JasonWW
May 24, 2017, 10:09pm
161
FlashPilot:
This is the new head design we have been working on for improved heat dissipation. Notice the stepped reflector and less air-space in the head (more material left on ‘pill’ section).
Updated in OP
Thanks Kronos,
While this is an improvement and shows a great deal of forward thinking and tenacity, the light is still riddled with significant thermal bottlenecks. Most of the heat will be contained within the lower portion of the head, while heating the heck out of the battery tube. Can you please consider the following changes?
1) The head should be machined from 1 solid piece of aluminum. Not 2. Dont take “no” for an answer on this one. I think the reasons are more than obvious.
2) Take advantage of the additional material the 1 piece aluminum round will offer and maximize the size and placement of the cooling fins. Do not taper the fins at the base or they will no longer be functional. Concentrate on dispersing heat away from the floor plate to the most significant surface area, which is the head. With the 1 piece head (and without changing your current concept), there is room for 3 additional cooling fins at the base to help extract heat from the hottest part of the light, which is more in line with the floor plate. Its probably starting to become abundantly clear why the 1 pc head is so important. Especially in a smallish light generating a whopping 9 amps.
3) Eliminate all the sharp angles inside the head. Heat does not travel well around angles, especially in aluminum.
4) Eliminate the “steps” on the sides of the reflector, just as so many other lights have done. Then the head stock can be machined as a continuous, thick walled, tapered barrel to maximize heat transfer.
5) If you’re shooting for +9 amp, maybe consider building a larger reflector/head to take advantage of the additional lumens and range that would become available. A larger head will also transfer a great deal more heat, assuming the prerequisites I just mentioned have been met. If not, its just another short use flashlight that takes 5 times longer to cool down than the amount of time it can be used at max power. And not to mention the first cell into the battery tube is getting cooked under intense heat… not good at all. If this isnt possible, increase the diameter of the 1 piece head stock so the cooling fins can be cut deeper, while maintaining the other suggestions just mentioned. You’re in need of a great deal more surface area to exchange all that heat, and that would do very nicely.
You’re all so close to making the functionality of this light all-it-can-be, and have come so far in getting there. IMHO, the additional cost implied in procuring and machining 1 piece round stock will produce a vastly superior light. And given the huge power level you intend to drive this light, a larger diameter head and reflector will convert to another leap in functionality, both in range and heat transfer.
I really, really hope you can pull this off.
Thank you for reading.
OMG, you want them to start over from scratch! Lol. They said they are just doing small changes to make improvements. I’m curious to hear what they say about all your suggestions.
FlashPilot:
This is the new head design we have been working on for improved heat dissipation. Notice the stepped reflector and less air-space in the head (more material left on ‘pill’ section).
Updated in OP
Thanks Kronos,
While this is an improvement and shows a great deal of forward thinking and tenacity, the light is still riddled with significant thermal bottlenecks. Most of the heat will be contained within the lower portion of the head, while heating the heck out of the battery tube. Can you please consider the following changes?
1) The head should be machined from 1 solid piece of aluminum. Not 2. Dont take “no” for an answer on this one. I think the reasons are more than obvious.
2) Take advantage of the additional material the 1 piece aluminum round will offer and maximize the size and placement of the cooling fins. Do not taper the fins at the base or they will no longer be functional. Concentrate on dispersing heat away from the floor plate to the most significant surface area, which is the head. With the 1 piece head (and without changing your current concept), there is room for 3 additional cooling fins at the base to help extract heat from the hottest part of the light, which is more in line with the floor plate. Its probably starting to become abundantly clear why the 1 pc head is so important. Especially in a smallish light generating a whopping 9 amps.
3) Eliminate all the sharp angles inside the head. Heat does not travel well around angles, especially in aluminum.
4) Eliminate the “steps” on the sides of the reflector, just as so many other lights have done. Then the head stock can be machined as a continuous, thick walled, tapered barrel to maximize heat transfer.
5) If you’re shooting for +9 amp, maybe consider building a larger reflector/head to take advantage of the additional lumens and range that would become available. A larger head will also transfer a great deal more heat, assuming the prerequisites I just mentioned have been met. If not, its just another short use flashlight that takes 5 times longer to cool down than the amount of time it can be used at max power. And not to mention the first cell into the battery tube is getting cooked under intense heat… not good at all. If this isnt possible, increase the diameter of the 1 piece head stock so the cooling fins can be cut deeper, while maintaining the other suggestions just mentioned. You’re in need of a great deal more surface area to exchange all that heat, and that would do very nicely.
You’re all so close to making the functionality of this light all-it-can-be, and have come so far in getting there. IMHO, the additional cost implied in procuring and machining 1 piece round stock will produce a vastly superior light. And given the huge power level you intend to drive this light, a larger diameter head and reflector will convert to another leap in functionality, both in range and heat transfer.
I really, really hope you can pull this off.
Thank you for reading.
Excellent points FP! :+1:
Specially point #3 , would like to see the driver pocket below the shelf radiused, or just leave the drill point from the rough machining pass, eliminate the flat bottom pocket, as long as there is room for the driver inductor.
Maybe not all can be accomplished this go around, but maybe/possibly in future designs?
Also maybe a different color ano besides the same old same old, gloss and matte black? :+1:
Tom_E
May 24, 2017, 11:55pm
163
I thought a good quality thermal grease used on threaded connections makes a big difference. I recall seeing thermal images, think from saabluster, comparing with and without a high qual grease and it making a huge difference. Wouldn't that at least help the issue of the 2 piece head?
I thought a good quality thermal grease used on threaded connections makes a big difference. I recall seeing thermal images, think from saabluster, comparing with and without a high qual grease and it making a huge difference. Wouldn’t that at least help the issue of the 2 piece head?
Sure I think it would help Tom, but why have it? The Jax X6 Hunter is a full head not 2 pcs, and the S70 is a pretty close copy/clone of the Original Jax X6 Hunter minus the e-switch?
You would think it would be easier and cheaper to produce, with out all the extra machining a 2pc head has involved in it?
Just saying……
Tom_E
May 25, 2017, 12:33am
166
Maybe, you could be right. Tell you the truth, I was wondering if that was even a threaded connection, but I'm no expert at reading those mech drawings. I know I've worked on a lot of cheaper lights that seemed press fit and/or glued at about that junction - I was thinking it was cheaper to make or assemble. The J12 and J18 are two examples like that.
Possible scenario… if you procure a section of thick wall tubing that will allow you to make the head without having to remove virtually all of the stock from inside, won’t that save a LOT of time at the lathe? Then only a short piece of smaller bar stock is required to make the pill section, which threads nicely into the tube (now nicely finned and all that)
So it’s an engineering choice, as much as anything else. I know I’ve paid for a large bar of high end aluminum only to see the majority of it in curlies on the floor. So it makes sense not to do it that way, if possible.
The Jaxman X1 is a solid piece from head to where the tail cap screws on. I like it, but don’t know if it makes it that much better in the long run. I probably like it for being different, for daring to take a different route.
Maybe, you could be right. Tell you the truth, I was wondering if that was even a threaded connection, but I’m no expert at reading those mech drawings. I know I’ve worked on a lot of cheaper lights that seemed press fit and/or glued at about that junction - I was thinking it was cheaper to make or assemble. The J12 and J18 are two examples like that.
The S70 and S70s I had were the same design, 2pc head, drawing looks to be the same…
The machining was excellent, fooled many a BLFer that purchased them, that it was a single piece head!
FlashPilot:
This is the new head design we have been working on for improved heat dissipation. Notice the stepped reflector and less air-space in the head (more material left on ‘pill’ section).
Updated in OP
Thanks Kronos,
While this is an improvement and shows a great deal of forward thinking and tenacity, the light is still riddled with significant thermal bottlenecks. Most of the heat will be contained within the lower portion of the head, while heating the heck out of the battery tube. Can you please consider the following changes?
1) The head should be machined from 1 solid piece of aluminum. Not 2. Dont take “no” for an answer on this one. I think the reasons are more than obvious.
2) Take advantage of the additional material the 1 piece aluminum round will offer and maximize the size and placement of the cooling fins. Do not taper the fins at the base or they will no longer be functional. Concentrate on dispersing heat away from the floor plate to the most significant surface area, which is the head. With the 1 piece head (and without changing your current concept), there is room for 3 additional cooling fins at the base to help extract heat from the hottest part of the light, which is more in line with the floor plate. Its probably starting to become abundantly clear why the 1 pc head is so important. Especially in a smallish light generating a whopping 9 amps.
3) Eliminate all the sharp angles inside the head. Heat does not travel well around angles, especially in aluminum.
4) Eliminate the “steps” on the sides of the reflector, just as so many other lights have done. Then the head stock can be machined as a continuous, thick walled, tapered barrel to maximize heat transfer.
5) If you’re shooting for +9 amp, maybe consider building a larger reflector/head to take advantage of the additional lumens and range that would become available. A larger head will also transfer a great deal more heat, assuming the prerequisites I just mentioned have been met. If not, its just another short use flashlight that takes 5 times longer to cool down than the amount of time it can be used at max power. And not to mention the first cell into the battery tube is getting cooked under intense heat… not good at all. If this isnt possible, increase the diameter of the 1 piece head stock so the cooling fins can be cut deeper, while maintaining the other suggestions just mentioned. You’re in need of a great deal more surface area to exchange all that heat, and that would do very nicely.
You’re all so close to making the functionality of this light all-it-can-be, and have come so far in getting there. IMHO, the additional cost implied in procuring and machining 1 piece round stock will produce a vastly superior light. And given the huge power level you intend to drive this light, a larger diameter head and reflector will convert to another leap in functionality, both in range and heat transfer.
I really, really hope you can pull this off.
Thank you for reading.
You raise some interesting points, and we are looking at them.
However, making another major design change is probably not in the works for this light.
I do like your ideas though…and we will look at them for future designs.
Thanks for being so detailed!
krono
I have asked TF…so we shall see.
Still working on it, but progress is slow. I’ll update that thread as soon as I know more. Thanks for asking!
On the fins…possibly…but we are pretty far along in the process.
It is TFs CAD program…so I am not sure if that is even possible.
[quote=Team KRONOS]
Some 4 or 5 years back, the Solarforce S2200 and S1100 had that large diamond knurling.
The Solarforce had the diamonds as squares, so not quite the same thing. The MecArmy PT16 is also similar…
At any rate, it’s a nice grip platform to be sure, especially on the larger diameter battery tube’s such as this.
Nice guesses…but the diamond pattern was inspired by the ThruNite Catapult:
That is strange. I edited the above post to embed the Catapult pic, and it put it at end of the thread. :question:
Hey Kronos team, so THAT’S what you old schemers have been up to!
Question: How would you describe the expected 5000k color temperature? The charts I’ve looked at have it right on the border between neutral white and cool white. How much difference would I notice between 5000k and 4500k, which is my usual comfort zone for nice neutral white tints?
They should be able to export it to a universal 3D solid format and then anybody can run it through an FEA program.
Ah, and another question, whenever you guys have time and complete information: What’s the parasitic drain rate looking like for the e-switch? Thanks a lot.
EDIT: Ah! Just noticed the mechanical lockout tail switch. Very nice indeed! But I’d still be curious to know the parasitic drain too.
I think Tom said 4 cells would last til our pensions run out. Something like that. Far longer than we need worry about it.
Alright, I’m in for one (1), with additional tentative interest in the 26650 batteries purchase option and a slightly warmer / more neutral tint if one becomes available. Sign me up, Scotty! :+1:
