# R bin Cree



## FASTCAR (Aug 19, 2007)

What are the lumen ratings for the R bin cree?

The P4 is like 176 at 1A.
Q5 225 ish I think

Any news on R ?


----------



## jirik_cz (Aug 19, 2007)

cree xr-e roadmap
I think you can estimate 1A flux by multiplying 350mA flux with 2.2
so 114*2.2 = [email protected] for R2 bin(I saw this formula here on forums, don't know if it's correct)


----------



## FASTCAR (Aug 19, 2007)

That R4 is a serious LED.HUGE jump from P4.
Hope that is out soon.


----------



## LukeA (Aug 19, 2007)

FASTCAR said:


> That R4 is a serious LED.HUGE jump from P4.
> Hope that is out soon.



Me too. Pelican 7060 + R4 = MUHAHAHAHAHA!

(the 7060 runs @1200mA)


----------



## Nitro (Aug 19, 2007)

Tiablo + FluPic + R4 = :rock:


----------



## gunga (Aug 19, 2007)

I think I'll keep a couple Fenixes around (I opened mine) waiting for the R4...

:naughty:


----------



## gsegelk (Sep 4, 2007)

Any idea of when the R bins will be released? With all the chatter going on, it's either already out in limited runs, or is soon to be released...


----------



## daveman (Sep 4, 2007)

Soon, I speculate within days from now.


----------



## jeremyison05 (Sep 4, 2007)

I hope Four 7's will be offering upgrade service to the R4 like he did with the Q5's (if fenix doesn't start using the R4's)


----------



## ah-see (Sep 5, 2007)

daveman said:


> Soon, I speculate within days from now.



Do you have a source? or is this 100% speculation??


----------



## AlexGT (Sep 8, 2007)

Hope you are related to Nostradamus! I want a R4... hell I want a R5 or S5!!!!


----------



## Kraid (Dec 27, 2007)

daveman said:


> Soon, I speculate within days from now.


:thinking:


----------



## daveman (Dec 27, 2007)

Kraid said:


> :thinking:


I was about 45 days off, I think. :thinking:


----------



## TorchBoy (Dec 27, 2007)

Quite a few days, and counting.


----------



## daveman (Dec 27, 2007)

TorchBoy said:


> Quite a few days, and counting.


 
?

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?t=170835


----------



## TorchBoy (Dec 27, 2007)

Er, not counting. (How did my post come after daveman's and I didn't see his?)

Edit: I see Cree takes the opposite approach to Luxeon - they still haven't announced the availability of the R2 with a press release. And it's not in their spec sheets. :sigh:


----------



## daveman (Dec 28, 2007)

TorchBoy said:


> Edit: I see Cree takes the opposite approach to Luxeon - they still haven't announced the availability of the R2 with a press release. And it's not in their spec sheets. :sigh:


Maybe Cree is busy developing and shipping their products out the door rather than typing up vaporware press releases. A welcome reversal of working priorities from other LED manufacturers.


----------



## Kraid (Dec 28, 2007)

Will they really stop at R4 like the roadmap says?


----------



## Erasmus (Dec 28, 2007)

Kraid said:


> Will they really stop at R4 like the roadmap says?


Yes. It goes upto the end of this roadmap and then it's finished. No more LEDs for us or anyone else!




Of course they will continue developing more efficient LEDs. This roadmap exists since around June I guess. Before that, the highest bin in datasheets was Q3, while there were no Q3 available but only Q2. Right now the roadmap goes upto R4 while the highest bin available right now is R2. By the time they release the R4 I think they will have an updated roadmap and so on


----------



## daveman (Dec 28, 2007)

Kraid said:


> Will they really stop at R4 like the roadmap says?


 
If you mean to ask if they will reach R4, then I think that is a very intelligent question. Manufacturers have some incredible bins listed in their spec sheet just for the heck of it, I think I once saw a spec sheet for SSC or Lumileds with bins producing 200 lumens at 350 ma. So we shouldn't count on a specific level of performance just because a manufacturer has published a listing or spec sheet with the numbers on it.

But I am personally convinced that Cree will reach AT LEAST 140 lumens @ 350 ma before they run into, if they run into, the next wall by the end of 08. Cree's been very honest with their published schedule so far.


----------



## MikeSalt (Jan 22, 2008)

Ok, here's my question. Why does each band never start at '1'? They always start P2, Q2, R2 etc...

Is there any word on the R-bin Crees yet? My finger is poised for an Fenix P1D-CE HA III Olive, and this may affect my decision whether it is a Q or an R.


----------



## daveman (Jan 22, 2008)

They're slowly coming down the line... I think Jet Beams has some AA light with a R2.


----------



## jtr1962 (Jan 22, 2008)

MikeSalt said:


> Ok, here's my question. Why does each band never start at '1'? They always start P2, Q2, R2 etc...


Because a "1" can easily be confused with a small "l". "2", "3", "4", or "5" don't look like anything else so there's no problem there, at least until we start getting to S bins. My guess is those will end with S4 because S5 might be taken for SS. I don't think we'll reach past S4 for a while, anyway. That would be roughly 190 lumens at 350 mA going by the present progression.

As for hitting any walls, I'd say there's a major one right around 200 lm/W. That efficiency requires an 80% efficient blue emitter. I think that's possible but I also think going much past that will take a long time. IIRC Nichia demonstrated 169 lm/W in the lab. One of emitters they used exceeded 190 lm/W at lower currents. Based on this, we can probably get to 200 lm/W fairly soon. According to Nichia, 265 lm/W represents the best thoeretical efficiency of a blue plus phosphor LED. It's obvious how little room is left for improvement compared to the best lab results.


----------



## EntropyQ3 (Jan 22, 2008)

jtr1962 said:


> As for hitting any walls, I'd say there's a major one right around 200 lm/W. That efficiency requires an 80% efficient blue emitter. I think that's possible but I also think going much past that will take a long time. IIRC Nichia demonstrated 169 lm/W in the lab. One of emitters they used exceeded 190 lm/W at lower currents. Based on this, we can probably get to 200 lm/W fairly soon. According to Nichia, 265 lm/W represents the best thoeretical efficiency of a blue plus phosphor LED. It's obvious how little room is left for improvement compared to the best lab results.


At that max efficiency, is most of the energy still turned into heat? Or is the energy turned into photons, only, since the light is white, a lot of those photons have frequencies where the eye is less sensitive, so the lumen value is lowered? 

I still haven't seen a lumen vs. wavelength weighting curve. I would really appreciate if someone would have the kindness to point me towards one.

Of course, these very high efficiencies are demonstrated at low effects and temperatures. For practical purposes, extending that efficiency to higher power applications (since todays LEDs loose a factor of 2+ from their optimum efficiency as the driving current goes up) and higher temperatures, is probably more important than increasing the peak efficiency. And looking from that perspective, there is a lot more headroom for improvement.


----------



## jtr1962 (Jan 22, 2008)

EntropyQ3 said:


> At that max efficiency, is most of the energy still turned into heat? Or is the energy turned into photons, only, since the light is white, a lot of those photons have frequencies where the eye is less sensitive, so the lumen value is lowered?


The luminous efficacy of the emitted spectrum of typical white plus phosphor LEDs is in the 330 lm/W area. However, there are inevitably Stokes losses in the phosphor conversion process of at least 20% (that's a theoretical minimum). So practically what we end up with is 80% maximum efficiency, or roughly 265 lm/W, for white plus phosphor LEDs. At that efficiency level, 80% of the input power comes out as light, the rest as heat. For a rough guide of the percentage of heat production, just divide the lumens per watt by 330, then subtract the result from 1. For example, an R2 bin is 100 lm/W minimum. 100 divided by 330 equals 0.303, or 30.3% (let's round to 30%). Subtract this from 1, and we get 0.70, or 70%. This is how much of an R2 bin's power input comes out as heat. In other words, it's still mostly heat, even at today's efficiency levels. ~165 lm/W represents the point where half is heat, half is light. We'll probably reach this level within two years in production LEDs. Also note that if we use RGB emitters to make white, there are no phosphor losses. We could in theory anyway have 100% efficiency (i.e. no heat production at all). My guess is we'll get into the 80s, perhaps low 90s, eventually. 100% obviously can't be reached in the real world but I think we'll probably get close.



> Of course, these very high efficiencies are demonstrated at low effects and temperatures. For practical purposes, extending that efficiency to higher power applications (since todays LEDs loose a factor of 2+ from their optimum efficiency as the driving current goes up) and higher temperatures, is probably more important than increasing the peak efficiency. And looking from that perspective, there is a lot more headroom for improvement.


Very true. I use the maximum lab efficiencies simply as a guide to tell me what is possible. Right now even the best Crees are only in the 60 to 70 lm/W area at 1 amp. If this could be brought up to the efficiency level these LEDs get at maybe 100 mA, then light output at 1 amp could be doubled. Still a lot of room for improvement there, but I don't think maximum lab efficiencies will go much higher, at least for phosphor whites.


----------



## TorchBoy (Jan 22, 2008)

EntropyQ3 said:


> I still haven't seen a lumen vs. wavelength weighting curve. I would really appreciate if someone would have the kindness to point me towards one.


The luminous flux article at Wikipedia has a lumen vs wavelength graph. As a bonus, the graph compares the curve for day vision to that for night vision. As you can see from the bell shape of the curves, the lumen is a weighted scale, with maximum sensitivity in the middle wavelengths.


----------



## znomit (Jan 22, 2008)

So does anyone know if there actually will be an S bin XR-E?
The roadmap is the same one that I've been looking at for a year now, it goes N,P,Q,R.
Is that it for the XR-E? 
Will there then be an XR_F with a different form factor (requiring different optics)?


----------



## Gomer (Jan 22, 2008)

If their trend holds, this is about what we should expect. 

N4 62 
P2 67.2 
P3 73.9 
P4 80.6 
Q2 87.4 
Q3 93.9 
Q4 100 
Q5 107 
R2 114 
R3 122 
R4 130 
R5 137 
S2 145 
S3 153 
S4 162 
S5 170


----------

