New VirEnce MCPCB for E17/E21/119/144/233U

101 posts / 0 new
Last post

Pages

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia
New VirEnce MCPCB for E17/E21/119/144/233U

Update: 171016:

- 60 pcs prototypes shipped!

--------------------------------------------------

 

Update: 170913:

I finally able to start the project. Thanks for all the support guys.

After many hours of sketching and discussions with some BLF brainiacs, I sent the final models up for prototyping today. The process alone will take 4 weeks, excluding shipping and document preparation. I'll report when I get the first 60 pcs of sample later.

Below are the two models undergoing processing:

 

16mm 5050 footprint quad [E17/E21 only] configurable for 3V, 6V, 9V, and 12V

 

16mm single [E17/E21/119/144/233]

 

More detail later

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Hi guys,

 

I'm going to make custom copper round CDTP MCPCB for a single Nichia 144A.

This new board will have several features:

  • Non insulated for superior heatsinking with direct soldering OR Insulated with options to use either thermal adhesives or pad
  • High reflectance white masking ink
  • High temperature masking ink (lead free/direct soldering friendly - less yellowing)
  • Hopefully will performs same or better than my previous 30mm x 30mm VirEnce board (will post the test result later)

 The sneak peek of the design is in my avatar. The questions are:

  • Diameter (tell me your favourites, could be more than just one size)
  • Thickness
  • Optics (tell me your favourites, could be more than just one type)
  • Slots? (most used cable thicknesses)

Please post your suggestions. Thank you!

 

May the Photons be with us,

Clemence

Edited by: clemence on 10/16/2017 - 05:39
maukka
maukka's picture
Offline
Last seen: 21 min 56 sec ago
Joined: 12/31/2015 - 04:15
Posts: 814
Location: Finland

That’s what I’ve been waiting for!

Diameter: 16 and 20 mm
Thickness: 1.6-1.8 mm
Slots: 2×3.0 mm

The Miller
The Miller's picture
Online
Last seen: 6 min 1 sec ago
Joined: 12/14/2015 - 12:08
Posts: 9737
Location: Charente France

Wouldn’t 4 slots (2 a bit smaller for screws to hold it centered, and 2 for wires) be better?

maukka
maukka's picture
Offline
Last seen: 21 min 56 sec ago
Joined: 12/31/2015 - 04:15
Posts: 814
Location: Finland

Yes, definitely holes for screws in addition to the wire slots.

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia

Are there any standard screw placements for each 16mm and 20mm? The screw holes need insulated vias or additional insulated washer for these boards. For 16mm board, even 2,5mm screw would be too big. It has to pressed down either using the reflector, optics, or additional fastening method if thermal pad is to be used. Or we can use thermal adhesives.

I plan to use thermal pad with 12-16W/M.K underneath the base, far superior than the best Arctic Silver. There’s thermal adhesives with proven 30+ W/M.K conductance from Australian manufacturer. The bad news: it’s permanent and has only 3 months shelf life.
Checked the AIN but still too expensive for small batch quantity.

Barkuti
Barkuti's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 28 min ago
Joined: 02/19/2014 - 14:46
Posts: 1813
Location: Alhama de Murcia, Spain

Thermal pad?

Any of you remember Aluminum Nitride?

#80 post in “Nichia 144A and 229A series: bigger dies, more output, 90CRI included,.......but no thermal slug Sad

Well, of course getting the MCPCB manufactured with a thin layer of that stuff somewhere would be handy.

Yet notwithstanding, it should be possible to buy some sheet/film. For example: http://www.goodfellow.com/E/Aluminium-Nitride'-Sheet.html

If you are willing to take a peek: aluminum+OR+aluminium+nitride+sheet+OR+film Google search

 

Cheers lasses/lads Party

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia
Barkuti wrote:

Thermal pad?


Any of you remember Aluminum Nitride?


#80 post in “Nichia 144A and 229A series: bigger dies, more output, 90CRI included,…….but no thermal slug Sad


Well, of course getting the MCPCB manufactured with a thin layer of that stuff somewhere would be handy.


Yet notwithstanding, it should be possible to buy some sheet/film. For example: http://www.goodfellow.com/E/Aluminium-Nitride’-Sheet.html


If you are willing to take a peek: aluminum+OR+aluminium+nitride+sheet+OR+film Google search


 


Cheers lasses/lads Party

I do remember it. AIN stands for Aluminum Nitride. I was referring to AIN coating to the base of MCPCB.
Nice find BTW Bark, will read them data sheets tonight.

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia

Lurked into the price list and found the 0,64mm thick cost GBP 148 for a square piece of 25mm x 25mm!!! Usable for only a single 20mm board.
You can get lower price for 20 pcs but it still GBP 33,8/piece

Far more expensive than what I got. No good for BudgetLessFellow Tired

The_Driver
The_Driver's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 7 min ago
Joined: 10/20/2016 - 05:51
Posts: 371
Location: Germany

clemence wrote:
Are there any standard screw placements for each 16mm and 20mm? The screw holes need insulated vias or additional insulated washer for these boards. For 16mm board, even 2,5mm screw would be too big. It has to pressed down either using the reflector, optics, or additional fastening method if thermal pad is to be used. Or we can use thermal adhesives.

I plan to use thermal pad with 12-16W/M.K underneath the base, far superior than the best Arctic Silver. There’s thermal adhesives with proven 30+ W/M.K conductance from Australian manufacturer. The bad news: it’s permanent and has only 3 months shelf life.
Checked the AIN but still too expensive for small batch quantity.

Yes, for 20mm PCBs there are standards. I would use the same screw hole placements as Sinkpad and all the other companies do. Here at the bottom of the page are some pdf documents with measurements for 20mm Star PCBs from a German company.

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia

The_Driver wrote:
clemence wrote:
Are there any standard screw placements for each 16mm and 20mm? The screw holes need insulated vias or additional insulated washer for these boards. For 16mm board, even 2,5mm screw would be too big. It has to pressed down either using the reflector, optics, or additional fastening method if thermal pad is to be used. Or we can use thermal adhesives.

I plan to use thermal pad with 12-16W/M.K underneath the base, far superior than the best Arctic Silver. There’s thermal adhesives with proven 30+ W/M.K conductance from Australian manufacturer. The bad news: it’s permanent and has only 3 months shelf life.
Checked the AIN but still too expensive for small batch quantity.

Yes, for 20mm PCBs there are standards. I would use the same screw hole placements as Sinkpad and all the other companies do. Here at the bottom of the page are some pdf documents with measurements for 20mm Star PCBs from a German company.

The link is not working

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia

Strange, it’s working now Silly

The_Driver
The_Driver's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 7 min ago
Joined: 10/20/2016 - 05:51
Posts: 371
Location: Germany
clemence wrote:
Strange, it’s working now Silly

It works for me ;).
Generally this is a great idea! These will be much more practical compared to your first design. When can you have them ready?

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia

Scheduled for January….
My first design wasn’t intended for flashlight, it’s for my personal specific use. This was a perfect size/shape for prototyping many general lightings with 144A/119 series.

emarkd
emarkd's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 04/14/2015 - 22:04
Posts: 1407
Location: Georgia, USA

I’m in the group buy for 2 of your “universal” boards and I’ll honor that commitment, but I’m definitely interested in some of these boards too. 16s and 20s seem like a great start.

chouster
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 days ago
Joined: 02/20/2014 - 15:05
Posts: 679
Location: germany

Very clever design, Clemence! By the way, it’s really great to have you amongst us!

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia

=)
Not possible without BLF & TLF supports

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia
emarkd wrote:
I’m in the group buy for 2 of your “universal” boards and I’ll honor that commitment, but I’m definitely interested in some of these boards too. 16s and 20s seem like a great start.

Let’s not hope much. CDTP design is highly surface area dependent, smaller surface area = higher Tj. That means bigger board will be better. But this new design utilizing maximum possible surface area possible for both anode/cathode. I also try to reduce current heating as much as possible. Using dielectric with as high as possible thermal conductivity I could get. I predict it would be a bit less cooler than the standard VirEnce S30 but in smaller 16mm package.

Barkuti
Barkuti's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 28 min ago
Joined: 02/19/2014 - 14:46
Posts: 1813
Location: Alhama de Murcia, Spain

Fellows, you're venturing into new territory here with a cathode direct thermal path board.

The lack of electric isolation is going to be a real hurdle, I think. Something which could be fixed with a thin layer of some über-high conductivity material. If the cathode track pad is reasonably maximized in surface and you can get some thin layer of über-conductive electrical isolator below, the problem is solved, and the industry moves forward.

Pretty sure there's someone around there who can offer aluminium nitride/beryllium oxide sheet/foil at much less than those prices, clemence. Hell, you could get diamond foil for a lower quote, LoL! 

Why don't you ask for some help from a specialized manufacturer? More or less recently some Shenzen Kerui Electronic Industry representative has been around here promoting their products. More info: https://www.linkedin.com/company/shezhen-kerui-electronic-industry-co-ltd-

 

Cheers Party

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia
emarkd wrote:
I’m in the group buy for 2 of your “universal” boards and I’ll honor that commitment, but I’m definitely interested in some of these boards too. 16s and 20s seem like a great start.

It’s indeed universal. I use some for my desk and workshop light with assymetric TIR optics. Plan to use it for my parking area lighting with Ledil Jenny CY optics.

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia
Barkuti wrote:

Fellows, you’re venturing into new territory here with a cathode direct thermal path board.


The lack of electric isolation is going to be a real hurdle, I think. Something which could be fixed with a thin layer of some über-high conductivity material. If the cathode track pad is reasonably maximized in surface and you can get some thin layer of über-conductive electrical isolator below, the problem is solved, and the industry moves forward.


Pretty sure there’s someone around there who can offer aluminium nitride/beryllium oxide sheet/foil at much less than those prices, clemence. Hell, you could get diamond foil for a lower quote, LoL! 


Why don’t you ask for some help from a specialized manufacturer? More or less recently some Shenzen Kerui Electronic Industry representative has been around here promoting their products. More info: https://www.linkedin.com/company/shezhen-kerui-electronic-industry-co-ltd-


 


Cheers Party

Thanks Bark,
Even without super material CDTP can be designed to surpass neutral DTP approach as long as you have the required surface area. The idea is to lower the heat potential difference (does anyone know shorter terms for this?) thus less thermal resistance. This is pretty much why Nichia still manufacture 2 pads design.
In theory two pads design can achieve lower Tj compared to three pads design (ignoring the surface area required) since copper used in cathode/anode has much better thermal conductance than the dielectric material commonly used in LED. Combined together with very high conductance and thin solder joint such as Indium solder, the result should be even better.

Upstream just at the heat source, heat flux intensity is higher that downstream where the surface area is cooler and larger.

For example: If a 119 has to pass 10 watt of power through two tiny solder pads. The heat intensity is roughly 10 watt/11,9 mm^2 (0,84 W/mm^2). After heat flux passing the solder pads, the intensity lowers down to 10 watt/201 mm^2 (0,05 W/mm^2) using a circular 16mm MCPCB.

My simple logics:

- Upstream:
common Sn60Pb40 thermal conductance ~50 W/M.K
heat intensity ~ 0,84 W/mm^2

- Downstream
Thermal pad material with X thermal conductance
heat intensity ~0,05 W/mm^2
To get the same state, thus X= ~2,9 W/M.K

I still don’t have any valid data to stand up for this one yet. I rather make some and then test it based on that logic. The universal VirEnce board test result was higher than expected. And I think (emphasizing the: I think), solder choice is one of the most important thing in CDTP design, it’s where the bottleneck occurs (not downstream at the MCPCB’s thermal pad). As long as we use MCPCB with surface area reasonably LARGER than the footprint of the LED’s solder pads.

I’m using Sn96,5Ag3Cu0,5 for most of my newer project now. It’s harder on the boards (218C liquidus) than 60/40 and requires extra effort to get a good reflowed boards. The thermal conductance is ~58-60 W/M.K.
I have a spool of SnxxAgxx (lost the label) solder wire rated at 70W/M.K but requires 240C to a flowable liquidus. Much harder and stronger joint very useful for aluminum soldering.

The larger the MCPCB surface/mating area to the heatsink, the less sophisticated the thermal pad required.

That’s the ideas behind my idea….

Barkuti
Barkuti's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 28 min ago
Joined: 02/19/2014 - 14:46
Posts: 1813
Location: Alhama de Murcia, Spain

Indalloy #290, 97In3Ag, is eutectic, melts at 143°C/289.4°F, and provides a 73W/m×K thermal conductivity figure. Sources:

 

Cheers Party

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia
Barkuti wrote:

Indalloy #290, 97In3Ag, is eutectic, melts at 143°C/289.4°F, and provides a 73W/m×K thermal conductivity figure. Sources:



 


Cheers Party

Very nice, must be expensive though

chouster
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 days ago
Joined: 02/20/2014 - 15:05
Posts: 679
Location: germany

“melts at 143°C”

would be too low for my liking

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia

chouster wrote:
“melts at 143°C”

would be too low for my liking

Best thermal protection….when it gets hot the LED would just dropping run off the board Big Smile
Good for “normal” applications, not for you Matthias

chouster
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 days ago
Joined: 02/20/2014 - 15:05
Posts: 679
Location: germany

Well, I think the opposite is the case. That stuff is for special applications. For normal application, just go with normal solder paste. Or go with SnAg (96.5/3.5) if you really want good thermal properties. 221°C reflow temperature shouldn’t be a problem at all and that stuff is quite affordable.

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia

chouster wrote:
Well, I think the opposite is the case. That stuff is for special applications. For normal application, just go with normal solder paste. Or go with SnAg (96.5/3.5) if you really want good thermal properties. 221°C reflow temperature shouldn’t be a problem at all and that stuff is quite affordable.

!{width:60%}http://s3.electronics-cooling.com/legacy_images/2006/08/2006_August_Tech...!

Yup, for example soldering over soldered joint. I have many PVC backed waterproof cable connector joiner with very low melting temp solder. Just apply moderate heat using heat gun.
Hey, I think that Sn96,5Ag3,5 is very similar to my spool. Mine rated at 221C but in practice I had to set my hotplate to 240C for it to reflow properly. That’s the solder wire I used when I sent Djozz the samples. 240C reflow temp really turned those white S30 VirEnce board dark yellow. I also used wrong flux to worsen the looks.

Barkuti
Barkuti's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 28 min ago
Joined: 02/19/2014 - 14:46
Posts: 1813
Location: Alhama de Murcia, Spain

chouster, the thermal conductivity figure you provide for Sn96.5Ag3.5 is not supported by the guys at Indium Corporation. They claim a 33W/m×K for it (Indalloy #121). Check it out in the table link above, and here: Alloy Thermal Conductivity @ Indium Corporation.

 

Cheers Party

chouster
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 3 days ago
Joined: 02/20/2014 - 15:05
Posts: 679
Location: germany

@ clemence

But I think you made a very valid point. It’s the solder joint that has to pull away the heat from the LED at first and using Sn96,5Ag3,5 instead of standard Sn63Pb37 should give an increase of 56% in thermal conductivity. Just use solder paste with less agressive flux.

Barkuti
Barkuti's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 28 min ago
Joined: 02/19/2014 - 14:46
Posts: 1813
Location: Alhama de Murcia, Spain

clemence, you slipped in while I was still editing my post.

So, you reflowed those Nichias with 96.5Sn3.5Ag? Ooops! You may had created a heat transfer bottleneck, so Djozz's tests may not resemble the results most of us would get with Sn63Pb37/Sn60Pb40/Sn99.3Cu0.7…
Time for a little retest?

 

Cheers Party

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia

chouster wrote:
@ clemence

But I think you made a very valid point. It’s the solder joint that has to pull away the heat from the LED at first and using Sn96,5Ag3,5 instead of standard Sn63Pb37 should give an increase of 56% in thermal conductivity. Just use solder paste with less agressive flux.

That was accidental….
I dipped the solder wire to a super aggressive ALUMINUM flux. If you see those boards in Maukka’s spectrum test thread, some were extremely “burnt” by the flux.

I don’t know if the move to SA35 (Sn96,5Sn3,5) would really make measurable end result difference (higher lumen) with thin solder line. With proper soldering (very thin bond line) the difference would be minimal. In the case of thicker joint then solder choice should be more critical.
I usually just put a small blob of solder paste and heat until the LED soldered, then remove excess solder using fluxed solder wick to create the thinnest possible joint. LED pre-centering is critical with this method. Less solder between LED and solder pads give less self centering effect.

clemence
clemence's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 30 min ago
Joined: 07/12/2015 - 02:58
Posts: 991
Location: Bali - Indonesia
Barkuti wrote:

clemence, you slipped in while I was still editing my post.


So, you reflowed those Nichias with 96.5Sn3.5Ag? Ooops! You may had created a heat transfer bottleneck, so Djozz’s tests may not resemble the results most of us would get with Sn63Pb37/Sn60Pb40/Sn99.3Cu0.7…
Time for a little retest?


 


Cheers Party

Heat transfer bottleneck? Of course, just like all of us. Until there’s a solder with thermal conductivity same/higher than cathode/anode material, there will be bottleneck at the solder joints. You can achieve that though. Just “weld” your LED pads to the MCPCB using the same technique as those copper electroforming – 100% pure copper joint! Hahahaha

As I wrote earlier, with such a thin joint the difference in the solder’s thermal conductivity would be not that obvious anymore. But we need an expert to validate my thoughts here.

Pages