# WA1185 Voltage & Lumen questions



## Flashanator (Aug 25, 2008)

In regards with a Borealis/mag85 light. What is the voltage limit before ?

At stock 9.6v the lamp is producing 817 lumens.

But I read it can get to 1200lumen when overdriven. Just curious what voltage & watts that is? 


thanks.


EDIT: just found the info I needed on LuxLuthor's Mag Mod list (Gotta love that guy ) So in my case @ 10.8v its about 1200lumen. No wonder it its more impressive then those cheap 6-12v 55w halogen lights.:twothumbs


----------



## Flashanator (Aug 25, 2008)

Also curious how they get the 1050lumens stated on the blackearflashlight website?


----------



## Bimmerboy (Aug 25, 2008)

I'll take a wild stab at it.

Perhaps they're knocking 150 bulb lumens off the usual overdrive estimate due to the underperforming batteries being used? Nothing I saw in the pictures appear to be loaded with anything that can match the performance of CPB1650's, Eneloops, and a few others. Additionally, the specs claim to use 2700mAH NiMH batts, which by most measures, do not hold up as well under load as their "lower capacity" bretheren.

The exact number "1050" could've been chosen because it rolls off the tongue more smoothly than 1100?

Again, these are just guesses.


----------



## Icebreak (Aug 25, 2008)

Best to ask Juan how he gets his numbers. Looks pretty close to me but I don't know if that's t lm or b lm.

Welch Allyn has a re-rater on its site that some use to get an idea of lumens. I pointed out a while back that because they don't use current (A) in their calculations they aren't calculating with Watts which makes sense because they are looking for lumens except for the fact that the full power should be accounted for. The full power is radiometric and the visible power is photometric. Radiometric would include IR. A Mag85 is putting out a good quantity of that. When you overdrive a lamp the calculation attributes all the voltage overdrive to lumens. Not a big deal if you are running say 30W or less but some of the crazy...erm...I mean adventurous Incan guys do 100W + or 250 or 500 or heck I don't know what the top is anymore. So using that WA system will give increasingly incorrect results in relationship to the amount of power being used. You'll see many references to lumens per Watt on CPF. lm/W is the ratio of luminous flux to radiant flux.

Worse is AWR's hotrater which uses goal seek which is muddy math. The concept of putting your best known calculations in a spreadsheet is a good one. I'm pretty sure that's what WA is doing as is evidenced when looking at the link below where V2 equals a quantity. V2 appears to be the name of a cell, not a variable.

Anyway, if you'd like to check out the WA re-rater just pop this link:

http://www.walamp.com/lpd/webstore/...&L2=3.31952948576512&adj=5&partnumber=01185-U

Within the address line of your browser you can change the V or the part number to see what they come up with for b lm. It's interesting but IMHO flawed.

Here is the calculation I think they are using plus the 65% a lot of us use to get t lm instead of b lm:

spec lm X (overdrive V ÷ spec V) ^3.4 = overdrive lm X .65 = torch lm

I haven't checked my facts scientifically on any of the above statements so treat this post as just one opinion voiced by one person...not fact.

The best way to figure what's going on with your light would be to measure it with an Integrating Sphere. I quit trying to figure exact lumens long ago and just try to approximate now. I know what several Incans are supposed to look like so for comparisons I use DM51's method of using an Integrating Tree.


----------



## Tessaiga (Aug 25, 2008)

On another note, can I know the runtime of the 1185 on a 3 X 17670 setup?

Does it also get significantly dimmer over the runtime??


----------



## Flashanator (Aug 25, 2008)

Wow! thanks for those replies.


:thumbsup:


----------



## AzN1337c0d3r (Aug 26, 2008)

Here's the link to the WA1185 on LuxLuthor's Destructive Incan Bulb Tests thread:

http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h75/pike444/bulbs/1185.jpg

Although I haven't much luck driving them over 11.5V. Even with AW's softstarter.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Aug 26, 2008)

Icebreak said:


> Best to ask Juan how he gets his numbers. Looks pretty close to me but I don't know if that's t lm or b lm.
> 
> Welch Allyn has a re-rater on its site that some use to get an idea of lumens. I pointed out a while back that because they don't use current (A) in their calculations they aren't calculating with Watts which makes sense because they are looking for lumens except for the fact that the full power should be accounted for. The full power is radiometric and the visible power is photometric. Radiometric would include IR. A Mag85 is putting out a good quantity of that. When you overdrive a lamp the calculation attributes all the voltage overdrive to lumens. Not a big deal if you are running say 30W or less but some of the crazy...erm...I mean adventurous Incan guys do 100W + or 250 or 500 or heck I don't know what the top is anymore. So using that WA system will give increasingly incorrect results in relationship to the amount of power being used. You'll see many references to lumens per Watt on CPF. lm/W is the ratio of luminous flux to radiant flux.
> 
> ...



Smart man!  Very few ever questioned or examined the real basics & assumptions to see how people were arriving at various predictions.

Actually, there is no such "thing" as *torch lumens* defined in any official scientific listing. It is a colloquial term that was made up to try and describe the differences between actual integrating sphere measurements of bulb lumens and what might be coming out the front of a light. However, when you track back to the origins of the 65% estimation of Torch Lumens, I do not consider it any more valid than AWR using his Excel Hotrater sheet with formulas extrapolated from Welch Allyn URL bulb re-rating to predict overdrive. None of their results, predictions, or test theories followed established reliable guidelines.

Of minor interest, in a revised Hotrater version this spring, after a number of conversations and showing AWR my destructive testing, we did come up with a more accurate complex exponent overdrive formula that algebraically follows more of an "S" curve. It correlated my test results closely for some bulbs, but not for others. 

None of the existing lumen output formulas additionally takes into account the changes in lumen/lux output at various overdrive levels...when bulb life run time is included.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Aug 26, 2008)

AzN1337c0d3r said:


> Here's the link to the WA1185 on LuxLuthor's Destructive Incan Bulb Tests thread:
> 
> http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h75/pike444/bulbs/1185.jpg
> 
> Although I haven't much luck driving them over 11.5V. Even with AW's softstarter.



Softstarter is one thing--it prevents startup inrush current spikes from cold filament. However, it outputs the same voltage as comes into it, so without a *regulation of voltage from whatever battery source,* you are not going to get a perfect 11.5V output delivered to the bulb from batteries that start at some higher voltage and continuously drained under load.


----------



## choppers (Aug 26, 2008)

Tessaiga said:


> On another note, can I know the runtime of the 1185 on a 3 X 17670 setup?
> 
> Does it also get significantly dimmer over the runtime??


I have a number of lights with this set-up and I don't experience much if any dimming....when the Li-ion batts get around 3.6v - 3.7v they just wont power up the light because of some resistance I am sure...how much I dont know...next time I will use my DMM to check how many Volts are truly being delivered to the bulb when the cells get down to 3.6v - 3.7v...


----------



## AzN1337c0d3r (Aug 26, 2008)

LuxLuthor said:


> Softstarter is one thing--it prevents startup inrush current spikes from cold filament. However, it outputs the same voltage as comes into it, so without a *regulation of voltage from whatever battery source,* you are not going to get a perfect 11.5V output delivered to the bulb from batteries that start at some higher voltage and continuously drained under load.



I stuck a DMM on the bulb leads when it was running. Obviously it's subject to change, but I tend to instaflash bulbs when running above that voltage as I have rarely seen anything higher than 11.5V with the bulb lighted.


----------



## Tessaiga (Aug 27, 2008)

choppers said:


> I have a number of lights with this set-up and I don't experience much if any dimming....when the Li-ion batts get around 3.6v - 3.7v they just wont power up the light because of some resistance I am sure...how much I dont know...next time I will use my DMM to check how many Volts are truly being delivered to the bulb when the cells get down to 3.6v - 3.7v...


 
Thanks for the info... do you have any idea of the runtime on this setup of 3 X 17670 running the 1185??


----------



## choppers (Aug 27, 2008)

Tessaiga said:


> Thanks for the info... do you have any idea of the runtime on this setup of 3 X 17670 running the 1185??


Good question....I havent timed it but I would guess around 30 minutes give or take...


----------



## Flashanator (Aug 27, 2008)

Speaking of runtime, what runtime do you Mag85 owners with the NiMH AA setup get?

thanks.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Aug 27, 2008)

Tessaiga said:


> On another note, can I know the runtime of the 1185 on a 3 X 17670 setup?
> 
> Does it also get significantly dimmer over the runtime??



_* To give the best answer to you, first click on thumbnail of my destructive testing to see the voltage and amp ranges that this bulb needs to "shine" properly.
*_

1185


​---------------------------------------------------------

_* Then I just finished testing the AW Protected 17670 battery by charging it to full with Pila charger, and discharging it at 3.4A, 3.3A, 3.2A, and 3.15A (see legend) shown in the 4 lines of this graph. 

When the batteries drain below 10V (3.3V each), the bulb performance craps out. It comes sooner than people realize with these cells.*_


----------



## AzN1337c0d3r (Aug 27, 2008)

Flashanator 500mW said:


> Speaking of runtime, what runtime do you Mag85 owners with the NiMH AA setup get?
> 
> thanks.



On a topped off 9-cell Eneloop pack, somewhere between 30-35 minutes.


----------

