I just noticed your (re)programming pads are there, which is cool. But, looking closer, they are interfering with the ATtiny footprint, or rather the ATtiny footprint is interfering with the (re)programming pads.
They should.
You are reprogramming the ATTiny with them.
driver will be likely without power bank equipped but its there, not sure how this goes
Looks good!
i agree that this first lantern version don’t need the power bank, just the ramping design & built in charging. The AMC design is perfect for this first production lantern model.
—
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
This lantern could make good use of the Sofirn Q8 extension tubes if designed to fit. Imagine having the lantern fueled with 8 or more 3500mAh cells. Runtime for ever
There is a picture with 8 extension tubes. That makes 32 cells
as long as its all in parallel & not any series its doable with up to 32 with extension tubes, to create a taller model that can run for days non stop. (the lantern will be a 4P design)
—
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
This lantern could make good use of the Sofirn Q8 extension tubes if designed to fit. Imagine having the lantern fueled with 8 or more 3500mAh cells. Runtime for ever
There is a picture with 8 extension tubes. That makes 32 cells
as long as its all in parallel & not any series its doable with up to 32 with extension tubes, to create a taller model that can run for days non stop. (the lantern will be a 4P design)
OH HELL “past 12hours on MAX”…. CRAP I think I need a total of 4 now so please make sure am down for FOUR IN TOTAL
We could increase that to 40 hours on max by removing all but one chip on each power channel.
I need clean underpants!!!!!!!! (scuttles away to change them) Thats better…… WHAT 40 hours by removing a chip or three!? Why has this not been done?
That’s why were going with the simple, easy to modify AMC 7135 driver design. The factory lantern will come with either 4 or 5 chips per channel for a given output on high, but if you want to increase run times in all the modes, (but at a reduced light output) you can remove one or two of the AMC regulator chips. (of if looking to mod it for more output can add chips to the empty 7135 chip pads.
—
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
This lantern could make good use of the Sofirn Q8 extension tubes if designed to fit. Imagine having the lantern fueled with 8 or more 3500mAh cells. Runtime for ever
There is a picture with 8 extension tubes. That makes 32 cells
as long as its all in parallel & not any series its doable with up to 32 with extension tubes, to create a taller model that can run for days non stop. (the lantern will be a 4P design)
wow that is cool if Sofirn does use the same battery body as the Q8, then yes the lantern can be modded to a pole-lamp that can run for weeks of nightly use before charging the cells.
—
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
I just noticed your (re)programming pads are there, which is cool. But, looking closer, they are interfering with the ATtiny footprint, or rather the ATtiny footprint is interfering with the (re)programming pads.
They should.
You are reprogramming the ATTiny with them.
No, look at the photos of the driver renderings. At the bottom edge of the driver board, there are several vias for the programming key that he designed. But some of the pads for the MCU cross more than one via and some of the pads for the MCU don’t contact any of the vias. I don’t know if it’s “right” or not but it doesn’t look right to me.
—
The Cycle of Goodness: “No one prospers without rendering benefit to others”
- The YKK Philosophy
wow that is cool if Sofirn does use the same battery body as the Q8, then yes the lantern can be modded to a pole-lamp that can run for weeks of nightly use before charging the cells.
But do you have that many cells that you would trust to put together like that? Would it be worth the high cost of buying that many cells just to not have to charge for a few days?
—
The Cycle of Goodness: “No one prospers without rendering benefit to others”
- The YKK Philosophy
I just noticed your (re)programming pads are there, which is cool. But, looking closer, they are interfering with the ATtiny footprint, or rather the ATtiny footprint is interfering with the (re)programming pads.
They should.
You are reprogramming the ATTiny with them.
No, look at the photos of the driver renderings. At the bottom edge of the driver board, there are several vias for the programming key that he designed. But some of the pads for the MCU cross more than one via and some of the pads for the MCU don’t contact any of the vias. I don’t know if it’s “right” or not but it doesn’t look right to me.
The MCU outline maybe confusing there. I checked and every Via connects where it should. I don’t think Lexel overlook that noticable problem. It is fine.
The MCU outline maybe confusing there. I checked and every Via connects where it should. I don’t think Lexel overlook that noticable problem. It is fine.
Aah, had to zoom way in to see that there’s a little space between the top vias and the pads for the bottom legs of the MCU. Ok. Sorry for the false alarm.
—
The Cycle of Goodness: “No one prospers without rendering benefit to others”
- The YKK Philosophy
Location: (469219) 2016 HO3 // I get way more privmsgs than I can respond to, so please ask in a public thread if possible, for a faster answer.
DavidEF wrote:
Sorry for the false alarm.
It should work fine. The only real risk there is if solder spilled over the edge of a pad and into a nearby via, bridging two MCU pins. It’s underneath so it’d be hard to see if it happened. But that’s probably pretty unlikely to happen.
Location: (469219) 2016 HO3 // I get way more privmsgs than I can respond to, so please ask in a public thread if possible, for a faster answer.
lohtse wrote:
I need clean underpants!!!!!!!! (scuttles away to change them) Thats better…… WHAT 40 hours by removing a chip or three!? Why has this not been done?
It has been done before. Cut the power level in half, and it doubles the runtime. For example, a Convoy light with 4×7135 driver runs twice as long as one with a 8×7135 driver. But it puts out half as much light.
On the lantern, there isn’t much need to remove chips to increase the runtime… just turn it down a level or two and it’ll run longer. Go down all the way, and it can run nonstop for about three months. You don’t have to run it at full power at all times.
driver will be likely without power bank equipped but its there, not sure how this goes
Looks good!
i agree that this first lantern version don’t need the power bank, just the ramping design & built in charging. The AMC design is perfect for this first production lantern model.
New here, can you clarify? Does this mean the first run for people here that said they were interested won’t have power bank function, but it will be added for later production runs? Or does this mean something else? Thanks.
driver will be likely without power bank equipped but its there, not sure how this goes
Looks good!
i agree that this first lantern version don’t need the power bank, just the ramping design & built in charging. The AMC design is perfect for this first production lantern model.
New here, can you clarify? Does this mean the first run for people here that said they were interested won’t have power bank function, but it will be added for later production runs? Or does this mean something else? Thanks.
We decided to drop the power bank option to reduce cost per unit, and get it into production sooner. (it will still have the charging function however. Originally the lantern was to be designed to be a simple, low-cost better quality lantern as a better option to all the low-quality plastic lanterns commercially available in stores & on the market, and adding to many bells & whistles will defeat that purpose of the low-cost part.
—
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
We decided to drop the power bank option to reduce cost per unit, and get it into production sooner. (it will still have the charging function however. Originally the lantern was to be designed to be a simple, low-cost better quality lantern as a better option to all the low-quality plastic lanterns commercially available in stores & on the market, and adding to many bells & whistles will defeat that purpose of the low-cost part.
We decided to drop the power bank option to reduce cost per unit, and get it into production sooner.
Good point.
But what about the possibility of an advanced version after the BLF Lantern is finished ?
There is plans for a deluxe version at a later date.
Definitely works for me. I like having the charging function, although I probably won’t ever use it. But, the power bank function is completely useless to me. I’d rather have light than to power anything else. So whatever power is in the lantern needs to stay there in my case. I know others are more hard core in their camping, hiking, caving, etc. and would find having a power bank built-in to be quite useful as it’s one less thing to carry.
—
The Cycle of Goodness: “No one prospers without rendering benefit to others”
- The YKK Philosophy
Definitely works for me. I like having the charging function, although I probably won’t ever use it. But, the power bank function is completely useless to me. I’d rather have light than to power anything else. So whatever power is in the lantern needs to stay there in my case. I know others are more hard core in their camping, hiking, caving, etc. and would find having a power bank built-in to be quite useful as it’s one less thing to carry.
For a future model we will look at the power bank function. for now the built in charging will be a great feature to have on long camping trips or off grid use.
—
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
I just noticed your (re)programming pads are there, which is cool. But, looking closer, they are interfering with the ATtiny footprint, or rather the ATtiny footprint is interfering with the (re)programming pads.
They should.
You are reprogramming the ATTiny with them.
No, look at the photos of the driver renderings. At the bottom edge of the driver board, there are several vias for the programming key that he designed. But some of the pads for the MCU cross more than one via and some of the pads for the MCU don’t contact any of the vias. I don’t know if it’s “right” or not but it doesn’t look right to me.
“Via in pads” is generally a no-no. Google it. Unless you really know what you are doing, how to tent the solder mask etc.
They potentially suck out the screen-printed solder resulting in a weak joint.
Then there is ROHS lead-free solder which doesn’t like this either.
Then the idea is that the underside provides good gold plated vias for the pogo pins to contact. Which they may not if the via is plugged with solder.
Lots of things to go wrong here, for no good reason. Separate the vias from the pads is my suggestion, I see plenty of area to do so.
Edit: agree on powerbank delete decision. I certainly don’t need or want it.
PS: I don’t know what charging chip you have chosen, but please be sure that it can cope with a small solar panel and dump every bit of available energy into the cells, no matter how weak the light, and how variable, night, day, clouds, shadows etc. Not all can, some only work in certain conditions and trip out otherwise.
This is nothing like charging up e.g a mobile phone from a mains adapter. Totally different situation.
Edit: I mean accepting current from any solar panel, from a standard nominal 12V panel (actually a lot higher), to one of the the popular portable USB output (5V ? delivered wastefully) devices.
TBH I think that making it only a USB input is a waste. I’d rather see a full-featured input via a rugged co-ax socket, that can accept almost any supply, from a 12V solar panel, to a re-purposed laptop 19V adapter, to a 12V or 24V automotive connection, to a USB passive or active adapter of any type.
PS: I don’t know what charging chip you have chosen, but please be sure that it can cope with a small solar panel and dump every bit of available energy into the cells, no matter how weak the light, and how variable, night, day, clouds, shadows etc. Not all can, some only work in certain conditions and trip out otherwise.
This is nothing like charging up e.g a mobile phone from a mains adapter. Totally different situation.
That was my original plan & the reason why i want to limit the charge rate to no more than 1 amp-draw from the USB line.
I know some have argued & cried to want it to have a 2+ amp “fast charge” but that’s not needed or practical for this lantern to be a true off-grid capable light. I am still wanting it to have the maximum 1-amp charge rate for many reasons. One is that a 10-watt small solar panel can be able to charge the lantern without suffering to much voltage “sag” with the heaver amp draw of a 2+ amp charger. on the V1 Prototype i used a single TP4056 charger module, set at 1-amp. On the 10 watt small panel it still charges the lantern with four 18650, 2500mah cells from 3.4 volts to full charge in 1 sunny day of light. (My test it took 7 hours to fully charge) then using the lantern for 5 ~ 6 hours average per night for 3 nights on medium & high intermittently with no problem or worry of it going dead. My tests also showed that just 4 hours average per day of sunlight on the same charger charged it back up to full after 4 to 5 hours of use per night, meaning the lantern can run every night for years as an off grid light source using small solar panels.
I did a test with two TP4056 chargers charging four cells ( in a 2-bank box) and the 10-watt charger with the 2-amp load, would loose so much voltage from load-sag the charger would continuously turn on & off, and the batteries did not charge up at all after a full day of sun. ( same goes with charging from some of the smaller 12-volt adapter USB power plugs, they can’t sustain much past 1.2 amps before they overheat, cause voltage sag, or burn out. ( i burned out a couple of them during load testing.
To try to design it to be a “multi-voltage” charging is just adding unnecessary costs again, (another reason why were dropping the power-bank option for this first lantern model.) The team has set the design now to get this rolling, as its been to long already discussing different options and delayed this project way to long.
—
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
It’s quite a bit more efficient than the TP4056 since it’s a buck converter, and doesn’t heat up much, if at all, at a 1A charge rate.
Since it’s also more efficient, that means you don’t need as much current from the charger to achieve the same charging rate, meaning you can slightly lower current, which will lower the voltage drop of the solar panel and the cable, making it easier on the panel and more efficient
It’s quite a bit more efficient than the TP4056 since it’s a buck converter, and doesn’t heat up much, if at all, at a 1A charge rate.
Since it’s also more efficient, that means you don’t need as much current from the charger to achieve the same charging rate, meaning you can slightly lower current, which will lower the voltage drop of the solar panel and the cable, making it easier on the panel and more efficient
TLDR: Let’s go with the TP5100 if we can.
interesting, i have not tested that module before.
(though it will be Lexel who is designing the driver to determine what he can incorporate on his driver prototype for that built-in charging circuit.
—
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
They should.
You are reprogramming the ATTiny with them.
Reviews: Olight Seeker2 pro, Lumintop GlowI, Sofirn SP36, Convoy 4X18A, Convoy M21C, Brinyte SR8 Rescue Angel, Astrolux MF01 mini, Astrolux FT03S, YLP Sherp S15, Sofirn SP40, YLP Panda 3R and Unicorn, Armytek Prime C1 Pro, Acebeam M50, Imalent MS18, Convoy M3, Nitecore TIP2, Imalent RT70, Wuben T70, Sofirn SP32A, Thorfire VG15S, Thorfire VG10S, Thorfire TG06S
Mods: Imalent MS18 dedoming, Astrolux MF01-20K, Small sun T08 MT-G2, Eagle eye X6 triple XPL, Ultrafire F13 MT-G2, Convoy C8 XHP70, Solarstorm T3 triple XP-L HI
Big flashlight measurement and beamshot collection
3D printing stuff for flashlights
My flashlight related Instagram
My Flashlight related Youtube channel called Zozzlights
Looks good!
i agree that this first lantern version don’t need the power bank, just the ramping design & built in charging. The AMC design is perfect for this first production lantern model.
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
I need clean underpants!!!!!!!! (scuttles away to change them) Thats better…… WHAT 40 hours by removing a chip or three!? Why has this not been done?
Problemes d'erection [url=https://www.viagrasansordonnancefr.com/]viagrasansordonnancefr.com[/url] meilleure pharmacie
That’s why were going with the simple, easy to modify AMC 7135 driver design. The factory lantern will come with either 4 or 5 chips per channel for a given output on high, but if you want to increase run times in all the modes, (but at a reduced light output) you can remove one or two of the AMC regulator chips. (of if looking to mod it for more output can add chips to the empty 7135 chip pads.
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
wow that is cool
if Sofirn does use the same battery body as the Q8, then yes the lantern can be modded to a pole-lamp that can run for weeks of nightly use before charging the cells.
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
No, look at the photos of the driver renderings. At the bottom edge of the driver board, there are several vias for the programming key that he designed. But some of the pads for the MCU cross more than one via and some of the pads for the MCU don’t contact any of the vias. I don’t know if it’s “right” or not but it doesn’t look right to me.
The Cycle of Goodness: “No one prospers without rendering benefit to others”
- The YKK Philosophy
But do you have that many cells that you would trust to put together like that? Would it be worth the high cost of buying that many cells just to not have to charge for a few days?
The Cycle of Goodness: “No one prospers without rendering benefit to others”
- The YKK Philosophy
The MCU outline maybe confusing there. I checked and every Via connects where it should. I don’t think Lexel overlook that noticable problem. It is fine.
Reviews: Olight Seeker2 pro, Lumintop GlowI, Sofirn SP36, Convoy 4X18A, Convoy M21C, Brinyte SR8 Rescue Angel, Astrolux MF01 mini, Astrolux FT03S, YLP Sherp S15, Sofirn SP40, YLP Panda 3R and Unicorn, Armytek Prime C1 Pro, Acebeam M50, Imalent MS18, Convoy M3, Nitecore TIP2, Imalent RT70, Wuben T70, Sofirn SP32A, Thorfire VG15S, Thorfire VG10S, Thorfire TG06S
Mods: Imalent MS18 dedoming, Astrolux MF01-20K, Small sun T08 MT-G2, Eagle eye X6 triple XPL, Ultrafire F13 MT-G2, Convoy C8 XHP70, Solarstorm T3 triple XP-L HI
Big flashlight measurement and beamshot collection
3D printing stuff for flashlights
My flashlight related Instagram
My Flashlight related Youtube channel called Zozzlights
Aah, had to zoom way in to see that there’s a little space between the top vias and the pads for the bottom legs of the MCU. Ok. Sorry for the false alarm.
The Cycle of Goodness: “No one prospers without rendering benefit to others”
- The YKK Philosophy
It should work fine. The only real risk there is if solder spilled over the edge of a pad and into a nearby via, bridging two MCU pins. It’s underneath so it’d be hard to see if it happened. But that’s probably pretty unlikely to happen.
It has been done before. Cut the power level in half, and it doubles the runtime. For example, a Convoy light with 4×7135 driver runs twice as long as one with a 8×7135 driver. But it puts out half as much light.
On the lantern, there isn’t much need to remove chips to increase the runtime… just turn it down a level or two and it’ll run longer. Go down all the way, and it can run nonstop for about three months. You don’t have to run it at full power at all times.
updated
added one for two total. Price estimate $40 or so (less?) has been discussed, but is not firm. Here is another
1079 T18
1080 agent80
1081 efi5phd
1082 Coyotehawk
1083 Terrys8
1084 Rdubya18
1085 wheremydonky
1086 wheremydonky
1087 lohtse
1088 zeroflow
1089 gottawearshades
PocketSammich wrote: I don’t need this, but I want it. Please sign me up.
I am also interested. Add me to the list.
New here, can you clarify? Does this mean the first run for people here that said they were interested won’t have power bank function, but it will be added for later production runs? Or does this mean something else? Thanks.
We decided to drop the power bank option to reduce cost per unit, and get it into production sooner. (it will still have the charging function however. Originally the lantern was to be designed to be a simple, low-cost better quality lantern as a better option to all the low-quality plastic lanterns commercially available in stores & on the market, and adding to many bells & whistles will defeat that purpose of the low-cost part.
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
added!
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
Got it, was just making sure.
Good point.
But what about the possibility of an advanced version after the BLF Lantern is finished ?
There is plans for a deluxe version at a later date.
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
I am in for one. please add me to the list.
Carpe Diem
Definitely works for me. I like having the charging function, although I probably won’t ever use it. But, the power bank function is completely useless to me. I’d rather have light than to power anything else. So whatever power is in the lantern needs to stay there in my case. I know others are more hard core in their camping, hiking, caving, etc. and would find having a power bank built-in to be quite useful as it’s one less thing to carry.
The Cycle of Goodness: “No one prospers without rendering benefit to others”
- The YKK Philosophy
For a future model we will look at the power bank function. for now the built in charging will be a great feature to have on long camping trips or off grid use.
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
Agreed, the charging function is much more useful to me.
BLF Member Map, add yourself
My 8th Annual contest entry My 7th Annual contest entry My 6th Annual contest entry My 5th Annual contest entry My 4th Annual contest entry
My DBSAR inspired SRK lantern hand made mod
“Via in pads” is generally a no-no. Google it. Unless you really know what you are doing, how to tent the solder mask etc.
They potentially suck out the screen-printed solder resulting in a weak joint.
Then there is ROHS lead-free solder which doesn’t like this either.
Then the idea is that the underside provides good gold plated vias for the pogo pins to contact. Which they may not if the via is plugged with solder.
Lots of things to go wrong here, for no good reason. Separate the vias from the pads is my suggestion, I see plenty of area to do so.
Edit: agree on powerbank delete decision. I certainly don’t need or want it.
PS: I don’t know what charging chip you have chosen, but please be sure that it can cope with a small solar panel and dump every bit of available energy into the cells, no matter how weak the light, and how variable, night, day, clouds, shadows etc. Not all can, some only work in certain conditions and trip out otherwise.
This is nothing like charging up e.g a mobile phone from a mains adapter. Totally different situation.
Edit: I mean accepting current from any solar panel, from a standard nominal 12V panel (actually a lot higher), to one of the the popular portable USB output (5V ? delivered wastefully) devices.
TBH I think that making it only a USB input is a waste. I’d rather see a full-featured input via a rugged co-ax socket, that can accept almost any supply, from a 12V solar panel, to a re-purposed laptop 19V adapter, to a 12V or 24V automotive connection, to a USB passive or active adapter of any type.
That was my original plan & the reason why i want to limit the charge rate to no more than 1 amp-draw from the USB line. I know some have argued & cried to want it to have a 2+ amp “fast charge” but that’s not needed or practical for this lantern to be a true off-grid capable light. I am still wanting it to have the maximum 1-amp charge rate for many reasons. One is that a 10-watt small solar panel can be able to charge the lantern without suffering to much voltage “sag” with the heaver amp draw of a 2+ amp charger. on the V1 Prototype i used a single TP4056 charger module, set at 1-amp. On the 10 watt small panel it still charges the lantern with four 18650, 2500mah cells from 3.4 volts to full charge in 1 sunny day of light. (My test it took 7 hours to fully charge) then using the lantern for 5 ~ 6 hours average per night for 3 nights on medium & high intermittently with no problem or worry of it going dead. My tests also showed that just 4 hours average per day of sunlight on the same charger charged it back up to full after 4 to 5 hours of use per night, meaning the lantern can run every night for years as an off grid light source using small solar panels.
I did a test with two TP4056 chargers charging four cells ( in a 2-bank box) and the 10-watt charger with the 2-amp load, would loose so much voltage from load-sag the charger would continuously turn on & off, and the batteries did not charge up at all after a full day of sun. ( same goes with charging from some of the smaller 12-volt adapter USB power plugs, they can’t sustain much past 1.2 amps before they overheat, cause voltage sag, or burn out. ( i burned out a couple of them during load testing.
To try to design it to be a “multi-voltage” charging is just adding unnecessary costs again, (another reason why were dropping the power-bank option for this first lantern model.) The team has set the design now to get this rolling, as its been to long already discussing different options and delayed this project way to long.
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
@DBSAR, I have a TP5100.
It’s quite a bit more efficient than the TP4056 since it’s a buck converter, and doesn’t heat up much, if at all, at a 1A charge rate.
Since it’s also more efficient, that means you don’t need as much current from the charger to achieve the same charging rate, meaning you can slightly lower current, which will lower the voltage drop of the solar panel and the cable, making it easier on the panel and more efficient
TLDR: Let’s go with the TP5100 if we can.
My very own high current Beryllium Copper springs Gen 3:
http://budgetlightforum.com/node/67401
Liitokala Aliexpress Stores Battery Fraud: http://budgetlightforum.com/node/60547
interesting, i have not tested that module before. (though it will be Lexel who is designing the driver to determine what he can incorporate on his driver prototype for that built-in charging circuit.
That Canadian flashlight guy & Lantern Guru -Den / DBSARlight
Pages