One for me and one for the family…
Texas_Ace BLF Calibrated Lumen tube / Sphere No math skills needed - Several spheres still available
Has anyone tested an emitter-swapped Q8? My tube is calibrated with maukka’s lights, and I get only 3340 FL1 lumens with an otherwise stock Q8 using LH351Ds and 30Qs. With 219Cs it was more like 2700 lumens.
I would expect that output with the 219C, but I’m thinking the LH351D should be close to stock output levels, right?
With FET drivers it depends on the amperage it’s pulling. You need max voltage to get highest output. Are you using button top or solder blobbed 30Q? Have you tried measuring it with only 3 cells and 2 cells to see if you get reduced output?
Are the battery ends and driver ring clean? Are any springs looking burnt or collapsed? Do all the cells drop to the same voltage after using the light for a while?
Does it still heat up real fast?
I would clean all the contact point with isopropyl alcohol or similar…
The measurement is with button top 30Qs from a reliable source. Flat top GAs produce a proportionally lower turn-on output of 3270 lumens. Cells discharge evenly and the springs look perfect. There was a small amount of crud on the contact ring, but cleaning it made no difference. The surface temperature of the head reaches 60°C within 3 minutes.
Testing turn-on lumens with different numbers of cells:
1 cell (briefly) - 2140 lumens
2 cells - 2880 lumens
3 cells - 3300 lumens
4 cells - 3540 lumens
Hmm, I don’t know. You might try posting on the Modded Q8 thread. Maybe someone there has tried those leds in a Q8.
Well, has anyone measured a stock Q8 with 219C in the TA tube? That would also be relevant.
Like Maukka said:
I’m sure people have swapped 219C. They may just not be on this thread. I’d check the modded Q8 thread.
I tested my q8 xpl a while ago with the TA tube… 4300 @ turn on… it dropped to 3330 lumen in 30 seconds…
How do you normally take a reading?
The Texas_Ace Integrating Sphere 2.0
I’ve eradicated everything but diffuser bounce back from the TA design and my lights now measure relative to one another and close to Maukka’s results. No sidewalls before initial diffusion, no glue or ledges for spill to slide down the walls onto and be absorbed into, no advantage for sending most of the beam centrally through the 1st diffuser.
I’ve got thicker diffusion after TA’s 1st plastic clear diffuser to spread the light evenly, it’s just a case of getting the right thickness of diffusion before the sensor now to get readings up 20% on each light.
Strange thing is the Acebeam X80-GT is still reading higher than my DX80. If I added the theorised percentage increase on both the TA and my device then the X80-GT will be way over 30k.
I’m glad to see you make your own design, but unfortunately you can’t call it the “Texas_Ace” …… Integrating Sphere. You’ll have to use a different name like the Flashaholics Sphere or KG Tuning Sphere.
The one thing you still need is a calibrated reference light such as the one sold by Maukka. Now that I have mine, I plan to experiment with some ideas I have in my head.
I do see one flaw in your design, I think, and that is you have the light reflecting back almost 180° into the sensor tube. Matt at Adventure Sport Flashlights did this same thing. Ideally the light should bounce around in the box to become diffused. You might get more consistent readings if the flashlight opening was on the left side of the box in the picture firing over the top of the tube. This way you avoid direct reflections.
I can push the sensor tube all way in so the opening faces the roof but tbh the inlet diffuser is so thick the light is very linear. Readings are relative no matter where the sensor is. I can seal the hole and put it inside the box.
I’m wondering if making the insides of a pyramid design reflective and using the same inlet/outlet arrangement will be as accurate.
TUNING Tube
.
Interesting design. :+1:
One question…. What calibration light, or lights; are you using to calibrate your device??
He’s not using a calibration light per se. He’s using his existing flashlights and assuming they have the same output as the ones that Maukka has measured in the past.
The hardest part about using a box is that you get reflections which doesn’t mix the light around as well as a sphere shape. If you have some extra styrofoam pieces I would add some baffles inside maybe in the corners to try and get the light to spread around as evenly as possible. Make sure that the light hitting the tube inlet is all ambiant light. You don’t want direct light hitting that diffuser disc.
If you did mount the tube and sensor completely inside you would need to make sure it didn’t move around or fall over. It would need to be fixed in a permanent position so that you get repeatability.
If anyone wants to see some cool home made integrating spheres, Djozz has built several. He’s done some very scientific work.
I’m using TA’s disks to block outside light, tbh I’m getting very similar readings to TA on my sub 6000 lumen lights, the Cometa is 200 odd fully zoomed!!! my X45, DX80 and X80 are right on what I thought but the X80-GT is reading phenomenally high, even on a system that may slightly favour throwers.
I hope Maukka tests it at some point. When sat on the diffusers it reads 12,000 lumens more than the X80 on my sphere and 10,000 more on TA’s sphere. So it’s undeniably comparatively bright.
I’ll post all readings tomorrow, I’m happy with them but 36,000 turn on lumens for the X80-GT is insane.
Here we go again… here is an general rule when shopping for an acebeam x80-gt… acebeam claimed 32500 lumen… general rule is lumen are off by 10 %…
X80-gt is about 29,250 lumen. Worst case scenrio…
Zoomies always read very widely depending on if they are zoomed or not. The majority of light gets absorbed inside the head due to no reflector.
I like where you are headed with the TUNING Tube, looks to have potential. :+1:
But again, I ask you; ‘what calibrated light source(s)’ are you using as a reference for the ‘calibration’ of your device?