Lexel wrote:

OUT_CHANNELS == 3 // Triple Channel
//———————————————————————————————————————————-

//—————————- MODE SETS (must be low to high) —————————————

// 1 mode (max) max
PROGMEM const byte mode7135Set1[] = { 0}; // for single 7135
PROGMEM const byte mode7135sSet1[] ={ 0}; // for 7135 bank
PROGMEM const byte modeFetSet1[] = { 255}; // FET only

// 2 modes (7135-FET) ~10% max
PROGMEM const byte mode7135Set2[] = { 255, 0};
PROGMEM const byte mode7135sSet2[] ={ 0, 0};
PROGMEM const byte modeFetSet2[] = { 0, 255};

// 3 modes (7135-7135s-max) ~10% ~50% max
PROGMEM const byte mode7135Set3[] = { 255, 0, 0};
PROGMEM const byte mode7135sSet3[] ={ 0, 255, 0};
PROGMEM const byte modeFetSet3[] = { 0, 0, 255};

// 4 modes (1.2-10-50-max) ~1.2% ~10% ~60% max
PROGMEM const byte mode7135Set4[] = { 25, 255, 255, 0};
PROGMEM const byte mode7135sSet4[] ={ 0, 0, 255, 0};
PROGMEM const byte modeFetSet4[] = { 0, 0, 0, 255};

// 5 modes (1.2-5-10-50-max) ~1.2% ~4,5% ~10% ~60% max
PROGMEM const byte mode7135Set5[] = { 25, 100, 255, 255, 0};
PROGMEM const byte mode7135sSet5[] ={ 0, 0, 0, 255, 0};
PROGMEM const byte modeFetSet5[] = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 255};

// 6 modes 0.8-2-5-10-50-max ~0.8% ~2% ~5% ~10% ~60% max
PROGMEM const byte mode7135Set6[] = { 17, 80, 255, 255, 255, 0};
PROGMEM const byte mode7135sSet6[] ={ 0, 0, 0, 100, 255, 0};
PROGMEM const byte modeFetSet6[] = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 255};

// 7 modes (0.5-2.5-5-10-25-50-max) ~0.4% ~2% ~8% ~20% ~50% ~80% max
PROGMEM const byte mode7135Set7[] = { 8, 200, 255, 255, 255, 0, 0};
PROGMEM const byte mode7135sSet7[] ={ 0, 0, 40, 120, 255, 255, 0};
PROGMEM const byte modeFetSet7[] = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 100, 255};

// 2 modes (all 7135s-FET) ~60% max
PROGMEM const byte mode7135Set8[] = { 255, 0};
PROGMEM const byte mode7135sSet8[] ={ 255, 0};
PROGMEM const byte modeFetSet8[] = { 0, 255};

Good! This is taken from the last version used in ROT66, right? The mode configurations appear slightly adjusted. Will this modified NarsilM become available for download?

Tom E wrote:

Oh boy, might have to buy one or two of these just to see what’s going on… Been debating spending the money.

If anyone should receive one for free, it’s you.

Mostly I just want to make sure people understand and follow the license, which requires publishing the code used in the product. I wouldn’t complain about a free light, and if I had one I’d probably port other code to run on it, but my main concern is that everything stays open.

Bob_McBob wrote:

I’m curious how long it takes to heat up if you disable the thermal stepdown. I don’t really like the behaviour with the Q8 because it never steps back up, so I just have it disabled and can generally get pretty decent usage out of turbo before it gets too hot to hold (i.e. high 50s C). Certainly more than 24 seconds.

ROT66 heated up really quickly. If you don’t like the default thermal step-down, you may set it to a higher value, or pick one of those NarsilM pre-defined step-down timers (60secs, 90secs, 2 mins, 3 mins, 5 mins, 7 mins). But do not disable it completely. I once tried to disable the step-down and cooled the light with two fans. However the surface temperature still went up and up, to 108°C, when Turbo was on. That’s dangerous…

Tom E wrote:

Hhmm. haven’t heard of issues storing settings, but, anything is possible – there is wear leveling logic – think the “block” of settings is up to about 4 bytes now. I’m thinking it is saving, or attempting to save every time, just that something went wrong there with the addressing or something. Could be failing to load the setting,s then using defaults when this problem occurs.

I don’t know what the issue is. Emisar had kind of a similar issue though, and I think this is the revision which fixed it in RampingIOS:

https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~toykeeper/flashlight-firmware/trunk/revisi...

FireFlies wrote:

seems a bit strange, we tried 11pcs ROT66 randomly today , all can remember Mode group without problem.

If I understand correctly, it only forgets when the batteries are removed… and it doesn’t always happen.

Received my Fireflies yesterday!

Nichia 219B SW45K R0908 vs. XPL HI 5000K 3A

Size comparison

Beamshots (Camera in Manual Setting, WB set 5000k)








GIF

Very nice, Thanks

ToyKeeper wrote:

Tom E wrote:

Hhmm. haven't heard of issues storing settings, but, anything is possible - there is wear leveling logic - think the "block" of settings is up to about 4 bytes now. I'm thinking it is saving, or attempting to save every time, just that something went wrong there with the addressing or something. Could be failing to load the setting,s then using defaults when this problem occurs.

I don't know what the issue is. Emisar had kind of a similar issue though, and I think this is the revision which fixed it in RampingIOS: https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~toykeeper/flashlight-firmw

Toare/trunk/revision/186.1.11

Ohh, thanx! I'll check it out.

charles lin wrote:

Size comparison

The size comparison is really useful. Definitely a bit more pocketable than the Q8, though I can see why it heats up faster on turbo. I’m always surprised by how chunky the M43 is.

Thanks Charles Lin! You post some of the best comparisons I’ve seen! I’m surprised the MF01 looks so much brighter than the Fireflies XPL-HI version. The MF01 219C makes about 7k real lumens. Whereas the XP-L hi ROT66 is supposed to make 10k lumens. Do you have a TA lumen sphere to compare the two?

Thanks for the pics Charles, very helpful. Noticed you have the MF01 beamshot in the gif but not standalone. Any chance you could edit that one in there?

SKV89 wrote:

Thanks Charles Lin! You post some of the best comparisons I’ve seen! I’m surprised the MF01 looks so much brighter than the Fireflies XPL-HI version. The MF01 219C makes about 7k real lumens. Whereas the XP-L hi ROT66 is supposed to make 10k lumens. Do you have a TA lumen sphere to compare the two?

It does look quite bright but honestly the floody LEDs really show off at this short distance. 7k vs 10k lumens is not much difference really and especially since the HI is more focused it’s probably just the extra 3k all in the middle where it’s already too bright in the middle for the camera.

Awesome comparison Charles Lin!

So if you had to only choose one ROT66, would you go with the XPL HI or the Nichia?

The Q8 is a wonderful light for the money and demonstrates its better reach in that picture quite well.

charles lin wrote:

Received my Fireflies yesterday! Size comparison

Very nice! What do you think of the champagne color? I could see myself loving it or hating it, but can’t decide from the pictures.

SKV89 wrote:

Thanks Charles Lin! You post some of the best comparisons I’ve seen! I’m surprised the MF01 looks so much brighter than the Fireflies XPL-HI version. The MF01 219C makes about 7k real lumens. Whereas the XP-L hi ROT66 is supposed to make 10k lumens. Do you have a TA lumen sphere to compare the two?

Firelight2 wrote:

Awesome comparison Charles Lin!

So if you had to only choose one ROT66, would you go with the XPL HI or the Nichia?

Jay wrote:

Thanks for the pics Charles, very helpful. Noticed you have the MF01 beamshot in the gif but not standalone. Any chance you could edit that one in there?

iamlucky13 wrote:

Very nice! What do you think of the champagne color? I could see myself loving it or hating it, but can’t decide from the pictures.

charles lin wrote:

My MF01 is running Lexel FET driver with NarsilM v1.2, it should output around 9000~10000 lm. The best output munber I can get from ROT66 XP-L hi is 7480lm 0 second & 6650lm30 seconds with VTC5A.

I’m surprised your MF01 look that much brighter than the ROT66 and even more surprised that it is so much more on the rosy side of the BBL than even the Cree 3A. I have two MF01, one stock and one with Lexel’s buck driver. The 219C tint on both is on the greenish side of the BBL. One is significantly greener than the other.

The MF01 renders colors the best in your comparison. I think you won the tint lottery with the 219C.

toobadorz wrote:

JasonWW wrote:

toobadorz wrote:

The max temperature around the side switch is ~45°C, which is fairly good. And after stepping down to the highest regulated brightness level, the max temperature is ~43°C after two hours.

Keep in mind that NarsilM is not designed to step down to the “highest regulated brightness level”. In ramping, the drops from max/turbo will be as follows:
1st: 100% (150) to 55% (125)
2nd: 55% (125) to 31% (105)
3rd: 31% (105) to 14% (88)
Drops will continue (if necessary), but stop occurring once it reaches about 150 lumens, or 0.35 amps.

So if it happens to stabilize within the upper part of the regulated mode, it is just a coincidence. Maybe a happy coincidence?

Well, I did trace NasilM to find out its step-down logic before, but… I tend to let the runtime curves speak for me this time

(Note: the peak brightness at 0s is higher with VTC6s)

(The first 5 minutes)

That first step down looks a bit larger than 100% to 55%. Maybe more like 100% to 35%? Does that seem correct?

toobadorz wrote:

JasonWW wrote:

toobadorz wrote:

Yeah, the default mode-set is:

Moon (7135 ×1, PWM)
7135 ×1, 20% (PWM)
7135 ×1, 100%
7135 ×7, 100%
FET only, 100%

right?

No, not unless Fireflies rewrote the NarsilM code, which seems unlikely.

Modes 4 and 10 (each have 4 brightness levels, not counting moonlight) are spaced as follows:

12.5%
25%
50%
100%

This is based on the percentage of light.

If moonlight is turned on, you will see 5 total levels.

I suppose those percentages are estimations, and may probably vary due to different LED/number of 7135 used in the bank/etc.

You may refer to the NarsilM source code, more specifically the mode-set definitions for 3 channels (OUT_CHANNELS == 3 in file ModeSets.h). The default mode-set (4) is defined as:

(EDIT: below are from Lexel’s numbers)
// 4 modes (1.2-10-50-max) ~1.2% ~10% ~60% max
PROGMEM const byte mode7135Set4[] = { 25, 255, 255, 0};
PROGMEM const byte mode7135sSet4[] ={ 0, 0, 255, 0};
PROGMEM const byte modeFetSet4[] = { 0, 0, 0, 255};

So the first mode is 25/255 = ~10%, while the others are indeed (7135 ×1, 100%) – (7135 ×7, 100%) – (FET only, 100%)

Is this correct? In mode 4:
Level 1 is set to 100% of channel 1.
Level 2 is set to 100% of channel 1 and 2.
Level 3 is set to 100% of channel 1, 2 and 50% of the FET.
Level 4 is set to 100% of channel 1, 2 and the FET.

This kind of makes sense to me. I hope it’s correct.

I believe the spacing in brightness levels will vary between the 219C and the xpl due to the Nichia version using 7 × 7135 and the Cree version using 14 × 7135. Is this correct?

Bob_McBob wrote:

I’m curious how long it takes to heat up if you disable the thermal stepdown. I don’t really like the behaviour with the Q8 because it never steps back up, so I just have it disabled and can generally get pretty decent usage out of turbo before it gets too hot to hold (i.e. high 50s C). Certainly more than 24 seconds.

I’m sorta glad that the 700ish lumen mode will probably be the one I use most, because it will be less rosy compared to the max. Those 9080 nichias driven to their limit are pretty damn pink. Although I might think differently once I get mine.

JasonWW wrote:

Does this concur with the the notes I quoted from the Q8 (FET+1)? I can’t really tell.

That first step down looks a bit larger than 100% to 55%. Maybe more like 100% to 35%? Does that seem correct?

The driver and configurations on ROT66 (FET+1+6, 3 channels) is different from Q8 (FET+1, 2 channels), so sometimes you cannot simply apply what you observed from Q8 to ROT66. The thermal step-down in ramping in original NarsilM periodically checks if the temperature limit is exceeded, and if yes, it will reduce 1/6 = ~16.7% of the current output level (output levels are not guaranteed to be linear though). And the lower bound of this step-down is the max of the 7135s, i.e., on ROT66 it is (1 + 6) = 7 × 7135. That’s why I said “step-down to the highest regulated brightness level”.

JasonWW wrote:

Sorry, all that code looks Greek to me. Lol. So does it look like the ROT66 is using their own tweaked version of NarsilM v1.2?

The default mode-sets defined in the code Lexel posted are slightly different from the original NarsilM v1.2, so they did tweak something, and I wish they could release that modified version (they should, for license compliance).

JasonWW wrote:

Is this correct? In mode 4:
Level one is set to 100% of channel 1.
Level 2 is set to 100% of level 1 and 2.
Level 3 is set to 100% of level 1, 2 and 50% of the FET.
Level 4 is set to 100% of level 1, 2 and the FET.

This kind of makes sense to me. I hope it’s correct.

Put them in a table:

255 means 100% output of a channel. 25 means 25/255 = ~10% output of that channel. Hope this is much clearer.

JasonWW wrote:

I believe the spacing in brightness levels will vary between the 219C and the xpl due to the Nichia version using 7 × 7135 and the Cree version using 14 × 7135. Is this correct?

Sorry, I have no idea how many 7135s are used in the XP-L HI ROT66.

The Nichia version is using 7 and the Cree version is using 14 according to Lexel.

toobadorz wrote:

Put them in a table:

Channel	(7135 ×1)	(7135 ×6)	(FET)
Level #1	25	0	0
Level #2	255	0	0
Level #3	255	255	0
Level #4	0	0	255

255 means 100% output of a channel. 25 means 25/255 = ~10% output of that channel. Hope this is much clearer.

Level 1 is set to 10% of channel 1. 
Level 2 is set to 100% of channel 1.
Level 3 is set to 100% of channel 1 and channel 2.
Level 4 is set to 100% of the FET (channel 3).

That’s correct?

Doesn’t the highest level in other versions of NarsilM add the 7135 channels to the FET? In this version it turns them off and uses only the FET?

JasonWW wrote:

Doesn’t the highest level in other versions of NarsilM add the 7135 channels to the FET?

No.

When all 3 channels are at 100%, the output is actually a bit lower than the FET by itself. So for the very highest level, most lights run FET-only. The 7135 chips would only drag it down.

toobadorz wrote:

I wish they could release that modified version (they should, for license compliance).

Tom and I got a copy of the code today. It’ll be up soon.

ToyKeeper wrote:

JasonWW wrote:

Doesn’t the highest level in other versions of NarsilM add the 7135 channels to the FET?

No.

When all 3 channels are at 100%, the output is actually a bit lower than the FET by itself. So for the very highest level, most lights run FET-only. The 7135 chips would only drag it down.

Here’s the output behavior on a scope. Gif from low to max FET. Horizontal lines are 100% 1×7135 and (1+6)×7135. The latter is almost impossible to activate on ramp mode so had to swap to mode config for that, but the 1×7135 I managed to do a couple of times.

JasonWW wrote:

The Nichia version is using 7 and the Cree version is using 14 according to Lexel.

Interesting. 7 × 7135 on the Nichia is right on the spot, the max temperature is ~43C in my runtime test. Curious about the brightness and stabilized temperature when 14 × 7135 are installed for the Cree version.

JasonWW wrote:

Okay so I think I’m getting it.
Level 1 is set to 10% of channel 1.
Level 2 is set to 100% of channel 1.
Level 3 is set to 100% of channel 1 and channel 2.
Level 4 is set to 100% of the FET (channel 3).

That’s correct?

ToyKeeper wrote:

Tom and I got a copy of the code today. It’ll be up soon.

Sounds good, looking forward to it.

maukka wrote:

Here’s the output behavior on a scope. Gif from low to max FET. Horizontal lines are 100% 1×7135 and (1+6)×7135. The latter is almost impossible to activate on ramp mode so had to swap to mode config for that, but the 1×7135 I managed to do a couple of times.

!https://imgur.com/ZoZcQTa.gif!

That’s fairly clear to demonstrate how the modes are achieved. Well done, maukka

toobadorz wrote:

That’s fairly clear to demonstrate how the modes are achieved. Well done, maukka