# New Luxeon Altilon



## evilc66 (Sep 9, 2009)

http://www.philipslumileds.com/newsandevents/releases/PR121.pdf

Not all that useful for the flashlight crowd, but I'm sure someone will find a use for it outside of headlight use.

Product page

http://www.philipslumileds.com/products/luxeon-altilon


----------



## bshanahan14rulz (Sep 9, 2009)

Neat find! Always wondered what company got to make the R8 quad-die. Always guessed osram, but wow, PL!


----------



## JohnR66 (Sep 9, 2009)

Indeed, a good product for automotive lighting. Hopefully LEDs will make their headlight debut in average priced vehicles.

If my math is correct, using average forward voltage, these won't be much interest to the high efficiency LED crowd as 44 to 60 lumens per watt is uninteresting.

Perhaps the extra heat these things make will be put to use to clear ice off the lenses in cold weather.


----------



## jtr1962 (Sep 9, 2009)

JohnR66 said:


> Perhaps the extra heat these things make will be put to use to clear ice off the lenses in cold weather.


That shouldn't be a problem as the light energy itself should be sufficient to melt the ice. In some of my experiments cooling power LEDs the lens only iced up at lower currents. For example, I recently had a K2 running at 1.5 amps with the heat sink at 9.5°F. The lens didn't ice up at all, despite the humid conditions in the room, due to the light energy keeping the dome above the dewpoint.


----------



## bshanahan14rulz (Sep 9, 2009)

linear arrays might not be too fun to focus in a flashlight either. gave me an interesting idea, though


----------



## space (Sep 10, 2009)

The efficacy isn't that bad if one consider 60 lm/w is at 1A/mm2 and the led does not have a, for high efficacies, very important light ekstracting silicone dome. Also the Vf, at [email protected] is close to "normal".


space

space


----------



## Jumi (Sep 10, 2009)

And that 62lumens/watt was the minimum value of that 850bin.

Now I want to see what kind of optics and reflectors are for this and does companies like Hella start using these in aftermarket high beams, fog lights and DLRs.

I want one to use DD or slightly resistored in my sled in existing lowbeams.

Juha


----------



## bshanahan14rulz (Sep 10, 2009)

most LED lighting optics remind me of the top half of an automotive projector. LEDs are aimed upwards at the top of the bowl which reflect the light forward and down. a ledge keeps light from straying too far down (up, after it passes through the asphere). 

kind of curious if the ledge is reflective or absorbant to light, and if it would have a positive or negative affect on the output...


----------



## rushnrockt (Sep 10, 2009)

Jumi said:


> Now I want to see what kind of optics and reflectors are for this and does companies like Hella start using these in aftermarket high beams, fog lights and DLRs.



If you look at Audi R8 design, they use double optic, first for each LED setup and then for the combined light beam for proper cut-off. More intricate than that of course, but that's the basics.


----------



## mds82 (Sep 10, 2009)

only 850 lumen??

HID lights are 3200 lumen. this is not going to be very bright


----------



## Illum (Sep 10, 2009)

lets see if some crazy modder feels compelled to stuff this is a flashlight...


----------



## lolzertank (Sep 10, 2009)

Even with a dome, 60 lm/W is not bad at 1A/mm^2. This might be of interest to people building super throwers. Efficiency at Cree's Q4 levels while having a very small apparent die size.



mds82 said:


> only 850 lumen??
> 
> HID lights are 3200 lumen. this is not going to be very bright



Compare to halogen high beams and you'll feel better.


----------



## space (Sep 11, 2009)

And who says one can only implement one LED in a lamp.

Car HID's are usually ~35/50W.


----------



## bshanahan14rulz (Sep 11, 2009)

car HIDs are between 32 and 38W.

and the optimist would say that these get 73 lm/W (and thats just assuming that the P bin isn't available. If the P bin were real, that would be between 1000 and 1200 lumens and between 73 and 87 lm/W)

And I don't think a dome would be beneficial for this LED's application. It would actually be detrimental to its ends as the focused borders would be less defined with a larger source.


----------



## NeSSuS-GTE (Sep 11, 2009)

Hey! Its not too often you see output ratings in *MegaNits*.
Why do I find that the most interesting part of this press release?

Interesting new form factor, but where's the new LED technology??

Hopefully soon, we'll see a press release like this that really blows our socks off... or more importantly blows the socks of HID lighting.


----------



## baterija (Sep 11, 2009)

Interesting catch Evil. Thanks for sharing.



jtr1962 said:


> That shouldn't be a problem as the light energy itself should be sufficient to melt the ice.



Don't be so sure. Even with halogen headlights and all their IR throwing ice removal goodness I've had occasional reicing issues on headlamps once they are clear. Driving introduces a significant air cooling factor.


----------



## bshanahan14rulz (Sep 11, 2009)

honestly, it's not the LED that interests me, its the optic. If only I could get my hands on it (for free, I'm not so curious that I'm willing to drop $3000 for a headlamp...)


----------



## lolzertank (Sep 11, 2009)

bshanahan14rulz said:


> And I don't think a dome would be beneficial for this LED's application. It would actually be detrimental to its ends as the focused borders would be less defined with a larger source.



It used to be that if you removed the dome, efficiency went down dramatically because of reflection caused by the different refractive indexes of the die and air. The dome is supposed to reduce those losses in addition to protecting the die.

However Lumileds is doing this, :twothumbs


----------



## LukeA (Sep 11, 2009)

mds82 said:


> only 850 lumen??
> 
> HID lights are 3200 lumen. this is not going to be very bright



Yes but the fixture efficiency of an HID projector is horrendous. Not so with LEDs.


----------



## IMSabbel (Sep 12, 2009)

baterija said:


> Interesting catch Evil. Thanks for sharing.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't be so sure. Even with halogen headlights and all their IR throwing ice removal goodness I've had occasional reicing issues on headlamps once they are clear. Driving introduces a significant air cooling factor.



I have seen designs that use fans /ram-air to circulate air from the heatsinks towards the front window as a de-ice function.

Also, about total lumens:
How much of the light of a HID headlight really goes "out of the front"? All this beamclipping and anti-glare surely kills some intensity...


----------



## PhotonWrangler (Sep 12, 2009)

The name Altilon sounds more like an air sickness medication than an LED. _Ask your doctor if Altilon is right for you. 
_


----------



## MichaelW (Sep 12, 2009)

5600K is just wrong.

LED based headilghts should be required to match HID, if not beat them (with a lower CCT)

70CRI, come on.


----------



## bshanahan14rulz (Sep 13, 2009)

LOL at photonwrangler. I thought it sounded like an allergy med when I first heard the name

and only a cpf flashaholic would mention the CRI of one's headlights


----------



## znomit (Sep 13, 2009)

PhotonWrangler said:


> The name Altilon sounds more like an air sickness medncation than an LED. _Ask your doctor if Altilon is right for you.
> _



I was thinking more like _*Altilon the Hun*_ 
Strike fear into the competition.


----------



## blasterman (Sep 13, 2009)

> HID lights are 3200 lumen. this is not going to be very bright


 


> LED based headilghts should be required to match HID


 
Anybody reading this thread beside me give a royal flip about HID? Seriously.....

Driving home last night I think I counted one car out of 100 running HID. The rest were all Halogen.

What the engineers building these 'focused industry' LEDs are doing is trying to produce a format that is as cost effective as possible for automotive manufacturers to displace current halogen with. Spec wise, 850lumen / 5600k does this very, very well. IMHO, I'd prefer lower CCT, but it's not the point. 

Current halogen light assemblies for your typical mid level automobile can be built for dirt cheap because of the low complexity of the lens/reflector molding. However, given the already directional nature of LEDs, it's actually *easier *to design a len/diffuser that pushes the LED in the desired light spread -vs- halogen, but the trick is to translate 'easier' into less costly to build. 

I live in michigan, so I'm well aware of icing issues with headlamps. The trick with LED is to simply move the radiated heat that is already being heat-sinked towards the front lens. Again, not hard to do from an engineering standpoint, but it has to be done cheaply.


----------



## jirik_cz (Sep 13, 2009)

Who said, that you have to use only one piece of this LED?

I've seen Audi R8 with LED headlights and they used 4 pieces of Altilon in one headlight. Should match HID headlights without problems.


----------



## HarryN (Sep 13, 2009)

MichaelW said:


> 5600K is just wrong.
> 
> LED based headilghts should be required to match HID, if not beat them (with a lower CCT)
> 
> 70CRI, come on.



Hi MichaelW - The CRI actually is not a very good indication of the "goal" of headlights, even though it seems like it might be.

Lumileds, Osram, the major headlamp makers, the auto companies, and the various government agencies world wide have spent a LOT of time - at least 8 years that I know of, working to develop an SAE spec of the required spectrum. A non trivial but important point - making sure the same headlight can be sold in every country.

In spite of the somewhat higher color temperature, there is actually a heck of a lot of redish light in the output, and that was part of the spec. I saw some demonstration testing around 2002-3 of visibility under the various proposed spectrum mixtures - pretty interesting - and demanding setups.


----------



## jtr1962 (Sep 14, 2009)

Looking at the spectrum is seems most of the reason for the 70CRI is the big valley around 480 nm, and not from a red deficiency. Also, 5600K seems high but in fact higher CCTs increase contrast (and apparent brightness) and aid peripheral vision. Remember that 5600K is about the same as the light source your eyes evolved under. When used on asphalt or concrete roads, which are mostly shades of gray, 5600k is pretty much ideal.


----------



## IMSabbel (Sep 14, 2009)

Looking at the spec-sheet, this led seems more and more impressive:

They are rating it for a lifetime of 5000h with 130 and 30000h with 110C _case_, not junction temperature.

This would mean that even in a hot summer day, with the car being 70C or so (typical "burn your fingers on the hood"-hot"), an heatsink with only 3k/W would be enough to keep them at optimal lifetime.

This is practically nothing, and should be cheaply archiveable.

And seeing that typically, cars need light at night (where your car is not boiling hot), and while driving (where you have all the forced-air cooling you want), this seems really thought-out.


----------



## MichaelW (Sep 14, 2009)

jtr1962 said:


> Looking at the spectrum is seems most of the reason for the 70CRI is the big valley around 480 nm, and not from a red deficiency. Also, 5600K seems high but in fact higher CCTs increase contrast (and apparent brightness) and aid peripheral vision. Remember that 5600K is about the same as the light source your eyes evolved under. When used on asphalt or concrete roads, which are mostly shades of gray, 5600k is pretty much ideal.



Lumileds could have based their automotive LED assembly around something like the LXM3-PW51
Contrast against the LXML-PW51, see page 13 http://www.philipslumileds.com/pdfs/DS63.pdf
Which one has the more enviable 'cyan trench'?
I wasn't asking for a CRI of 90 or better, but 70 is just too low, 85 is more than good enough.

Contrast? I don't want contrast, I want to see. If I want contrast I will use selective yellow.
How about the fact that cool-white LED make everything look blue, grass doesn't look like grass. I wouldn't force my worst enemy to drive in snow with such blue headlights. (especially with SAE beam pattern)
'apparent brightness' = glare.
peripheral vision, see beam pattern.

Just because it is close to the sun's CCT doesn't make it right to drive with at night. Can you light up everything with the same level of light, no.
I don't like HID headlights under the SAE headlamp standard (they should have never been permitted)

I'd like to have the SPD/CCT of LED headlamps split the difference between the best incandescent (HIRs) and arc discharge headlights.


----------



## jtr1962 (Sep 15, 2009)

MichaelW said:


> I wasn't asking for a CRI of 90 or better, but 70 is just too low, 85 is more than good enough.
> 
> Contrast? I don't want contrast, I want to see. If I want contrast I will use selective yellow.
> 
> ...


Just to correct a few things:

1) 5600K actually appears as stark white, not blue-white. It is NOT the color of typical cool-white LEDs which are generally around 6500K or more. Think of 5600K as intermediate between neutral white LEDs and cool white ones. It makes grass look like it does under sunlight, although I don't see why the way grass appears should be relevant if you're driving an automobile (unless you're driving off-road).

2) I'll grant that you need a certain beam pattern for peripheral vision, but you also need a certain color light. Peripheral vision is almost entirely based on rods (peak sensitivity around 555 nm, almost no sensitivity past 650 nm (reds) or under 450 nm (violets)-source. This is why peripheral vision under sodium streetlights is close to zero, and also why something around 5600K is close to optimal for peripheral vision. Remember that rods can't see colors, so CRI for peripheral vision is irrelevant.

3) Contrast IS what you want when driving, and 5600K is about optimal for that regardless of light levels. It's the way you pick up on moving objects-namely when they contrast with their surroundings. In fact, ALL of vision is based on contrast in one way or another. Without it, you would just be viewing a single amorphous blob of one color.

4) It's important to separate what is _visually pleasing_ for lighting a static scene from what is optimal for piloting an automobile down the road at high speeds. I can understand where you're coming from about wanting to split the difference between HID and halogen if you're interested in lighting the inside of a car, or maybe a night-time barbeque. 5600K and CRI of 70 wouldn't look all that great for those uses. But for driving an auto on asphalt or concrete 5600K is about optimal, and a CRI is 70 is more than good enough. It's enough to be able to spot a small brown animal crossing a grey road. You don't need to pick up subtle variations in the animal's coat. Rather, you just need to be able to see it. For driving purposes CCT is probably more important than CRI, so long as CRI falls into the "good enough" category (and that applies only to forward vision-CRI is totally irrevelant for peripheral vision). Sure, a CRI of 90 here would be great, but it would undoubtedly impact the LED's efficiency while offering little additional driving benefit.

One thing which has me excited here is the prospect of LED headlights becoming mainstream faster than the naysayers thought.


----------



## space (Sep 15, 2009)

One thing we can be very sure of is that the 5600K is not picked from random by the Lumileds people. It is for sure a well considered choice, with the best compromise of all points made here and probably a dozen more.


space


----------



## MichaelW (Sep 15, 2009)

5600K just happens to be what Lumileds has at hand (see what the Luxeon I). Cool white has the highest efficacy-least phosphor and usually has better heat tolerance & drive currents.
I'd hope that Audi would specify A3 bin-5200K, over B bin-5600K or A1 6000K, but the distribution is Gaussian, right? So Audi will take what they can get (and cheapest)
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/crash1-950.jpg
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/led3-950.jpg
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/led1-950.jpg
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/led2-950.jpg
Funny that you say 'It's enough to be able to spot a small brown animal crossing a grey road.'
Say, like a rabbit?
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/carnage flash 950.jpg
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/ET highway 900.jpg
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/r8 nose distort 950.jpg
There probably is an payback to perhiperal vision with a higher white point, but at what cost to forward vision?
HID headlight already do WAY more tricks than LED light do.
See the Hella Variox system. dynamic auto leveling, steering, variable distribution.
Scheinwerfermann would say, lets see the isolux scans comparing the hid bi-projectors to the led. Are they as bright as HIDs, probably not. But HIDs have more than enough light for low beam.
So, what is the raison d'être for LED headlights? They are not to replace HIDs, if they are to replace incandescents, on the grounds of higher efficiency why not start with high quality first (correct CCT and good CRI), and then move to high quantity later? (like 2015-2020, when quantum dot this, nanodust that, esoteric other bring up output/efficiency to incredible levels.
A 20% drop in flux to get those attributes isn't much, just wait two years and the deficit will be negated.


----------



## jtr1962 (Sep 15, 2009)

MichaelW said:


> There probably is an payback to perhiperal vision with a higher white point, but at what cost to forward vision?


It's all interelated. Higher CCT also increases visibility and contrast of forward vision although there are limits. IIRC the limit is in the 5000Ks. Past that there is no gain, and overall vision suffers due to the increased content of blue in the light (blue light tends to be more out focus for most people than longer wavelengths). And on the flip side the presence of mostly longer wavelengths (reds) kills peripheral vision (and also negatively affects forward vision but not as much). One extreme you have today are sodium streetlights. They stink for forward vision (low apparent brightness, poor contrast, plus they tend to lull you to sleep). And they're a big fat zero for peripheral vision. I almost hit a guy exiting his car last night while cycling. Just didn't see him in my peripheral vision until I was almost on top of him. That's how bad sodium lights are. Halogens suffer from the same problems due to low CCT, although to a much lesser extent than sodium lights. I'm going to guess that 5600K represents a compromise of all the factors (vision along with what is easiest to mass produce with today's technology). It's not written in stone, either. 5200K would work just about as well if available. Just don't get much under the mid 4000s, or you start getting into the zone where you hurt peripheral vision.



> Scheinwerfermann would say, lets see the isolux scans comparing the hid bi-projectors to the led. Are they as bright as HIDs, probably not. But HIDs have more than enough light for low beam.


That depends upon the complete system (LED + optics). We won't know anything until someone designs a headlamp using these. And we can use more than one emitter if we want to reach the output of HIDs. That's the whole point here-a modular approach where one emitter can more or less equal a halogen headlight, but you can add more than one if you want more light.



> So, what is the raison d'être for LED headlights? They are not to replace HIDs, if they are to replace incandescents, on the grounds of higher efficiency why not start with high quality first (correct CCT and good CRI), and then move to high quantity later? (like 2015-2020, when quantum dot this, nanodust that, esoteric other bring up output/efficiency to incredible levels.


LED headlights will offer a CCT more suited to driving than halogens without the cost or complexity associated with HIDs. Higher efficiency is a bonus but not necessarily their primary reason for existance. A third reason is lifetime. If you design the complete system correctly, you don't need to also have a way to replace headlamps. They'll last the life of the car, same as well-designed HIDs. Another advantage is that LED headlights take up less space than halogens. This, combined with not needing to design a housing which allows lamp replacement, gives design freedom.

Regarding CRI, I'd like to see how these fare under one of the newer metrics such as gamut area or full-spectral index. CRI has its limitations. It fails to take into account CCT. LEDs especially seem to render objects much better than their CRI numbers would indicate. This may be because they're not a discontinuous source like HIDs or fluorescents. They're a continuous source with a few humps and valleys, but nevertheless they're not totally missing certain wavelengths.


----------



## fieldgoal00 (Aug 11, 2010)

Does anyone know where these can be purchased at yet?


----------



## HarryN (Aug 12, 2010)

fieldgoal00 said:


> Does anyone know where these can be purchased at yet?



Hi, you can buy them through Future Electronics, Philips Lumileds official distributor. Last time I checked, you had to call them to get these, but it was not a big deal.


----------



## jashhash (Aug 13, 2010)

I have a friend who is an engineer at Mazda and he gave me a head lamp to play with. One thing I noticed was how bad the thermal path was for the headlight, since the whole things is plastic theres nowhere for the heat to escape. Now when I hear 60 lm/w I think this thing must generate a ton of excess heat. Seems the best LED for an auto headlight would be the upcoming CREE XM that can put out 850 LM at an efficiency of 110 lm/w. Actually I think even the MC-E would be much better than this solution. Im really unimpressed by this "new technology."


----------



## HarryN (Aug 13, 2010)

The Altilon actually has a quite impressive thermal path, of course, you have to still design for it.

As far as efficiency, it is sort of a special deal in some ways. Automotive specs are very specific for wavelength distribution, which is not always the same as a person would pick for efficiency. (lumens per watt) This is going to be true regardless of who makes the LED package. Keep in mind, this has to work under automotive temperature range and shock conditions, which can be pretty unfriendly.

Lastly, automotive specs are a bit different than traditional LED millisecond type testing for lumens and lumens per watt measured at room temperature.

The Altilon has actually been around for a while, its just more recently that Lumileds has been been offering it to non OEMs.


----------

