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

We dont know the real correction factor… i dont have an integration tested light to calibrate… so jason, my 4” tube correction factor would estimate around .84… without plastic! Lol.

Just curious, what are you basing that estimate on??

IIRC that is the highest correction factor mentioned yet by anyone, seems like TA mentioned a correction factor of around .70 would get these in the ballpark until he could get a more correct one worked out & established from known light sources.

Why—He’ll say you did something wrong or not what you are suppose to———————————————— :person_facepalming:

Thrunite tc20… like i said, i need a real light to calibrate… which light do guys recommend to do the calibration ?

As now i only have fenix tk15 rated 1000 lumen. This light could be 1004 lumen, 1050 lumen, 1090 lumen, anywhere from 1000-1096 lumen… we are not suppose to be using stock light to calibrate…

Personally, I do not have a light with verifiable tested lumen output. So anything I did would just be a shot in the dark… a crapshoot so to speak.

So, therefore I will just wait until the verifiable correction factor data is worked out by TA and/or the guys who actually have verifiable lights to test.

Although after reading the PFlexPro site yesterday, I may spring for one of those tested & verifiable lights in the not to distant future. :wink:

Honestly until I am able to get some calibrated lights for more exact numbers (or if someone else has some like that), I would not really worry about getting it exact.

Just post the as-is numbers and maybe some numbers with whatever method you found got them in the right ballpark.

All I am looking for now is the average correction factor among the spheres at this point. So far it is looking well within my goal tolerance levels but more data is always good.

You are welcome to adjust your sphere however you want and to whatever you want for now. Once I figure out a fix then everyone can apply it and compare readings evenly (well, within ~10-15% or so, with everything factored in).

I will use fenix tk15 to calibrate temporary… i got 1430 lumen. Fenix got 1000 lumen… so my correction factor will be .70

Fenix is legit in their lumen rating…

My 4” lumen tube correction factor is .70. :student:

You need more faith in Newlumen.

I got 2877 lumen @30 seconds for the lumintop odf30… no plastic bag, and .70 factor has been counted.

So that is with or without the correct factor being applied? I assume that is after just not sure what the “counted” means in this context.

Very good, it looks like they are averaging out very good sphere to sphere. That is the hardest part by far so I am very pleased with those results thus far.

Okay, so the raw number was 4111 I think. I remeasured mine at 30 secs with a Liitokala and got 4490 x .70 = 3143 so we are very close. Within 10, which is well within Cree’s 14 tolerance.

Are you using a protected battery? I’m not sure if that will effect a boost driver, but it might. Our numbers might be even closer if we used the same battery.

Got to remember that not only do you have the 14” tolerances of the LED to factor in but also the 1% (resistors are usually 1) to 20 (capacitors, coils and other such components range from 10% to 20%) tolerances of the components on the drivers.

On top of that and many of those tolerances compound on top of each other. Particularly with buck and boost drivers as they have a lot of components that factor into the final output.

This is why using random lights off the assembly line is so inconsistent and hard to calibrate a sphere with.

Here are some fresh numbers from most of my lights. All CW.

Some interesting notes are that I lost 23% output on the X2R by switching the reflector to a 60° TIR lens. So to go from my headlamp measurements, which both use the same 60° lens, I need to add 30% which I did at the bottom.

The new Boruit 5K headlamp is kicking some butt. It’s rated at 5000 lumen, but that is Chinese lumen so completely unbelievable. I think the predecessor RJ02 was only about 300 or so lumen, but this one is an estimated 650 lumen. Not bad for a no name emitter.

Most of my lights match up to the JoshK Sphere by the same general percentage. The C8 was off quite a bit. I wonder if it’s due to the narrow beam.

The L5 and L6 are my custom lights which is why they are reading very high.

Thanks you the info… you should test fenix lights… they have a higher lumen standard…

I Do —————-NewLumen is a Good Dude

What does “lumen standard” mean?
Do you mean it’s more accurate to the rated output?

I never pay attention to rated output. I tend to go by emitter type, driver type and amp draw on battery. Then I compare it with emitter tests done by testers such as koef3, djozz, match and others. I have most of these charts in my head.

Then I calculate estimated driver, reflector and lens losses. Battery type can also play a factor. Anyway, I can pretty much tell you what it should be outputting and whether it’s more or less than the rated output. It’s not exact, but not bad for a back of the envelope calculation. Flashlight manufacturers can’t bend the rules of physics. Lol

The general rule of thumb is that most lights are below their rated output.

I never paid much attention to Fenix as they always cost a lot more than similar lights from other manufacturers.

Yea Randy at PflexPro haven’t been very responsive to emails in the last two months. He used to reply to every email right away. I hope it’s just because he’s taking a long vacation temporarily.

Trust me. If thrunite, acebeam, lumintop, olight use the fenix integration sphere, their number will be much lower…