i dont get why it is so hard to understand that there is obviously sufficient heat sinking for the current the emitter is being driven at.
is it a disappointment that my beloved ea4s heat sink looks like nothing more than a star? yes.
i just don’t buy it, i am not at all convinced that much metal to anodization contact is enough to prevent any lumen sag
without specific testing on this light i may be wrong, but my own experience tells me either it will sag or we are missing something
maybe that is also why the light is designed to not stay on turbo mode very long
does not look like it is only touching anno…
i cant find the selfbuilt right now… but it shows that it has adequate enough heat sinking
edit: dont get me wrong, id rather have seen better heat sinking. that way they could have squeezed a little more out of it. but it is what it is, and seems to function as needed
edit again: who wants to throw in the “pulsar will run his light on turbo until a new set of lithium primaries run out of juice” fund? only needed if said light fails during test… im not going to attempt it on it, i like it too much to torture it… like all my lights too much to intentionally torture them
I had the EA4 warm up by 25C on the body. I assume the emitter had to warm up by at least that much, since it is the source of the heat. If the drive current was the same from beginning to end, there would be an output sag by the end of the test. It is unavoidable without there being a feedback system to adjust for the increase in temperature. Maybe a temperature sensor. Not likely though, since it would be a positive feedback loop. More current ,more heat, more current…
I’m going to run a controlled test on the EA4. I do not have an EA8, but I find it very difficult to believe it has no lumen sag at all. If the light warms up at all, the emitter must as well.
OK, I’m hooked up to a power supply, light draws about 2A at 6.0V. Driver is a buck converter. At 5.5V it’s 2.22A. It tops out around 3.8V with 3.14A in. I’m guessing this is close to the emitter current (right before it stops bucking). Below that the output starts to drop off. The driver looks to be of a decent efficient design, not linear.
Edit: For those who want to know, this light has a parasitic drain of ~540uA, not including the blue LED flashes. Higher than I expected but not terrible.
Test details: I’m setting the input voltage at 5.5V and measuring current, temperature and lumens at 30s intervals for 10 minutes. Results pending…
The only thing I can think of is that the light has reached steady state temperature by the time it drops out of Turbo to High in selfbuilt’s runtime test.
That doesn’t really make any sense. The more current you push into the LED the hotter it gets and the more current you have to push into the LED… You end up with thermal runaway.
You are misreading this as usual, since you have a big chip on your shoulder about certain vendors. It has everything to do about what I see with the heat sink, which goes against what I have been taught about heat sinks, no matter who the vendor is. Do us a favor and don’t go down the poor downtrodden Mfg. route again, at least not in my thread.
Really sick of some people protecting their favourite brands by concluding it is sufficient without proper test done and ignoring what is considered best heatsink design that is to have unibody and screws used to firmly secure base plate. I am called Fenix fan, but I criticise Fenix either. Check my post in CPF about RC40. Not targetting specific people here in this thread or in this forum, they exist every where. Want to defend your favourite brand? do a test or do a proper analysis and present it.
im not defending them because im a nitecore fanboy. i only have one. just looking at selfbuilts chart, it shows that its doing something right. i dont have anything to monitor temps, and i dont have a power supply, so cant really do much but run it on high until either it dies or the batteries die.
patiently waiting for a second set of results on this light
Who is doing that? There have been several tests and so far they have all shown that the heatsink design is working adequately. If this “proper” test shows something out of the ordinary, that’s great. However, using the objective evidence currently available, visual evidence notwithstanding, it isn’t unreasonable to conclude adequate heatsink design. If anything, the overreaction in this thread needs to be subdued. Innocent until proven guilty?
My intention is to highlight to everyone for this discussion to be objective and resourceful with measured data, post less about conspiracy theories or assumption. For example, someone posted he saw a video of BlackShadow Terminator having very ugly hotspot. I asked him politely for the link of the video. At the end, he admitted he made a mistake and it was EYE30, not BS Terminator. Since I don’t own EYE30, I don’t discuss further his subjective view on EYE30. Now OL presented tear down and shows that EA8 share the same heatsink design with EA4 which is already criticised in China forums. He doesn’t need to test it to comment it because this kind of heatsink design make most of people who have seen better heatsink design worrying. So OL shared his thought that is completely normal response to see this kind of design.
