Lexels driver compilation

Interesting. I don’t know much about go fund me’s. I’ll look into it.

22mm D1S white flat

after the first ptototype failed due to PCB bug I can now finally announce I it for white flats running

first Prototype 20mm small LDO and MCU did not work out

2. Prototype of 22mm with D1S specifications works

still a few things to be addressed, like The not tented Viases next to the LED- Pad that are ground, they are there to get heat from MOSFET note spread but should be below mask

A public “Thank you!” and “Well done!” for the excellent 8A L6 buck driver. I received the replacement xhp70 from Simon yesterday and installed it and the driver with a large spring from BlueSwordM. The L6 is now a close second behind my Chimera for my favorite.

Do you think it would be a good idea to make some future generation that would have FET on MCPCB, compatible with Led4Power’s PCBs?

I have that board thermally improved a lot filling vises with solder, placing a lot of them from ground plane right next to the FET planes
I guess up to 5-6A should be no problem with that PCB, 2 layer MCPCB would be too expensive

there is no single 20mm MOSLED DTP MCPCB for 3030 LEd that I am aware of
also the driver runs on 2.8V
I need for OTSM with also a diode after the LDO
the MOSFET has to have a low resistance below 2.5V for good reguilation at lower battery level
SIR800, 404 and the Infineon BSC009 have down to about 2V relative constant low on resistance

for LFPAK33 package I need a new MOSFET with similar prroperties

any recommondation what to change?

LDO in D1? For what?

CC FET OPAmp has to compare the voltage over the shunt
relative to to the PWM cycle which gets transformed to a DC voltage
The OPV changes the FET resistance to match both voltages the same

But for a constant max current the PWM voltage needs to be aleways the same amplitude so I have to use a 2.8V LDO

Got it. :+1:

I didn’t mean to suggest switching entirely to FET on MCPCB but rather offering it as an option. LD4B can regulate 12A. And maybe FET removal would enable shrinking the driver so it fits more lights.

why buy it for 800€ when you can hack it in 30 minutes?

Legally your not supposed to. You lose the warranty as well. That’s the only reasons I can think of.

legally I can also set them back to original non A version, but why is it they sell me the hardware with locked features
unlocking cost 70-80% of the PSU?

So is it legal you reflash the firmware on a driver?

its just a few bits in a a code line that make A version or non A version, no hardware or special calibration
the calibrated PSU costs another 300€ more

I don’t know anything about it, but if it comes with any kind of user agreement, then that could be the basis for the “legally” that Jason mentions. Other than that, it’s just a loss of warranty, since they “legally” don’t have to honor a warranty on a modified piece of hardware. I say go ahead and do it, as long as you are willing to take the risk.

EDIT: I just want to add that people have been fighting this kind of “anti-feature” design for a long time with technology, including Microsoft Windows, Canon digital cameras, Apple iPhones, even Android phones (supposedly open source software). Those are just some of the examples off the top of my head, but it seems to me that the more expensive the technology is, the more likely that the manufacturer will install “anti-features” so you have to pay even more money to get full functionality.

Legally it’s complex and depends on jurisdiction. Manufacturers often want buyers to be licensors rather than owners. Some countries push back more some push back less.

They do it with lots of electronics. My to modify a Fluke 177 to a Fluke 179 takes 15min. It’s a lot cheaper! Well done Lexel!

I mean, Lexel is an individual, not a company.

What he does with what he bought is not the company’s business.

Yes, if he has to do a warranty claim, he’ll have problems.

He can just flash back the software if needed.

There’s what’s legal, and what shouldn’t be illegal.

the thing is both firmwares are identical, the hack changes only in a file DP811 to DP811A,
so its one byte of data changed which makes the difference from a limited to unlimited features supply

It is my property if I want I can throw it out of my window and beat it to a pile of scrap with a 4 pound hammer,
guess trying to claim warranty successful is kind of hard if I do so

Huh, wait, there’s no different firmware that you had to install? Just a different pointer address to the name of the machine?

And yeah. What you buy belongs to you.

The reason they sell the cheaper model with all the same hardware is because it saves the company money. One item comes off the assembly line and they can make it either version depending on their needs.

The difference in price based on software features allows the company to offer 2 models to fit different people’s needs. If you don’t need all the features, you can buy the software limited version. The company makes a smaller profit on it, but they might make up for it in volume. They probably sell more of the cheaper ones than they do the more expensive ones.

It’s about product differentiation. If they did not offer the cheaper one their competitors will and they will lose money.

What driver is sold as having features turned off that you have to pay more to get turned on? I have never seen such drivers.
Some UI’s are illegal to flash such as Guppydrv. If you tried to sell drivers with it and you did not pay the fees to use it, you could be sued by the creator.

All of this gets into the digital copyrights act.

It is one thing to violate these clauses on your own personal equipment as it is hard to prove anything. It is another story if you buy a bunch of the DP832, convert it to the DP832A and then try to sell them for a profit.

Personally, I would not admit to any kind of illegal activity on a public forum. It could be fine or it might come back to bite you in the rear.