Texas_Ace BLF Calibrated Lumen tube / Sphere No math skills needed - Several spheres still available

1500 posts / 0 new
Last post
Micael
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 1 week ago
Joined: 12/04/2016 - 07:49
Posts: 50
Location: Sverige ( Sweden)

Yes i will send some lights to Finland to get them measured.

Micael

Texas_Ace BLF Calibrated Lumen tube

saypat
saypat's picture
Offline
Last seen: 31 min 33 sec ago
Joined: 07/13/2011 - 20:32
Posts: 3470
Location: Calif

… just curious, perhaps others in the know could chime in on this: If these spheres are reading high, does that mean the HaikeLite group buy lights rated around 20,000 lumens after TA’s mods, are are all overrated? This stuff gets confusing Sad

thank you

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 21 hours 23 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8514
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

saypat wrote:
… just curious, perhaps others in the know could chime in on this: If these spheres are reading high, does that mean the HaikeLite group buy lights rated around 20,000 lumens after TA’s mods, are are all overrated? This stuff gets confusing Sad

thank you

It would seem that way, although when compared to other lights in the same class they compared favorably, so I am not sure what to make of it.

We will need to wait for more data to make nay educated guesses.

saypat
saypat's picture
Offline
Last seen: 31 min 33 sec ago
Joined: 07/13/2011 - 20:32
Posts: 3470
Location: Calif

agree, it’s just a number, and I couldn’t be happier with my MT03 and TA driver. The driver added some ~ 4000 lumens I think, a wonderful UI, and it’s bright as the sun.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 21 hours 23 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8514
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

It may just be a number but I still feel horrible that I might of unknowingly mis-represented these lights.

Once some more people get the spheres we can see how things compare with a wider selection of lights.

I am also going to see if I can get some lights measured in an ANSI sphere.

I just need to figure out some very consistent lights for this. Most of the lights I have here are not regulated anymore or not very consistent.

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 59 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3039
Location: US
Terry Oregon wrote:

TA, in order to make this project work as expected, is it safe to assume that:


 


(1) after measuring several lights from respected manufacturers, each of us could come up with our own correction factor, and end up with relatively accurate readings?


(2) that correction factor should be about the same for everyone?


 


Based on four of the lights I’ve measured so far (from respected manufactures), my correction factor would be .72


Using a correction factor only takes a few seconds to compute, really no big deal.


 


 

I like to caution the idea of assuming respected manufacturer’s lights are accurate and consistent throughout. I just posted some ceiling bounce results for my AA lights and there are several identical lights from “respectable” companies that show considerable variation in light output. My ceiling bounce measurements have been extremely consistent even when measuring the same light months apart.

Also I prefer we don’t apply our own correction factor and instead apply a standard correction factor among all the lumen tubes. One of the main benefits of so many people owning TA lumen tubes is so we have a standardized basis to compare lumens among members. Even if the lumen tubes are not calibrated to realistic lumens, they are still calibrated consistently among all the units so we need to come up with standardized correction factor.

hIKARInoob
hIKARInoob's picture
Online
Last seen: 5 min 27 sec ago
Joined: 08/28/2016 - 08:15
Posts: 3997

M43 is very consistent. Output remains constant all the way down to 3.5V (boost driver). I’ve got three identical, and output is very close to each other.

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 59 min ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 3039
Location: US

I forgot to post the link at first to see how indentical lights compare http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60463

Micael
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 1 week ago
Joined: 12/04/2016 - 07:49
Posts: 50
Location: Sverige ( Sweden)

I have a question. If the 4” lumen tubes did readings about 30% low when you put them together, Isnt that close to point?

Low as in comparison to the 3” ones.

Micael

Texas_Ace BLF Calibrated Lumen tube

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 21 hours 23 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8514
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

Micael wrote:
I have a question. If the 4” lumen tubes did readings about 30% low when you put them together, Isnt that close to point?

Low as in comparison to the 3” ones.

Yes, as they were setup at the start looks to be pretty close to what they need to be. Although they have now been calibrated up to match the rest so it really doesn’t apply now.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 21 hours 23 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8514
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

It is also looking like I will be sending some lights to finland for testing on a real sphere so I can get a good calibration.

I am thinking of using an

S2+ with 7135 driver as they are usually pretty stable.

Possibly a BLF348 as I hear they are fairly stable since they use a regulated boost driver

Old fenix light I got 10 years ago that was pretty stable when tested.

These are small enough and cheap enough to risk in the normal mail, otherwise it would be $75+ in shipping.

Micael
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 1 week ago
Joined: 12/04/2016 - 07:49
Posts: 50
Location: Sverige ( Sweden)

I’v sent a mail to him to, to get som lights measured.

I did a list and will let him pic what he think vill be good.
The list is this

Out of these lights witch ones do you want to test?

Sr mini intimidator

Utorch 02

Astrolux S1

Nitecore Ec11

Klarus Xt11gt

Sofirn Sp10a

Imalent Dn70 flood king

Imalent Dn35 throw king

Micael

Texas_Ace BLF Calibrated Lumen tube

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 36 min ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 474
Location: Beaverton Oregon

Added several more lights to my original post (#342)

My reviews: , My personal collection of lights LINK,  J5 Tactical V1 Pro review LINK,  Thirteen Optical Sensors review LINKZebralight SC700d review LINK,  Ray-O-Vac Super Power Sportsman review LINK,  Convoy S2+ color combos LINK,  How To flash D4V2 LINK.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Online
Last seen: 9 min 56 sec ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11530
Location: Houston Texas

TA, is your plan to get a couple of properly measured lights from Maukka and then figure out a simple and repeatable way to reduce output on the sensor?

I would much rather we do that so that we can still use the numbers directly off the Lux meter. I realize we can just use a correction factor and do the math, but that’s not ideal to me. We can still make these tubes live up to the intended expectations.

BTW, I’m going to put off measurin all my lights for a few days when I have more time. Plus other people will be receiving theirs. We will get it sorted out. Thumbs Up

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 21 hours 23 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8514
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

Yes, my goal is to get a good calibration figured out first and this try to figure out a way to calibrate the spheres.

Mailing them back to me is the best way then I can calibrate them directly.

Or if you have a nice stable light you can take some before measurements and calibrate it yourself.

Or if I can find a way to add something that will adjust them that I can mail out that would be cool but after having messed with these, I doubt that is possible.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Online
Last seen: 9 min 56 sec ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11530
Location: Houston Texas

We just need to find a consistent, thin, film-like material that we can layer up.

A paper-based product would certainly be cheap, but I’m not sure of its consistency. I think you share the same concerns. Maybe we can test a variety of thin papers.

What about a lens that can be bought and stuck into the hole that the sensor mounts into? Kind of like a neutral density filter but fairly weak. I’ve got that ND filter you sent me and that thing really knocks down the lumens. I have to multiply my readings by 13.1. This should be more consistent, but the odds of getting exactly the right reduction in output seems a bit slim.

I will do some more experiments next week and report back.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 21 hours 23 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8514
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

Yeah, it is possible a film or sheet can be found that will work, but consistency is the problem from sphere to sphere.

Even now I can not explain the fact that no 2 spheres calibrated exactly the same way, they all needed to be customized.

Although putting something at the sensor end is possible, it would vastly reduce the possible variables.

I have about 10 spheres here I could test it on, if it worked on all of those then it is safe to say it should work on everyones.

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 36 min ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 474
Location: Beaverton Oregon

Based on the results from fifteen lights (manufacturer spec vs TA Tube), my average correction factor would be .728

Later, if we need a standard across all units, I can also use that. But for now, that number makes the tube useful for me until everything gets sorted out.

If others can post their correction factor, it would be interesting to see if the results are close - or not.

 

My reviews: , My personal collection of lights LINK,  J5 Tactical V1 Pro review LINK,  Thirteen Optical Sensors review LINKZebralight SC700d review LINK,  Ray-O-Vac Super Power Sportsman review LINK,  Convoy S2+ color combos LINK,  How To flash D4V2 LINK.

Newlumen
Newlumen's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 hours 5 min ago
Joined: 05/27/2017 - 00:19
Posts: 2070
Location: United states
Terry Oregon wrote:

Based on the results from fifteen lights (spec vs TA Tube), my average correction factor would be .728


Later, if we need a standard across all units, I can also use that. But for now, that number makes the tube useful for me until everything gets sorted out.


If others can post their correction factor, it would be interesting to see if the results are close – or not.


 

Sure i will.. i will test out a bunch of lights on tuesday.. we are taking @ 30 seconds right?

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 36 min ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 474
Location: Beaverton Oregon

Quote:
we are taking @ 30 seconds right?

correct

My reviews: , My personal collection of lights LINK,  J5 Tactical V1 Pro review LINK,  Thirteen Optical Sensors review LINKZebralight SC700d review LINK,  Ray-O-Vac Super Power Sportsman review LINK,  Convoy S2+ color combos LINK,  How To flash D4V2 LINK.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Online
Last seen: 9 min 56 sec ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11530
Location: Houston Texas

Terry Oregon wrote:

Based on the results from fifteen lights (spec vs TA Tube), my average correction factor would be .728



When you say spec, do you mean the lumens the light is advertised to be?

Compared to the JoshK sphere, my numbers (roughly) are around .65 to .70, so pretty close to your .73. We are in the same ballpark. Thumbs Up Of course, this all needs to be decided later on.

We should also try to standardize the time we measure. ANSI-FL1 says 30 seconds. That might be our standard time unless we state otherwise.

The batteries also can make a difference with certain lights. I have 26650 blue and black Liitokala’s that are low IR. I’ve also got some low IR button top 30Q. I can have several on the charger as I’m using one. Then put it on the charger and grab another so the voltage is always topped off.

I guess I will record the lumens as they come off the stock TA Tube. Then we can probably decide on a specific correction factor at a later time.

I can see this being a fun marathon session when I get a day off. Big Smile

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

Terry Oregon
Terry Oregon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 36 min ago
Joined: 10/21/2017 - 17:03
Posts: 474
Location: Beaverton Oregon

Quote:
When you say spec, do you mean the lumens the light is advertised to be?

Correct (clarified post).

I also took all measurements 30sec after turn on.

 

My reviews: , My personal collection of lights LINK,  J5 Tactical V1 Pro review LINK,  Thirteen Optical Sensors review LINKZebralight SC700d review LINK,  Ray-O-Vac Super Power Sportsman review LINK,  Convoy S2+ color combos LINK,  How To flash D4V2 LINK.

charles lin
charles lin's picture
Online
Last seen: 6 min 48 sec ago
Joined: 03/09/2016 - 17:08
Posts: 378
Location: SoCal, US

Terry Oregon wrote:

Based on the results from fifteen lights (spec vs TA Tube), my average correction factor would be .728

If others can post their correction factor, it would be interesting to see if the results are close – or not.


It is much higher than mine. Base on maukka’s review DATA, my average calibration# for TA’s tube is 0.6730133. The number is not 100% accurate because I know maukka did upgrade & recalibrate his integrating spheres several times.
I use most mid & low mode for more constant output from maukka’s review found on CPF and BLF. I choose seven stock lights same model & CCT as in maukka’s review to calibrate TA’s tube:
Lumintop Tool AAA Copper Nichia
Lumintop Tool AAA Ti Nichia
Zebralight SC600w HI Mk3
Olight H1 Nova NW
Olight S Mini Ti NW
Nitecore EC4SW
Nitecore MH20 NW
maukka
maukka's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 38 min ago
Joined: 12/31/2015 - 04:15
Posts: 1901
Location: Finland

I wouldn’t use the Lumintop Tool AAA for any calibration as its driver has been known to vary wildly from one batch to another. I can remeasure the Nitecores when I have time to give you more accurate numbers. It was a long time ago when I tested them.

JasonWW
JasonWW's picture
Online
Last seen: 9 min 56 sec ago
Joined: 10/22/2016 - 11:41
Posts: 11530
Location: Houston Texas

charles lin wrote:
Terry Oregon wrote:

Based on the results from fifteen lights (spec vs TA Tube), my average correction factor would be .728


It is much higher than mine. Base on maukka’s review DATA, my average calibration# for TA’s tube is 0.6730133. The number is not 100% accurate because I know maukka did upgrade & recalibrate his integrating spheres several times.
I use most mid & low mode for more constant output from maukka’s review found on CPF and BLF.

I would not call that much higher. Is 0.06 considered a lot?

I am just glad that we are all so close to one another. Even TA said that his calibration was plus or minus 5%.

Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights

Click this to go to signature links.

emarkd
emarkd's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 21 hours ago
Joined: 04/14/2015 - 22:04
Posts: 1600
Location: Georgia, USA

If I find time today I think I’ll try layering some DC Fix in mine, unless someone has tried it already. More diffusion, plus reduction. Might take several layers but worth a shot. The stuff is cheap, ~12 bucks a roll from amazon and I’ve got plenty of it here.

maukka
maukka's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 38 min ago
Joined: 12/31/2015 - 04:15
Posts: 1901
Location: Finland

Here’s new output numbers for Nitecore EC4SW and MH20. Both with full 30Qs. Measured first on high, then on turbo, so the turbo numbers aren’t with absolutely topped off cells, since I had the high on for about 40 seconds. I did let the light cool off a couple of minutes though.

Seems my small styrofoam sphere I used when originally tested these was reading about 8-9% low. Still I think a 10% error margin is quite good for DIY integrating devices.

Nitecore EC4SW
High 0 sec: 860 lm
High 30 sec: 850 lm
Turbo 0 sec: 1738 lm
Turbo 30 sec: 1667 lm

Nitecore MH20 NW
High 0 sec: 497 lm
High 30 sec: 500 lm
Turbo 0 sec: 932 lm
Turbo 30 sec: 890 lm

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 21 hours 23 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8514
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas
emarkd wrote:
If I find time today I think I’ll try layering some DC Fix in mine, unless someone has tried it already. More diffusion, plus reduction. Might take several layers but worth a shot. The stuff is cheap, ~12 bucks a roll from amazon and I’ve got plenty of it here.

This is an option I was considering for a fix-all solution. Or some other similar film. Possibly cut out some acyrlic discs to fit in the hole the sensor goes and then add layers of the DC fix to it until the readings are correct. People can then install it. Although I have not figured out a good method for that yet.

Glue works but can also change the readings.

Texas_Ace
Texas_Ace's picture
Offline
Last seen: 21 hours 23 min ago
Joined: 03/24/2016 - 07:44
Posts: 8514
Location: Everything is brighter in Texas

maukka wrote:
Here’s new output numbers for Nitecore EC4SW and MH20. Both with full 30Qs. Measured first on high, then on turbo, so the turbo numbers aren’t with absolutely topped off cells, since I had the high on for about 40 seconds. I did let the light cool off a couple of minutes though.

Nitecore EC4SW
High 0 sec: 860 lm
High 30 sec: 850 lm
Turbo 0 sec: 1738 lm
Turbo 30 sec: 1667 lm

Nitecore MH20 NW
High 0 sec: 497 lm
High 30 sec: 500 lm
Turbo 0 sec: 932 lm
Turbo 30 sec: 890 lm

So even nitecore are not true to the numbers?

I can’t seem to find the fenix I used to have, I might of given it away.

emarkd
emarkd's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 21 hours ago
Joined: 04/14/2015 - 22:04
Posts: 1600
Location: Georgia, USA

While we’re all bouncing factory numbers around don’t forget that the variation among LEDs in any single flux bin is something like 12 or 15%, so Nitecore may say a light makes 1000 lumens but each light made will actually vary along a range of output depending on the efficiency of that specific LED and where it falls in that bin range. The only way that I can think of to calibrate these tubes to within less than the binning variation is to either sample many many many specimens of the same light and average them, or better yet to compare the tube’s readings against a NIST-calibrated sphere using the same exact light source, not another specimen of the same model. …which is what I tried to do using the HDS lights because supposedly they do that for each individual light sold.

Pages