17mm & 20/26/27mm single-sided DD/FET driver release: A17DD-SO8 / A20DD-SO8 / etc

731 posts / 0 new
Last post
DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

I had bought 3 Convoy M1’s for comparing components before. I can use one of these to put an A17DD-S08 in and compare side by side to the 70N03 version driver. Shall I do so?

Edit: More or less they’re already set up that way. One has the prototype of this driver, one has Richards Moon Qlite, and one has C_K’s Ver 3.1 driver. All I have to do to compare the A17DD-S08 to the 70N03 driver is swap emitters in the proto model. (It’s got an XP-G2 where the 70N03 has an XM-L2 U3 1A)

wight
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Joined: 11/27/2013 - 16:40
Posts: 4969
Location: Virginia, USA

Sounds worthwhile to me!

Still fine, still on a break. One day I’ll catch up with you folks! previous wight catchup Wink
list of my drivers & variants (A17DD, FET+1 stuff, WIP stuff, etc)

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

Ok then, tomorrow I will build a fresh new A17DD-S08 driver and a fresh new BLF17DD Ver 3.1 driver and put the same UI in each. I will then put the same XM-L2 U3 1A emitters in each M1 (from same batch and purchased together) and use the same cell for testing. In this way the test bed will be as level as I can make it. I won’t even put any of my well squeezed amperage rocks in either light. Silly

cajampa
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 2 months ago
Joined: 08/01/2014 - 01:55
Posts: 1963
Location: Sweden

ToyKeeper wrote:

I have a battery check mode already built in to an on-time clicky firmware, an off-time clicky firmware, and an e-switch firmware. However, both of the clicky firmwares are a bit complicated (I crammed in as many modes as I could fit).

The clicky ones go in a loop (read voltage, display it, pause, repeat) while the e-switch one simply displays the voltage once and shuts itself off. Since the reading can vary from measurement to measurement, it’s usually a good idea to watch it for a few cycles to get a more accurate idea what the actual value is.

Unfortunately the hardcoded voltage values generally need tweaking for each style of driver, which complicates things. I’m hoping to include some reference values for common drivers to make this easier.

Sounds nice Smile if i ever get to the point where i have all of this figured out so i can start flashing firmwares myself, i will look forward to try it out if its ready then, Good luck

Rufusbduck
Rufusbduck's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 4 days ago
Joined: 04/04/2012 - 15:34
Posts: 10389
Location: Golden state

DBCstm wrote:
Ok then, tomorrow I will build a fresh new A17DD-S08 driver and a fresh new BLF17DD Ver 3.1 driver and put the same UI in each. I will then put the same XM-L2 U3 1A emitters in each M1 (from same batch and purchased together) and use the same cell for testing. In this way the test bed will be as level as I can make it. I won’t even put any of my well squeezed amperage rocks in either light. Silly

Checking the Vf of the emitters will verify the levelness of the test. Maybe also compare output at lower cell voltages.

I agree wight about not jumping the gun, just making an offer to our mega mod members who might want to eliminate this as possibility.

Three Tanna leaves to give him life, nine to give him movement. But what if he eats the whole bag?

Scott

Tom E
Tom E's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 25 min ago
Joined: 08/19/2012 - 08:23
Posts: 14636
Location: LI NY

I built up some drivers last night, not done - not much time lately. I'll do a direct swap in the same X6 of drivers, then see (hoping this eve). I'm testing with an old XM-L2 U2 1A now to eliminate the de-domed XP-G2, so hopefully that's a better test case than the de-domed XP-G2.

Really could all be the Vf of the specific LED/MCPCB I'm seeing - dunno, but would be nice to get an understanding. In my other builds there are lots of variables - some with e-switch, some with the LED+ wire bypass of the driver (not always the best), different LED bin's/tint, etc. The only obvious thing in comparing the 3 driver designs is the original BLF v1.0 seems to have the thickest ground ring, but that's probably not exactly true - the others could have a thicker one, but not all exposed.

wight
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Joined: 11/27/2013 - 16:40
Posts: 4969
Location: Virginia, USA

Tom E wrote:
[snip] original BLF v1.0 [snip]
Are you referring to the original, or the latest? This is exactly why I didn’t want Mattaus to reset the version numbering in the way he did. You say “original” but in the same breath say “v1.0” which is the designation for the latest version which Mattaus has released.

Still fine, still on a break. One day I’ll catch up with you folks! previous wight catchup Wink
list of my drivers & variants (A17DD, FET+1 stuff, WIP stuff, etc)

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

I can build the original and compare it to the A17DD-S08 if that would be more prudent than the Ver 3.1?

By original , I mean the one with no ground contacts on the spring side, the original , aka, first board.

wight
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Joined: 11/27/2013 - 16:40
Posts: 4969
Location: Virginia, USA

I don’t really have an opinion on that.

Still fine, still on a break. One day I’ll catch up with you folks! previous wight catchup Wink
list of my drivers & variants (A17DD, FET+1 stuff, WIP stuff, etc)

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

Ok, I’m about to build 2 lights…one with an A17DD-S08 and the other with a BLF17DD Ver 3.1. I will use AVRGCC44 with the A17DD-S08 for the 22,000 R1 to work at 3.0V and 2.8V and the AVRGCC45 with the BLF17DD Ver 3.1 for the 19,100 R1 to work at 3.0V and 2.8V. All other settings are the same.

This has 7 mode levels at 0, 3, 9, 27, 73, 140, and 255.

I’ll be back!

RMM
RMM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Joined: 07/23/2013 - 13:47
Posts: 4006
Location: USA

What is a BLF17DD v3.1?  Am I missing something here?  

The way to go is to use different drivers in the same light, with the same emitter and the same LED wires.  That way there is only 1 variable changed.  Using different emitters is a bad idea when you're trying to test for 0.2A difference.  

Mountain Electronics : batteries, Noctigon, and much more! What's new? 

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

Done! I have 2 identical M1’s but different driver styles. Before assembling the emitter/star into the pill (I reflowed them both) I checked Vf on a Sanyo FJ and each had 3.61Vf at 5 seconds on direct drive. These are XM-L2 U3 1A on the new 20mm Noctigon that has temperature sensor pads and the contact pads are closer to the edge (wider stance)

Both have the large bronze phosphor spring from Intl-Outdoor, upside down, and a copper disc soldered to the wide end for ease of use with various cells (flat tops or button tops) No spring bypass due to the spring type and no spring bypass in the tail cap of either light.

So, what kind of tests do we want? Vf on the same cell fresh off the charger each time?
Amperage on the same cell, freshly charged each time?
Amperage in the lower modes simultaneous to the Turbo reading? Or separate from that reading?
Lumens in each level, again on the same cell and freshly charged for each light?

What am I missing?

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

The BLF17DD Ver 3.1 is the last variation on the 70N03 FET driver, rearranged by Cereal_Killer for an easy Zener modification with Zener pads on the board. The difference between 3.1 and 3.0 is that the Voltage Monitor set-up is taking it’s reading straight off the batt + pad for the spring, before the diode and or Zener. Dan didn’t change the silk screening so it still reads Ver 3.0, but the trace can be seen coming off the resistor bank for the Voltage Monitor.

I am not organized enough, engineer enough, patient enough or willing enough to use the same emitter on different drivers and do all that testing. I have 2 emitters out of the same tape, side by side, that both test at the same Vf on the same cell. That will have to do or I’m done here and will just use the 2 lights and call it even.

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

So I have 2 Convoy M1’s that make just under 5 lumens in moon, 1405/1455 in Turbo. Worth the doing at any rate. 4.59A from one, 4.50A from the other. Head to head each holds it’s own.

RMM
RMM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Joined: 07/23/2013 - 13:47
Posts: 4006
Location: USA

Looking good.  0.09A is nothing.  All of the lights I've built with the small LFPAK have all seen very similar performance to what I usually get out of the big FETs.  

Mountain Electronics : batteries, Noctigon, and much more! What's new? 

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

While the A17DD-S08 did indeed pull .09A less than the BLF17DD Ver 3.1, the A17DD-S08 is the one that logged 1455.9 lumens! Wink

RMM
RMM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Joined: 07/23/2013 - 13:47
Posts: 4006
Location: USA

Not enough difference to be statistically significant.  

OT: how do you like the through hole wire vias on the 3.1 driver?  I personally would rather have a flat pad to solder to, but I'm wondering what everyone else's opinion is. 

Mountain Electronics : batteries, Noctigon, and much more! What's new? 

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

The through hole via’s are nice at 22ga, a PITA at 20ga. Forget about 18ga. (Actually, I’ve split the end of 18ga and run each half through a via, works ok, still a PITA. Not pulling any pads off though.)

I like the extra ground via beside the FET ground leg on the A17 board and the big pad is good for soldering the LED – lead to. The middle of the board positive LED lead is a bit on the tricky side though. Not horribly bad but fairly easy to mess up if you jitter instead of jigger. Shimmy instead of shake? You know what I mean….

The microscopic switch+ via on the Ver 3.0/3.1 board is nuts! And the location is tricky as well.

Single sided makes up for a lot of things though, love that aspect! Really makes it easy in a lot of lights, piggybacking too.

Edit: Point being on the comparison…the smaller FET meets or exceeds the performance level of the large 70N03. Wink

Rufusbduck
Rufusbduck's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 4 days ago
Joined: 04/04/2012 - 15:34
Posts: 10389
Location: Golden state

Nice job Dale.

Three Tanna leaves to give him life, nine to give him movement. But what if he eats the whole bag?

Scott

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

I used a new Panasonic NCR18650BD button top and charged it again after every test. So each “run” started with the cell showing 4.21/4.22V (it must have been like 4.218 or something because my meter, 2 decimal point digits, flickered back and forth between 4.21 and 4.22)

………A17DD-S08……………BLF17DD Ver 3.1
0.01A ——-4.52 lumens……0.01A——-4.55 lumens
0.06A ——22.94 lumens…..0.07A——23.08 lumens
0.13A ——51.13 lumens…..0.11A——50.34 lumens
0.35A —-148.70 lumens….0.31A—-140.42 lumens
1.15A —-421.59 lumens….1.12A—-400.89 lumens
2.28A —-807.30 lumens….2.36A—-772.80 lumens
4.50A —1455.90 lumens…4.59A—1404.15 lumens

One would think I used 2 of the same everything, they’re so close. I think the A17DD-S08 is doing a fabulous job, and in my triple and quad lights it’s definitely up to the task. Wink

Thanks again Wight! Smile

Edit: Notice the low high end amperage, and the resulting lumens output. The new XM-L2 U3 1A’s…

led4power
led4power's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 10 hours ago
Joined: 12/29/2012 - 09:48
Posts: 1327
Location: Croatia,EU

Dale,I think it's simpler to just measure parasitic resistance of each driver.And based on that number you can tell which driver will provide more current on high(if all other factors like battery,led Vf,springs wires are the same).

For DD drivers this is very easy:you need one ammeter and one relatively precise voltmeter,battery or power supply(better),led or resistor as load(not important,xm-l,xp-g...).

Connect driver,led and battery(or power supply) as usual(you don't need host),and ammeter in series for current measurement. At the same time measure voltage(mV range) across driver's "power" connections-GND and led cathode pad.

Parasitic resistance is then: R(par)=U/I

And that's it,repeat the same procedure for other driver(important thing is that it's best to use the same battery at same voltage and same load,because mosfet parasitic resistance Rds, which is dominant part of total parasitic resistance in DD drivers, depends on gate voltage).

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

You’re saying if I measure the off amperage at the negative end of the cell, and the Voltage between LED negative and ground, then divide which by which to get parasitic resistance?

Touching the LED negative to ground will normally give direct drive, right? So this is where I take a Voltage reading? While taking an amperage reading at the tail?

I’ll either pull the light engine and do this, or remove the bezel and use the host as a holder for the assembly of light engine/cell. I can use my older DMM with short 12ga copper leads to do the amperage reading, my clamp meter with probes hooked up gives very small Voltage readings.

Edit: Is the lower parasitic resistance driver the one that will make the highest power output?

RMM
RMM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Joined: 07/23/2013 - 13:47
Posts: 4006
Location: USA

Yes, lowest resistance will give the highest output.

Mountain Electronics : batteries, Noctigon, and much more! What's new? 

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

On the A17DD-S08 I get a current of .01 and Voltage of 1.867

On the BLF17DD Ver 3.1 I get a current of .06 and a Voltage of 1.885 ( I think this one skipped moon and the test was on level 2, is that crucial?)

Edit: Was I supposed to be testing on High or does it matter? These numbers come out significantly different…

RMM
RMM's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 6 months ago
Joined: 07/23/2013 - 13:47
Posts: 4006
Location: USA

Ideally you would want to test them both on the highest level, so PWM response isn't a factor. 

Mountain Electronics : batteries, Noctigon, and much more! What's new? 

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

Back to the drawing board Silly

See? If it can be done wrong, I’ll find the way…

Edit: It’s better to grow a few new hands than to enlist my wife for help.

A17DD-S08 shows 4.82A and 30.0mV
BLF17DD Ver 3.1 shows 4.85A and 103.5mV

EditII: So is this A= .16 parasitic drain and B= .05 parasitic drain?

Catnap
Catnap's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 3 min ago
Joined: 12/25/2013 - 08:15
Posts: 100

I can’t find the PSMN3R0-30YLD fet anywhere. The shipping from mouser,digikey and farnell is like $30 to Finland :_( Could someone sell me 3?

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

R=U/I is Resistance=Voltage divided by Current.

So the A17DD-S08 has 6.22ohms of resistance
and the BLF17DD Ver 3.1 has 21.34ohms of resistance

So the A17DD-S08 should have higher capability? Interesting…

led4power
led4power's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 10 hours ago
Joined: 12/29/2012 - 09:48
Posts: 1327
Location: Croatia,EU

DBCstm wrote:
R=U/I is Resistance=Voltage divided by Current. So the A17DD-S08 has 6.22ohms of resistance and the BLF17DD Ver 3.1 has 21.34ohms of resistance So the A17DD-S08 should have higher capability? Interesting...

First,as RMM said,you must measure current and voltage on highest(no PWM) mode.

Parasitic resistance for first driver is 6.22mOhm (miliOhm) which sounds about right,slightly higher than mosfet Rds;

but something is wrong for 2nd one, 21.34mOhm is too high for that mosfet? Value should be similar to first driver.

For fair comparison,it's important to measure parasitic resistance at same battery voltage,because mosfet's Rds usually starts to grow rapidly at voltages <4V(of course,that depends on mosfet)

DB Custom
DB Custom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 37 min 28 sec ago
Joined: 01/13/2013 - 22:28
Posts: 20727
Location: Heart of Texas

My not so able bodied and not so willing partner in crime made it a big issue this morning. Geesh, just wanted a little help! lol

miliOhm huh, I was guessing on the Ohm connection studying Wikipedia on Ohm’s law. lol

I did both repeatedly, the Clamp meter is Auto sensing and gave me Voltage on the first one, then mV on the next and wouldn’t switch over. So I did them each repeatedly, arguing with the cranky wife, we both yelled at the kid, and ultimately I tested them again by myself holding the amperage leads on the cell with my tongue. Now it’s me that’s cranky! Vroooom! I started! Woohoo!

I’ll charge up the cell I used and try again. With peace and quiet the prevalent factor.

Pages