What if you loosen the tail cap, then tighten the battery tube fully, then tighten the tail cap?
I’m trying to figure out what gets squeezed when you tighten everything.
I think both positive and negative are on both ends of the battery tube. Positive in the middle and negative around the outer ring.
Does tightening the battery tube just put pressure on the brass driver ring or does it miss that and tighten up against the aluminum body?
If the battery tube presses against the driver then it’s just squeezing the pcb against the 3 legs the 3 screws go in to. Are the 3 screws tight?
Then the rear cap just compresses that single driver spring until the battery tube outer ring contacts the driver outer ring. No current goes through the tail cap.
You may be squeezing the battery holder too much. Are those 8 screws tight?
I loosened the tail cap and aligned the engraving on the tube with the switch on the head. Now I can simply twist the tail cap for physical look out, which makes more sense than tightening or loosening the head.
The LEDs lighting irregularly may be due to variance across the LED banks + drivers. That is a strong reason as to why there is not a lower moonlight mode because going lower may have only caused 1 bank to light and they didn’t want people thinking they had bad LEDs? I would very much light to go the Narsil route because the UI is nothing short of miraculous, but that TA driver is essentially just a banks of chips + FET right? I’d much rather keep the constant current driver for better efficiency without burning off excess voltage or wait for a buck driver capable of replacing this that can closely replicate Narsil. This is why I didn’t want the light to be glued up extremely tight because of these concerns.
I’ll suspend harsh criticisms until the light is in my hands in a few days. If it’s only a few LEDs being dimmer on the lowest mode and not a bank of LEDs not turning on at all I will be able to sleep at night. I didn’t get this light for it’s lowest mode…
The difference of brightness in low mode maybe because of difderence in Vf of led
They set voltage too low, so the difference will be more noticeable
I believe the brightness of each group at higher mode is also different, but our eye is not good enough to notice
It is a 3 channel design. Fet + 8 + 1
It’s more efficient than a single or 2 channel.
I can’t tell you much about efficiency because I use my lights during a work week and recharge them on my days off. As long as it can make it through the week, I’m happy.
Wasn’t the point of waiting a couple more weeks so the manufacturer and Banggood could test out the lights to make sure they didn’t have problems? I know only a couple people have the light and we are already having problems.
I’m not so sure about that. If this driver uses current control, which I expect it does, it should be able to compensate for minor variations in LED forward voltage.
Another possibility:
I think from a photo I saw that there is a separate driver for each of the three sets of LEDs, all controlled together by the one MCU. Each driver will control the current for it’s own set of LEDs using it’s own sense resistor and other circuitry. Operating at the lowest current levels is the most tricky to do precisely, voltages across the sense resistor and PCB traces will be minute, tiny differences between each of the three drivers could cause large variations when running at the lowest levels.
Any small differences between each of the three drivers will be very obvious to the eye at the lowest levels.
Maybe this is why there is no ultra-low mode, perhaps this driver circuit is not capable of the fine precision needed to work consistently at very low current levels ? It is asking a lot to expect a driver to have a dynamic range of perhaps 1000 to 1 (e.g. say 10 lumens to 10,000).
I wonder if we are simply seeing inevitable sample variations in quantity manufacturing, which evaluation of a small number of prototypes or pre-production units did not expose. (Or could not, if they were built from components all from the same manufacturing batch, i.e. were more consistent.)
Seems unlikely to me. Poor battery contact would likely affect operation at high levels. But at the lowest current level, as here, it should have little significance.