I want to try better TIR optics

I’ve used the 23mm ones from DX. The beam was fine (not dirty in mine) and it basically looked almost the same as with a reflector except the spill was slightly reduced in brightness and I’m sure the corona was slightly increased.
I like it for the effect that it had on the spill. Since it was reduced it also had the effect of reducing that hard edge that you get with reflector as you go from some light to total dark at the outer edges.

Today I ordered a few TIR lenses from DX and Cutter Electronics. I hope I’ll find the better results I was looking for.
Oh, I also found a UltraFire light with huge TIR lens. Here at the DX www.dealextreme.com/p/ultrafire-m3-t60-xm-lt6-5-mode-1200-lumen-white-led-flashlight-black-1-x-18650-100157
Has anybody tried this light?

Have you tried LEDSupply.com yet? They have a fantastic selection of Carclo TIR optics and just about every LED you could want. It's where I get my TIR lenses. Here are their 26.5mm optics. I have only used their 20mm optics so far but Carclo is considered one of the best TIR lens makers.

Hmm, nice site. Doesn’t send to Turkey, though. Or the shipping is via courier. Anyway, I got one of that 26,5 mm optics from Cutter and some other 20mm, 35mm and 45mm too. the $14 shipping of Cutter was the best I could find.

which will give more throw & should be brighter

1>(Reflector)

http://www.dealextreme.com/p/sst-90-smooth-aluminum-reflector-7-3cm-diameter-47996

2>(Optics)

http://www.dealextreme.com/p/75mm-optical-glass-lens-for-flashlight-spot-light-43044

Actually want to know Optics vs Reflector

Plz update

That optic you reference from DealExtreme is not a TIR. It's an aspheric.

TIR Optics are very different.

If a TIR Optic is well manufactured, it will be more efficient than a reflector.

Carclo and LEDiL both make excellent optics - I've tested both. I could find no fault with the CarClo's, but for my particular application, the LEDiL optic was a better fit.

PPtk

P.S. I didn't look into distributors for Carclo - but I know that Mouser, Digikey, Newark and Cutter all carry the LEDiL products.

An aspheric optic will throw further than a reflector all other things being equal.

I've only ever used Carclo. What about the LEDiL made it a better fit?

Just they physical size - they happened to offer an optic that fit where I wanted it to.

PPtk

Thankx all for providing the useful info,as TIR optics are not that easily accessible for me,it is better to stick with aspherics.By reading post of gcbryan it seems aspherics are better thrower than reflector.I can think of two main drawbacks 1>Bulkyness 2>Square Led Image,one more thing is efficiany of the optic itself.

I ordered ledil tir optics from ledtech.de specially for xm-l. 26mm in diameter. I would like to swap it with my p60-reflector, then i became aware that the reflector bolted in the pill is the main heatsink and its diameter is larger than the pill. Somebody wrote he drilled out the reflector to make the tir fit. Do I need a special tir-pill to get proper fit and heatsinking?

On the topic of TIR’s, can you get one that’d fit a D Maglite?

Ledil makes EVA 35mm single optics, Cute-3 and Cute-4 35 mm triple and quad optics, and Rocket-3 and Rocket-4 50mm optics as well as others. Khatod and PolymerOptics are also makers of optics that can be found at Future Electronics
The tir optics I’ve use are not real throwers but do provide a very useful beam with a smooth spot and even spill.

Looking at diagrams, the optics is essentially the same as with a reflector and a small lens in the center. I have at least one old incandescent like that. The whole in the center refracts the light, making the reflecting shape deviate from a parabola, but the main difference is that TIR is really total for small angles, up to the TIR angle, and then drops off fast near perpendicular where the reflection is partial. So for the light emitted forward but still hitting the sides, it is more efficient, and for light emitted to the sides it is less efficient. It would not be practical without a silvered reflector with an incandescent bulb, because it would miss most of the light emitted backwards. Silvering the back part of the “lens” would appear to be a possible improvement.

Isn't it a "general rule of thumb" that a reflector looses 15%? Another general rule of thumb is that TIR optics also loose 15%, so they are about equal. How much does an Aspheric loose?

Carlco has to be about the most well known TIR Mfg. There are several out there. The different TIR optics I have tried from China seem to be no better or no worse than Carlco.

The big thing I see with TIR optics is that there is a hot spot, but the blend from spot to spill is so gradual that it all looks the same to me, where a reflector usually has a defined hot spot with less spill, (usually).

I have also found that using a TIR that is not made for the led, can have a dirty/blotchy appearance to the beam.

I have never seen a glass TIR. I would think it would be hard to focus/direct the light inside the TIR with glass versus plastic.


See how compact and efficient it is.
I think Fresnel and others did similar things in 19th century lighthouses, though they typically depended at least mostly on refraction. Flashlight designers should study lighthouses, because the function was similar but huge effort went into designing and building them.
The problem was similar. The emitters were Argand lamps, burning whale or lard oil and with as many as five concentric wicks. So the sources were extended, like leds are. I may have seen refracting Fresnel lens flashlights, but not recently.

If a TIR looses 15%, it is in the back of the reflector where the reflection isn’t total (if you don’t call the spill as lost). That can be mostly fixed by silvering that part. Maybe that looses the smooth edge you like, not sure. An aspheric that is coated would lose very little light that hit the lens, but the spill isn’t well controlled.

The picture you posted is a combination of TIR and Frensnel. Common Fresnel lenses don’t use the principe of total reflection at the outside (backside) of the lens, but are like collimator lenses using refraction relieved of negligible lens weight. TIRs are reflectors using smart the threshold of the angle of total reflection to ensure reasonable reflector dimensions. You can chrome-plate a Tir at the outer surface and get the same beam-characteristics, but you catch some stray photons who were out of the pattern.

Fresnel compared to “normal Lens”:

combination of Tir and fresnel:

Yes, you found an example. I think Fresnel himself (You don’t pronounce the s.) made some with TIR, so it is optional whether to call that thing a Fresnel lens or not.
You can silver the surface to make it work in an extended angular range, but metallic reflection always involves some loss.

The spots have soft edges because the outer rings are segments of longer focal length lenses or mirrors than the inner ones.