A 30Klumen light must dissipate a huge amount of heat and care must be taken in getting it away from the leds. In the design pictured in the OP there is some nice deep fins (but only a fraction of the surface area needed to dissipate the close to 200W of heat, as all big-lumen lights this light needs to stepdown fast) but they neglected the most important thing with these power levels: spreading the heat over the body as fast as possible so that the heat can actually get to those fins (and further over the body). You need a heat highway and they made a bottleneck just under the leds. The result is unneeded fast heating up near the leds and shorter time in Turbo. In my view they can buy significant turbo-time if they sacrifice some finning near the led-shelf for body-material, like this:
A 30Klumen light must dissipate a huge amount of heat and care must be taken in getting it away from the leds. In the design pictured in the OP there is some nice deep fins (but only a fraction of the surface area needed to dissipate the close to 200W of heat, as all big-lumen lights this light needs to stepdown fast) but they neglected the most important thing with these power levels: spreading the heat over the body as fast as possible so that the heat can actually get to those fins (and further over the body). You need a heat highway and they made a bottleneck just under the leds. The result is unneeded fast heating up near the leds and shorter time in Turbo. In my view they can buy significant turbo-time if they sacrifice some finning near the led-shelf for body-material, like this:
as it has a 2S/4P battery compartment the active heat path at the base of the shelf has at least a diameter of 45mm, this is well enough to conduct 1000W of heat, the fins are really thick, no need to widen the head as you show
the LEDs wont be sittingh at the edge of the light like the X80, head is bigger and less LEDs, so they more more to center
How are you supposed to turn it on with an overhand or reverse grip with the light by your shoulder? This is how I use my L6, but this light has a weird finger cutout preventing this.
The ugly grenade style battery tube. The 4 ugly flat cutouts on the battery tube. The big, diagonal slices on the head. The screws holding the switch cover in place.
What happened to the sexy looks of the earlier MF01 and MF02? Did they hire the designer that Haikelite fired after he designed their MT03 and MT07? I see a lot of similarities.
I know they are trying to save weight by cutting a lot of material out, but geez, don’t turn it into a ugly monstrosity only a few will want to buy. So far these teaser pics make the Imalent it’s competing against look like a beauty queen.
IDK, I sure seem grumpy for some reason.
—
Texas Ace Lumen Tube and JoshK Sphere calibrated with Maukka lights
Let’s discuss how much is too much for kcd? Do we want to use binocular to see so far. The answer is yes, please make it shoot the farthest as possible.
When I play with 450kcd, I am worried I shine on people at distance unknowingly because I can’t see clearly anymore. So everyone please use our big toy responsibly. I am thinking to bring my binoculars to be safe.
A 30Klumen light must dissipate a huge amount of heat and care must be taken in getting it away from the leds. In the design pictured in the OP there is some nice deep fins (but only a fraction of the surface area needed to dissipate the close to 200W of heat, as all big-lumen lights this light needs to stepdown fast) but they neglected the most important thing with these power levels: spreading the heat over the body as fast as possible so that the heat can actually get to those fins (and further over the body). You need a heat highway and they made a bottleneck just under the leds. The result is unneeded fast heating up near the leds and shorter time in Turbo. In my view they can buy significant turbo-time if they sacrifice some finning near the led-shelf for body-material, like this:
as it has a 2S/4P battery compartment the active heat path at the base of the shelf has at least a diameter of 45mm, this is well enough to conduct 1000W of heat, the fins are really thick, no need to widen the head as you show
the LEDs wont be sittingh at the edge of the light like the X80, head is bigger and less LEDs, so they more more to center
I’m sorry that I do not I understand that calculation, especially why the battery configuration matters, I just see 200W of heat that is generated at the front part of the head, that either stays where it is or it goes somewhere else and thus keeps the head temperature a bit cooler for a bit longer time. And the little practical experience that I have with these power levels is that to funnel 200W to elsewhere it needs a large aluminium cross-section, a tube in the center with common wall thickness will not do that sufficiently.
(btw, always I’m all for keeping material thickness as low as possible, don’t like big chunks of material where it is not needed, but here I see a very good reason to add that material)
I’m sorry that I do not I understand that calculation, especially why the battery configuration matters,
I think for the approximately size of the tube which transfers the heat to the fins.
I see, so the idea is that that central shaft is close to massive then, with a small hole for the wires? (in that case I still think that a higher cross-section would matter))
Rather see 3-XHP70’s with 3 big deep reflectors at 8-9000lm Turbo like a huge BTU shocker and 5-70’s at 8-9000lms Turbo like a Ace beam X60. Not one for mixed emitter, multi-emitter lights. Rather have them all the same, but this is still very interesting…
Are they working with any of the BLF driver wizards for this one? It’d be nice to get a great firmware UI to go with that dual button physical UI, and it’d be one less thing they could screw up.
No, it’s another Mateminco/Banggood light like the MF01 and MF02.
Which is a shame. You’d think some manufacturers would take notice after the Q8’s positive reception.
A 30Klumen light must dissipate a huge amount of heat and care must be taken in getting it away from the leds. In the design pictured in the OP there is some nice deep fins (but only a fraction of the surface area needed to dissipate the close to 200W of heat, as all big-lumen lights this light needs to stepdown fast) but they neglected the most important thing with these power levels: spreading the heat over the body as fast as possible so that the heat can actually get to those fins (and further over the body). You need a heat highway and they made a bottleneck just under the leds. The result is unneeded fast heating up near the leds and shorter time in Turbo. In my view they can buy significant turbo-time if they sacrifice some finning near the led-shelf for body-material, like this:
as it has a 2S/4P battery compartment the active heat path at the base of the shelf has at least a diameter of 45mm, this is well enough to conduct 1000W of heat, the fins are really thick, no need to widen the head as you show
the LEDs wont be sittingh at the edge of the light like the X80, head is bigger and less LEDs, so they more more to center
I’m sorry that I do not I understand that calculation, especially why the battery configuration matters, I just see 200W of heat that is generated at the front part of the head, that either stays where it is or it goes somewhere else and thus keeps the head temperature a bit cooler for a bit longer time. And the little practical experience that I have with these power levels is that to funnel 200W to elsewhere it needs a large aluminium cross-section, a tube in the center with common wall thickness will not do that sufficiently.
(btw, always I’m all for keeping material thickness as low as possible, don’t like big chunks of material where it is not needed, but here I see a very good reason to add that material)
Take a look on current >100W lights like X80, MF01, they are barely bigger than a Q8 and handle the heat for more than a minute
The MF03 compared to them has a huge head and also way more surface to loose some of the heat, that will increase sustained output
I’m sorry that I do not I understand that calculation, especially why the battery configuration matters,
I think for the approximately size of the tube which transfers the heat to the fins.
I see, so the idea is that that central shaft is close to massive then, with a small hole for the wires? (in that case I still think that a higher cross-section would matter))
I agree. It doesn’t really make sense to have such a bottleneck directly under the heat source even though that (hopefully) thick tube is large. Trying to funnel 100% of the heat into 50% of the heat conducting area isn’t ideal.
Still looks like a very cool light though. Interested to see more details.
A 30Klumen light must dissipate a huge amount of heat and care must be taken in getting it away from the leds. In the design pictured in the OP there is some nice deep fins (but only a fraction of the surface area needed to dissipate the close to 200W of heat, as all big-lumen lights this light needs to stepdown fast) but they neglected the most important thing with these power levels: spreading the heat over the body as fast as possible so that the heat can actually get to those fins (and further over the body). You need a heat highway and they made a bottleneck just under the leds. The result is unneeded fast heating up near the leds and shorter time in Turbo. In my view they can buy significant turbo-time if they sacrifice some finning near the led-shelf for body-material, like this:
as it has a 2S/4P battery compartment the active heat path at the base of the shelf has at least a diameter of 45mm, this is well enough to conduct 1000W of heat, the fins are really thick, no need to widen the head as you show
the LEDs wont be sittingh at the edge of the light like the X80, head is bigger and less LEDs, so they more more to center
I’m sorry that I do not I understand that calculation, especially why the battery configuration matters, I just see 200W of heat that is generated at the front part of the head, that either stays where it is or it goes somewhere else and thus keeps the head temperature a bit cooler for a bit longer time. And the little practical experience that I have with these power levels is that to funnel 200W to elsewhere it needs a large aluminium cross-section, a tube in the center with common wall thickness will not do that sufficiently.
(btw, always I’m all for keeping material thickness as low as possible, don’t like big chunks of material where it is not needed, but here I see a very good reason to add that material)
Take a look on current >100W lights like X80, MF01, they are barely bigger than a Q8 and handle the heat for more than a minute
The MF03 compared to them has a huge head and also way more surface to loose some of the heat, that will increase sustained output
I’m sure that with its clunky build it will do much better than those tiny monsters, but with my simple suggested correction in the design that hardly costs extra (if any) I’m pretty sure it will still perform noticably better.
djozz, is it you are suggesting to have more thermal mass under leds mcpcb seating by reducing the length of fin? Those deep section of fin don’t have much airflow anyway, might as well make the fins shallower?
djozz, is it you are suggesting to have more thermal mass under leds mcpcb seating by reducing the length of fin? Those deep section of fin don’t have much airflow anyway, might as well make the fins shallower?
It is not the thermal mass I want it for (although it does add a bit that will help lengthening the turbotime somewhat just because of that), but I want it for a large enough cross-section to help the heat getting through to the rest of the body of the flashlight.
(and with 200W power the fins are mostly cosmetic, they will do a certain job at lower powers)
And what will this “little darling” be powered with? Driver and batteries is the next question. I do like my 20700’s, I just got a few for $7.91 each from a U.S.A. store.
I would rather see 3-XHP70’s with 3 big deep reflectors at 8-9000lm Turbo like a huge BTU shocker and 5-70’s at 8-9000lms Turbo like a Ace beam X60.
You know they can’t push them that hard due to the poor efficiency.
The Imalent DX80 does 8 × 70.2 at 4,000 lumen each which is about 5A (6v). That’s about 32,000 lumen at 40 amps.
If this light had 8 × 70.2 at 8,500 lumen each that’s about 16A. Which is about 68,000 lumen at 128 amps.
You get double the output, but triple the power consumption.
Would we need to triple the batteries? Load it with 24 18650 cells? 6S4P.
The Imalent draws maybe 10A per cell on 8 cells.
This light would draw 32A per cell on 8 cells. So you’d need to at least run 16 cells to get it down to a more manageable 16A per cell. So at least 16 18650 cells. That’s a long battery tube.
I haven’t even mentioned the heat. You’d probably be triple at over 750 watts.
These are the reasons we are not seeing manufacturers push things so hard. The light would be so big and bulky and expensive to produce. It would not be practical at all and would therefore not sell well.
Kawiboy, I’m sure you know all this already, but I wanted to explain to all the newer folks the major hurdles involved.
—
Texas Ace Lumen Tube and JoshK Sphere calibrated with Maukka lights
Wow! Interesting.
What about the cooling?
I was thinking will it be mixing LED yesterday… what a Mr. hindsight I am.
Great! Flood and Throw at the same time.
A 30Klumen light must dissipate a huge amount of heat and care must be taken in getting it away from the leds. In the design pictured in the OP there is some nice deep fins (but only a fraction of the surface area needed to dissipate the close to 200W of heat, as all big-lumen lights this light needs to stepdown fast) but they neglected the most important thing with these power levels: spreading the heat over the body as fast as possible so that the heat can actually get to those fins (and further over the body). You need a heat highway and they made a bottleneck just under the leds. The result is unneeded fast heating up near the leds and shorter time in Turbo. In my view they can buy significant turbo-time if they sacrifice some finning near the led-shelf for body-material, like this:
link to djozz tests
Interesting light… not sure where exactly it’s going, but it’s going somewhere.
Maybe they’ve found the secret heat dissipation we’ve all been waiting for.
as it has a 2S/4P battery compartment the active heat path at the base of the shelf has at least a diameter of 45mm, this is well enough to conduct 1000W of heat, the fins are really thick, no need to widen the head as you show
the LEDs wont be sittingh at the edge of the light like the X80, head is bigger and less LEDs, so they more more to center
[Reviews] Miboxer C4-12, C2-4k+6k, C2, C4 / Astrolux K1, MF01, MF02, S42, K01, TI3A / BLF Q8 / Kalrus G35, XT11GT / Nitefox UT20 / Niwalker BK-FA30S / Sofirn SF36, SP35 / Imalent DM21TW / Wuben I333 / Ravemen PR1200 / CL06 lantern / Xanes headlamp
[Mods] Skilhunt H03 short / Klarus XT11GT, XT12GTS / Zebralight SC50+ / Imalent DM21TW / colorful anodisation
[Sale]
Drivers: overview of sizes and types
DD+AMC based drivers Anduril or Bistro OTSM 12-24mm, S42, 24-30mm L6, Q8, MF01(S), MT03, TN42
Anduril or Bistro 8A buck driver for 20-30mm, MF01/02/04, TN40/42, Lumintop GT, MT09R
UVC and UVC+UVA drivers
programming key
Remote switch tail DD board with FET
Aux boards:
Emisar D1, D1S, D4, D4S, D18, Lumintop FW3A, Fireflies ROT66, Astrolux MF01, Tail boards like S2+
This once sexy light just got a whole lot ugly.
How are you supposed to turn it on with an overhand or reverse grip with the light by your shoulder? This is how I use my L6, but this light has a weird finger cutout preventing this.
The ugly grenade style battery tube. The 4 ugly flat cutouts on the battery tube. The big, diagonal slices on the head. The screws holding the switch cover in place.
What happened to the sexy looks of the earlier MF01 and MF02? Did they hire the designer that Haikelite fired after he designed their MT03 and MT07? I see a lot of similarities.
I know they are trying to save weight by cutting a lot of material out, but geez, don’t turn it into a ugly monstrosity only a few will want to buy. So far these teaser pics make the Imalent it’s competing against look like a beauty queen.
IDK, I sure seem grumpy for some reason.
Texas Ace Lumen Tube and JoshK Sphere calibrated with Maukka lights
Click this to go to signature links. I'm still around, just not reading many new threads.
Can we have options of 8 xhp35 hi?
The Acebeam X65 has five of them and gives 12,000 lumens plus 423,000 candelas.
we will see...
all new deals are also posted here: deals.m4dm4x.com
if you do not find what you are looking for :
ask MARTIN@M4DM4X.COM - i will save you money!
Ya, imagine 16000 lumens 600kcd, continuously.
… sounds like a MF04
Let’s discuss how much is too much for kcd? Do we want to use binocular to see so far. The answer is yes, please make it shoot the farthest as possible.
When I play with 450kcd, I am worried I shine on people at distance unknowingly because I can’t see clearly anymore. So everyone please use our big toy responsibly. I am thinking to bring my binoculars to be safe.
I’m sorry that I do not I understand that calculation, especially why the battery configuration matters, I just see 200W of heat that is generated at the front part of the head, that either stays where it is or it goes somewhere else and thus keeps the head temperature a bit cooler for a bit longer time. And the little practical experience that I have with these power levels is that to funnel 200W to elsewhere it needs a large aluminium cross-section, a tube in the center with common wall thickness will not do that sufficiently.
(btw, always I’m all for keeping material thickness as low as possible, don’t like big chunks of material where it is not needed, but here I see a very good reason to add that material)
link to djozz tests
Just options is enough. Save on engineering cost. MCPCB changes only.
That would be great
I think for the approximately size of the tube which transfers the heat to the fins.
I see, so the idea is that that central shaft is close to massive then, with a small hole for the wires? (in that case I still think that a higher cross-section would matter))
link to djozz tests
Rather see 3-XHP70’s with 3 big deep reflectors at 8-9000lm Turbo like a huge BTU shocker and 5-70’s at 8-9000lms Turbo like a Ace beam X60. Not one for mixed emitter, multi-emitter lights. Rather have them all the same, but this is still very interesting…
KB1428 “Live Life WOT”
Which is a shame. You’d think some manufacturers would take notice after the Q8’s positive reception.
Take a look on current >100W lights like X80, MF01, they are barely bigger than a Q8 and handle the heat for more than a minute
The MF03 compared to them has a huge head and also way more surface to loose some of the heat, that will increase sustained output
[Reviews] Miboxer C4-12, C2-4k+6k, C2, C4 / Astrolux K1, MF01, MF02, S42, K01, TI3A / BLF Q8 / Kalrus G35, XT11GT / Nitefox UT20 / Niwalker BK-FA30S / Sofirn SF36, SP35 / Imalent DM21TW / Wuben I333 / Ravemen PR1200 / CL06 lantern / Xanes headlamp
[Mods] Skilhunt H03 short / Klarus XT11GT, XT12GTS / Zebralight SC50+ / Imalent DM21TW / colorful anodisation
[Sale]
Drivers: overview of sizes and types
DD+AMC based drivers Anduril or Bistro OTSM 12-24mm, S42, 24-30mm L6, Q8, MF01(S), MT03, TN42
Anduril or Bistro 8A buck driver for 20-30mm, MF01/02/04, TN40/42, Lumintop GT, MT09R
UVC and UVC+UVA drivers
programming key
Remote switch tail DD board with FET
Aux boards:
Emisar D1, D1S, D4, D4S, D18, Lumintop FW3A, Fireflies ROT66, Astrolux MF01, Tail boards like S2+
I agree. It doesn’t really make sense to have such a bottleneck directly under the heat source even though that (hopefully) thick tube is large. Trying to funnel 100% of the heat into 50% of the heat conducting area isn’t ideal.
Still looks like a very cool light though. Interested to see more details.
I’m sure that with its clunky build it will do much better than those tiny monsters, but with my simple suggested correction in the design that hardly costs extra (if any) I’m pretty sure it will still perform noticably better.
link to djozz tests
djozz, is it you are suggesting to have more thermal mass under leds mcpcb seating by reducing the length of fin? Those deep section of fin don’t have much airflow anyway, might as well make the fins shallower?
It is not the thermal mass I want it for (although it does add a bit that will help lengthening the turbotime somewhat just because of that), but I want it for a large enough cross-section to help the heat getting through to the rest of the body of the flashlight.
(and with 200W power the fins are mostly cosmetic, they will do a certain job at lower powers)
link to djozz tests
wolfdog1226. Are you four?
Solitude breeds contemplation which creates clarity.
Environment molds a person. Perseverance changes them.
WOLFDOG
And what will this “little darling” be powered with? Driver and batteries is the next question. I do like my 20700’s, I just got a few for $7.91 each from a U.S.A. store.
Awesome !
- George
My Reviews : KDlight C8 / ThruNite Archer 1A V3 / Thorfire C8s / ThruNite TN12 (2016) / Utorch UT01 / Utorch UT02 / Jetbeam WL-S2 (xp-l) / ThruNite TC12 V2 / Massdrop Brass AAA / Manker LAD / Lumintop SD26 / ThruNite Mini TN30 (3x xm-l2) / Qualilite D81 / Nitecore MH20GT / Odepro TM30 / Klarus XT30R / Nitecore NU20 CRI / Ultrafire XM-L2 / Foursevens Mini MK II / Manker E02 / Manker E14 II / Teekland Flashlights / Lumintop Elfin / Thorfire S70S / ThruNite Neutron 2C / Jaxman M8 / KDLITKER C8.2 / Zanflare F1 / Nitecore Concept 1 / Emisar D4 / Astrolux MF-01 / ThruNite TC10 V3 / Amutorch JM70 (xpl hi)
You know they can’t push them that hard due to the poor efficiency.
The Imalent DX80 does 8 × 70.2 at 4,000 lumen each which is about 5A (6v). That’s about 32,000 lumen at 40 amps.
If this light had 8 × 70.2 at 8,500 lumen each that’s about 16A. Which is about 68,000 lumen at 128 amps.
You get double the output, but triple the power consumption.
Would we need to triple the batteries? Load it with 24 18650 cells? 6S4P.
The Imalent draws maybe 10A per cell on 8 cells.
This light would draw 32A per cell on 8 cells. So you’d need to at least run 16 cells to get it down to a more manageable 16A per cell. So at least 16 18650 cells. That’s a long battery tube.
I haven’t even mentioned the heat. You’d probably be triple at over 750 watts.
These are the reasons we are not seeing manufacturers push things so hard. The light would be so big and bulky and expensive to produce. It would not be practical at all and would therefore not sell well.
Kawiboy, I’m sure you know all this already, but I wanted to explain to all the newer folks the major hurdles involved.
Texas Ace Lumen Tube and JoshK Sphere calibrated with Maukka lights
Click this to go to signature links. I'm still around, just not reading many new threads.
Pages