noticed it wasn’t getting hot anymore.

I did a timed run to 5 minutes and it only got a little warm. I checked the battery voltage and it’s down to 3.6v. Normally I can go 3 full nights with the xhp70 and end up with 3.7 or so volts, but this emitter sucker them down in one night. Wow! I’m not liking this new 50.2 at all. The 70.2 will probably be the same.

I’m gonna keep using it a little while longer to verify my initial impressions then I’ll probably skip the 70.2 and go back to the regular xhp70.

There is a very simple fix to the battery life, simply reinstall a sense resistor to limit current. The XHP50.2 has such a low Vf I would not be surprised if you are running 12A+.

If you install a sense resistor to limit power to around 6-7A the batteries will last about the same or possibly longer then the xhp70. Although most likely with a bit less lumens naturally.

I want to swap to an XHP50.2 or 70.2 in my L6 and swap back to the stock driver with the sense setup to limit it to 7-8A.


Thanks TA. I’m charging my batteries back up right now to test the amperage.

I don’t have enough resistors to put it back to stock, but I should be getting in an order of 20 each R082, R100 and R120. Once they arrive I’ll be back in business. Smile

Heres a question for you.
If my FX-30 driver had the stock resistors (two R082’s) would the 50.2 draw more amperage that the xhp70?

I’m curious how the lower emitter voltage effects the drivers output.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 17 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8566
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

JasonWW wrote:
A better choice would probably be for Cree to not use this new lower voltage. Smile

I can see people hoarding the older designs already. Lol

The lower voltage is actually a massive improvement in everything not flashlight related and the only reason it is not a positive thing for flashlights at this point is that we don’t have drivers designed to take advantage of the low voltage.

We need some current controlled drivers, buck being the best but also impractical solution.

I have a few ideas floating around for drivers that would take advantage of the lower Vf and once we have drivers that can control the current then these will be the better option for sure.

That way you will actually be able to regulate the output instead of the output flat out dropping with the voltage.

In your case by putting the sense resistor back you will get a regulated current output instead of an unregulated voltage output. Thus the light will remain at a steady brightness until it falls out of regulation and net you better real world lighting.

With the XHP70 the Vf was so high that you had to pick between max brightness and regulation, with the XHP50.2 you get both.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 17 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8566
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

JasonWW wrote:
Texas_Ace wrote:
JasonWW wrote:
At the beginning of this night I had fully charged batteries and my light got hot at just 20 to 30 seconds, which is definetly faster than the xhp70. After using it throughout the night I noticed it wasn’t getting hot anymore.

I did a timed run to 5 minutes and it only got a little warm. I checked the battery voltage and it’s down to 3.6v. Normally I can go 3 full nights with the xhp70 and end up with 3.7 or so volts, but this emitter sucker them down in one night. Wow! I’m not liking this new 50.2 at all. The 70.2 will probably be the same.

I’m gonna keep using it a little while longer to verify my initial impressions then I’ll probably skip the 70.2 and go back to the regular xhp70.

There is a very simple fix to the battery life, simply reinstall a sense resistor to limit current. The XHP50.2 has such a low Vf I would not be surprised if you are running 12A+.

If you install a sense resistor to limit power to around 6-7A the batteries will last about the same or possibly longer then the xhp70. Although most likely with a bit less lumens naturally.

I want to swap to an XHP50.2 or 70.2 in my L6 and swap back to the stock driver with the sense setup to limit it to 7-8A.


Thanks TA. I’m charging my batteries back up right now to test the amperage.

I don’t have enough resistors to put it back to stock, but I should be getting in an order of 20 each R082, R100 and R120. Once they arrive I’ll be back in business. Smile

Heres a question for you.
If my FX-30 driver had the stock resistors (two R082’s) would the 50.2 draw more amperage that the xhp70?

I’m curious how the lower emitter voltage effects the drivers output.

In theory the sense resistor is only effected by current, so the stock 2× 0.082ohm should give about 5A regardless of the LED used. Although depending on exactly how the circuit is setup that can vary a little.

Also remember that the FX30 is a buck driver, so the tailcap current draw will vary depending on the input voltage while the output will remain more or less the same. Better batteries will actually cause a lower amp draw at full charge.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 8 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11874
Location: Houston Texas

Thanks for explaining things.

It seems these new lower voltage emitters, including the 70.2 which should be out soon, are not the easy upgrade many were hoping for.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 17 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8566
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

JasonWW wrote:
Thanks for explaining things.

It seems these new lower voltage emitters, including the 70.2 which should be out soon, are not the easy upgrade many were hoping for.

It depends on the light you will be upgrading. Most lights that came with an XHP already installed will be a simple drop in swap to the newer LED as they already use a buck driver.

With the stock L6 driver it would have easily worked as a direct drop in, the only reason you are seeing worse battery life is because you modified the driver to remove the current regulation.

In fact at the stock output level of the driver the xhp50 should be more efficient and give you longer battery life (with less lumens naturally) due to it being a more efficient LED.

The xhp70.2 will give you better battery life for sure with the buck driver at the same current as the lower Vf means it will be pulling less total watts. It will also remain in regulation longer and should give you a bump in output as well along with hopefully eliminating the donut.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 8 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11874
Location: Houston Texas

All the guys running FET/DD drivers will be sad. I, myself, just ordered a Texas Avenger driver. Facepalm Oh well, I’ll just stick with the regular xhp70 for now.

What are all the hot-rodders gonna do when these new emitters make FET drivers a bad choice? Will they just avoid the new emitters or find new drivers that can push them, but not too far?

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Online
Last seen: 12 min 45 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20367
Location: Heart of Texas

Simply use a cell that can’t supply beyond the 10A or so.

I don’t have a problem hooking them up, my triple 50.2 “only” pulls a little over 20A.

The thing is, at 10 to 12A on the 50.2 you’re beyond the max output level and just burning amps for heat. The XHP-70 can still make output levels at the same 12A so it’s got the advantage. The MT-G2 can do 16A, but peaks around 7-9A. I’ve had em doing some 4300 lumens at 16A. And the XHP-70 makes around 7200 lumens at 12A. The 50.2 can’t compete. And the new phosphor aka XP-G3 gives an odd tint to the beam so it actually has losses in comparison to other emitter choices.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 17 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8566
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

JasonWW wrote:
All the guys running FET/DD drivers will be sad. I, myself, just ordered a Texas Avenger driver. Facepalm Oh well, I’ll just stick with the regular xhp70 for now.

What are all the hot-rodders gonna do when these new emitters make FET drivers a bad choice? Will they just avoid the new emitters or find new drivers that can push them, but not too far?

Now that there is a reason, there will be new drivers made to take advantage of the lower Vf, just a matter of time.

The easiest fix right now is to simply turn the max PWM down on the TA driver to get the current you want, it will still drop off as the battery drains but at least you will limit current to what you want.

I do this with 219C’s or small lights that I want to limit the heat in. I simply set the max PWM to keep total power where I want.

A firmware upgrade could allow for very crude “regulation” using this setup. While not perfect, it is better then we once assumed. In my testing you only loose about 10% efficiency @ 50% duty PWM. This is a worthwhile tradeoff for the low cost and compactness of a PWM driver over a buck driver.

Although I do have slightly better improvements in mind PWM regulation is the way of the future for cheap and compact drivers. For lights that can use larger drivers buck drivers will become much more popular.

djozz
djozz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 21 min ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 16120
Location: Amsterdam

If you PWM a XHP50.2 at 12A, you still get the inefficiency that the die has at 12A, just not the heat sag. The output drop at high currents is not solely caused by heat. Do you know what the individual contributions of those two effects are?

EasyB
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 03/09/2016 - 15:24
Posts: 1722
Location: Ohio

I agree with Dale’s post above. I think these low-Vf emitters can be used advantageously in multi-emitter lights (triples and quads). Direct drive with a single emitter (XPL2 or XHP50.2) usually results in a lot more current but not a huge output increase because the output curve tends to level out at high current. But in a triple or quad the low Vf allows to drive each emitter more optimally. For example a triple XPL with a single cell might draw 12A, or 4A per emitter, but a triple XPL2 might draw 5-6A per emitter which is near the optimal current before the output curve levels off too much.

Of course these low-Vf emitters also tend to not have as good throw, but that’s another story.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 17 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8566
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
djozz wrote:
If you PWM a XHP50.2 at 12A, you still get the inefficiency that the die has at 12A, just not the heat sag. The output drop at high currents is not solely caused by heat. Do you know what the individual contributions of those two effects are?

I don’t have a function generator to test this as completely as I would like but in my testing I have consistently seen results in the same ballpark as the XHP35 PWM I posted.

In that test it lost about 11% efficiency @ 50% duty tapering to 0% loss at 100% duty. In other tests I have seen similar numbers.

Thus as the battery voltage drops the efficiency loss will taper down to 0%. So it could actually be brightest on a slightly drained cell.

EasyB
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 03/09/2016 - 15:24
Posts: 1722
Location: Ohio

That loss ~11% is really not so bad. However, the loss should depend on the peak pulsed current, so it could be higher with these low-Vf emitters.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 17 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8566
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
EasyB wrote:
That loss ~11% is really not so bad. However, the loss should depend on the peak pulsed current, so it could be higher with these low-Vf emitters.

Yeah, it does depend on the pulsed current although the xhp35 is a pretty good comparison from my un-publised testing.

I have tested a few other low Vf emitters and they had very similar numbers, some slightly better like the XP-L2 I played with and some slightly worse (like the 144A I played with).

At 50% duty it appears to range between 10-15% loss. Which like you say, is really not that bad, the higher the duty the lower the loss. Using thin wires and low drain batteries improves the numbers as well. As the battery voltage drops the efficiency loss drops to 0 as well.

The lower ranges can be taken care of with current regulation in most cases without much trouble.

PWM is not ideal but it is cheap, effective, simple and compact. It does have some advantages as well such as little to no tint shift in different modes, seemingly better tint / CRI in my experience ect.

Future drivers will most likely use a combo of constant current and PWM if I had to guess.

Lowtech
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 02/19/2017 - 05:13
Posts: 170
Location: Sweden

What would a change to a 50.2 from a 50 in a standard light like EA81 do? If anything.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 8 min ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11874
Location: Houston Texas

One of my build plans was to take a single 26650 light (ultrafire F13) and run a pair of 26350 batteries from Banggood along with a direct drive 22mm driver from Mountain Electronics then put in the xhp50.2 that I tried out in my Convoy L6.

Now I know that will pull way too many amps. I can’t switch to amp limited batteries as they don’t exist. I don’t know of any non direct drive drivers that will work. Do you guys know of any?

I guess I’m gonna have to shelve the 50.2 and buy a new xhp70 to run in it. Does that sound right?

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

EasyB
Offline
Last seen: 10 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 03/09/2016 - 15:24
Posts: 1722
Location: Ohio

JasonWW wrote:
One of my build plans was to take a single 26650 light (ultrafire F13) and run a pair of 26350 batteries from Banggood along with a direct drive 22mm driver from Mountain Electronics then put in the xhp50.2 that I tried out in my Convoy L6.

Now I know that will pull way too many amps. I can’t switch to amp limited batteries as they don’t exist. I don’t know of any non direct drive drivers that will work. Do you guys know of any?

I guess I’m gonna have to shelve the 50.2 and buy a new xhp70 to run in it. Does that sound right?

One thing to keep in mind with the 26350 cells is they can’t handle much more than 7A. See discharge curves at the bottom of the banggood listing. Banggood says they are out of stock, by the way.

These 26350 cells with an XHP50 V1 resulted in about 7A on a full charge. Using an emitter with a lower Vf would, in my opinion, probably be asking a bit too much of these cells.

Pages