TomE, I don’t know why it seems I’m rubbing you the wrong way and if I did, I apologize. I’m not challenging you, Hank, Vinh, nor anyone. I’m trying to clarify where there are differences, both in my understanding, and among greater BLF. I’m sorry if my familiarity and opinion that another naming convention is/was more popular seems confrontational.
Personally, I have no problem remembering or typing out full Osram model numbers. Shorthand is merely a convenience. If it starts to cause more confusion that the longform, then it’s not worth it IMO.
id30209, while I have personal feelings that seem to reflect yours about the parties we are discussing, I think it’s fair to acknowledge that in the early days of 4040 white flats, Vinh was one of the exclusive sources of these emitters and lights equipped with them. Not until the K1/KR1 was there any whisper of these emitters in Hanks main thread. In fact, searching that thread for either w1.1 or w2.1 only returns one post by SKV89 from May 2020. I can trace back the W1.1 on CPF/Vinh as far as August 2019.
Searching all of BLF for “w2.2” only yields a handful of hits besides here. All are from Sept/Oct 2020 except one by Agro which may have been a typo as he changed it to w2.1 at some point (original frozen in time by the quote in the following post) Ironically here, I was one of the few to ever write w.2.2 back in Sept 2020 , and I’d like to say it was a error as well that got away from me, but I used that” two times”:Lume1-FW3X: Constant Current Buck-Boost & FET Driver with Anduril1/2 + RGB Aux - #368 by JaredM in that thread, albeit only 11hrs apart.
Again, I’m really, honestly not trying to ruffle feathers. I’ve added to the confusion myself as I just pointed out in the previous paragraph. id30209 also has acknowledged the W2.1= Boost HX in the Convoy thread not too long ago. Now that I’ve spent a bit of time playing etymologist, it’s fair for me to say there isn’t a widely accepted standard on BLF and we all can get confused by these alpha numerics at times.
Going forward, I’m probably going to stick to the full names of these emitters.
No no, nothin meant. All's good Just being obsessed bout trying to figure this naming mess out, not to mention features. I checked my inventory and I got like 5 W1's, which I regret not using. Sure looks like the Boost HL makes the W1 obsolete - more lumens and seems like more throw, though not sure that's been proven.
I think we (or me) should ask Hank where he got it - may have been done wrong. Could be since Chinese is written right to left, the rev "2" is to the left of the part #, being 1 or 2.
I am unaware of what happened before they started showing up in mod threads, so thanks for the info. I want to be clear that in my individual experience, aforementioned cpf threads were the first place I knew of those nicknames becoming popular.
But is there agreement that there are now two similar, but different, naming conventions for this series of emitters? Right or wrong isn’t the question, it’s just that W2.1 now can mean either Boost HL (hank) or HX (neven/vinh).
The HL definitely seems to have an advantage by a solid 5-10% over the 3030 1mm². But that really only shows up at the very top end of the current range. I’d use the 3030s in triple or quad setups personally. I really want to get a D4Sv2 and try these under an Angie. In that application, I’d bet there’s a negligible difference.
I’m really surprised no one has published output comparisons of the HX vs 3030 2mm2. I know djozz had some unpublished testing that didn’t show any improvement. I’ve only read handful of mods with HXs, of which most seem to not show a major advantage. Some of those were from questionable sources like the Yinding AE store… I Really want to see how samples from Hank and Simon stack up.
I recently gained access to a multichannel Agilent DAQ and a 20A-8V / 10A-20V power supply. If I can build find time to scrap together a solid test fixture, I’d gladly setup some testing of my own. I also have access to a FLIR camera and a uv through nir spectrometer, if I want to get fancy. Time and money is tight this year so who’s knows if I’ll get around to it.
With the multivhannel DAQ, I could easily capture Vf, Tj, heatsink temp and current with fast sweeps. This could allow me to capture data that minimizes thermal bottlenecks from things like sub-optimal reflow and a relatively small heatsink. For example, I could write a script to ramp up 1A/s until lumens max out (starting at rt), followed by a pid that finds a current that saturates the sink/mcpcb at say 50C, sweeps again, 80C, etc.
Yeah there have been people talking about building and buying lights with the new gen Osram emitters that probably aren’t even aware of Emisar-Noctigon. Hank just chose a naming scheme that is way, way easier to understand and memorize than Osram’s product IDs.
My $0.02… GF2 for the green light version, YF2, for yellow, etc. would make sense for the sake of not having to memorize or look up the specific codes too! …and yes, I know “white flat” comes from the pad color rather than the light emitted but this would make sense since the original “WF” is the white light version anyway.
The “.1” simply denotes 4x4mm pad versions. For hotrod flashlight use that larger thermal pad should be an advantage (although that depends heavily on what bins people have access to based on some of the tests of the CU- emitters here recently).
Oh my, it was a mess before and now it’s even worse
It would be best of one side switched their naming but I doubt it will happen because this would confuse their existing customers.
Vinh’s lights are far less popular but not rare enough to be disregarded. And he used the naming for a longer time, so there are quite a few mentions around.
I strongly suggest using neither Vinh nor Hank naming. Or at very least making it clear which is being used, i.e. Hank-W2.1. Even in the case of Hank-W2.2 - that’s because even if the name has a singular meaning now, Vinh may want to use it eventually.
The more I consider it, I think the nick names should be dropped altogether. Boost HL and Boost HX are clear enough and brief. Funny, we are on the 3rd generation of these LED's already.
I'm more concerned about the lack of knowledge of them here. Hank rates the K1 with the HL as more throw than the HX (650 kcd vs. 600 kcd), but that's just one data point, and we don't know what the amps and lumens are. I think these #'s are higher than the W1 and W2, but I'm not sure now, since Hank took those options down.
Wow I completely missed that, assumed the “W2.1” he listed was the CULPM1.TG until now and that there was a “W1.1” listed as well still. Yeah Hank’s nomenclature makes little sense IMHO.
I would personally just prefer to use the part numbers. CULPM1 (and the .TG part if we’re discussing the color variants)… I wander over to reddit and nobody is keeping any of the conventions for the “2.1” style names straight… If the part numbers are hard to remember, just specify 3030 or 4040 and 1mm or 2mm.
The good news at least is that probably nobody is actually talking about the CULNM1.TG because it’s basically impossible to get a hold of. So that assumption makes things slightly easier to figure out…
That post is old (days? ). I've dropped the nick names in favor of their real names: Boost HL and Boost HX. Simple, to the point, can be shortened to HL or HX, and the manufacturer named them that way, so what could be better?
OSRAM LED’s for max throw
Color Part # footprint (LED surface) Max/Pulsed Peak Output (A)
White – KW CSLNM1.TG – 3030 (1mm²) W1 3/3.3 A 4.5-5.0 A (W1/NM1)
White – KW CSLPM1.TG – 3030 (2mm²) W2 5/6 A 7.0-8.0 A (W2/PM1)
White – KW CULNM1.TG – 4040 (1mm²) 3.3/4 A ~6 A (Boost HL)
White – KW CULPM1.TG – 4040 (2mm²) 6.6/8 A 9 A (Boost HX)
Red – KR CSLNM1.23 – 3030 (1mm²) W1
Blue – KB CSLNM1.14 – 3030 (1mm²) W1
Green – KP CSLNM1.F1 – 3030 (1mm²) W1 3/4 A 6.5 – 7.0 A
Green – KP CSLPM1.F1 – 3030 (2mm²) W1
Just fyi, if you follow the links to the individual LED's above, you may notice the W1, W2, and Boost HX are in full production phase, while the Boost HL is in End-Of-Life and not recommended for new designs. This may explain the availability issues.
Yeah, I remember when Led4Power had the CULNM1.TG/Boost HL he could only get a small number and they were already discontinued.
Sorry, I wasn't really addressing your table in particular, but rather the use of the "W2.1" style nicknames in general - I keep seeing them used inconsistently so I never know what is actually meant by them...
The CULNM sold by L4P was also a low flux bin. Surprisingly Fireflies was able to source the 6Q, which is the 2nd highest flux bin for their new lights. I wonder if the emitter is not really discontinued. They are probably still making them as long as the purchase quantity is high enough.
You’ll want to use the CSLNM1 for the S2, to get similar throw on the CULPM1 it needs to be driven at 7.4 - 8A and that’s getting way to hot in such a small host
To use the CULPM1 in the S2 requires Simon’s fet driver and he won’t give any warranty for it. I’m running it in my C8+ with a Samsung 30Q which peaks at 7.4A, no higher. I get 1300 lumens and 1002m range. I only have a cheap meter so I like to subtract 50m off that measurement
Just being obsessed bout trying to figure this naming mess out, not to mention features. I checked my inventory and I got like 5 W1's, which I regret not using. Sure looks like the Boost HL makes the W1 obsolete - more lumens and seems like more throw, though not sure that's been proven.