Sorry to break the news but you might be a bit disappointed with them if you are not aware of the output.
Thread here.
anyone got tailcap readings with xml2 using this driver?
The quality of the T1 seems excellent. I haven’t done much but look at it, and quickly order another. Of course it’s a bigger light than the Roche F8, so it seems more appropriate to mod it with drivers that are way to big for the chosen emitter. :bigsmile:
It seems odd how the pill screws in from the front, and locks the body tube onto the head, leaving the only part that still unscrews at the tailcap, for battery insertion.
Sorry, not yet… But at 3A I dont see any reason why it should differ from XM-L. (and yes I am fully aware of vf differences)
Yupp! That was my reason for testing/using the 4A ramping driver in it. Needed a fairly large sized pill, and good heat sinking…
I have 10 on the way, I'll check each of them with the same cell and LED and see how consistent they are. Any preferences as to XML U3 vs. XML2 U2 vs. copper vs. aluminum etc.? I'll test them, but I ain't doing ALL the possible combinations! :party:
id like to at least see the results of xml2 on copper with one driver, not all 10
Oh no, they will ALL be tested before I even think about soldering the first one into a pill, but I'm just looking for consistency (want to avoid stuff like the group-switching 105c's I got last time which had a 50% DOA rate). Which parts I use to test with doesn't make any difference to me, but I can use whatever would be most useful to others.
lol. well in that case, my vote is xml2 on copper as thats what im thinking of putting this in
The driver ceases to provide full current to the XML2 on a sinkpad at 3.634V in.
BTW, my drivers seem to start out around 2.98A on full, dropping to around 2.9A when they warm up.
High actually has PWM, just at a high duty cycle of 96% or 98% (I forgot). I don’t know why they did that.
That's retarted! I don't see the point of that either.
I put a scope on it. On high, I am seeing a 200 nanosecond current pulse followed a microsecond later by a 500 nanosecond pulse. That pattern repeats every 65 microseconds. It looks like they are not programming the timer-counter used to PWM the LED properly when they want full-on. That first 200 ns pulse is probably a result of the capacitance of the wires and LED… it wants to be another 500 nanosecond pulse.
Also, one of the drivers that I tested is PWMing at 16 kHz, another one is running at 18.5 Khz.
I also noticed that if you glitch the power just right to the driver, there is a 5th mode… dark. At least DARK has no PWM.
That residual PWM on the HIGH mode accounts for the fact that a supposed 3.05 amp driver is really a 2.95 amp driver…
These are good drivers… but they could have been “qlite” a bit better. Getting rid of the residual PWM on high and making that 20ma/2% mode spacing 20ma/5% would be fantastic.
I do not own an oscilloscope, but I mentioned once that I measured 4700Hz on High mdoe o nthe old Nanjg 105C. texaspyro said to me he never saw something like that. Actually then I tested another one from another source and that was 4400Hz on High mode. For these qlites I cannot get a reading on High with my DMM. On the first page of the thread I mention all 5 pcs are around 2970mA on high mode tested with my power-supply, using 30cm 2.5mm2 leads.
This has been brought to my attention by a couple of customers reading the thread and I feel the need to reply.
High mode has been programmed at 100%.
We asked the factory about these reports and they checked and said it’s the batch of 7135 that cannot really do 380mA, but 372mA. The factory didn’t even know about this until we asked for some rechecks.
For who has accurate possibilities to measure the current can simply take the MCU from the 2800mA 105C and replace it on the Qlite, you will see the high mode will not increase.
Thanks!
Hank
Thanks for the feedback Hank, I for one am very happy with my Qlite 105c! It does what it’s supposed to do and comes on in Lo mode whenever I want it to without distraction of blinkies and such. If I need a bit more from it, I have a second one with added chips.
> High mode has been programmed at 100%.
Well, I see that their programmers believe that they did, but actually they didn't. Texaspyro and I independently found that behavior, it's there, it comes from the MCU, and it is in the firmware.
I think I know what they did wrong: They probably used Compare Output Mode 3 with an Output Compare Register value of 0 for high, but that won't give a constant high level.
Instead Compare Output Mode 2 with an Output Compare Register value of 255 would have been appropriate for high (and lower values for lower brightness levels).
Or even better, turn off the timer-counter and program the output pin directly when you don’t want PWM.
Hank, don’t believe what the factory is telling you!. There is definitely PWM on high with these drivers. Here is a scope image of the current waveform the Qlite drive puts out on HIGH. PWM pulses are clearly seen. Scale is 250 mA per division, inverted (positive going is where the PWM pulse turns off). Current probe was a Tektronix AM503 clamp-probe. Scope was a Tektronix THS730.
Thankfully, DrJones still sells 7135 drivers with his meticulously programmed MCU’s.