# 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review



## NeSSuS-GTE

I recently became a customer of Newark Electronics (aka Farnell) and noticed they exclusively offered an interesting family of LED arrays by BridgeLux.
Consequently, I noticed a surprising lack of information on CPF or even the web in general.





I decided to evaluate these and share my findings and feelings with my fellow CPF crew!
I spent about a week testing, photographing, exploding TaskLED drivers, etc.. etc..

Enjoy!

*[SIZE=+1]BridgeLux LED Arrays - Cool White [/SIZE]*
(Left to Right) 
6 die - 440 Lumens @ 600ma 9.8Vf 
12 die - 880 Lumens @ 1300ma 13.0Vf 
16 die - 1320 Lumens @ 1600ma 13.2Vf 
25 die - 2200 Lumens @ 1750ma 16.6Vf *- *My Favorite!!!




*[SIZE=+1]Color Temps[/SIZE]*
These four LEDs are *Cool White* with a 5600K color temp.

They are also available in:
*Neutral White* (4100K)
*Warm White* (3000K)

Both types cause considerable loss in output efficacy.

The 2200 Lumen array is only available in *Cool White*.

*INITIAL THOUGHTS:* 


BridgeLux designed these LEDs to be very bright and low cost. Cost is reduced by excluding optics from the package unlike almost all other LEDs. They are clearly the best '*Lumen/per $*' package currently available even versus SSC P7 and Cree MC-E. They *destroy* the 6-die OSRAM OSTAR in that regard!
The lack of an optic and the wide surface area will make these a perfect candidate for wide area flood lighting but *a poor candidate for tightly focused beam patterns*.
The resin dome is gummy and sticky. It was VERY DIFFICULT to take pictures without dust and fibers clinging to it.
*CLOSE-UP:*
[SIZE=-1](NOTE - These pictures were taken after extensive testing, soldering, clamping, etc... and demonstrate wear characteristics.)[/SIZE]

*Click ANY Close-Up picture for BIG ZOOM!*
 
*Model #BXRA-C0400 - 440 Lumen**s*







*Model #BXRA-C0800 - 880 Lumen**s*







*Model #BXRA-C1200 - 1320 Lumen**s*
*

*




*Model #BXRA-C2000 - 2200 Lumen**s*
*

*




[SIZE=+2]*LIGHT 'EM UP!*[/SIZE]
This set of pictures is of the *1320 Lumen array*. The camera has difficulty capturing the true apparent brightness
of these LEDs, especially since there are no optics to generate beam shots. Because of this I took very few
photos to demonstrate brightness.


*Relative Brightness - *This is roughly the apparent brightness.
In this photo the array is being UNDERDRIVEN at 1000ma output rated at *1052 Lumens*!







*16 Dies w/ Fuzzies*
You'll have fuzzies all over it without meticulous and persistent cleaning.





*Underexposed*
This photo is greatly underexposed to show the very thin power leads going from die to die.





*Blinded By The Light*
Opps! This picture was accidental. I was making adjustments when the camera timer ran out. It was too bright to see what I was doing!




[SIZE=-1]Indeed... I was using a LuxLuthor 15.6v pack for that test.[/SIZE]


*THE 4000 LUMEN MONSTER*
I decided to push the 2200 Lumen array as far is it could go! The following pictures are the result of that experiment.


*A 25 Die LED Is Pretty Crazy*
*

*




*Test Setup*
Here is the test bed. To safely push this LED to the extreme I chose to use Peltier cooling to keep temps
as low as possible and keep emitter efficiency as high as possible. The Peltier is powered by a separate 15A power supply.

The brown wire held by the alligator clip is the thermocouple that will allow me to track the case temperature.






*LED Case Temperature Before Test*
The Peltier cooler brings the LED temperature below freezing before the test begins.






*Crank It Up!*
In Constant Current mode I set the LED current to a steady 4 Amps.
This is *500mA beyond its absolute maximum* rated current!







*LED Case Temperature During Test*
Even with the Peltier at maximum cooling the case temp still reaches over 200 deg F.






*4000+ LUMENS!*
At 4000mA the LED output is literally* off the chart*!
My best interpolation is a Normalized Luminous Flux of 1.9 which calculates to [SIZE=+1]*4180 Lumens!*[/SIZE]

This photo was taken during the day. The shadow cast on the wall is testament to its ridiculous brightness!






FINAL THOUGHTS:

Personally, I was impressed by these LEDs, enough so that I wanted to take the time to document and share what I was seeing.

The format precludes the use of tight beam optics, but reflectors are likely to still be somewhat effective.
I certainly am willing to bet that we'll see some potent flood monsters from guys like Mac showing up here and there using these LEDs.

You can rest assured you'll see these in a flashlight from me at least! Sometime very soon... :thumbsup:

Here is the <DATASHEET> for those of you interested in more technical detail.


----------



## Zeruel

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! BridgeLux LED Review & 4000+ Lumen Test!! <-·´¯`·.*

                        

Holy momma.... I think I just peed my pants. 

This power must be used for good and should not befall unto evil hands.

Wonder if it can be modded onto my Surefire. As the first post, am I entitled to a sample? :duh2: 
Nice job, Nessus! :thumbsup:


----------



## vestureofblood

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! BridgeLux LED Review & 4000+ Lumen Test!! <-·´¯`·.*

Wow! Thanks NeSSuS,

This is a great review. The pics give a clear picture of what these emitters are really like. Ie the realative size, and what kind of effort is going to be needed to properly heat sink one of these.


----------



## jeffosborne

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! BridgeLux LED Review & 4000+ Lumen Test!! <-·´¯`·.*

Thanks for the detailed review!

Your quote:

BridgeLux designed these LEDs to be very bright and low cost. Cost is reduced by excluding optics from the package unlike almost all other LEDs. They are clearly the best '*Lumen/per $*' package currently available even versus SSC P7 and Cree MC-E. They *destroy* the 6-die OSRAM OSTAR in that regard! 

A question: How much did you pay for these various LED's?

Thanks,

Jeff O.


----------



## NeSSuS-GTE

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! BridgeLux LED Review & 4000+ Lumen Test!! <-·´¯`·.*

You are welcome guys!



jeffosborne said:


> Thanks for the detailed review!
> 
> A question: How much did you pay for these various LED's?



I will add the price I paid for each to the specs near the top...



vestureofblood said:


> Wow! Thanks NeSSuS,
> 
> This is a great review. The pics give a clear picture of what these emitters are really like. Ie the realative size, and what kind of effort is going to be needed to properly heat sink one of these.



Heat management in general isn't bad at all with these. I have them installed in two applications that I will post in the automotive section.
I only had to go to such extremes with cooling because I was pushing almost 15% beyond the absolute maximum current rating. There is no conceivable practical reason why anyone would ever need to do that.

My tests with TaskLED's hipFlex driver really showed that pushing the 2200 lumen LED at 2.8A gives you huge brightness rated at about *3300 Lumens* and manageable heat. Anything more doesn't really payback.


----------



## Th232

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! BridgeLux LED Review & 4000+ Lumen Test!! <-·´¯`·.*



:bow::bow::bow:

That is insane!

I might have to get myself one of the stars to play around with. Thanks for sharing them.

Edit: Maybe not... Farnell Australia is selling the 440 lumen ones for 41AUD... 12USD <=> 41AUD?!? I get this sneaking feeling that it'd be cheaper to buy a couple from the US site and have them ship it over here. Wonder if they'll allow that, or just redirect me to the Aussie site?


----------



## NeSSuS-GTE

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! BridgeLux LED Review & 4000+ Lumen Test!! <-·´¯`·.*

BridgeLux is headquartered in Sunnyvale, California. So I guess it makes sense that they are cheaper domestically in the US.

I did also notice that Farnell UK was selling them at substantially higher cost. Hopefully those prices will normalize soon.


----------



## EngrPaul

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! BridgeLux LED Review & 4000+ Lumen Test!! <-·´¯`·.*

There goes the neighborhood!


----------



## Greg G

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

Holy Mackerel! 

I think I now know what my next Mag mod will be. I wonder how this LED would work with a FiveMega OP reflector?

Edit: I ordered one of the 2200 lumen LED's. Heh Heh.....can't wait to put it in something....hopefully it will work in a Mag.


----------



## csshih

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

80 watts???!!


----------



## bullettproof

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

Freakin awesome!!!!! I would love to see what it looks like behind a reflector!!!!!


----------



## Greg G

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

I'll find out soon! If it doesn't look good behind a reflector I'll get an aspheric lens for it. 

Gotta order a piece of copper to make a good heatsink tomorrow.


----------



## saabluster

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

Good luck collimating that! Its cool anyway to see these ultra high output LEDs coming on the market. However the LEDs here have no place in a flashlight unless all you want is flood. Thank you so much for doing the testing though. Great work.:thumbsup:


----------



## Greg G

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

If it doesn't work in a flashlight I'll buy a second one and put them in my headlights, then go find Luke A and tailgate him!


----------



## Gryloc

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

Nessus,

Really quick, I just wanted to tell you that you placed the wrong test current numbers next to the forward voltage in your original post (next to price). I looked at the datasheet and it notes that the 880 typical lumen emitter was tested at 900mA (not 1300mA), and the 1200 typical lumen emitter was tested at 1300mA (not 1600mA). If I misread things, tell me and I will edit this post.

With those revised current figures, it makes sense because each emitter is operating at around 75lm/W at it rated currents (the current for which they are binned/identified). I was worried because with the other numbers that you used, one had an efficiency of 52lm/W and the other 62lm/W (while the other two were at 75lm/W).

Great review! It is great seeing other power junkies who like to push limits. Well, with the part being only $40, I could see myself do the same! Thank you for sharing this product. I will have to come back here for more info and discussion. This looks like a decent product to be used in general lighting (oh so cheap too). 

EDIT: I take back what I said about its low price for the neutral and warm white models (tints suitable for general lighting). These are not as cheap as the cool whites (which are still a great bargain). I wonder now what the tint looks like on the cool whites. If they do not look too blue, then they could still be used for general lighting (work and cargo lights, emergency lighting, camp lights and such). END EDIT.

-Tony


----------



## LuxLuthor

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

Now you're talking. Wonderful to see these. 

Like Saabluster says, I do wonder what the extent of useful focussed LED output is in general, considering the layout of these, power requirement, and heat. Makes me wonder about a freznel setup.


----------



## maxspeeds

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

YES Please!!! 

This is a flashaholic's dream! Thank you very much! Now I am going to take a cold shower

lovecpf


----------



## NeSSuS-GTE

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



Gryloc said:


> Nessus,
> 
> I looked at the datasheet and it notes that the 880 typical lumen emitter was tested at 900mA (not 1300mA), and the 1200 typical lumen emitter was tested at 1300mA (not 1600mA). If I misread things, tell me and I will edit this post.
> 
> With those revised current figures, it makes sense because each emitter is operating at around 75lm/W at it rated currents (the current for which they are binned/identified). I was worried because with the other numbers that you used, one had an efficiency of 52lm/W and the other 62lm/W (while the other two were at 75lm/W).



You are correct I had the wrong numbers in there for the Cool White arrays. Actually, those two numbers were for Warm White. Which goes to show how much of an efficiency drop there is at lower color temps. I'll edit it. Thanks for the correction!



saabluster said:


> Good luck collimating that! Its cool anyway to see these ultra high output LEDs coming on the market. However the LEDs here have no place in a flashlight unless all you want is flood. Thank you so much for doing the testing though. Great work.



It was clear from the outset that tightly collimating these was not going to happen. Hence, my Initial Thought:


The lack of an optic and the wide surface area will make these a perfect candidate for wide area flood lighting but *a poor candidate for tightly focused beam patterns.*
However, Lux has a *very* smart idea about using a freznel lense! That is an intriguing experiment I am willing to try!


----------



## Zeruel

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



NeSSuS-GTE said:


> However, Lux has a *very* smart idea about using a freznel lense! That is an intriguing experiment I am willing to try!



  Do share with us once attempted


----------



## Hamburger

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

Uhhh that makes 29,05Watts that means 73,33lumens per watt which is still quite nice and that for fourty bucks is awesome.

At farnell germany it costs 43,80€ which are like $60 arrr damn it


----------



## jtr1962

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

Very nice testing although I have a few questions/comments about your peltier setup:

1) First off, that heat sink is _way too small_ for a 40mm peltier, even if it's one of the 3 amp ones. If you're going to use a microprocessor heatsink, then the ones for the P4 or the recent multicore processors work best.

2) Did you raise the heat sink so that the fan can still suck in air to cool the heat sink?

3) What is the maximum current rating of your peltier?

4) What was the current you were actually running it at? This is important because the way to get the most cooling from a given peltier/heatsink arrangement is to increase the current in small intervals, wait until the cold side temperature stabilizes (can take 10 minutes or more), increase current again, measure temperature, etc. You stop when the temperature starts increasing, and drop the current back to the previous increment. For an 8.5A peltier running with one of my P4 heatsinks I found that 5.8 amps is the maximum. At that current the temperature of the cold plate, when well insulated, stabilizes at around 48° to 51° C under room temperature. This is usually -30°C, give or take a few degrees, depending upon the temperature in my workshop.

5) You really should have had an aluminum plate on the cold side of the peltier so that all of the thermocouples would be cooling the LED. And it should have been bolted to the heatsink with stainless steel screws and fiber insulating washers, sandwiching the peltier in between the plate and the heatsink. See here (scroll to bottom). Unless mounted properly, you'll get poor performance from peltiers.

Don't mean to be overly critical but I made these comments because it seems like the temperature of the LED shouldn't have gone as high as it did. In fact, just mounting the LED on a decent air-cooled P4 heatsink without a peltier it should have gone no higher than about 40° to 45°C. Temps with a peltier might be better or worse depending upon the peltier's rating. In general if you're cooling a load of ~77 watts like that LED then you'll need a peltier with Qmax of at least twice that. Just for reference Qmax of a typical 8.5 amp peltier is around 70 to 75 watts.


----------



## HarryN

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

I will have to tell Heng (Their CTO) that you like them.


----------



## NeSSuS-GTE

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



jtr1962 said:


> Very nice testing although I have a few questions/comments about your peltier setup:
> 1) First off, that heat sink is _way too small_ for a 40mm peltier, even if it's one of the 3 amp ones. If you're going to use a microprocessor heatsink, then the ones for the P4 or the recent multicore processors work best.
> 
> ...



That is so off topic... :shakehead
I'm not going to answer in detail to help you hijack my own thread.

I tested many different thermal management techniques for this extreme setup. Nothing about it is inadequate, and you don't have enough information to determine that.

I got case temperatures as low as I possibly could with what I have at my disposal. If that's not good enough for you, then you can open your own thread and we can discuss different Peltier techniques and results there instead of here.

For now.... Please stop hijacking my thread.





HarryN said:


> I will have to tell Heng (Their CTO) that you like them.



That's very cool, Harry! Tell him its not just me that likes them!

And ask him about optic or reflector solutions... we need those!! :twothumbs


----------



## saabluster

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



NeSSuS-GTE said:


> That is so off topic... :shakehead
> I'm not going to answer in detail to help you hijack my own thread.
> 
> I tested many different thermal management techniques for this extreme setup. Nothing about it is inadequate, and you don't have enough information to determine that.
> 
> I got case temperatures as low as I possibly could with what I have at my disposal. If that's not good enough for you, then you can open your own thread and we can discuss different Peltier techniques and results there instead of here.
> 
> For now.... Please stop hijacking my thread.


You need to seriously rethink your response and your attitude. jtr was _not_ trying to hijack your thread. He was trying to help you as he has a lot of experience in this area.


----------



## HarryN

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

Hi Nessus,

JTR, like all of us, is REALLLLY into LED lights and testing. Maybe he is even a bit more than the rest of us.

I will admit that his post had a lot of questions, but you should actually be happy that all of us are so interesting in what you are doing, and how to drive those babies even harder and cooler. 

I have played with LEDs as well (not that bright though) and know well what working around really bright LEDs can do to your vision. It is seriously time to invest in sunglasses or better.

BTW, in case I didn't say so, really nice work - thanks for posting it.


----------



## jtr1962

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



NeSSuS-GTE said:


> That is so off topic... :shakehead
> I'm not going to answer in detail to help you hijack my own thread.
> 
> I tested many different thermal management techniques for this extreme setup. Nothing about it is inadequate, and you don't have enough information to determine that.
> 
> I got case temperatures as low as I possibly could with what I have at my disposal. If that's not good enough for you, then you can open your own thread and we can discuss different Peltier techniques and results there instead of here.
> 
> For now.... Please stop hijacking my thread.


Fine! Goodbye! And just for the record I think you more or less have a nice setup but I was only trying to help you refine things a bit. But if you would rather not have my help, that's fine. I won't help people who aren't interested.


----------



## NeSSuS-GTE

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

I will take a moment and think about that before responding. The last thing we need here is any further negativity.


----------



## PhotonWrangler

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

Those are amazing. I've purchased from Newark before; this might inspire me to pick up their catalog again. Thanks for all the info and tests!
:goodjob:


----------



## cerberuss

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

These look good for home lighting... a small chandelier = 8 x 4000lumen


----------



## Greg G

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

My 2200 lumen version came in today. Newark ships fast. 

I put it on a 2" round aluminum *drop* I had with some thermal paste and fired it up. It is very bright. My eyes were screwed for several minutes after looking at it from the side. I took a FiveMega LOP reflector, bored it out to .750", and placed it over the LED. It didn't look too bad. Definitely all flood though. 

I then took the lens out of an Acura TL HID projector I have and placed it over the LED. It's a nice smooth flood. This LED might work in this projector housing, maybe. I don't know. I'm going to experiment with it.


----------



## saabluster

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



NeSSuS-GTE said:


> I will take a moment and think about that before responding. The last thing we need here is any further negativity.


Well it's been several days. I guess maybe you are following the golden rule to not say anything unless you have something good to say? It certainly is better than more of the same but I think you owe jtr an apology. It would be nice to have resolution and have these silly posts taken out of this thread so we can go back to enjoying the good work you did. If such resolution does come about I will be more than happy to remove my posts. :thumbsup:


----------



## clint357

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

So.....how would one go about driving this from a vehicle's 12v power supply?


----------



## sami_voodoo

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

I think the Taskled CCHIPO might work. They *are *unavailable at the time being though.


----------



## clint357

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

I think I could actually use the HIPCC and drive at 2.8A with a Vout of around 11v. How do you configure the output current on the customizable ones?


----------



## sami_voodoo

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



> I think I could actually use the HIPCC and drive at 2.8A with a Vout of around 11v. How do you configure the output current on the customizable ones?


Except for the 6-die model, wouldn't you need a boost convertor to run from a 12 volt source? :thinking:


----------



## clint357

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



sami_voodoo said:


> Except for the 6-die model, wouldn't you need a boost convertor to run from a 12 volt source? :thinking:


 
I don't know, if you put 2.8A to the dies at 11v with an input of around 13V, I don't know why you would need a boost? I guess I don't know exactly how those IC's work though. Is my math correct?


----------



## Illum

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! BridgeLux LED Review & 4000+ Lumen Test!! <-·´¯`·.*



Zeruel said:


> Holy momma.... I think I just peed my pants.



You think?! I just did 

it blew me away that even with a peltier that started the run at 29F the junction immediately goes to 200F... 

What does the manufacturer recommend to heatsink the LED?


----------



## clint357

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

If someone can tell me the best way to drive 2 of these c2000's, I'll but a setup and make some auxilary vehicle lights.


----------



## sami_voodoo

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



clint357 said:


> I don't know, if you put 2.8A to the dies at 11v with an input of around 13V, I don't know why you would need a boost? I guess I don't know exactly how those IC's work though. Is my math correct?



Original post:



> 6 die - 440 Lumens @ 600ma 9.8Vf *- $12*
> 12 die - 880 Lumens @ 1300ma 13.0Vf - *$20*
> 16 die - 1320 Lumens @ 1600ma 13.2Vf *- $26*
> 25 die - 2200 Lumens @ 1750ma 16.6Vf *- $40* -- My Favorite!!!



https://www.candlepowerforums.com/posts/2891044&postcount=1

Except for the smallest model, you need a boost convertor IMHO.


----------



## snarfer

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



> Except for the smallest model, you need a boost convertor IMHO.



I think a buck/boost would be preferable for a 12 volt supply, otherwise you might not be able to dim them down much. Also a boost driver like the CCHIPO would probably not be able to turn the LEDs completely off unless you added an additional FET for the return.


----------



## clint357

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

How do you set the output current on the CCHIPO for 1.75A, will it adjust that high or do you have to mod it? Also, would this be safe to encapsulate in a thermally conductive, non-electrically conductive, potting epoxy as long as the heatsink is sticking out? I wonder because this would be put in an offroad vehicle somewhere and would probably be submerged at some point.


----------



## clint357

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



snarfer said:


> I think a buck/boost would be preferable for a 12 volt supply, otherwise you might not be able to dim them down much. Also a boost driver like the CCHIPO would probably not be able to turn the LEDs completely off unless you added an additional FET for the return.


 
Couldn't I just run a switch on the positive lead of the CCHIPO to turn it off?


----------



## sami_voodoo

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

Instead of encapsulating it in Epoxy or some Resin, why not a sealed aluminium box? That way you can set the current later if you wish, and you can thermally link the heatsink with the box. And from what I can read on the site, you'll have connections for an external pot to change the LED drive current.


----------



## clint357

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



sami_voodoo said:


> Instead of encapsulating it in Epoxy or some Resin, why not a sealed aluminium box? That way you can set the current later if you wish, and you can thermally link the heatsink with the box. And from what I can read on the site, you'll have connections for an external pot to change the LED drive current.


 
I didn't know if any of the other components got hot enough that the air temp in a sealed box would be too great. As for setting the current, I would set it initially for the c2000 LEDs and never touch it again so I wouldn't care if it was permanently sealed.


----------



## sami_voodoo

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

The best bet would probably to shoot an email to Taskled and ask them about it. That way you'll cover all bases. Or else wait for more the more experienced to voice their thoughts.


----------



## clint357

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

So, does anyone have any ideas on how to get a decent beam out of these things?


----------



## Zeruel

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



clint357 said:


> So, does anyone have any ideas on how to get a decent beam out of these things?



Hee hee hee.


----------



## degarb

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



Zeruel said:


> Hee hee hee.



I agree that one frustration with buying leds is that most suppliers forget the led is useless without lens/reflector and driver. They need to be one stop shopping, for at least one or two basic/typical setups.

Also, if the forward voltage were better matched a bit below easily attainable battery configurations, you wouldn't need a driver, perhaps only a pot. 

(Easily attainable voltages: 3.6 volt, 6 volt with agm, 7.2 volt, 12 volt with agm, 18 volt. typical store bought lion config)


----------



## Zeruel

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! BridgeLux LED Review & 4000+ Lumen Test!! <-·´¯`·.*



Illum said:


> it blew me away that even with a peltier that started the run at 29F the junction immediately goes to 200F...
> 
> What does the manufacturer recommend to heatsink the LED?



Probably one of the usages is for cars' headlamps. So that the entire car is the heatsink.


----------



## Benson

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



clint357 said:


> So, does anyone have any ideas on how to get a decent beam out of these things?



8" aspheric? (More realistically... 8" (or even bigger) fresnel lens stack? Maybe rip the fresnels out of a couple or 5 old overhead projectors...)


----------



## bshanahan14rulz

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



Greg G said:


> I then took the lens out of an Acura TL HID projector I have and placed it over the LED. It's a nice smooth flood. This LED might work in this projector housing, maybe. I don't know. I'm going to experiment with it.



Maybe try putting the LED behind the cutoff shield facing up and positioned near where burner would be. I always thought that a strong enough LED right there could do wonders but don't have the money to try it out.

Hmm, just got another idea too. sit a flat mirror about level with that ledge on the sides of the TL and have the emitter on top of that facing up OR forward

btw, I've never tried LED + projector, I'm just throwing ideas that seem sound in my head. keep in mind it is very possible that somebody replaced my brain with pudding recently...


----------



## clint357

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



Benson said:


> 8" aspheric? (More realistically... 8" (or even bigger) fresnel lens stack? Maybe rip the fresnels out of a couple or 5 old overhead projectors...)


 
Could you make a reflector to gather the light into an aspheric lens? Just use the design of the P7 reflector and lens but scaled up.


----------



## Greg G

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



bshanahan14rulz said:


> Maybe try putting the LED behind the cutoff shield facing up and positioned near where burner would be. I always thought that a strong enough LED right there could do wonders but don't have the money to try it out.
> 
> Hmm, just got another idea too. sit a flat mirror about level with that ledge on the sides of the TL and have the emitter on top of that facing up OR forward
> 
> btw, I've never tried LED + projector, I'm just throwing ideas that seem sound in my head. keep in mind it is very possible that somebody replaced my brain with pudding recently...



Keep the ideas coming. I am open to all suggestions. I hope to find time soon to sit down and do some beamshots. First with the original HID bulb, then with the LED. I went to Fry's electronics Sunday and looked at computer cooling systems for chips. I found a couple that will probably work, maybe, depending on how much current I feed the LED.


----------



## bshanahan14rulz

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

For a test probe, you could use a straight heatpipe or bar of copper and solder an xre to it, poke it into the projector and try to find that sweet spot

The TL is a very interesting part. I kind of want to think that the bottom part of the bowl behind the cutoff shield is there to reflect light back to the top part of the bowl to reflect out. I wish I could find some light ray simulation diagrams for any automotive projectors. It would help me understand them so much better. 

I'm excited to see how this turns out.


----------



## clint357

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

I'm going to go buy a concave and convex lense to see what I can do with a P7 just for fun, but I'll let you know if it's worth toying with.


----------



## Benson

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



clint357 said:


> Could you make a reflector to gather the light into an aspheric lens? Just use the design of the P7 reflector and lens but scaled up.


Really, you want an elliptical reflector for most reflector/lens designs, and I don't know of any lights that use that.

But the critical thing here is that whatever you use, it must be large diameter to get a narrow beam from the large emitter area. And fresnel lenses can get large without getting heavy, unlike good reflectors or aspheric lenses.

So to me, a fresnel lens (or a stack of them) in a bulky, but lightweight, housing (possibly even a converted projector body) with a fan-cooled heatsink could be your best shot at a decently-tight spotlight, although it wouldn't be a real throw king -- nothing like an HID or even halogen spotlight with the same diameter reflector.

If you want a flood beam, then you could try various reflector and aspheric combos in the Mag to 6V lantern size range.


----------



## HarryN

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



Benson said:


> Really, you want an elliptical lens for most reflector/lens designs, and I don't know of any lights that use that.
> .



Well, there actually is one but it is not widely available - my CR2 based Breeze light. For those contemplating constructing this, it is a royal ____ and expensive to pull off.

I got the idea from the headlights of a BMW I used to own.


----------



## blasterman

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



> Also, if the forward voltage were better matched a bit below easily *attainable battery configurations, you wouldn't need a driver, perhaps only a pot.
> *


*

Man, do I hear that. It's obvious that LED makers are assuming they only need supply OEM'ers who have an engineering staff that does nothing all day but design custom power supplies from chinese parts. They might be surprised at the applause if they had a LED config, or multiples of LEDs, that could use...lets say...a standardized 12-volt or 6-volt. 12-volt would also accomodate the fixed lighting crowd where it's been a standard for decades.

As for lenses....feh.....If I want to diffuse one of these big muthas....I'll simply bounce it off of a white painted panel or glass. Paint the panel with chrome paint and and you get a more specular/directional source. I'm working on some cool lamp ideas based on this principle.

For flashlights or narrow flood, what you might want to try is take PAR 30 or PAR 40 narrow angle Halogen bulbs , pry the front cover off either with a razor or flame or both, rip the bulb out of the middle with a pair of needle-nose, and you have a decent reflector albeit heavy reflector.

Discount department stores almost always have close-out halogen hand torches for $10.00 or so. That big old reflector is just begging to have the bi-pin halogen removed and re-mounted with that 2000lumen Bridgelux. :huh:*


----------



## Guy's Dropper

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

What are intended applications for these? They seem like they'd work well in a projector or something, with a lens of course. Those projector light bulbs are so expensive, it would be nice not having to replace them...


----------



## Benson

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



Guy's Dropper said:


> What are intended applications for these? They seem like they'd work well in a projector or something, with a lens of course. Those projector light bulbs are so expensive, it would be nice not having to replace them...



I don't think these would do well for projection -- I'd think any projector bulb with a filament or arc that big would be even higher-output, so it'd be too dim with these. They're probably intended for automotive or general-purpose lighting, where you don't need a tight focus.


----------



## bshanahan14rulz

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

if you had a half elliptical reflector with the emitter at one focal point, would you put the lens at the other focal point or would you match the lens' focal point to the reflector's other focal point?


----------



## Benson

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



bshanahan14rulz said:


> if you had a half elliptical reflector with the emitter at one focal point, would you put the lens at the other focal point or would you match the lens' focal point to the reflector's other focal point?



If I'm thinking straight, you'd colocate the focal points to focus at infinity (i.e., maximum throw). But you'd probably offset the lens a little axially to defocus it for a broader beam, and most importantly to eliminate any dark gridding from the separate dies.


----------



## clint357

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

Who knows where you can buy some generic lenses? I want to get some convex, concave, .ect and I was wondering if hobby lobby or radio shack carries stuff like that.


----------



## SQ40

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

Would it be possible to Modify an existing LCD Data Projector Bulb Housing to use one of these bad boys?


----------



## Illum

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



SQ40 said:


> Would it be possible to Modify an existing LCD Data Projector Bulb Housing to use one of these bad boys?



don't see why not...but the collimation's gonna be...


----------



## bozola

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

A wallflower chimes in:

On a whim based on Nessus's review, I decided to get a couple of the BXRA-C0800 to play around with.

Couldn't be as annoying as my HIDs. Naaah. Bright but not much worse than that...after all I am an experienced HID guy - nothing can surprise me.

So they came today. I rip open the box and drag everything down the the lab. Grease one to a huge chunk of cold iron I've got laying about and power it up.

Fiat lux, baby.

The thing's bright.

The thing's stupidly bright.

The bloody thing's so stupidly bright birds flying by outside burst into flames and pilots overhead report a nuclear detonation. Maybe I exaggerate, but the damn thing's _bright_.

HIDs just lost their appeal. Another LED evangelist is born.

Thanks, Nessus!


----------



## SQ40

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



Illum said:


> don't see why not...but the collimation's gonna be...


 

Hmm.. Wonder how I can make this work.. What If I use the built in Reflector of the existing bulb?

I realize that we are focusing the bulb through the aperture on the LCD.. so a tight beam is ideal, right? Or am i going to get one big hot-spot?


----------



## blasterman

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

I'm a bit dissapointed at how quickly interest seems to have died regarding these emitters.

I recently ordered a couple of the smaller 400 lumen Bridgelux; a warm-white and neutral-white for testing with some fixed lighting projects. Shipping with standard (cheap) US Postal took 2 1/2 days to the midwest.

Neutral-White emitter was perfectly neutral with zero tint, and matches my neutral-white Crees at the same 4000k color temp.

Warm-White was a gorgeous color, and again matched my *best* warm-white Crees. Reason I say 'best' is I have a variety of warm-white Crees and they all tend to vary in terms of minor tints, with the worst having too much green/yellow in them. Obviously unless you can get a specific bin-tint for Cree this is what happens. The warm-white bridgelux however was perfection.

So, for $18 I get a quickly shipped (U.S.A) 400 lumen emitter on an industrial grade star without having to screw around with guessing bin-tints or if it was the 'B' shift on the Asian soldering line. Me like.... lots.

I'm not a flashlight guy, but I played around with a couple large reflectors scavanged from dead incan flashlights and the lot, and with some finagling they produced a decent 20degree or so beam.


----------



## Rexlion

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



clint357 said:


> Who knows where you can buy some generic lenses? I want to get some convex, concave, .ect and I was wondering if hobby lobby or radio shack carries stuff like that.


 surplusShed.com has a great variety of lenses at budget prices. Maybe something suitable there.


----------



## aljsk8

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

id like to see the photos on the first post but i cant see them on IE7 or FIREFOX

can anyone help?


----------



## clint357

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

What is the maximum current you can give the 25 die unit and still expect to get your 50,000 hrs out of it? I think I'm about to put a couple of these in my offroad light enclosures and drive them with CCHIPOs.


----------



## Illum

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

errm...
we've lose every picture on the op thread hotlinked from www.swieringa.com

anyone remember how they looked like?


----------



## Cheapskate

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



aljsk8 said:


> id like to see the photos on the first post but i cant see them on IE7 or FIREFOX
> 
> can anyone help?



From the tone of the Op's later posts, it would not be unreasonable to assume he took his ball (the pics) home with him in a huff.


----------



## BeachBoy

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

so, anyone found an optic that could get a tight beam out of these?


----------



## jtr1962

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



Cheapskate said:


> From the tone of the Op's later posts, it would not be unreasonable to assume he took his ball (the pics) home with him in a huff.


The pics show up for me. I suspect there may have been a temporary glitch with the picture hosting site.


----------



## dharmaone

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

What's the CRI on these puppies? could they be used as photography or video lights?


----------



## KevinL

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

I am impressed at the sheer light output, but cooling these adequately is going to be a challenge. 

I was thinking about what it would take to mount a 1200lu assembly as a fixed lighting system. 16 volts from their datasheet, plus 1.4 amps, is going to generate 22+ watts of heat. That's gonna require a pretty big slab of metal for passive cooling. 

As a video light, you could do that, but you'd need a fairly big heatsink on the back of your light, and you might not want to run continuously at max power. PWM dimming would help.


----------



## dharmaone

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

cool. Heatsink shouldnt be a problem. PWM dimming is something i only learned about recently - are there some ready modules for this?

Also for video I think having small high power point lights isn't ideal - I've been looking into ways of distributing the light.

Some innovative stuff I've come across for this are 3M Light Pipes and light distribution film

https://www.inventables.com/technologies/light-distribution-film







basically i want to turn the bright point lights into a large area light - which will create more even light and soft shadows. I think a box with the leds in it, reflecting mylar on the other side (inside) and transmissive light distribution film on the other side would be ideal. Even light fibre that emits light to the sides like this could work.

http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/...Applications/InteriorEnvironments/LightFiber/

I don't know what these products are called and where to get them though.. Any ideas?


----------



## snarfer

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

You can order 3M stuff through Digikey.

Just google "side emitting light fiber" for lots of other vendors. Here are a couple that looked interesting:

http://www.fiberoptix.com/products/largecore.html
http://www.meshtel.com/glow.htm

from the Bridgelux press release:

The arrays are rated at 400, 800 and 1200 lumens for warm white (3000K and CRI = 82), neutral white (4100K and CRI = 80) and cool white (5600K, CRI = 65). There is also a 2000-lumen part in cool white.

Pretty low CRI overall. Not good enough for professional film/video/photography.


----------



## NeSSuS-GTE

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



Cheapskate said:


> From the tone of the Op's later posts, it would not be unreasonable to assume he took his ball (the pics) home with him in a huff.


 
Such a waste of time and energy that would be.

Optic-wise, I did discover that the 3-up Endor Star optic fits quite precisely on the 6-die emitter. That was a nice surprise. But that optic is still VERY wide and only helps control flood. It does much improve its usability, though.

I am anxious to find some other optic candidates. My eyes are peeled. :huh:


----------



## bozola

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

I've been playing now with the 400 lumen stars. It's taken a while to figure out all the little details of power control, heat, and enclosures. The learning curve ain't so bad and I can honestly say that this has been a seriously fun project.

What I'm after is a stupidly bright set of off road lamps for my Russian Ural sidecar motorcycle. I've already got a spot light. I've already got fog lights. They aren't enough.

I'm about road test some enclosures based on the BRIDGELUX BXRA-C0400-00000, a 700mA BuckPuck, a 10w passive heatsink, and a really cheap aluminum Chinese enclosure.

Thank you Nessus for starting this thread. It's changed my life.


----------



## moovinfast

Did this thread die? Has anyone found a found a lens that would work to make a tight beam? I wanted to try it in a projector that I have already gotten to stay on without a bulb. I was looking into using a p7 with a lens but then I found this.


----------



## NeSSuS-GTE

I'm glad that you asked about optics. It inspired me to take another look.
I don't know how I missed this before!

HERE is the a link to: 
*Application Note AN16*
[FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]_Optical Considerations for Bridgelux LED Arrays_ [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

Here is the important part of that document!!

[FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]



[/FONT]
[/FONT][/FONT]


----------



## moovinfast

Thank you. Nice find. I emailed LEDil about pricing for the 24 degree for the C2000.


----------



## zeramant86

Itchin to see some creations with these.


----------



## blasterman

> I emailed LEDil about pricing for the 24 degree for the C2000.


 
Yeah! I could do some interesting things with that.

One helluva disco-ball light at the least :huh:

Curious about pricing.


----------



## purduephotog

blasterman said:


> Yeah! I could do some interesting things with that.
> 
> One helluva disco-ball light at the least :huh:
> 
> Curious about pricing.



I've asked Anderson and they couldn't get a response from Ledlil- this was almost 6 months ago. I've mailed Ledil a couple times too and never heard back from them.

They might be selling the Bridgelux optics, but I'll be damned if I know where to get them.


----------



## blasterman

Also note that Bridgelux is now selling a 5000 lumen array.


----------



## andromeda.73

too strong!


----------



## eyeeatingfish

Maybe this will be the first LED light to boil water.

On a serious not I think that one of the big applications will be house lighting. Obviously brighter than those multiple 5mm led models and still better than the 3xQ5 style models
If someone were buying these LEDs wholesale im sure you could get a 1,000-2,000 lumen bulb for less than 60 bucks. I would buy that.
A lot of house lighting bulbs for medium rooms output in the 1000-2000 lumen range so this would definately be competition.
With the flood, maybe some thin lamp shade to spread out the light!

Anyone here know how to turn the 25 die LED into a basic household lamp? If the price were right I would even buy one from someone here who started making those!


----------



## parawizard

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



SQ40 said:


> Hmm.. Wonder how I can make this work.. What If I use the built in Reflector of the existing bulb?
> 
> I realize that we are focusing the bulb through the aperture on the LCD.. so a tight beam is ideal, right? Or am i going to get one big hot-spot?



You want the straightest throw possible. In the case of LCD Projectors they use a flyeye lens array to homogenize the light but you still want it fairly even. 

These LEDs that are arrays of single dies do not work as well as a SST-90 in combination with a ~50mm Aspherical lens as you cannot get nearly as much light straight (collimation) as you can get with a 3x3mm source. The lens I find that works best is from KD the 52mm exotic.


----------



## CandleLightPower

This is perfect! I've been looking for a way to see my bacon and fry it at the same time.


----------



## blasterman

> A lot of house lighting bulbs for medium rooms output in the 1000-2000 lumen range so this would definately be competition.


 
Been experimenting with such. Because of the built in directionality and efficiency of LED it really only takes about 800 lumens to fill a room if you do it right. I've been working with diffusing the light by upfiring and bouncing off of a diffusion panel or white umbrella. The light is utterly glorious.

The Warm-White versions have awesome / perfect color. They are superb for living room lighting.

The 5000lumen version is generating some excitement in the reef community because it can displace a 250 watt metal halide.


----------



## eyeeatingfish

blasterman said:


> Been experimenting with such. Because of the built in directionality and efficiency of LED it really only takes about 800 lumens to fill a room if you do it right. I've been working with diffusing the light by upfiring and bouncing off of a diffusion panel or white umbrella. The light is utterly glorious.
> 
> The Warm-White versions have awesome / perfect color. They are superb for living room lighting.
> 
> The 5000lumen version is generating some excitement in the reef community because it can displace a 250 watt metal halide.



Are you able to build such a house lamp assembly? I would pay for it. Probably make my own shade and stand but the electronics I dont know how to do. Last time I went to radio shack the people there did not really know anything about all the various electrical components...


----------



## blasterman

I use conventional external power sources like laptop bricks, Xitaniums, Meanwells, etc. Keeps the design clean.


----------



## eyeeatingfish

blasterman said:


> I use conventional external power sources like laptop bricks, Xitaniums, Meanwells, etc. Keeps the design clean.


 

???


----------



## thepaan

eyeeatingfish said:


> ???


 
For your house, which uses AC power, you have to convert it to something usefull for an LED. You could build your own power supply with base components or you could 'keep the design clean' as blasterman puts it, by using a premade AC-DC converter. I'm using an old Sun monitor brick for my desk lamp.


----------



## eyeeatingfish

thepaan said:


> For your house, which uses AC power, you have to convert it to something usefull for an LED. You could build your own power supply with base components or you could 'keep the design clean' as blasterman puts it, by using a premade AC-DC converter. I'm using an old Sun monitor brick for my desk lamp.


 
Gotcha there, but you would still need to make sure it had the right voltage in DC right? I dont know how to build that kinf of thing. I could follow simple directions or I could buy one from someone.


----------



## blasterman

eyeeatingfish said:


> Gotcha there, but you would still need to make sure it had the right voltage in DC right?


 
Example: I have a box of 18.5 volt laptop bricks. If I run five LEDs in series they get 3.7 volts each. That's 700mA for most 3watt white LEDs. Or, if I run six LEDs in series they get 3.1 volts. 

If I run two smaller Bridgelux in series they get 9.25 volts each. I don't need a custom power supply.


----------



## jtr1962

I'll add that even though LEDs strictly speaking should be run on _constant current_, rather than _constant voltage_, supplies, if they are adequately heat-sinked to prevent thermal runaway, then they can be safely run on a constant voltage power supply.


----------



## bshanahan14rulz

So thermal runaway is the only reason we use CC for LEDs? So if I had a few Cree's wired in series only, on a big beefy fan-cooled heatsink, I could use a CV driver? Neat-o!

Wish lasers were that way...

and EEF, a laptop brick is that thing you plug into the wall that charges your laptop, converts AC to DC. A Xitanium is basically a laptop brick with extra bits and pieces that make it more betterer for LEDs ;-)


----------



## blasterman

> I'll add that even though LEDs strictly speaking should be run on _constant current_


 
Why? Who declared that law? 

Constant curent drivers have more problems than this forum will admit to given the amount of mail I've responded to. Current regulation electronics are prone to failure and Q/C issues, which might explain all the dead bucks out there. 

A _fixed voltage_ supply will also *not* put out more voltage than it's rated for. However, a _current regulated_ supply will fling out it's max voltage under less than ideal conditions including transient shorts, power-ups, etc. 

For instance, a solder breaks on a string of LEDs on a 700mA Current Regulated supply causing intermittent contact, and hence rapid pulses of dangerous voltage as the circuit keeps discharging. Next thing you know I'm replacing $50 worth of Crees. Never had that happen with a constant voltage supply.

When a laptop brick shorts or detects a problem, it typically shuts off for a few second. When a 700mA current regaulted driver detects a fault it delivers more power first before stopping.

Matter of fact, I've never lost a single LED due to thermal runaway on a fixed voltage circuit, but there are likely a few billion 5/10mm LEDs out there trashed on current regulated arrays (like traffic lights) due to voltage hogging in a parallel / series array.


----------



## jtr1962

blasterman said:


> Why? Who declared that law?
> 
> Constant curent drivers have more problems than this forum will admit to given the amount of mail I've responded to. Current regulation electronics are prone to failure and Q/C issues, which might explain all the dead bucks out there.
> 
> A _fixed voltage_ supply will also *not* put out more voltage than it's rated for. However, a _current regulated_ supply will fling out it's max voltage under less than ideal conditions including transient shorts, power-ups, etc.


So will a voltage regulated supply if something goes wrong. Constant voltage circuits use a feedback network ( generally a resistor divider ) to determine the output voltage. If one of those resistors goes, then the circuit may think it has zero on the output. Bingo, output keeps increasing until it reaches the input. Yes, I've seen it happen, thankfully only once.

The ideal for driving an LED is a constant current/constant voltage circuit but unfortunately few drivers do it this way. Ideally, the voltage limit is set above whatever the string of LEDs will reach under normal operation. This ensures constant current operation except if the string open circuits. If that happens, voltage rises, but not to the point where it will kill the LEDs if the open circuit somehow reconnects itself.

The problems you mention are poor design. If your constant current circuit doesn't have a voltage limit, then all the components on the output ( i.e. filter caps ) should be able to take whatever voltage the output rise to ( generally something close to the input voltage ). Sadly many don't. End result predictably is failed supplies.

I think the reason you've had a lot better luck with CV supplies might have to with numbers more than anything else. CV supplies are made in _massive_ numbers. You can just design them better at any given price point by economies of scale. CC supplies mostly cater to the LED market, which is a niche market compared to the market for power bricks. You have a lot of one-off designs which really aren't throughly tested before coming to market. 

As for why operate LEDs on constant current ( besides that the major LED manufacturers all say you should in their design guides ), the reason is to better control heat and light production. LEDs have a wide variance in forward voltage. Operate a string of 3 Crees at 10V, for example, and most of the time forward current might be 500 mA, give or take. However, if you happen to get LEDs with particularly low Vf they might well be pulling over a amp. If your heat sink is barely adequate for 500 mA then you have problems. Temperature goes up, Vf drops further, current goes up. Eventually either the power supply, or LEDs, or both, destroy themselves. With a constant current supply of 500 mA, you'll have a much smaller variation in heat output ( it would really only vary with Vf ). With constant voltage, your heat here is 10V times whatever current the LEDs happen to pull at 10V ( less light output, of course ). That could easily vary by a factor of 2 or more. With a 500 mA constant current circuit heat is 500 mA times the total forward voltage of the string ( which might vary from ~9.3V to maybe 10.5V, or only about 13% ). If you want to massively heat sink your LEDs, then constant voltage is just fine. I've done it both ways but I'm honestly more comfortable with constant current, or better yet CC/CV. The downside to CC/CV is that you're pretty much limited to a fixed number of LEDs. If you put more LEDs in then they won't be driven at full current. If you put fewer in they'll get the full current but won't be protected in the event of an open circuit/reconnect. This is why most drivers are simply CC-flexibility. Not an ideal situation, but not as problematic as you make them out to be if designed well ( most sadly aren't ).



> For instance, a solder breaks on a string of LEDs on a 700mA Current Regulated supply causing intermittent contact, and hence rapid pulses of dangerous voltage as the circuit keeps discharging. Next thing you know I'm replacing $50 worth of Crees. Never had that happen with a constant voltage supply.


Are you referring to those Xitanium drivers? That shouldn't happen on a well-designed supply. I've made CC circuits where I can connect LEDs to powered drivers all day long without problems. The key is to limit the output capacitance to something reasonable so that the LED junction isn't hit with massive amounts of energy. Apparently Xitanium doesn't do that.



> When a laptop brick shorts or detects a problem, it typically shuts off for a few second. When a 700mA current regaulted driver detects a fault it delivers more power first before stopping.


Shouldn't happen. When a 700 mA CC circuit is shorted, you should get 700 mA going through the short, and near zero power. Or at least that's what happens with the drivers I make.

The driver problems you or your customers experience are mostly to do with designers of CC circuits not knowing what the heck they're doing ( or being forced to do things they shouldn't to contain costs ). I've had the opportunity to examine drivers even on $200 lights. For the most part I'm shocked by what I see. Inadequate current sense resistors, inadequate MOSFETs. Inductors which operate very close to saturation even at the design current. Output caps with voltage ratings far below the input ( the best I saw was a 4V cap on the output of a 12 volt input driver-yes, it was designed to drive 1 LED, but if the output was open then the cap fried ). It's even worse with boost drivers. At least with buck drivers the output voltage is inherently limited to the input voltage less a few tenths. Boost drivers on the other hand MUST be designed with some means of limiting voltage in the event of an open circuit or they WILL destroy themselves. Sadly, a lot aren't.

There's a good reason I don't really bother with commercial drivers when I make projects. They're a crapshoot. Some are great, most aren't. Which you end up with is sadly not necessarily determined by what you pay for them.


----------



## jtr1962

bshanahan14rulz said:


> So thermal runaway is the only reason we use CC for LEDs? So if I had a few Cree's wired in series only, on a big beefy fan-cooled heatsink, I could use a CV driver? Neat-o!


No, we also use CC to better control heat production so we can use a fixed-size heat sink ( see last post ). And yes, you can run a few Crees on a CV driver. Just make sure you stick a resistor in somewhere unless the CV supply is within a few tenths of a volt of the total Vf of your LED string. Add up the forward voltage of all the LEDs at whatever current you intend to drive them at ( let's say 10V driven at 500 mA ). If your supply is 12V, then you need to use a (12-10)/ 0.5 = 4 ohm resistor in series with the LEDs. Wattage rating of the resistor should be at least ( 12 -10 )*0.5, or 1 watt.


----------



## blasterman

> Are you referring to those Xitanium drivers? That _shouldn't _happen on a well-designed supply.


 
What's the IC code for 'should'?

Also, 700mA Xitanium drivers are *exactly* the ones that have suffered this problem and I take a bit of offense that you seem to be denying this can happen when I've experienced first hand. All it takes is for a bit of solder to hit a ground or poorly isolated pad and you can kiss a string of Cree's goodbye. A fixed voltage supply like a laptop brick turns off because they are designed not to fry your $2,000 laptop. The current regulated supply disharges and *kills *emitters because it's too stupid to tell a short from a full string of LEDs and isn't designed for a specifc task in general.

Also, I'm not directly picking on Xitanium because all commercial current regulators in this class are likely built with identical components. However, frankly speaking, this commercial design _effing_ sucks. It might be efficient, but it's not a good solution for what they are hyped for.



> Shouldn't happen. When a 700 mA CC....


 
There's that annoying word _should_ again. If I divide the forward voltage of three 9.7volt Bridgelux into 24volts times a _should_ what do I need?__

You are aware of the very thread in this forum confirming the problem with Buck-Sucks not delivering their rated current? 

Also, there's the strange issue I've experienced with Satistronics LEDs. They run fine on fixed voltage supplies. Even at 700mA they work perfectly and I've yet to lose a single one. They run on my reef tank, over house plants...no problem. 24/7 since summer, and my camera confirms intensity hasn't dropped a bit. 

However, hook a Satistronics 3watter up to a 700mA current regulated supply and 'poof', they die within hours. So, if you want to vote that the problem is entirely the design of the emitter, then we have a serious disagreement. I'm using a single surplus laptop brick to run every LED array on an entire side of my room, and I'm not close to full capacity. I'm waiting for the 'thermal runaway' that some of you keep claiming will happen. Still waiting. Still waiting...... 

I realize you build your own supplies, and this is perhaps why we have such a radically different perspective. However, the fact remains I've been cobbling together some fairly powerful arrays with a huge variety of LED types, and the fixed voltage approach has yielded near 100 success. Current regulated supplies make nice pretty sparks when they short.


----------



## jtr1962

blasterman said:


> Also, 700mA Xitanium drivers are *exactly* the ones that have suffered this problem and I take a bit of offense that you seem to be denying this can happen when I've experienced first hand.


I didn't say it couldn't happen as it obviously did happen to you, merely that it shouldn't happen on a properly designed supply. Evidently the Xitanium isn't. Also, without seeing a schematic and/or having one to test I have no idea exactly what the Xitanium is doing electronically. There are more than a few ways to drive LEDs off 120 VAC. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the Xitanium uses a high-frequency transformer to step-down the voltage. Basically, you first rectify and filter 120 VAC, end up with about 165 VDC, then use MOSFETs to chop this DC into a high-frequency ( several tens of kHz or more ) wave which is fed into a step down transformer. All good and well except that transformers are inductors. Inductors can store rather large amounts of energy. Moreover, disconnect an inductor from its load, and guess what happens? The current wants to continue to flow, but can't, so the voltage rises. Now reconnect the load a short time late, and POOF! That seems to be what happened with you. I'm not saying the Xitanium is a horrible design, merely that the designers didn't account for the possibility of the load being momentarily disconnected. They could probably mitigate the problem by putting a large filter cap on the output. You would still get the voltage _trying_ to rise if the LEDs were disconnected, but the capacitor would limit the rate of rise ( technically it would absorb the energy in the inductor ).

And your typical laptop brick usually has _exactly_ the same topology as it's the best way to step down 120 VAC BUT it has a bunch more failsafes. As it's a CV supply designed for a finicky computer it also has HUGE filter caps on the output.



> Also, I'm not directly picking on Xitanium because all commercial current regulators in this class are likely built with identical components. However, frankly speaking, this commercial design _effing_ sucks. It might be efficient, but it's not a good solution for what they are hyped for.


Let's put it this way-it's a less than optimal solution. In all honestly, want a quick and dirty but fairly good way to run LEDs off 120 VAC, here's one:







As shown the circuit drives 24 LEDs at ~20 mA. If you want to drive, say, 6 power LEDs at 350 mA, then change C1 to 10 uF, change R1 to about a few ohms ( or even just stick in a 1 amp fuse ), and change C2 to about 4700 uF or 10000 uF. Efficiency > 90%, not bad current regulation, no surges if there is a short, very simple, inexpensive parts. Yes, the output voltage will still rise if the one of the LEDs gets disconnected, but fairly slowly due to the huge filter cap. I'm also fairly sure another cap across the AC input to the bridge will limit the rise ( I'll test it in my circuit simulator ).



> You are aware of the very thread in this forum confirming the problem with Buck-Sucks not delivering their rated current?


Yep. It's a design problem in the driver. Maybe they rate their drivers by what they put into a dead short. Put a real load on it, and some drivers will deliver less current. Like I said, this is exactly why I make my own drivers. 95% of what you can buy has some glaring fault. I also realize about 95% of people here are not capable of doing what I do electronically. 



> Also, there's the strange issue I've experienced with Satistronics LEDs. They run fine on fixed voltage supplies. Even at 700mA they work perfectly and I've yet to lose a single one. They run on my reef tank, over house plants...no problem. 24/7 since summer, and my camera confirms intensity hasn't dropped a bit.
> 
> However, hook a Satistronics 3watter up to a 700mA current regulated supply and 'poof', they die within hours. So, if you want to vote that the problem is entirely the design of the emitter, then we have a serious disagreement.


I never said anything about the emitters being at fault here. It's crappy drivers, period, ironically much the same problem plaguing cheap CFLs. I'll take a good guess that the so-called current regulated supply actually fed the emitter a bunch of multi-amp current spikes chopped up to average 700 mA instead of 700 mA steady. Perfect way to kill an LED. I once killed a Peltier in a couple of hours with a commercial board which fed it a low-frequency PWMed voltage. Meanwhile, my home-made CC drivers ran the same type of Peltier for months.



> I'm using a single surplus laptop brick to run every LED array on an entire side of my room, and I'm not close to full capacity. I'm waiting for the 'thermal runaway' that some of you keep claiming will happen. Still waiting. Still waiting......


Like I said, nothing wrong with what you're doing here. You use heat sinks which are overkill. Thermal runaway will never be an issue if you do that, provided you match the supply voltage to the LED's Vf at whatever current you're aiming for. You might end up with a factor of 2 higher current if your LEDs have a much lower Vf than you thought, but no thermal runaway. Now if you use a heat sink which is barely adequate, that's another story ( yes, I've had it happen to me ).



> I realize you build your own supplies, and this is perhaps why we have such a radically different perspective. However, the fact remains I've been cobbling together some fairly powerful arrays with a huge variety of LED types, and the fixed voltage approach has yielded near 100 success. Current regulated supplies make nice pretty sparks when they short.


That's the source of our differences. When I make a supply, if I have issues I can fix them. I've been making CC supplies since the early 1990s. First for Peltiers, later for LEDs.


----------



## Head2Wind

I am curious if anyone has continued with these emitters? I am a NOOB to the forum, however I am very serious about looking more closely at these for offroad forward facing lights. Application would require a driver that is basically as follows: ~10-15Vdc input, with the spec'd 16.2V/1.5A output per emitter for the BXRA-C2002-00000 . 

It appears that Ledil has optics available (inquiry submitted to them for a sample), however I wonder if there are alternatives or perhaps custom solutions?

Sage advise and offerings very welcome


----------



## Axkiker

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*



bozola said:


> A wallflower chimes in:
> 
> On a whim based on Nessus's review, I decided to get a couple of the BXRA-C0800 to play around with.
> 
> Couldn't be as annoying as my HIDs. Naaah. Bright but not much worse than that...after all I am an experienced HID guy - nothing can surprise me.
> 
> So they came today. I rip open the box and drag everything down the the lab. Grease one to a huge chunk of cold iron I've got laying about and power it up.
> 
> Fiat lux, baby.
> 
> The thing's bright.
> 
> The thing's stupidly bright.
> 
> The bloody thing's so stupidly bright birds flying by outside burst into flames and pilots overhead report a nuclear detonation. Maybe I exaggerate, but the damn thing's _bright_.
> 
> HIDs just lost their appeal. Another LED evangelist is born.
> 
> Thanks, Nessus!


 

HAHAHAHAH that just cracked me up

im sold


----------



## Axkiker

So im getting ready to purchase one of the 5000lm emitters from newark and will also need to purcahse a dc to dc power supply...


Being that there was just a big discussion on power supplies what do you all recommend. Looking for a rugged product which will survive in an automotive application

thanks


----------



## Dark_

For those folks running or planning to run the 5000lm units, what are you using to keep them cool?


----------



## Lon

Im looking at a 5000lm as well, for a flood light. Any suggestions on driver with a 12v dc supply?


----------



## deadrx7conv

Heatsink? use a big piece of finned aluminum, or a large CPU cooler with fan. 
I've posted the dimensions of a typical finned aluminum fanless heatsink 50w outdoor type LED flood light here:
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb...ding-a-BRIDGELUX-light-share-your-experiences

I've used 12v DC adjustable step up converters from ebay to power large LEDs from 12v deepcycle/rv batteries. You just have to adjust the output voltage 1st with no load. Then, you connect the heatsink'd LED and verify that the voltage/current are what you want, and readjust as needed. For example: http://cgi.ebay.com/220697691827 http://cgi.ebay.com/160485425684


----------



## Lon

bridgelux recommends using a constant current driver rather than a constant voltage, any opinions on that?


----------



## PhotonWrangler

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! BridgeLux LED Review & 4000+ Lumen Test!! <-·´¯`·.*



Illum said:


> You think?! I just did
> 
> it blew me away that even with a peltier that started the run at 29F the junction immediately goes to 200F...


 
That is amazing. You could use a small array of those to build a waffle iron. 

Eutectic solder melts around 364 degrees F. I'm wondering if a fixture based on these should be built with higher temperature silver solder just to have an extra margin.


----------



## Lon

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! BridgeLux LED Review & 4000+ Lumen Test!! <-·´¯`·.*

Oh yea, and there is now a 8000 lumen model available


----------



## deadrx7conv

Lon said:


> bridgelux recommends using a constant current driver rather than a constant voltage, any opinions on that?


 
Recommends isn't a requirement. CC might be more idiot-proof compared to using a DMM to adjust voltage/current as needed.


----------



## Lon

deadrx7conv said:


> Recommends isn't a requirement. CC might be more idiot-proof compared to using a DMM to adjust voltage/current as needed.


 I thought it might have been a protective kinda deal, what you said makes sense, I mean if the voltage is at spec the current must be proportionate to the constant load drawn by the device...no?


----------



## MikeAusC

blasterman said:


> . . . . . All it takes is for a bit of solder to hit a ground or poorly isolated pad and you can kiss a string of Cree's goodbye. . . . . .


 
A failure in a constant voltage supply can also cause overvoltage.




blasterman said:


> . . . . . The current regulated supply disharges and *kills *emitters because it's too stupid to tell a short from a full string of LEDs and isn't designed for a specifc task in general. . . . . .


 
Yes, the current regulated supply is not designed for what you're using it for.




blasterman said:


> . . . . . Current regulated supplies make nice pretty sparks when they short. . . . .



True, if they're not designed for an appropriate open-circuit voltage.


----------



## MikeAusC

jtr1962 said:


> I'll add that even though LEDs strictly speaking should be run on _constant current_, rather than _constant voltage_, supplies, . . . . .





blasterman said:


> Why? Who declared that law? . . . . .



The laws of physics did. If you increase the voltage to an LED by 10 %, the power through the LED may increase up to 100 %.

Why is that drivers designed specifically for LEDs are constant-current ? AMC7135 etc. If the readily available constant voltage supplies were suitable, no-one would have bothered developing constant current LED drivers to get better power stability.


----------



## MikeAusC

I'm in the process of writing up my modifications to a $12.00 DC-DC converter which will convert 12 volts to 30 volts at up to 3 amps to drive a 100 watt LED array. 

I've modified the constant voltage output to add true current-sensing and it's designed to vary the current between 3 and 0.3 amps by changing the sensing resistor. I'm using Low=0.3, Mid=1.0, Hi=3.0 amps. There's only 0.5 volt across the resistor, so it's very efficient.

I've set the open-circuit voltage so that it won't exceed a safe current level for the LED array. If you don't do that, the output capacitors charge up and then dump excess current into the LED, which the Constant-current circuit cannot regulate, as it's before the output capacitor.

I have one of the Chinese 100 watt LED arrays and it's working well to drive that.


----------



## deadrx7conv

Watts = amps x volts 

Whether you want to control one or the other is your perogative. CC or CV is a choice. End wattage is the same. 

I wonder if packaging/cost is at play here which has nothing to do with the law of physics. Budget? simplicity? size? flexibility? economics?.... 
AMC7135 is cheap and its easy to use. Its horribly inefficient when input voltage increases. And, LEDs are variable. So, CC might be an easier foolproof choice. 

My step up dc-dc 'VARIABLE' voltage converter works great. I can power almost any LED from 25-140w with it, within the voltage limitations of the converter, which means I can't have an unlimited series string of LEDs. I can adjust output by simply turning a knob. Find me a CC(actually variable current) driver that can does this for under $20. 

BTW, MikeAusC, I can't wait to see your build and schematic for your $12 converter.


----------



## Lon

I too am anxious to see that converter by mikeAusC.


----------



## clint357

Are there any good ways to properly drive this thing (price not being an issue)? I have not really seen any constant current drivers that would work for this 8,800 lumen beast. I'm really tempted to make a housing for one though. I made a light that is mounted on a boat with the 2,200 lumen model with a eurobeam aspheric on it and it works great.


----------



## blasterman

> Why is that drivers designed specifically for LEDs are constant-current ? AMC7135 etc. If the readily available constant voltage supplies were suitable, no-one would have bothered developing constant current LED drivers to get better power stability.


 
Missed this one awhile back, otherwise I'd be all over it. Constant current drivers were built for design specific LED arrays where factories in China pump out zillions of beehive fixtures that burn out in six. months and in a universe where 10watts is a lot. I've never blown a power led on a fixed voltage circuit, nor seen one fail. I've killed a shoebox full on fixed current drivers though, not that I advocate designing for such. This myth that power LEDs are hyper sensitive components that freak out and fail at the drop of a 10% current flux is absurd. 

At present I've built several LED reef lights + 100watts and lost count at the number of odd ball custom LED designs I've made. Typically I use constant current drivers, most notably MeanWell because of their price / performance ratio. A pair of 48Ds can light a small/medium size reef tank pretty good and provide variable color via external pot, Arduino, etc. 

I also have several arrays in place using fixed voltage bricks, and they worked quite well. I'm not some idiot trying to run a 20watt Ebay LED from a 12volt battery. I get 12-24volt 700mA drivers from China for a Dollar, and they have proven to be more reliable, consistent and more durable than Buck-Sucks from LuxDrive. A 35watt / 48volt AC/DC Mean Well costs $17, so it's pointless and a waste of time building my own circuits.

Obviously a current regulated source, particularly a high quality one can deliver greater efficiency, and be design specific. However, current regulated sources suffer from design issues when run in parallel that are very annoying.
So, the best option is simply to design so you don't need parallel runs, but that's easier said than done. As per above, most of the higher end LED drivers are capable of 48volt and higher, which is cool because the higher voltage allows for greater efficiency off mains and longer series runs. They are also mandatory for firing higher voltage Bridgelux emitters.

The down side is a 48volt LED driver throws enough current inrush to stain your underwear and they torch more sensitive 3watt LEDs, specifically rebels. They also short a lot easier than 24volt. I started using Rebels for reef lights, but found it takes half a dozen in series with a Mean Well to buffer current inrush and keep from randomly popping them. So, these current regulated drivers you guys so lovingly endorse start to get not so friendly when driven at +20 watt levels. They'll also give you a hard smack when shorted against your arm. Thermistors are no help with larger circuits because they require massive cooling.

A few years ago I started building high powered 6' rails for a night club, and the owner couldn't decide how many rails he wanted. That meant I couldn't use a fixed current regulated source because I needed additional parallel runs. I could have used a 48D and trimmed the current as I added each parallel run, but any slight mistake and I'd pop all of them. Or, I could have mounted a AC/DC regulated driver to each rail, which would have drastically increased cost and required extensive ceiling rewiring. Or, I could have used a fixed voltage source < 24volts negating conduit requirements and used a DC/DC constant current driver on each rail. That's kind of how on board SMD strips do it.

I ended up just running the 18.5 volt brick to each rail in parallel because at approx 3.1 Vf to each LED the illimunation level is perfect for what he wants and they'll last forever. Been up close to 3 years 24/7 already, which is already better than 75% of the current regulated junk that costs 3x as much and isn't nearly as bright. I could have added a 12/24 DC/DC regulator on each rail, but what the hell for. It would just eat power anyways and raise costs.


----------



## blasterman

> Are there any good ways to properly drive this thing (price not being an issue)?


 
Sure. I think a Mean Well HLG 100 will do it at 95% efficiency and AC/DC conversion, but why would you? I simply don't get the facination with these big emitters.

Seriously - do the math on Bridgelux's site. Often it's cheaper to hit the same lumen levels using more of their lesser powered emitters because their big ones carry a premium. Usually it's their 800-1200 lumen range emitters that have the best price per lumen ratio. So, use several of those instead on their big arrays. Plus, by using half a dozen 800 lumen LEDs you can tweak the array around and find a better driver to fit. Figure out your desired lumen level first, and choose LED config next. AC/DC drivers for Bridgelux emitters are easy to find, efficient as hell and not expensive, but those big, 30volt arrays are awkward to drive from a common LED supply unless you want to DIY the driver as well.


----------



## clint357

I like the simplicity of a single LED, single optic, less wiring, and single housing. It also seems to be easier to get a good beam out of a single source than trying to aim multiple devices into a specific pattern. I like the beam pattern of the single bridgelux light I made with a euro beam pattern more than what I could get with a trio of P7 sources. I personally like the look of a single can vs a light bar as well. I will have to post a pic of the other bridgelux light I made...I just prefer the form factor over the bar style. I'm not saying that you are right or wrong...just personal preference. If it were a goal to make them in mass quantities for profit, I believe that the single source would be cheaper in the long run for the amount of light you are getting.


----------



## 1-3-2-4

I know this thread is old but I have a security light I want to retrofit, I was looking at the BridgeLux BXRA-50C5300-H-00 I just don't know if a 5 1/2" 6 1/2" aluminum heatsink is enough to cool one or two of them? Would I be better off going with smaller LED's? I need at least 6800 lm.


----------



## argleargle

*Re: .·´¯`·-> !! 4000+ Lumen Test & BridgeLux LED Review!! <-·´¯`·.*

Heh. Even if it's an old thread, this is still awesome.


----------



## SemiMan

Deleted .. just realized it was an old thread.


----------



## Matie

jtr1962 said:


> As shown the circuit drives 24 LEDs at ~20 mA. If you want to drive, say, 6 power LEDs at 350 mA, then change C1 to 10 uF, change R1 to about a few ohms ( or even just stick in a 1 amp fuse ), and change C2 to about 4700 uF or 10000 uF. Efficiency > 90%, not bad current regulation, no surges if there is a short, very simple, inexpensive parts. Yes, the output voltage will still rise if the one of the LEDs gets disconnected, but fairly slowly due to the huge filter cap. I'm also fairly sure another cap across the AC input to the bridge will limit the rise ( I'll test it in my circuit simulator ).



> 90% efficiency is quite good. 
Could you help with 2x 54 Parallel LED's at 2.98 fv 1050ma for a total of 160.92v 2100ma from 240AC. 






I have a single 240v Mains powered Mean Well power supply to drive this, but it is not doing a lot for the cost.

Unfortunately the 2.1A high current required for this Array could not be meet simply by adding Capacitors.

If there was a better option, guessing it would be known.

Merry Christmas


----------

