Dale,
Could the Temperature step-down thingy (PID?) be shocked/stuck?
Thanks,
-Chuck
Do they do that? I have no idea. But it’s being consistent over multiple tests, the big numbers are not coming back. I checked the springs in the tail, everything is as it should be. All the emitters are burning, whether on L1 L2 H1 or H2 (I’m not looking at it on Turbo, thankyouverymuch!)
Wow that truly was insane….! While it lasted. That wasn’t practical anyways. Haha
Maybe instead of 20 seconds, it was a minute, that would be a good trade off instead of the 7000 lumen for 2 minutes, or was it three mins.
I know I’m forgetful and all that, but when I do something like this it makes me wonder if I have a brain wormhole or something? I ran it through the lightbox 3 times, took it in the game room and showed my mom and dad, it was intense! I lit up the kitchen above and beyond the house lights. I lit up the living room, bedroom, back in the light box, it was consistently doing that 11,000-12,000 and getting searingly hot VERY fast.
Now it won’t do it at all, and all I did was pull the cells and charge em! I just tried LG HE4 cells, fresh off the charger, 22,800 in the light box on the meter for 7866 lumens. I just don’t get it.
Uh, it was me all along. Somehow I didn’t get one of the 2 driver screws tight. Ground was not solid.
With the LG HE-4’s in it, 36,300 on the meter for 12,523.5 lumens. :bigsmile:
Hate it when I do stupid stuff like that, and then can’t find it! Love it when I DO find it! lol
Holy cow. Now I want one. I hope Hank adds XP-L HI as an option. Preferably in 2A, 2D, 3A, or 3D tint.
On another note I’m really surprised they’re apparently much brighter than the dedomed XP-Ls we’ve been using. djozz’s testing showed XP-Ls took virtually no hit in output when dedomed? Tell me I am I missing something.
Glad to hear that you found the problem, Dale.
Now the question is; Would Hank sell the light ‘like that’, that would get hot in 20sec. - Or would he throttle it back?
.
Slim,
Yes! - 2A, 2D, 3A, or 3D is where it’s at! - No Green in those, and I HATE Green.
Thanks,
-Chuck
High 1
High 2
Turbo
Interesting. I’m not seeing a comparable illumination to other lights that I’ve built that had similar numbers. Is it because of the 4 triple optics? Normally a triple doesn’t compare well to other lights with similar output due to the much wider beam angle. Is that what’s going on here? Everything is saturated from all the rains so the darker materials may be absorbing more light? I don’t know.
Tint looks good - At least in the pics I don’t see the usual DD Green.
Thanks,
-Chuck
Awesome news, thanks Dale!
Not sure if I missed it, but were you able to measure the LED current in your M43?
You didn’t miss it, just got done…
At the negative lead going to the mcpcb, I see 8.42A in Turbo. Forward Voltage is 10.03V in Turbo. So it’s doing 84.4526 Watts.
Now, what do these things mean? I measured 4.06V with the light off, this is the reading taken using the positive and negative leads On the mcpcb. Light on, in Low 2, shows 7.80Vf, in High 1 shows 8.25V, and then in Turbo it shows 10.03V.
I don’t understand it, I just read the meter on these things.
Edit: y’all show me where I”m wrong, but I see this as 2.81A per emitter at 3.34Vf each. Is this correct? We are running 3 XP-L’s in series, 4 sets of these in parallel. How all that inter-relates is confusing to me. But if you read the charts and do the comparisons, 2.81A at 3.34Vf is pretty much equivalent to the 1000 lumens per emitter the light box is showing. Yes? Match’s charts show an XM-L2 at 1070-1080 lumens correlated to these numbers, so everything looks pretty much accounted for.
It just gets crazy when you see the size of the light and 12 emitters doing this. 
Edit II: Oh, and it shows 57.5Kcd for 479.58M extrapolated.
Thanks for the measurements.
It seems like the M43 is pushing more power into the LEDs since the body heated up faster.
I wonder if that’s because XP-G2 has a higher forward voltage than XP-L. I’ve been looking for djozz’s current vs Vf plots but couldn’t find them. I think I trust them more than Cree’s own conservative tests.
I used Match’s charts, since the XP-L is an XM-L2 die. They’re not exactly the same but it’s close enough for government work.
Hmm the XM-L2/XP-L does seems to have a slightly higher forward voltage than the XP-G2.
Assuming the emitters are in a 3S4P (total Vf of 10.03V in turbo) configuration, the emitters are still “only” getting 8.42A/4 = 2.1A per emitter, which is pretty light for an XP-L. However, we are reaching the max reasonable heat generated for such a small body, so I don’t think there’s too much sense in pushing the M43 farther.
I wonder what the sense resistor values are for the XP-L edition and the XP-G2 edition.
Um, Ryan? If we have 3S 4P, wouldn’t the 8.42A be divided by the 3 in series? Each of the the 4 triples is getting the same 8.42A, divided into the 3 emitters in each chain, for 2.81A each, which is right inline with the 1000 lumens each emitter is putting out. Right?
And in that line of thought, an XP-G2 at 2.81A will only make what, 550 to 600 lumens? So this explains the huge difference in output as compared to the smaller dies. Doesn’t it?
One Sipik SK68 makes for a neat little beam, what about a dozen rubber-banded together?
Edit: Sorry, the brain wormhole at work…
Edit II: I took the 12,523 lumens, divided it by the 84 Watts, for 149 lumens per watt, out the front. I think that’s pretty dang decent, isn’t it?
Djozz just tested a new S4 xpg2 at over 900 lumens at 2.8amps.
That’s interesting, especially when 12 XP-G2 S4 2B’s in the same light made 7690 lumens (from memory, which is flawed) as compared to 12,523. Same driver, same cells, only thing different is the emitters.
What are we to make of that? In this particular instance it’s 642 lumens per emitter vs 1044, a significant difference. Again, I don’t understand the in’s and out’s, I just read the meter.
That’s also bare emitter output I believe, so no optic/lens losses
Hmm here’s what I sketched up previously for another member:
Since there are four emitter banks in parallel, the 8.42A is split among the four while the voltage is the same across the banks, and each emitter is seeing 10.0V/3 = 3.33V.
If it were the other way around, each emitter would see 2.81A at 10.0V/4 = 2.5V.
Is the camera settings the same? Seem like your triple XP-L X6 shot is righter than M43 Turbo. Building and surround pavement are dry, doubt it has any impact to the pic.
[quote=DBCstm] Interesting. I'm not seeing a comparable illumination to other lights that I've built that had similar numbers. Is it because of the 4 triple optics? Normally a triple doesn't compare well to other lights with similar output due to the much wider beam angle. Is that what's going on here? Everything is saturated from all the rains so the darker materials may be absorbing more light? I don't know. [/quote]