I tried de doming a XHP50, (i assume XHP70 is going to be the same) in short it failed.
like the MTG2 i can’t see any bond wires, and like the XPL it has a white layer under the dome round the edges however unlike the XPL’s white layer it has another layer of phosphorus under the white layer,where i see a glimpse of a gold bond wire…
i tried a petrol de dome and a de dome with heat and knife both failed but cant see why
with petrol de dome some of the phosphor floated off, (like if you do a petrol de dome on MTG2) and only 2 of the 4 dies light up.
with the heat de dome none of the phosphor came off, but no dies light up.
I hope someone figures out the trick to get these dedomed successfully, maybe some other solvent like acetone or tinner could work.
How long did you have it in gas to get the 2 dead & 2 working dies? maybe it can help to narrow down what leaves all 4 working by the solvent/gas method.
Did you slice the dome slightly before hand, i know that is a popular way to get a quicker gas dedome.
Thanks for trying, what a peculiar build with the white layer over the phosfor layer!
I do not see a good reason why you would want these dedomed, they were not going to throw anyway, so I would go for maximum output, which is with dome on.
One reason I hope someone succeed with successful dedome of the XPH’s,
is that we don’t know how it will change its features because no one has done it yet, for example i have read several account that the MTG2 looks even better tint & color wise after a successful dedome.
And maybe the XPH’s doesn’t loose much of their lumens from it, i am just curious to know how it will function without the dome
I don't think that you'll see anything fundamentally different from dedoming an XPH than you would from dedoming an XP-G2, XP-L, or XM-L2. They are both phosphor layers with a silicone dome.
I can’t figure out why there’s a phosphor layer below the White layer… Odd.
I always buy a couple of the new emitters when they come out and try and de dome them, if Im successful I sell them on my thread!
I think they would be good de domed, You could say the same thing about MTG2 de dome, it’s not a massive thrower and you could just keep the dome on for max output, but people still buy de domed ones off me (It also might get rid of that dark cross in the beam seen with the 4die emitters)
Thank you for taking 2 for the team. I figured these would dedome like xlm's. Boy was I wrong. If you can't dedome one, I know I don't have a chance. Thanks for the report and for saving me and others money.
I’ve got a third one I’ve not touched yet, but I’m thinking of the best way to go about de doming it
I think it’s possible if I can stop the phospher layer coming off somehow!
I don’t know if I’m being a bit dim, but I’ve just looked at the die (new dome on one) with welding goggles on, and only 2 dies light up? This is with it mounted on a XML Noctigon so 6v config
(Direct drive with 2 18650 cells)
I am surprised that you would say that, because i know you know well how many more options we have in builds by dedoming or not dedoming the various emitters we have available.
Are you not the least bit curious if for example like James postulated that maybe XPH’s when dedomed would have much less of a cross/donut artifact in the beam or if it loses lumens similar to the XM-L2 or like some here say less like the XP-L when domeless.
Anyway i look forward to the day when someone here succeed so some of these questions can be answered
EDIT
Another good reason to possibly want an dedomed XPH is now with the short supply in the beginning of production, if the XPH’s would show to dedome nicely as in stay true to the BBL and not get overly green or yellow or lose to much lumens, one could start with an CW of high flux bin and make an warmer version of it just like we do with the other emitters, but with the limited selections now it opens up a lot of options.
How strange……maybe your gasdedome didn’t fail but your mounting did? did you check that one with welding glasses before you gas dedomed it? maybe it was 2 dead from the start………
My comment referred to your question about efficiency. You will still lose efficiency without the dome.
The cross isn't going to disappear; you've still got four individual dies with space between them. The apparent distance will decrease dedomed, but it will still be there. This is why you can't compare the XPH series to the MT-G2.
the gas de dome failed because the phospher came off, the dies still lit up (2 of them) all 3 worked before de dome, mounting can’t have failed because there’s only 3 pads (thermal,positive,negative) it’s not like the sinkpad XHPs where the pos and neg are split in half
I don’t know, I’m stumped.
I checked all 3 before de dome but only the 1 after with welding goggles, but they all seemed of the same brightness to eye, which would mean they all had 2 dies only lighting up
I’m working on the third one now to see if I can do it!
Anyone any ideas on why only 2 dies lighting up at 6V?!
You might need to resort to the slice method. Best if you can find an appropriate shim to use as a guide for the blade to get an even smooth cut, lubricate the razor, and make the cut in one sliding motion rather than back and forth saw cuts.
The reason I compared the XPH dedome to the MTG2 was when people started to dedome those some found out that the quality of the light got even better after dedome that was unknown before that. Most of the other cree emitters gets worse with an apparent less CRI & often time less nice tint, i want to know how the XPH are going to appear.
And i understand that the 4 dies characteristic aren’t going to disappear, but what we don’t know is the practical implications of a smaller cross artifact, it could be that more reflectors & host will look nice enough with a dedome for example, if a simple dedome can be developed that is
ok, I’ve done it!
a little messy yes… but thats because i cant remove that white layer, the bond wires are underneath that, ill work on it and see if its possible to clean up and make it look tidier
!
!
!
!
