Nichia 219BT-V1, R9080 Warm White, 2700K is available

3623 posts / 0 new
Last post
ToyKeeper
ToyKeeper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 16 hours 35 min ago
Joined: 01/12/2013 - 14:40
Posts: 10759
Location: (469219) 2016 HO3

pol77 wrote:
E21A 3500K D4V2 Ti …

I have done the temperature configuration and set the light to step down at 60C. The head gets hot but I can hold the body comfortably and it allows for longer time on turbo, which is nice. Is there a possibility this may damage the driver or emitters? What is the highest safe setting?

I don’t have one so I don’t know what the highest safe setting is… but E21A does not use a direct thermal path because the LEDs don’t support it. So it’s generally more sensitive to heat than other LEDs. This is why the power is limited to 5A or less on that model.

At a guess, it’s probably okay… but personally I would keep it set to a lower limit.

ToyKeeper
ToyKeeper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 16 hours 35 min ago
Joined: 01/12/2013 - 14:40
Posts: 10759
Location: (469219) 2016 HO3
SKV89 wrote:
… lights without usb-c are not giftable.

Conversely, lights which are too dangerous to gift to regular folks… probably shouldn’t have USB charging built in. It might make them seem gift-able.

pol77
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 58 min ago
Joined: 02/21/2019 - 07:54
Posts: 407
Location: London

ToyKeeper wrote:
At a guess, it's probably okay... but personally I would keep it set to a lower limit.

 

Thanks for the reply! I know it is personal preference, but I would be very interested to know what limit you would prefer to set for D4V2 Ti with:

  1. E21A (5A driver)
  2. Nichia 219b (modded to, from 219c, normal, old driver)
  3. XP-L HI (normal, old driver)

Also, some interesting observations:

  1. The secondaried and switch LEDs seem quite a bit less bright on low, which is very good, for nightstand duty
  2. When setting the floor to 1/150 the light will come on every time without a problem, but with a delay. I do not mind that. The problem is that if I go to Turbo from there by double click and then double click to go back from turbo to floor of 1/150, the LEDs go off, while the light still think it is on. A floor of 2/150 acts the same. 3/150 works fine. Toykeeper, is it possible to correct the turbo --> 1/150 issue (LEDs going off) via firmware? If so, I do not mind the delay on the initial turn on, as I like the low moonlight mode quite a lot.
ToyKeeper
ToyKeeper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 16 hours 35 min ago
Joined: 01/12/2013 - 14:40
Posts: 10759
Location: (469219) 2016 HO3
pol77 wrote:
is it possible to correct the turbo —> 1/150 issue (LEDs going off) via firmware?

Not really. It’s a side effect of how the regulator chip works. Technically, 1/150 and 2/150 shouldn’t produce any light at all, because they have the regulator chip set to a level of zero. But it usually allows a small amount of power to pass through even at “zero”, so it’s included as an option because it can provide a nice moon mode.

However, when coming down from a high level to “zero”, it generally overshoots the usual brightness and hits the actual floor… and then slowly settles back to where it should be. There isn’t really a way to fix this in firmware, that I’m aware of. When it doesn’t turn on at a zero level, the chip is operating correctly. If anything in this setup is a bug, it’s that the moon level works at all… because technically, it shouldn’t.

To truly fix it, the driver would need another power channel for the low modes. Like, if the main chip runs at 5 A, the low-mode chip could be like… 80 mA, or about 1/64th as much power. I’m hoping there will be a driver like this eventually, because it would make better low modes, and it would greatly increase the resolution available for brightness.

But that doesn’t exist yet. For now, it’s limited to about 2 lm per step.

pol77
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 58 min ago
Joined: 02/21/2019 - 07:54
Posts: 407
Location: London
ToyKeeper wrote:
pol77 wrote:
is it possible to correct the turbo —> 1/150 issue (LEDs going off) via firmware?

Not really. It’s a side effect of how the regulator chip works. Technically, 1/150 and 2/150 shouldn’t produce any light at all, because they have the regulator chip set to a level of zero. But it usually allows a small amount of power to pass through even at “zero”, so it’s included as an option because it can provide a nice moon mode.

However, when coming down from a high level to “zero”, it generally overshoots the usual brightness and hits the actual floor… and then slowly settles back to where it should be. There isn’t really a way to fix this in firmware, that I’m aware of. When it doesn’t turn on at a zero level, the chip is operating correctly. If anything in this setup is a bug, it’s that the moon level works at all… because technically, it shouldn’t.

To truly fix it, the driver would need another power channel for the low modes. Like, if the main chip runs at 5 A, the low-mode chip could be like… 80 mA, or about 1/64th as much power. I’m hoping there will be a driver like this eventually, because it would make better low modes, and it would greatly increase the resolution available for brightness.

But that doesn’t exist yet. For now, it’s limited to about 2 lm per step.

That makes sense. The about 2lm low mode of 3/150 is not bad, but the 1/150 is so much better that I am torn and just switched back to it, despite the turbo —> 1/150 issue. I am sure I will move back and forth between them for a while, until I settle.

A way this could be fixed in firmware, I think, is when the floor is set at 1/150 or 2/150 and turbo has been activated from that level, when double clicking from turbo to go back, that could be done in two steps. Step one: turbo —> 3/150, step two: 3/150 to 1/150 (or 2/150). That would solve the problem of turbo to floor.

I cannot think of a way to solve the issue of slow turn on, and it is a bit strange having to let go of the button before the light goes on, for the light to go on at 1/150 and not start ramping before I even see any light, but that is not a huge issue. Unless there is another special check in the firmware and when the light turns on at 1/150, the start of ramping is purposefully delayed.

I think those two checks in the firmware, if they are possible and you can be bothered to implement them, would solve the 1/150 and 2/150 issues and make the modes quite usable.

Any suggestions regarding temperature settings, as asked above?

westermac
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 6 days ago
Joined: 08/19/2019 - 21:14
Posts: 15
Location: Wisconsin

Does anyone else’s KR4 exhibit flickering at the default low (3/150) setting? It’s not as pronounced as the flickering that happens at 1/150 and 2/150 (though I understand those are officially below spec) but it is still noticeable, especially when the light is stationary for ceiling bounce, etc.

Edit: Flicker is visible from 1/150-6/150

trakcon
trakcon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 43 min ago
Joined: 01/23/2019 - 15:50
Posts: 441

westermac wrote:
Does anyone else’s KR4 exhibit flickering at the default low (3/150) setting? It’s not as pronounced as the flickering that happens at 1/150 and 2/150 (though I understand those are officially below spec) but it is still noticeable, especially when the light is stationary for ceiling bounce, etc.

Edit: Flicker is visible from 1/150-6/150

I’ve noticed that, too. I figured it was just a quirk of this driver, though it is a little frustrating. I rarely leave my lights stationary, so I can kind of pretend it isn’t there. I would be interested in TK’s or Hank’s thoughts on this, though.

ToyKeeper
ToyKeeper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 16 hours 35 min ago
Joined: 01/12/2013 - 14:40
Posts: 10759
Location: (469219) 2016 HO3
trakcon wrote:
westermac wrote:
KR4 … flickering at … 3/150

I would be interested in TK’s or Hank’s thoughts on this

Sorry, I don’t have anything helpful to add. I only have a late prototype, and it doesn’t flicker at 3/150.

At 1/150 and 2/150 it’s expected to flicker a bit, but at 3/150 or above I haven’t seen it happen. It might be worth cleaning the contacts though, since dirty connections can cause flickering on almost any light.

shirnask
shirnask's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 22 min ago
Joined: 03/21/2016 - 23:58
Posts: 1357
Location: Louisiana

I have three – no flicker

westermac
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 6 days ago
Joined: 08/19/2019 - 21:14
Posts: 15
Location: Wisconsin
ToyKeeper wrote:
It might be worth cleaning the contacts though, since dirty connections can cause flickering on almost any light.

I’ll try that, thank you for the suggestion.

It may be worth mentioning that mine is the E21A version; not sure if different emitters can effect how the driver behaves.

Hikelite
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 07/13/2011 - 16:18
Posts: 3888
Location: Honeyland

contactcr wrote:
Scallywag wrote:
contactcr wrote:

If 1200 lumens is 3.5-4A I think you can figure out why it cant do 3000 lumens with a 7.5A driver Smile


But you see, that’s each emitter at about 1A. They’re going to be more efficient at 7.5A/16 emitters ~ 0.57A per emitter.

From TA’s test, four emitters at 2A (0.5A per emitter) produced 753 lumens. That’s 188 lumens per emitter, which gives us 3008 lumens for 16 emitters.
Same test, 3.5A to four emitters, gives us 1205 lumens. If we maintained that power per emitter ratio (.875A), we’d get 8 or 9 emitters, and probably around 2600 lumens.

Fair enough.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CERSuF2JvYtjsoyPh-wEZ0dG6fSI-FDC...

Maukka test, lets call it E21A 4500K – 163lm (@ 0.5A) * 16 = 2,608 lm

Actual draw is 0.47A so even less (-5%), then subtract for lens (-2%) and light lost to side of bezel (-5%), less still. Conservative <2300lm

Point remains.

Do you know what bins are tested in that spreadsheet, there is no mention, all of the CCTs come in 3 luminous flux bins, for example D180, D200, D220.

You can easily use Nichia datasheets basically, at least that is what I have done, and could easily figure out it cannot be anywhere over 2500lm using D220 (220lm-240lm) bin.
Usually datasheets are ignored even if they can prove very useful, especially for the E21 they are pretty good.

The rating is for 700mA . Then you can see what multiplier to use for that 700mA with the graph blow.
Multiple that 220lm by 0.65x and get a relative 143lm * 16pcs = 2288lm
Or the max rage of 240lm by 0.65x and get 156lm *16pcs = 2496lm

contactcr
Offline
Last seen: 9 hours 21 min ago
Joined: 05/19/2017 - 18:52
Posts: 3644
Location: US

D220 for that one. It’s from the ones on virence.com most are 200,220,240

Hikelite
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 07/13/2011 - 16:18
Posts: 3888
Location: Honeyland
contactcr wrote:
D220 for that one. It’s from the ones on virence.com most are 200,220,240

So D220 for the 4500K?
That is why I was calculating with D220 ( min 220lm and max 240lm at 700mA) for a 4500K.

5000K is D240 at IOS, so with that the results are 9% higher (increase from min 220lm to min 240lm at 700mA) for the minimum and 8.33% higher for the maximum (increase from max 240lm to max 260lm at 700mA)

iamlucky13
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 27 min ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 09:18
Posts: 1022
Location: USA

ToyKeeper wrote:
To truly fix it, the driver would need another power channel for the low modes. Like, if the main chip runs at 5 A, the low-mode chip could be like… 80 mA, or about 1/64th as much power. I’m hoping there will be a driver like this eventually, because it would make better low modes, and it would greatly increase the resolution available for brightness.

But that doesn’t exist yet. For now, it’s limited to about 2 lm per step.

It sounds to me like 1×7135 + 5A CC (+ FET?) driver might be a means to achieve this.

I don’t think Loneoceans’ lume1 inductor would fit in the shallow driver cavity of the D4, nor do I know how low that driver can go, but the buck-boost + FET approach seems appealing, too.

ToyKeeper
ToyKeeper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 16 hours 35 min ago
Joined: 01/12/2013 - 14:40
Posts: 10759
Location: (469219) 2016 HO3
iamlucky13 wrote:
ToyKeeper wrote:
To truly fix it, the driver would need another power channel for the low modes. Like, if the main chip runs at 5 A, the low-mode chip could be like… 80 mA, or about 1/64th as much power.

It sounds to me like 1×7135 + 5A CC (+ FET?) driver might be a means to achieve this.

A 7135 chip does 350 mA. To make this work well, it would probably need to be significantly smaller… and ideally a nice power-of-two ratio to the higher power channel, like 5A * 1/64 = 78.125 mA.

What we have now:

  • 5A = ~2000 lm
  • 2000 lm / 256 = 7.8 lm resolution with 8-bit PWM
  • 2000 lm / 1024 = 1.95 lm resolution with 10-bit PWM

It uses 10-bit PWM, or 1.95 lm per step. But 1.95 lm is pretty coarse resolution at the bottom end of the ramp… so the idea is to add a second power channel to fix that. It’d make better moon levels, and make the bottom of the ramp smoother instead of having visible steps.

If the second channel used a 7135 chip, it would effectively be an upgrade from 10 bits to ~11.5 bits. It’s not nothing, but it’s not a big upgrade. The effective resolution ends up at about 0.6 lm per step. And the math gets really awkward since it’s not very close to a power of two ratio between the power channels.

So I’m hoping for something smaller with a cleaner ratio.

If the second channel has a power-of-two ratio to the main channel, we can treat it like it’s just extra resolution on the main channel. Like, let’s say we run the main channel in 8-bit mode. It then has 256 steps, and each step is 7.8 lm. Then add a second channel with a 1/64th ratio. Now instead of 8 bits, we basically have 14 bits… and each step is 0.12 lm.

Or it could even go as far as 16 bits… 5A for the main channel and 20mA for the lower channel. This gives 16-bit resolution where each step is 0.03 lm. And it would still run at 16 kHz so there wouldn’t be any visible PWM.

Basically, if 7135 chips or other linear regulators come in a 20mA variety, that would probably be about right.

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 5 hours ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 4338
Location: US

Output tested using Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights at 2 seconds. Light quality measured using Sekonic C-800-U. The E21A 4500K is just as rosy as the 219B sw45K but with cooler tint. It is a very beautiful tint but I think mixing it with 8x4500K with 8x3500K will result in somewhere near 4300K, which would be more idea. Also the E21A 4500k does not reach 9080. 

The E21A 2200K is much rosier than I expected. The 2200K batch that Clemence had was on the BBL. This batch is nicer IMO and exceeded my expectations. Because of the negative duv, it doesn't take long for your eyes to adapt because it doesn't look very yellow. The 2200K tint is similar to a pinkish sunset whereas the E21A 2000K that Clemence sells look like real candle light. 

Also pay attention to how much output the bezel kills on the mule lights. Even the color of the bezel (stainless steel vs dark gray) makes a big difference in output. I think Hank should use white mcpcb for the mules to reflect as much light as possible to minimize output loss.

The D4v2 TI with the 16x E21A 2200K is the only light with a loud electronic whining noise on turbo and it smokes as if there's a fire burning. At first I thought it might be moisture that its burning but the smoke doesn't stop and it sure doesn't smell like water. I wonder what is the cause. I don't get this on the KR4 16x E21A 4500K mule or any of the other Hank lights. Anyone have this experience?

D4v2TI 16x E21A Mule Warm White Switch (Aux Light)   0 lumens 2370K 0.0079 DUV 68.4 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.19 -12.2 R9 20.5 R12 72 Rf 90 Rg Molicel P26A
D4v2TI 16x E21A 2200K Mule 5A Regulated w/ DD Turbo no bezel Turbo 3,612 lumens 2370K -0.0054 DUV 89.6 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.24 49.3 R9 92.4 R12 87 Rf 102 Rg Molicel P26A
D4v2TI 16x E21A 2200K Mule 5A Regulated w/ DD Turbo Turbo 2,991 lumens 2319K -0.0050 DUV 89.8 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.23 49.3 R9 93.0 R12 87 Rf 103 Rg Molicel P26A
D4v2TI 16x E21A 2200K Mule 5A Regulated w/ DD Turbo Top of Ramp 1,200 lumens 2234K -0.0034 DUV 92.2 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.20 59.3 R9 92.7 R12 90 Rf 103 Rg Molicel P26A
D4v2TI 16x E21A 2200K Mule 5A Regulated w/ DD Turbo lowest mode 4 lumens 2148K -0.0026 DUV 92.6 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.17 62.2 R9 88.8 R12 91 Rf 101 Rg Molicel P26A
KR4 16x E21A 4500K Mule 7.5A Regulated w/ DD Turbo No Bezel Turbo 4,733 lumens 5218K -0.0137 DUV 91.5 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 69.9 R9 84.0 R12 90 Rf 106 Rg Molicel P26A
KR4 16x E21A 4500K Mule 7.5A Regulated w/ DD Turbo SS Bezel Turbo 3,879 lumens 5075K -0.0125 DUV 92.2 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 73.6 R9 84.4 R12 90 Rf 106 Rg Molicel P26A
KR4 16x E21A 4500K Mule 7.5A Regulated w/ DD Turbo Gray Bezel Turbo 3,578 lumens 5120K -0.0126 DUV 92.2 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 73.8 R9 84.3 R12 90 Rf 106 Rg Molicel P26A
KR4 16x E21A 4500K Mule 7.5A Regulated w/ DD Turbo SS Bezel Top of Ramp 1,578 lumens 4922K -0.0086 DUV 94.4 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 75.0 R9 77.3 R12 91 Rf 105 Rg Molicel P26A
KR4 16x E21A 4500K Mule 7.5A Regulated w/ DD Turbo Gray Bezel Top of Ramp 1,477 lumens                 Molicel P26A
KR4 16x E21A 4500K Mule 7.5A Regulated w/ DD Turbo SS Bezel lowest mode 5 lumens 4692K -0.0055 DUV 94.7 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 73.3 R9 74.2 R12 91 Rf 102 Rg Molicel P26A
KR4 4x XP-L HI 4000K 5D Turbo 3,388 lumens 4381K -0.0049 DUV 72.8 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 -12.7 R9 47.3 R12 67 Rf 99 Rg Molicel P26A
KR4 4x XP-L HI 4000K 5D Top of Ramp 1,621 lumens 4313K -0.0039 DUV 72.5 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 -14.6 R9 46.7 R12 67 Rf 99 Rg Molicel P26A
KR4 4x XP-L HI 4000K 5D lowest mode 7 lumens 4047K 0.0007 DUV 73.7 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 -15.9 R9 44.9 R12 71 Rf 98 Rg Molicel P26A
KR4 4x E21A 3500K Turbo 1,135 lumens 3903K -0.0070 DUV 96.6 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.89 92.0 R9 85.0 R12 94 Rf 103 Rg Molicel P26A
KR4 4x E21A 3500K Top of Ramp 978 lumens 3748K -0.0054 DUV 96.6 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.82 92.5 R9 86.3 R12 94 Rf 104 Rg Molicel P26A
KR4 4x E21A 3500K lowest mode 7 lumens 3637K -0.0010 DUV 95.8 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.75 82.3 R9 81.9 R12 93 Rf 101 Rg Molicel P26A
D4v2 SST-20 Red LED Turbo 1,175 lumens                 Molicel P26A
D4v2 SST-20 Red LED Top of Ramp 545 lumens                 Molicel P26A
KR1 W2 Turbo 1,174 lumens 8831K -0.0141 DUV 68.7 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 10.7 R9 42.1 R12 56 Rf 100 Rg Molicel P26A
KR1 W2 Top of Ramp 975 lumens 8118K -0.0113 DUV 67.3 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 -0.1 R9 40.6 R12 56 Rf 99 Rg Molicel P26A
KR1 W2 lowest mode 10 lumens 6040K -0.0020 DUV 67.8 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 1.00 -21.7 R9 37.1 R12 61 Rf 97 Rg Molicel P26A
D4v2 SST-20 2x4000K + 2x2700K Turbo 1,940 lumens 3107K -0.0050 DUV 96.6 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.44 81.7 R9 91.8 R12 94 Rf 102 Rg Molicel P26A
D4v2 SST-20 2x4000K + 2x2700K Top of Ramp 1,108 lumens 3306K -0.0017 DUV 97.1 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.57 91.1 R9 87.9 R12 94 Rf 103 Rg Molicel P26A
D4v2 SST-20 2x4000K + 2x2700K lowest mode 3 lumens 3486K -0.0015 DUV 97.0 CRI Blue light relative amplitude 0.72 95.4 R9 80.1 R12 91 Rf 99 Rg Molicel P26A
djozz
djozz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 29 min ago
Joined: 09/07/2012 - 17:04
Posts: 17993
Location: Amsterdam

Quote:
Basically, if 7135 chips or other linear regulators come in a 20mA variety, that would probably be about right.

(disclaimer: I do not know electronics well so I could be wrong)
A very simple 20mA channel could be no more than a resistor inline with battery and led, switched by a tiny FET. The current (and so the light output levels) would not be truly constant but vary somewhat with battery voltage but maybe that is not such a big deal.
thefreeman
thefreeman's picture
Offline
Last seen: 27 min 9 sec ago
Joined: 01/06/2020 - 09:56
Posts: 871
Location: France
SKV89 wrote:
Output tested using Texas Ace Lumen Tube calibrated with Maukka lights at 2 seconds

Thanks for all these measurements. The output loss due to the bezel is significant, I did find it weird that the LEDs were packed to the edge of the MCPCB , I think they should be centered with the wires and screws on the edge instead.

The color measurements are not integrated but at the center of the beam right ? E21As do have quite a bit of tint and CCT shift so that explains the low duv and higher CCT.

lazerEagle
lazerEagle's picture
Offline
Last seen: 22 min 36 sec ago
Joined: 05/20/2020 - 21:11
Posts: 229
Location: Australia

@SKV89 Interesting data thanks. RE: smoke my guess would be flux? Be careful not to burn out those puppies!

- the best way to predict the future is to create it -

contactcr
Offline
Last seen: 9 hours 21 min ago
Joined: 05/19/2017 - 18:52
Posts: 3644
Location: US

KR4 4x E21A 3500K
D4v2 SST-20 2×4000K + 2×2700K

SST-20 mix seems superior, surprising. Less tint shift, higher output, r9 vs r12 break even. More optics choices too.

ToyKeeper
ToyKeeper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 16 hours 35 min ago
Joined: 01/12/2013 - 14:40
Posts: 10759
Location: (469219) 2016 HO3
djozz wrote:
Quote:
Basically, if 7135 chips or other linear regulators come in a 20mA variety, that would probably be about right.

(disclaimer: I do not know electronics well so I could be wrong)

A very simple 20mA channel could be no more than a resistor inline with battery and led, switched by a tiny FET. The current (and so the light output levels) would not be truly constant but vary somewhat with battery voltage but maybe that is not such a big deal.

You’re not wrong. That is one way to do it… and it’s basically how the aux LEDs work. But as noted, the output is not constant; it varies with battery voltage. That’s not really an issue for aux LEDs, but it’s kind of a problem for the main LEDs.

I hope this image explains the idea, and why I want the 20mA channel to be regulated instead of just a resistor. It’s meant to smooth out the ramp between steps, but the ramp will only be smooth if the extra channel has a consistent slope.

Basically, the point is to make it look like the “4.0V” bottom center image… no matter what voltage the battery is.

It’s a different method than how FET+7135 or FET+5A works. With those, the lower power channel ramps up to full power and then stays on while the higher power channel ramps on top. But I’m thinking of doing a totally different method where the lowest power channel does miniature ramps between each step of the higher power channel.

I’m not sure if it’s a good idea, because it’s more difficult to do correctly… but it sure would be nice to have a truly smooth and stable ramp all the way down to firefly levels.

Also not sure if I should suggest it, because it means I’d have to rewrite a bunch of code. Would be nice once it’s done though.

Frostcream
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 4 days ago
Joined: 05/26/2020 - 16:26
Posts: 126

On a lighthearted note, I just placed an order for a KR4 Ti. E21A mule, 2200k.

I can hardly wait!

I’m now up to
4 D4V2 Ti (various flavors)
2 D4V2 Brass (XPL-Hi V3 & E21A)
2 KR1 (cyan, XPL-Hi V3 & Osram W2
3 KR4 (black, cyan and Ti, all E21a)
1 D18 (black, SST-20 4000k)

Damn Hank! Great products.

iamlucky13
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 27 min ago
Joined: 06/22/2018 - 09:18
Posts: 1022
Location: USA
ToyKeeper wrote:
iamlucky13 wrote:
ToyKeeper wrote:
To truly fix it, the driver would need another power channel for the low modes. Like, if the main chip runs at 5 A, the low-mode chip could be like… 80 mA, or about 1/64th as much power.

It sounds to me like 1×7135 + 5A CC (+ FET?) driver might be a means to achieve this.

A 7135 chip does 350 mA. To make this work well, it would probably need to be significantly smaller… and ideally a nice power-of-two ratio to the higher power channel, like 5A * 1/64 = 78.125 mA.

What we have now:

  • 5A = ~2000 lm
  • 2000 lm / 256 = 7.8 lm resolution with 8-bit PWM
  • 2000 lm / 1024 = 1.95 lm resolution with 10-bit PWM

It uses 10-bit PWM, or 1.95 lm per step. But 1.95 lm is pretty coarse resolution at the bottom end of the ramp… so the idea is to add a second power channel to fix that. It’d make better moon levels, and make the bottom of the ramp smoother instead of having visible steps.

If the second channel used a 7135 chip, it would effectively be an upgrade from 10 bits to ~11.5 bits. It’s not nothing, but it’s not a big upgrade. The effective resolution ends up at about 0.6 lm per step. And the math gets really awkward since it’s not very close to a power of two ratio between the power channels.

So I’m hoping for something smaller with a cleaner ratio.

If the second channel has a power-of-two ratio to the main channel, we can treat it like it’s just extra resolution on the main channel. Like, let’s say we run the main channel in 8-bit mode. It then has 256 steps, and each step is 7.8 lm. Then add a second channel with a 1/64th ratio. Now instead of 8 bits, we basically have 14 bits… and each step is 0.12 lm.

Or it could even go as far as 16 bits… 5A for the main channel and 20mA for the lower channel. This gives 16-bit resolution where each step is 0.03 lm. And it would still run at 16 kHz so there wouldn’t be any visible PWM.

Basically, if 7135 chips or other linear regulators come in a 20mA variety, that would probably be about right.

Ok, I think I understand what you’re suggesting – the low channel tops out around the lowest stable level of the 5A channel.

I was thinking of using a 1×7135 channel full range, then either switching on the 5A channel in parallel as is done in 1+N x 7135 drivers. Alternately, if the different driver types don’t play well in parallel, then once the first channel reaches 350mA, the next step turns off the 7135 and turns on the 5A driver at the next logical step above 350mA.

But I hadn’t thought through what that would imply for the ramp resolution or scaling.

lightdecay
Offline
Last seen: 9 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: 06/17/2019 - 08:55
Posts: 421
Location: U.S.A.

SKV89, thank you for sharing all those measurements.

I was under the assumption that 16x E21A mules would be limited to 7.5A CC only, and there would be no direct drive, because it isn’t safe. I am surprised that direct drive is enabled. Are you sure it is safe to use Molicel P26A for this?

D4v2 SST-20 2×4000K + 2×2700K seems really good.

crazy.about.lights
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 4 days ago
Joined: 08/20/2019 - 18:19
Posts: 32
Location: In the 3rd dimension

How hard would it be to implement multiple drivers into a singular light say an Emisar D18? My use would be controlling pairs of emitters separately.

My lights: 219c D4V2, 219c Noctigon Meteor M43, SST20 4000k D4V2 Ti, xpl Hi V3 3A D4SV2, SST20 5000k KR4 (MULE), 219b FF ROT66 v2, Olight s1 mini baton CW.

SKV89
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 5 hours ago
Joined: 12/10/2017 - 12:46
Posts: 4338
Location: US

lightdecay wrote:
SKV89, thank you for sharing all those measurements.

I was under the assumption that 16x E21A mules would be limited to 7.5A CC only, and there would be no direct drive, because it isn’t safe. I am surprised that direct drive is enabled. Are you sure it is safe to use Molicel P26A for this?

D4v2 SST-20 2×4000K + 2×2700K seems really good.

Actually I like the E21A 3500K better in person than the 2×4000K + 2×2700K. The tint is more uniform and rosier.

With 16x direct drive should not be a problem. I’m guessing it would push each E21A to about 1A or a bit more.

Texas Ace tested 4x E21A up to 10A.

Here is Djozz’s test of a single E21A, which peaks at 3A and terminated it at 5A. Death current was 7A for a single E21A

trakcon
trakcon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 43 min ago
Joined: 01/23/2019 - 15:50
Posts: 441
shirnask wrote:
I have three – no flicker

I have two, and both show it to the same extent.

.

ToyKeeper wrote:
trakcon wrote:
westermac wrote:
KR4 … flickering at … 3/150

I would be interested in TK’s or Hank’s thoughts on this

Sorry, I don’t have anything helpful to add. I only have a late prototype, and it doesn’t flicker at 3/150.

At 1/150 and 2/150 it’s expected to flicker a bit, but at 3/150 or above I haven’t seen it happen. It might be worth cleaning the contacts though, since dirty connections can cause flickering on almost any light.

I appreciate the response, TK.

I cleaned the contacts, and actually very lightly sanded them to make sure there’s nothing blocking the connection surface, but the flicker is still there. Now, when I say flicker, it’s very subtle. It’s only really noticeable when you’re not moving the beam.

I tried varying the floor from 1/150 to 3/150, and the flicker is evident on 1/150 and 2/150, as expected.
When moving it to 3/150, though, it’s as if the very low level flicker from 1/150 and 2/150 is still there, but is masked by the higher brightness of 3/150. I hope that makes sense.

It’s tolerable, I guess, but it’s also annoying when I notice it, and just knowing that one of my favorite lights isn’t stable at moonlight drives me mildly nuts since I use it every night.
Do you think there’s anything on the code side that could be done to eliminate this? I’m not familiar with the coding at a hardware level.

Thanks, again.

Edit: Would increasing the clock speed at level 3/150 make a difference? Or, maybe just disabling dynamic underclocking would be a reasonable test.

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 57 min ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 14684
Location: LI NY

Might just be a flaky 7135, either the part or the reflow.

SammysHP
SammysHP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 11 min ago
Joined: 06/25/2019 - 14:35
Posts: 981
Location: Germany

@Tom
The KR4 has no 7135. Wink

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 57 min ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 14684
Location: LI NY

smileembarassed 

Pages