****Copper Eagle Eye X6 heatsinks****(design)

Thermal conductivity seen here. How do you convert to W/(m K) in order to compare with Engineering Toolbox? I’d like to see how this Tellurium Copper compares to “regular” Copper and Aluminum.

Edit: I found this to convert. W/(m K) of Tellurium Copper is 354.8 and Engineering Toolbox has Copper at 401 and Aluminum at 205.

I was thinking of having the quad done in aluminum and the triple in copper, i hate to remove the bottom post of the triple because that would be loosing a place to reduce heat transfer through the host

i no the Quad is around $10 each and i have to get a quote on some copper rod should be around the same price or just a hair more due to being more $$$ than aluminum but will find out ASAP...........Edit: The price also reflects on quantity more interest the better and should be cheaper

Please don’t make any compromises for the sake of a few dollars. If it doesn’t get done correctly there is no point doing it at all in my opinion. I always go by the motto “do it once do it right”.

Your current design in copper looks spot on to me.

I agree with LSX. We got the lights at such a heck of a price. No need to skimp here! lol Nothing like buying a $20 light and dropping $75 in mods! :money_mouth_face: :davie:

How about some slots for Tritium while your at it??

I like the idea of a copper 2 piece on this build. But a one piece would be nice as well. Thanks for the handy work guys. I am looking forward to some sample pics so I can wrap my peabrain around it. :Sp This light is the perfect platform.

Ricflair i wish there was room for Tritium slots :) but if u wanted u can cut slots into the optic for them ?

Gonna have to add interest in a copper triple. So that’s one each in copper, would accept the quad in aluminum if supply is too low or copper isn’t made in this one.

And there’s plenty of room in the surround on the quad for trits, as many as you want to purchase. With that ~1/4” surrounding the optic, merely drilling holes for vertical mount would work fine. Slot could be milled for laying them down.

How well do the trit vials tolerate heat?

If im right i think u guys wanted aluminum on the quad ? and copper for the triple.?

If so that would keep cost WAY down

the aluminum quad will be $10 for 50 pcs <<witch is no problem

the copper triple should be around the same if not a tad more due to copper being pricey, once i get both made ill be posting another thread about the samples and pictures on how they look and inside the host and from there ill be writing on who wants what ect.......

just guessing of the top of my head if u wanted copper quads it would be high $20's and i think that's high for a budget light ?

I would pay $20 for a copper quad. I know what it took me to make the aluminum one, $20 would be great in copper if indeed you can get one made for that. Definitely want a triple in copper.

And I’d rather have pure oxygen free copper than beryllium or tellurium or any other alloy.

One thing that I think is important is that they keep tolerances tight enough that you have to push it into the host. Even tight enough you have to bang on it a little. (press fit) If I have to freeze the sink and heat the head of the light to get the 2 to mate up, that’d be awesome! Then we’d know it’s a great thermal joint and it’d almost be one piece. If it slips in too freely, opportunity will be lost.

Edit: I’d rather have to sand the anodizing out of the head and bezel of my light in order to get it to fit than have to wrap the sink with foil to make it tight, does that make sense?

yup that's what i told them, they just brought up the other type of copper because its easy to machine , cant wait till these are done :)

I really like the feel of a light with some heft to it. Copper adds a weight that makes a light feel substantial and I like that. I know a lot of people are all about how light-weight a light is, but I am the opposite of that and enjoy the heft, the solid feel. My all copper Cypreus from Sinner is a little chunk of a light and I love it for that!

The Quad has that kind of feel to it, even with 6061 aluminum used. The light just feels solid, reliable, a thumper (well, if it were bigger!) I alternate EDC between my Quad and Triple X6 lights and it’s difficult to say which is my favorite. I think I like the look of the triple, but the weight and style of the quad has a merit of it’s own that is undeniable. I polished the top face of my quad (ok, I pretty much polished the entire thing) and that mirror finished ring around the optic inside the black host is pretty cool. An anodized color would be a neat customization as well. I guess a printed color wheel could be inserted that would give the same appearance as it would be under the glass lens. It could then be changed out fairly easily. The trit idea is also cool. :wink: Gonna have to look into that, what are trits…$5-7 each? Need to look up the trit guy at marketplace…

I’ve even got the curing light for Norland now! :slight_smile:

Trits are $7.50 ea for 1.5mm x 5mm, so 7 around the optics would be $55.50 shipped. Would look awesome, but would throw budget right out the window!

Copper Quad, tritted, man, so tempting!

Edit: Might have to look into the bigger vials, fewer of em. Being as how I’m more of a big trit kind of guy…

FWIW I think you two (and others probably) are confusing “doing it right” with something else. DBCstm specifies that this should be a secure press fit. That gives a huge amount of contact area; more will not help. (Where’s comfychair when you need’em? ;)) Filling the space below requires [at least one] extra machining operation and the measurements for that space between hosts was called into question. (The measurements things seems to be an non-issue though.)

It’s simply a matter of paying (slightly?) more for something which achieves nothing. Nitro could also have a pair of little nubs machined onto the very bottom to fit into the stock wire holes. They wouldn’t help with anything and they’d cost extra, so he doesn’t. The same thing applies to this slightly larger nub IMO.

From my perspective eliminating that operation significantly reduces the complexity of this manufacturing job. I’m not sure what the optimal way to build these is, but with my suggestion you’ve got to turn the diameter, center-drill the workpiece, and do two facing operations. I suppose that the actual order of operations is something like:

  1. Turn down a solid rod of bar stock to the correct diameter, unchuck.
  2. Cut the entire rod up on a chopsaw.
  3. Center drill one piece.
  4. Face the piece, unchuck.
  5. Face the other side.
  6. repeat for 49x more pieces or whatever.

If you include a bottom-post then you’ve got to do another turning operation and facing operation somewhere in between step 3 and step 6, so two more operations - all with tight tolerances. When it comes to what must be done to each piece after the initial turning operation, we are talking about a 66% increase in the number of operations (from 3 to 5). I’m not in that business, I don’t know if tool changes are involved or what, but it seems significant to me.

While we’re on the subject of “doing it right” adding another thermal interface for the quad is not going to help the quad’s already-poor performance. I’d want a solid spacer for the quad if I was doing one in the X6 (I’m not). In this case there’s significant extra mass to be had from the ‘wrap around’ heatsink… but again we’re talking about a pretty pricey heatsink for what already appears to be a lackluster performer….

got a quote for 1.375" diameter in 48" piece for $270 not bad for C110 copper, going to contact the machinist and see if he would do it in C110 instead of 145 copper fingers crossed

1.25” has to be turned down slightly to fit into the X6 head. The triple is only .30” tall, so anything larger than 1.25” copper or aluminum for the triple is wasted material and wasted time spent removing it.

Dale that was my first size i was going with, its very close to the size needed and might take 1 pass on the lathe to get the correct OD but how well would the finish be ? have to ask i did not handle much copper when i had my lathe :(

It should work ok, I figure a thin film of thermal paste will make up for any surface irregularities. One of those deals where a dollop on the finger and wipe it in should suffice. Pressing the sink into the head should push most of the thermal paste out anyway.

I’d be in for a copper triple.

here’s where I read about the speculation of the hosts being a different depth than the BLF Special bodies:

I gather it’s an eyeball measurement and maybe not significant.

Thanks hank i found out that its off by like 1-2mm so im going to keep the design

I don’t understand what you mean.