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

Excellent. I’m planning an E17a RGBA build with a floody optic (either S2+ and Kaidomain driver or Skilhunt H03RC hosts). The E17a board should help reduce beam weirdness.

I would also like to know if a modified version to fit Armytek headlamps will be offered again.

Compared to older copper boards it has a much better dielectric layer.

Compared to alu boards:

  • worse dielectric (but still good)
  • better base board
  • slightly higher price (though that may be due to the alu one being phased out)

For some lights I think copper would be better but for others alu still seems better.

So how does max amperage compare for the 17 and the 21 board? It has become a bit overwhelming.

Thanks Johnkey, I borrow your pic here…

The copper board works unexpectedly way better than predicted. From many tests performed in BLF, we knew the tighter the LED pitch the hotter it gets. Not only because the copper trace surface area needed to shed the heat from the LED base reduced, but also due to the “photon cross talk” as mentioned by Nichia in their application notes. The LED takes and recycle the photon from the neighboring LEDs and the stored photon, instead escaping as light flux, trapped and heats the phosphor layer. The same phenomenon known as back scatter lights in undeveloped light guide.

Previous 16mm x 1,5mm nanoceramic aluminum PCB (VR16SP4) maxed out at 11,2A. And that was with LED pitch 0,4mm. The other 21mm x 2mm (0,25mm LED pitch) nanoceramic PCB (VR21SP4) peak output maxed at approximately same 11A but it’s thicker and larger in diameter. New copper based VR16SP4 v.2 with 16mm x 1,5mm (0,2mm LED pitch) maxed at 11A! I underestimated it, and expected no more than 8A. At first I couldn’t believe it, because VR16SP4 v.2 also has reduced copper trace area for mounting clearance. And then, it uses “standard” IMS technology with more than double (50µm) the thickness of the nanoceramic MPCB NC MCPCB (20µm). The thinner the dielectric layer the faster the heat moves away from the LED base to the heatsink.

Below you can see the big penalty in output just by closing the gap down to 0,1mm in VR16SP4m. With wider LED pitch, quadtrix E17A should be able to reach at least 7A instead of 5,75A. But this reduction in output means wider optics compatibility and more importantly, more control over beam shapes. With VR16SP4 v.2 you can’t go too narrow or there will be “donut” hole in the middle of the beam. And OP/textured reflector or microlens (honeycomb/peebled/textured) TIR has to be used for narrower optics. VR16SP4m can use lighter texture OP reflector or finer microlens surface TIR. It also produce higher intensity beam (brighter hot spot).

Same 1000mA total input. Note how E17A have much higher luminance for farther throw

Note:
Due to complication in maintaining relatively constant and cool MCPCB temperature using total loss water cooling, clamping jig, etc… I could not directly measure the output. Ouput measured once at 100mA briefly to prevent heating the LED and the rest of the output numbers derived using the plotted lux measurements (TASI 632A). Measurement done in my DIY light box using Maukka’s calibrated lights.

[Clemence]

Didn't see that coming...

This is even better than i was thinking it could be!

Clemence, thanks for all this test data. It definitely provides confidence in your boards.

Will you be offering those optics through your store, or can you share the source (especially for the microlens version)?

Also, will you be offering either of the VR16SP4 boards trimmed to fit in Armytek’s as you have in the past? Thanks!

Indeed.
Now…any news about 3x3 boards? :wink:

Savage....

I think I’ll skip that for this…

[Clemence]

Clemence, you caught the wave...

Interesting…but too large for the 20.6 mm diameter light that waits for it. :wink:
ADDED: though without the corner LEDs the following 12 would have just 0.42 mm larger diameter than 9….
ADDED: About 10-12A when driven off 16340? A hottie.

Too sleepy to continue, will post the beam shots tomorrow…

[Clemence]

^ That looks like exactly what I’m planning on doing: RGBA quadtrix (in an S2+). :nerd_face:

I’m hoping to find a better 4-channel driver than the single mode per channel model that kaidomain sells, but even if not, I will enjoy experimenting with these.

Clemence, is that 4x4 still going to be 35mm? If so, it won’t be able to fit in any flashlights :weary:

That 4x4 E21A requires big 13mm LES class COB optic to work properly. With smaller than 35mm (ideally 50mm) the wiring will interfere and creates artifacts unless special flat wires which is not common is used. With 30mm diameter it’s uses are even more limited. And another reason is the heat spreading factor which is a very important factor for non isolated thermal pads in E21A. Larger the diameter is better. Above thermal simulation shows that to get into BLF output range (8500 lumens in R9080 or 12.000lumens in R70), 0,21mm (6 oz) thick copper trace is needed (with current best IMS available)

[Clemence]

Without corners it has LES not much bigger than XHP70.2…

Yes I know, and it’s designed to work with 4 - 16 LED

[Clemence]

BTW a 21 emitter config like that

 ***
*****
*****
*****
 ***

would have merely 0.4 mm (3.2%) larger LES diameter than than a 16-up.

E17A Color mixing (Red, Green, Blue, Amber)

White matte PVC LED holder only

20mm Plastic aspheric, 15mm focal length

20mm 10° polished surface, plain TIR lens

20mm 15° frosted surface, plain TIR lens

20mm 25° microlensed surface, convex center TIR lens

20mm 30° frosted surface, convex center TIR lens

20mm 40° microlensed surface, convex center TIR lens

20mm 60° microlensed surface, convex center TIR lens

20mm 90° frosted surface, plain TIR lens

20mm 110° microlensed surface, convex center TIR lens

[Clemence]

A best color mixing are produced with elliptical TIR and VR16S1+2 different CCTs parallel led. I tested sm303+sm653 may be 95% dissolves on both, only minor singularities on edged. Non-elliptical TIR does performing mirred of source.