freeme posts pretty regularly, having posted several times today.
I measured at 4m and the numbers I got were a bit less than the FT03S reflector. Seems a bit strange considering that the hotspot is smaller and seems more intense to me. The middle of the hotspot doesn’t measure any higher than near the edge so maybe the donut hole is just an illusion?? It isn’t really a hole but to my eye it seems like the hotspot is brighter near the edge. I’ll try swapping back and measuring at max ramp since turbo brightness can vary so much.
I’ve observed this with the sbt90.2 in my convoy L2. Like just the outer ring of the hotspot seems brighter. I think it is an illusion maybe related to how well defined (and big) the hotspot is. The intensity drops off dramatically right outside the hotspot whereas on lots of lights there is a more natural transition to the corona. Maybe related to how well defined the actual LED light emitting surface is, not like an XPL HI where the white part surrounding the die lights up some and that will brighten the beam corona.
So I swapped the reflectors back. With the old (FT03) reflector I get about 2-4% higher readings but that could just be margin of error. The hotspot is a bit smaller with the old (FT03) reflector in the FT03S and it seems that the intensity is more even in the whole spot whereas the FT03S reflector decreases as you move away from the middle. That could explain the similar readings but different hotspot size. The FTO3 is about 8-10% less intense with the FT03S reflector and the spot is noticeably larger. Seems like the SST40 it’s more affected than the SBT90.2. M4DM4X’s FT03 was also affected more than the FT03S by the reflector difference. I did also notice the donut like effect when I put the FT03 reflector back in the FT03. I think the old reflector performed better outside but I’m not sure if I should be able to tell such a small difference.
So I just tested it again with the FT03 at max ramp and the FT03S at 6/7. This time I leaned it against a wall so the distance remains the same throughout the test. I measured no difference in output on both and no difference in throw on the FT03S. The FT03 however dropped in intensity by 10% with the FT03S reflector. one thing I do notice with the FT03 reflector is that the flowery corona pattern seems slightly bigger on one side. Is this to do with the centering of the LED. It does seem centred to me.
A big evenly illuminated very bright hotspot causes a strong optical illusion that the center is darker, it is your brain doing that. It may be a reason why people report a donut hole. If you do lux-measurements over that hotspot you will find that the brightness does not vary much.
Is there a name for this phenomenon?
Not that I’m aware. I don’t know what Djozz is talking about.
When I see donut holes I can measure as well as see them. If I hold the light stationary on an object it can be hard to see, but when I move it around it becomes more clearly visible.
Moving the beam around helps with avoiding the illusion. It is at least something that I have and had to verify with a luxmeter that it was indeed an illusion.
So, are they working on fixing the issues with this light? At the moment, the processing time for the black color is March 28, 2020. I guess the current batch is sold out. Should we expect the next batch to have better reflectors, thicker wires and fixed driver??
freeme?
Is there a coupon yet?
I am still waiting for manufacturer's reply. From what i know last week, their engineers are not back at work for some reasons. I do not know, situation might have improved this week?
Has anyone tried this? One of the reviews say the beam is slightly better than the original FT03 reflector. Not sure whether that means the intensity or the beam pattern.
Edit: fixed link
So i finally got mine the other day and the beam is definitely not exactly round. With that being said it it definitely gets a good bit of light well out over 800 ft. But i don’t think there should be something on the surface of the led. I have not taken it apart yet to investigate as I don’t have much experience in doing so and don’t want to end up with dust in the light. not sure how to get photos on here. but it almost looks like a small pin prick somewhat centered on the led
So it’s probably not best to buy this light just yet
Mine has something on LED but I’m pretty sure that happened after I opened it and switched the reflector. There’s a window protecting the LED so you can probably take the spec of dust off it. Not sure how this should be done though. Make try shaking it or a microfiber cloth?
Great find! My FT03S is supposed to have shipped on Jan 10 but I still haven’t received it and I’ve been asking them for a refund because of the reported issues. They said they are looking into it. If I do receive it, I will buy this reflector. Hopefully it performs even better than the FT03 reflector.
Question? can this driver be re flashed with Narsil ? to keep it from stepping down like the FT03 being able to disable step down
Sure, or you could change Anduril, assuming you are configuring it for a high max temp - 40 clicks to set the max 70C, and if you need more, then calibrate the temp 15C lower.
If the question of thermal step down for the irregular dips of the turbo behavior (the ‘yoyo’ effect), creating a larger interval between the perceived ambient temp and the upper limit (70ºC) has no bearing with my unit.
Also tried dissipating any heat from the FET or some of the 7135s:
Copper pill inserted between the FET and the charging port:
But I did stumble on something, with a partially discharged cell, much better results:
So I explored this avenue and had some interesting results.
Using a 20700 Molicel:
And then with a Sofirn 5500mAh / 26650 cell:
My interpretation is the PID behavior of Anduril when the ‘gate’ is fully opened there is an inrush current that prematurely steps down the current, the light then tries to climb back up but the current is again too high so it re-throttles. As was mentioned, Mateminco did not consult TK and there seems to be no tweeking for this particular emitter, or they had tested with a >50 mOhm cell.
It is not a workaround as rather a compromise. There is small loss of the turbo (~10%) but with a 64 mOhm cell the dip is but once.