It’s funny that people want the beacon mode to be brighter. I find it way too bright.
Maybe it can use the memorized ramp level instead. That’s an easy change.
Anyway, Hank sent sort of a “care package”. It consists of a bunch of parts which (mostly) were either prototypes or failed QC, but can be assembled into working lights for testing and development. There are sharp edges and dents and other issues on nearly every piece. These are the kind of parts you won’t get in production units:
There is one XP-L HI and one XP-G2, unknown tints. I’ll get measurements after they’re assembled and working:
Of particular interest is that these show how the switch is assembled. It appears to be very compact, just a membrane switch and a rubber boot, with a ring press-fit over the boot to keep pressure on the parts:
Since I know someone will ask, here are the dimensions:
Boot hole depth: 1.9 mm
Boot hole diameter: 13.7 mm
Membrane switch thickness: 1.3 mm
Membrane switch PCB: 6.0 mm x 6.0 mm
Switch hole: ~1.0 mm (?) x 6.0 mm x 6.0 mm (plus cutout corners)
…
On a totally different note, I updated my thermal regulation simulator today to try to make it match what I measured on the D4. It’s fairly close, but I think the actual D4 gets less-hot and reaches its stable temperature sooner than the simulation. And for some reason I had to use attn=6 here instead of attn=4, but otherwise the parameters are the same as I used on the actual hardware. Here’s how it looks when simulating the “regulation test 5” from earlier:
The most interesting parts are a bit easier to see if I give the simulator a smaller “battery”:
There is, um, probably a bit too much info packed into each graph… but I think what it shows is pretty close to what I measured on actual hardware. So it seems like a fair model for testing changes without waiting an hour for each test.
My opinion about UI is
From off
Long click min
Click - saved ramped mod
Two Click - max mod
And some idea about ramping. Now there are 150 levels and it is impossible to tell which one is selected now. Idea is to make 2 mode of ramping one with 150lv and another with only 10lv. Mods are easy to distinguish and have nice spacing. The ramping time is the same ,but mods change every 0.25c
This is already implemented in the new D4 code. Additionally, it has:
Loosen + tighten tailcap, then click: Go to maximum 7135 level (~140 lm with no PWM and no FET).
I implemented those two UIs in 2014 in the “Ferrero Rocher” project. They’re called Ramping_UI_table.c and Baton.c in the firmware repository. I plan to make updated versions for the D4, but it won’t be part of the production run. They’re example UIs or test cases for a new generic code base.
Thank you for the switch info didn’t want to pry on the retainer until someone had some info, so thanks TK I can pry away,
Do you think Hank will have any replacement switches and boots, mainly switches, drivers would be great also, thank you…
Both level65 and 10 lumen are good values for such a small EDC light as default memory values. However, I certainly prefer level65 (133 lm) for two reasons:
1) It is a very symbolic value that portrays the essence of the light and driver; a true flashaholic should/could understand and appreciate the meaning of this output.
2) ramping to a comfortable 600-ish lumen output is much faster from single click level65, than it is from single click 10 lumen output. Edit: percentage wise it’s faster.
Efficiency vs. output curve is nearly flat, then falls of the cliff and is again nearly flat.
350 mA is the cliff top. It should be easily reachable.
But it should be also easy to tell on which side of the cliff the flashlight is at any given mode. Otherwise there will be nasty surprises of battery draining much faster than it should.
Making 350 mA the default level is a great way of making it easily reachable.
However, ramping from low, one can easily pass it without noticing. I don’t like it and I think it should be somehow communicated to the user.
It always amazes me how, regardless of the amount of work put in and the level of achievements attained, there’s always ALWAYS gonna be someone saying “I don’t like it!”
I think you’re doing a fantastic job on this TK, taking it to the next level with your simulations and total expertise. You know, of course, that when the dust settles on this and you’ve got it where you want it I’m going to HAVE to get a green one, right?
I did not say that I don’t like you work TK, just this aspect of UI. It was meant as a discussion-opener really, though the topic was meant to be slightly different than what DB Custom stated.
I did not say that I like it either. Now I do: Thank you for your great work! :+1:
I’ve been deciding between the Manker E14 II and Astorlux S41, so this looks interesting, wondering roughly when the revised versions will be available.
