# Dual MC-E w/Boomerang Reflectors



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

I've nearly finished this dual Cree MC-E light. It's been fun following other threads on the MC-E as we all tried to figure out what was the best way to drive them, what optics to use, and how we would keep them cool enough. I was actually quite happy riding along with my Triple SSC light. But temptation set in, and be as it may, I succumbed to the pressure of jumping on the mult-die bandwagon.

Here is a photo of the light... I've since cleaned it up a little (removed the excess AAA) and added plexiglass to the front.
Specs: 3023 Buckpuck, 1A
2x MC-E (M-bin) wired in series (rated at 430 lumen each @ 350mA)
The two MC-Es are in parallel @ 500mA each.
Reflectors: Ledil Boomerang 1xSS and 1xMedium (?? should have used 2x SS)
Power: 14.8v, 4A Li-Ion pack.
Total Weight: 125g










For comparison purposes, I took some beam shots and compared it to my Triple SSC light.The top photo is the Triple SSC and the bottom is the Dual MC-E. The distance is about 50 feet to the fence. I really like how much better the ground between me and the bush next to the fence is lighted. The trails I ride are so twisty, there's rarely any distance greater than 50 ft. to look ahead.









Ride test next week!
Enjoy. I'll post some build pics soon!

*NOTE*: Just added an outgrowth of this light to the thread: a hybrid MC-E/SSC P4 as shown below. Discussion of this variation starts at post #29


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

Nice tidy and simple. Love it.
:thumbsup:


----------



## ocean breathes salty (Oct 1, 2006)

Nice work Achesalot :thumbsup:

MCE's sure are flood monsters aren't they. Something tells me you aren't going to have any problems keeping them cool 

When do you think the temptation to run them both at 1A will set in with a dim to 500ma ?? 

Your housing looks like it may be able to take it with all the cooling available!


----------



## p97z (Dec 19, 2006)

Looks nice!

Thanks for the update!


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Thanks guys. It was fun to build. I don't think you can have too much cooling with the MC-E. Higher power? Hmmm... 

Here is an interesting sequence of shots of how the body slides together. I was in a dilemma for a while about how to have the heat sink fins cover the entire top and still be able to pull the light apart and change reflectors, etc. Then I decided to cut them where the light halves join together.


----------



## ocean breathes salty (Oct 1, 2006)

You are simply put... the master of square tubing. 

I had one go at an "achesalot" style light and realised precision wasn't my strong point  (and promptly posted it in the fuglies  )

Your seams look so good that they might almost be watertight.. congrats


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

ocean breathes salty said:


> You are simply put... the master of square tubing.
> 
> I had one go at an "achesalot" style light and realised precision wasn't my strong point  (and promptly posted it in the fuglies  )
> 
> Your seams look so good that they might almost be watertight.. congrats


Why thanks Ocean! My son certainly thinks that I'm the master at being square


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

That is sweet Sir Achesalot .

and The rocket engine docking is a work of genius and precision sawing.

looking at the mounting brackets is it for the helmet


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

Wow, the hand shot shows how really small it is!

Is there a big temp difference on the bench between the front and back. Doesn't look to be a lot of surface area connecting the two.


----------



## Hack On Wheels (Apr 29, 2006)

Very very nice build! So you reckon the Vfs of the 4S wired MC-Es are close enough to each other? That would sure simplify the wiring, but I'm not sure if running 2 2S2P wired MC-Es in series might be a bit better matched or not... I guess it would depend on whether CREE Vf matches the dies on each MC-E or not. Being able to run at 700mA over each die would be nice, but I think you've made the best compromise at 500mA... lose a few hundred lumens perhaps, but still getting 1000+ easy, and it makes the driver dilemma easy as pie.  Good stuff!


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Troutie: Thanks. Yes, I will first try it as a standalone helmet light. I'm ordering another SS to replace the medium Boom. I always enjoy your threads Troutie... lot's of good fun!

Znomit: Yes. It is small. I was originally going to make it larger just for heat dissipation. The back part heats up first, of course, due to it having more contact area. I tried to make the front fit as tightly as possible along the sides of the 1/8" aluminum behind the stars. I also used threaded aluminum risers for connecting the front to the body. Since they are AAA'd behind the stars, they sort of act like heat pipes to get heat out to the sides. I use non-adhesive thermal compound on all the contact areas to help transfer between the two parts. After about 5 minutes of static testing, all of the fins, including the side ones and front ones are heated up, and the bottom of the light below the stars is cooler than the fins... I think that's a good thing. The feet even act as heatsinks. The worst part of this design (heatwise) is heat trapped in the body... we'll see how it does on the ride test with cool night air flowing over it!










Hack: Thanks! I went back-and-forth on wiring (you might be right on the 2S2P as way to go). The MC-Es were pretty close on Vf (I don't remember the exact numbers but only differed by less than 1/10 volt; 0.02 diff if I recall). I don't think I could keep it cool driving it with any more current and I don't want to draw any more from my battery. I think you'd really have to be aggressive on the heat management when driving them harder.

Consider Cree's Relative Flux versus Junction Temperature chart below:










It's real easy to get into the 10-15% and higher luminous flux loss if you're not careful. So at some point you are just sucking more juice from your battery and causing the LEDs to output less light (not to mention shorten their useful life).


----------



## wkumtrider (Dec 27, 2007)

Nice light achesalot. On the MC-Es, can you wire them so only one die works? I'm not sure I understand the dies and how they work. Is it like 4 leds in one package?

Thanks. I'm a dummy.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

wkumtrider said:


> Nice light achesalot. On the MC-Es, can you wire them so only one die works? I'm not sure I understand the dies and how they work. Is it like 4 leds in one package?
> 
> Thanks. I'm a dummy.


Yes. It is like 4 LEDs in one package. I'm not sure how that would affect the beam to just run some of them... I thought about trying that, but never did it. BTW, Thanks.


----------



## msxtr (Dec 10, 2006)

*achesalot* Hi, how all your works brilliant!!!!!!!!!

Greetings - Saludos

msxtr


----------



## texas (Nov 26, 2004)

*Very nice.*

Another great job. People will continutue to inspired by your light and your bikeled.org to build similar lights. Keep up the good work.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Thanks Tex and Msxtr.

Here's another photo after the MC-Es were wired. It's always a good idea to check for shorts after doing this much soldering. It turns out I had one place where a small piece of solder had wrapped around (and shorted) to the metal part of the star and might have caused damage to the driver and/or LED chip had I powered it up like that. I always take my meter's continuity tester and check for shorts against the star body and the other connections before the smoke test.










Below is how the feet of the Boomerang reflectors had to be cutoff and a few other hacks made to accomodate my solder and wires on top of the star. Sorry I didn't take a _before _shot of the feet. I also had to trim just a bit off of the front edges (at two points) to get the reflector to fit inside the 1" square tubing (which is 1-7/8" ID).


----------



## cobym2 (Apr 11, 2005)

Once again, a masterful light achesalot. What are you using for a front cover?


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

cobym2 said:


> Once again, a masterful light achesalot. What are you using for a front cover?


Thanks. I'm using a piece of 1/16" plexiglass that is rated optical grade. It is sealed in place with silicone caulking.


----------



## ocean breathes salty (Oct 1, 2006)

achesalot said:


> It's real easy to get into the 10-15% and higher luminous flux loss if you're not careful. So at some point you are just sucking more juice from your battery and causing the LEDs to output less light (not to mention shorten their useful life).


That is a wise statement. It is very easy to get caught up in pursuing more and more lumens and not even realize you are making negative gains.


----------



## sdnative (Aug 10, 2008)

Number 5 is alive. For some reason reminds me of that movie "short circuit" with that joke telling robot that becomes self aware after being hit with a bolt of electricity ...ya anyway. Very cool ...god those reflectors are tiny aren't they!!


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Yes it Johnny #5 junior 
I've been experimenting with modifying an old IMS20 reflector to see if it's possible to get a hotspot from the light. It works pretty well, with only a slight doughnut. I'll try to do some beamshots tonight.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

I decided to try the old IMS20 reflector with some mods and here are the results:

The left reflector is the modified IMS20. Right is the Boomerang SS.









Here is a ceiling shot comparison where the top is my Triple SSC (which has an IMS20 in the middle), and the second shot is the Dual MC-E with IMS20 and SS Boomerang. Yes there is some doughnuting with the IMS20 on the MC-E, but not terrible.










Finally a comparison shot with the fence at about 50 feet and the bush about 8 feet in front of it is the center of focus for all lights.
Top: Dual MC-E w 1x SS Boom, 1x Med Boom
Mid: Dual MC-E w 1x SS Boom, 1x IMS20 (modified)
Bottom: Triple SSC w 2x15 L2 optics, 1x IMS20 (modified)










*Conclusion*: The target bush (and fence) is notably more well-lit using the IMS20 reflector on one MC-E and not too much flood is lost. The bush is still not lit as brightly as the SSC IMS20 combo, but close, and everything between the light and the bush is well-lit with the Dual MC-E. I think I'll ride with this tomorrow night.


----------



## .40AET (Jun 7, 2007)

Awesome light!!! After my Endor Star project bombed I had lost hope on something better than the 3x cree housings. That is some good inspiration. I like that you have carried most of the design principals from the 3x SSC housings into your MC-E light. That helps me out a lot.

Thanks!!!!


----------



## Calina (Apr 8, 2008)

The IMS20 reflector seems better suited to the MC-E than the boom. 

Would you try two IMS to support this impression?


----------



## texas (Nov 26, 2004)

*That IMS20 reflector looks good.*

Where can I get one?

Thanks


----------



## StevelKnivel (Jun 23, 2007)

Nice work as always!

Here's a link an old thread of mine that might be useful to this discussion. There are beamshots of a single MC-E combined with a modified IMS 20 reflector.

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=456778

To modify the IMS 20 to work with the MC-E I just drilled the hole in the bottom of the reflector big enough to clear the dome of the MC-E and then used Krylon Crystal Clear to "sputter" the reflector to get rid of the artifacts in the beam.

After I finished this light I built another MC-E light for my dynamo hub, but used a larger IMS27 reflector with similar modifications. The IMS 27 does a much better job than the IMS 20, it has almost a perfect balance of lots of spill and very long throw at the cost of a slightly larger size.

You can buy IMS reflectors here:

http://theledguy.chainreactionweb.c...50_64&osCsid=5ab75dcd52f06d2fb4941481b5d298d4


----------



## Hack On Wheels (Apr 29, 2006)

achesalot said:


> *Conclusion*: The target bush (and fence) is notably more well-lit using the IMS20 reflector on one MC-E and not too much flood is lost. The bush is still not lit as brightly as the SSC IMS20 combo, but close, and everything between the light and the bush is well-lit with the Dual MC-E. I think I'll ride with this tomorrow night.


Nice stuff! Interesting results... is it just me, or in the photo does the IMS20/BOOMSS combo look like it has a brighter spot/middle than the older triple?

Are you still planning to try a dual SS setup, or do you think its good enough as is? I'll be interested to hear how you like it, it looks great.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Thanks guys! Did the test ride tonight and it was great. No heat issues at all (it was 65F and I rode about 10MPH). Some noticeable doughnut with the IMS20 but I felt real comfortable with the light. I'll try it Thursday with the original config: SS Boom+Med Boom.

_Stevel:_ I was thinking of trying to put some orange peel on the IMS20. I've never done it but read about techniques on CPF. Your single MC-E looks great with the modded IMS20.

_Hack:_ Yeah it's close on comparing the IMS20/BoomSS combo versus the Triple SSC in those shots; the difference could just be in the tints of the LEDs but the MC-E light definitely doesn't throw as far as my Triple SSC; however, it really lights up the trail where I need it given our twisty single track here in Florida.

Is the IMS20 the ultimate MC-E reflector? Probably not, but with some modifications and a little sputter action, it can be made to look pretty good (as Stevel has shown). I'll still try it with 2xSS Booms when I get the other one, and I might give it a try with 2x IMS20 if I can get rid of the doughnut.

The only problem with this light is that now all my riding buddies want one  although I think that it might not be enough throw for some.

As someone said Sandwich Shoppe has the IMS20 reflectors but I bet the IMS27 would do great with the MC-E (just won't fit in my light).

I'll be playing around with the reflectors a little and will keep you posted regarding my results.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

*Update*: rode tonight with the Dual Boomerang reflector setup (1xSS, 1xMed). The flood was smooth and nice, but at times I missed the throw I had using the IMS20 (even with its doughnut hole). Once again the OAT was in the mid 60s (F) and the light stayed cool to the touch while riding at about 10MPH (could easily take this design to 700mA per MC-E despite my earlier heat concerns).

I will play around with putting some splatter texture on the IMS20 (to eliminate the doughnut) and I've ordered another Boomerang SS.

I'm having thoughts about a 1xMCE, 1xSSC (or Cree XR-E) combo. One MC-E to give you a lot of nice fill, and one SSC P4 with IMS20 reflector for the throw. The total lumens would be less, but perhaps more effective. Any thoughts on the best way to wire/drive that combo?

This should work, I believe... sanity check please.










Should produce 700+ very effective lumen.


----------



## ocean breathes salty (Oct 1, 2006)

Logically it looks like it would work to me although what Vf are you seeing on the MCE and what Vf are you seeing with your P4's?


----------



## Calina (Apr 8, 2008)

Wouldn't two XP-E on 10mm star fit in?


----------



## msxtr (Dec 10, 2006)

achesalot said:


> *Update*: rode tonight with the Dual Boomerang reflector setup (1xSS, 1xMed). The flood was smooth and nice, but at times I missed the throw I had using the IMS20 (even with its doughnut hole). Once again the OAT was in the mid 60s (F) and the light stayed cool to the touch while riding at about 10MPH (could easily take this design to 700mA per MC-E despite my earlier heat concerns).
> 
> I will play around with putting some splatter texture on the IMS20 (to eliminate the doughnut) and I've ordered another Boomerang SS.
> 
> ...


Hi, I have thought do the same, but I want use 1 switch to run the MC-E and another to run the Seoul, logically with 2 drivers, clear 

1 question, your stars are individual wired?

Greetings - Saludos

msxtr


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

msxtr said:


> Hi, I have thought do the same, but I want use 1 switch to run the MC-E and another to run the Seoul, logically with 2 drivers, clear
> 
> 1 question, your stars are individual wired?
> 
> ...


Yes Msxtr, my MC-E star is individually wired.


----------



## Calina (Apr 8, 2008)

StevelKnivel said:


> Nice work as always!
> 
> Here's a link an old thread of mine that might be useful to this discussion. There are beamshots of a single MC-E combined with a modified IMS 20 reflector.
> 
> ...


Do you have a thread or info to post on he IMS 27 reflector light. I'm curious of the details.


----------



## gillestugan (Nov 12, 2008)

Would it be possible for you to take two separate ceiling shots with reflectors. Just block one of them while taking a picture of the other. Im curious of how strong the doughnut of the IMS reflector is and it's hard to tell from your picture as the boom is filling in.
Would also be nice to be able to see how much tighter the boom it is, so boom SS control picture would be nice.

Your P4 in series with the MC-E will work great. If you want to be able to control which of them should be running you can use a simple ON-OFF-ON switch to shorten one of the leds at a time. (or none for both lights running).


----------



## dnlwthrn (Jan 26, 2006)

Here's a question... What's the stack height of the boom reflector on a star? I see that the reflector is 15mm tall, but how tall is it in conjunction with the star?

Yes, I'm contemplating a dual MCE light now. I'm thinking low profile, with 2 of the booms and a maxflex controller. If I wire the leds in series I'm around 12V, correct? That should work well with my 7.4v Li-Ion packs (4Ah). 

Thanks!

After reading through your later posts (I'd kind of skimmed them), I'm thinking maybe I should throw a third LED in as well... How about this for a combo: MC-E with boom SS, R2 with IMS20, MC-E with Boom Med. 

I also realized I was off on the Vf of the LEDs. It was 12.2V if you ran 2 series-wired MC-Es in parallel. So to put a third LED I'd have to do some funky wiring... Maybe the idea of a single MC-E and a single R2 or the dual MC-E. If we had a really tight spot on the R2 I think it would make up for the lack of lumens compared to an MC-E.

Ok, time to stop thinking.


----------



## ocean breathes salty (Oct 1, 2006)

dnlwthrn said:


> After reading through your later posts (I'd kind of skimmed them), I'm thinking maybe I should throw a third LED in as well... How about this for a combo: MC-E with boom SS, R2 with IMS20, MC-E with Boom Med.
> 
> .


I wouldn't use a Boom in Med, the SS is floody enough. I have some Med Boom's sitting in my parts box and i don't think they will ever get used as I can only imagine how floody that beam would be. I tried the SS first and never bothered to see what the med looked like.

I got around the "funky wiring" problem by adding a second driver. It wasn't an elegant technical solution but it got the job done  It also lets you dim the lights independently which is nice.


----------



## dnlwthrn (Jan 26, 2006)

Well, I was planning on using series-wired stars for the MC-Es. If I went 2S2P on the MC-E, I "think" I could get away with wiring the three (MC-E, R2, MC-E) in series.... I'll have to think about that one more, though.

Plus, I fried my one Maxflex and I only have one MC-E right now, so I'm limited in what I can do...


----------



## ocean breathes salty (Oct 1, 2006)

dnlwthrn said:


> I "think" I could get away with wiring the three (MC-E, R2, MC-E.


Sorry to threadjack aches

My maths gets approx. 21.7 V for that combo and the maxflex datasheet says it can drive up to 24V. Sounds like all systems are go to me


----------



## dnlwthrn (Jan 26, 2006)

Yep, that's what I got too... 

Now back to your regular achesalot MC-E thread.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Hey guys... had to step away for a while.

Calina: No IMS27 thread I know of.

Gillestugan: I'll try to get some of those beamshots together this weekend. 

dnlwthrn: Star+Boom = about 16mm and as Salty says, the Boom SS is pretty floody in its own right, probably no need for Med Boomerang. Check out Salty's Knuckle Duster if you haven't already... he's already doing some mixing of MC-E and R2.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

I modded another IMS20 reflector, this one I kept the hole pretty tight around the MC-E dome and did not take any off the base other than having to trim the legs. I also had to take off the front of the reflector to get it to fit in my housing. I've gotten rid of the doughnut, but there are some minor artifacts, but better than the doughnut... especially when mixed with the SS Boomerang. Too tired for now... beamshots tomorrow or Sunday night. Got some shopping to do!


----------



## joebreez (Sep 10, 2005)

Steve K, any idea what kind of depth dimensions the 27 IMS lens has?
I might buy one but I'm afraid it's too deep for my housing.
Troutie, how did you get rid of the dreaded donut hole? Was it luck or trial and error?
I'm dealing with the stock reflector on my unit(small torch conversion), it has a nice throw but I have a mild clover leaf pattern going on. 
I may try the 'sputter' idea Steve used but I don't want to muck up anything.
The Booms seem OK but are a bit 'floody' not as much throw.


----------



## gillestugan (Nov 12, 2008)

dimensions can be found in the data sheet.


----------



## mdsjack (Oct 26, 2007)

error


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

JoeBreeze. While I'm sure Troutie's had his share of doughnuts, I was the one speaking of that in this thread. The IMS20 reflector that I used, causing the doughnut, had been sanded off on the bottom about 1/16". I started out with a new one and only made the hole big enough for the MC-E to fit through (as Steve K had suggested) and did not take any off the bottom. I did have to shorten the legs, mostly to fit over my solder joints and wires. I also had to take quite a bit off the front of the reflector to allow it to fit in my housing (which probably didn't help the throw).

Anyway, the results, though still not optimal, are a little better I believe that the doughnut and provides more throw than the Boomerang SS. I'm still playing with it all. Modifying reflectors to fit other LEDs than originally intended is tricky business and minor deviations can cause noticeable beam variations. I'll try to get some more beam shots soon. Just been real busy with the pending holiday season here.


----------



## 2calif (Dec 14, 2008)

*integrated light bulb*

I don't mean to start a new thread but,

Did any of you ever used SureFire Cree R2 bulbs for DIY lights. They have LED driver built in and ready to go. Check it out and let me know what you guys think.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=270311030497


----------



## SkUG (Feb 19, 2008)

2calif said:


> I don't mean to start a new thread but,
> 
> Did any of you ever used SureFire Cree R2 bulbs for DIY lights. They have LED driver built in and ready to go. Check it out and let me know what you guys think.
> 
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=270311030497


what about this lot too?
http://www.dealextreme.com/search.dx/search.r2 drop~r.11188108


----------



## BEDFSR (Feb 2, 2008)

Where did you buy the optics for thhis new setup?????


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

gillestugan said:


> Would it be possible for you to take two separate ceiling shots with reflectors. Just block one of them while taking a picture of the other. Im curious of how strong the doughnut of the IMS reflector is and it's hard to tell from your picture as the boom is filling in.
> Would also be nice to be able to see how much tighter the boom it is, so boom SS control picture would be nice.


Here ya go:










and tweaking the contrast a little to better see the hotspots:


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

@2Calif and Skug : Please start new thread... not here.

@BEDFSR: I got the Ledil Boomerangs at cutter.com.au
and the IMS20 that I'm experimenting with at www.quickar.com


----------



## SkUG (Feb 19, 2008)

achesalot said:


> @2Calif and Skug : Please start new thread... not here.
> 
> @BEDFSR: I got the Ledil Boomerangs at cutter.com.au
> and the IMS20 that I'm experimenting with at www.quikar.com


oi don't go blaming me - i just replied and i used the quote buttons so i didn't muck up the lineage of the thread... unlike yourself


----------



## BEDFSR (Feb 2, 2008)

I'm familiar with Cutter, however the link www.quikar.com appears to be a dead link. Thanks for the quick response.


----------



## Calina (Apr 8, 2008)

BEDFSR said:


> I'm familiar with Cutter, however the link www.quikar.com appears to be a dead link. Thanks for the quick response.


Try www.quickar.com .


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

SkUG said:


> oi don't go blaming me - i just replied and i used the quote buttons so i didn't muck up the lineage of the thread... unlike yourself


Sorry Skug. No big deal, just thought it better in new thread.


----------



## .40AET (Jun 7, 2007)

Calina said:


> Try www.quickar.com .


Gentlemen- I tried ordering the 27mm reflectors from Quickar. I received an email back that they no longer carry them.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

.40AET said:


> Gentlemen- I tried ordering the 27mm reflectors from Quickar. I received an email back that they no longer carry them.


You might try the SandwichShoppe
Let us know how it works out if you get one.


----------



## .40AET (Jun 7, 2007)

Speaking of the Sandwich Shoppe, does anyone know where they are located. I plowed through their website and it doesn't say where they are. I'm becoming unmotivated with the entire overseas shipping thing.

Thanks,


----------



## TOMMO (Dec 12, 2008)

I wonder how much current one of the very small fans you see on pc motherboards draws.
You could rig one(if it would fit into the box section)to come on when a thermistor trips
when it gets to a certain temp it would be a simpler version of thermal throttling.
It would only come on when your riding slowly or stood still.
Just a silly idea!
Tommo.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Whoops


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

.40AET said:


> Speaking of the Sandwich Shoppe, does anyone know where they are located. I plowed through their website and it doesn't say where they are. I'm becoming unmotivated with the entire overseas shipping thing.
> 
> Thanks,


California


----------



## .40AET (Jun 7, 2007)

Thanks. I ordered 4 of the 27mm optics and the MCE's, Boomerangs, and Ledils should be here soon. Thanks for making up the prototype. I'll be sure to post up some comparison shots.


----------



## kuksul08 (Oct 8, 2006)

Nice work. Do you put silicone in the cracks once it's assembled to keep it water tight? I'm building my own and can't decide where it will go.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

kuksul08 said:


> Nice work. Do you put silicone in the cracks once it's assembled to keep it water tight? I'm building my own and can't decide where it will go.


Yes, silicone is great to seal any seams and you can get it back apart later if needed... although it makes it more difficult.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Hey guys. I've got an initial build of the MC-E/SSC P4 Hybrid that I discussed earlier and drew the schematic for in post #29. The impetus for building this variation was the lack of throw obtainable from the dual MC-E. The dual MC-E does put off a great amount of light, but most of it is near the front of my bike... still very acceptable for the twisty/wooded trails I ride, but sometimes I would like a little more throw from a helmet light.

Here is a shot of where I'm at (wired and running, but will need some heatsink fins/lens/feet, etc):










It is wired as shown below:










The MC-E has a Boomerang SS reflector
The SSC P4 has an IMS20 reflector (had to trim the front to fit in housing)
Total Vf for all the LEDs is about 9.5v, meaning you could power this from an 11.1v Li-Ion or a 12v pack. (Draws 0.66A from my 14.8v Li-Ion battery pack (reading 15.6v) thus using about 10.3 watts.

The light should put out 700+ lumens (MC-E (580) + SSC (220) - Loss (80)) = ~ 720 lumens)
Initial ceiling beamshots are promising. I will post some beamshots and outdoor comparisons to my dual MC-E and Triple SSC lights tonight.


----------



## hootsmon (Feb 7, 2008)

Well done, that thing's tiny acheselot. A very thoughtful little circuit too.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Here are the comparison beamshots that I promised. 

Top: Triple SSC P4 (2x L2 20mm 15 degree) + (1x IMS20 reflector)
Middle: Dual MC-E (1x Boomerang SS) + (1x IMS20 reflector - modded)
Bottom: Hybrid (MC-E w/Boomerang SS) + (SSC P4 w/ IMS20)

There is a notable hotspot with the hybrid, and not too much flood loss. I think this will be great... trail test later this week. It's a little puzzling why my top Triple SSC photo doesn't show about the same hotspot as the bottom photo since it's the same LED and reflector. I guess the Boomerang SS on the MC-E combined with the SSC and IMS20 adds some punch... or either I didn't have my triple turned up to full brightness  I don't know. Anyway, you can certainly see the added brightness at the base of the target bush/tree and on the fence behind it. The fence is about 60 feet from camera and lights. All shots at 1/4sec, F2.8 and ISO 200.


----------



## joebreez (Sep 10, 2005)

Nice shots Allen, confirms what I had thought about the MCE optic choices so far- nothing shines deep enough. It's a clever way of getting around the optics issue.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

joebreez said:


> Nice shots Allen, confirms what I had thought about the MCE optic choices so far- nothing shines deep enough. It's a clever way of getting around the optics issue.


Thanks. I guess we'll just keep tweaking this thing until we get it right!


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

I took a ride with the new Hybrid (1xMC-E, 1xSSC P4) last week. It is a fairly good compromise between flood and throw. It's a nice light that I think most people would be happy with on the trails. It doesn't have as much of the impressive wow factor in the 0-30ft range as the Dual MC-E, but it has adequate flood and a noticeable spot for looking further down the trail. Pretty close to the beam of an L&M HID, maybe a little brighter.

Another plus is that it only draws about 10.5 watts and will work with an 11.1v Li-Ion pack that some might end up with when their HID lamp or ballast dies. I measured 0.66A being pulled from my 14.8v, 4A Li-Ion pack, so you could get decent runtime from even a smaller 2400mA pack.

I still like the super flood Dual MC-E as well, and it will always be a toss-up for me to choose which light to use... of course I should just use both! Unfortunately I only have one battery pack right now, as one of mine died


----------



## 2calif (Dec 14, 2008)

achesalot said:


> Another plus is that it only draws about 10.5 watts and will work with an 11.1v Li-Ion pack that some might end up with when their HID lamp or ballast dies. I measured 0.66A being pulled from my 14.8v, 4A Li-Ion pack, so you could get decent runtime from even a smaller 2400mA pack.


I was wondering about using that high a voltage on these lights (14.8v).:skep: Wouldn't it POOF your LED? How much over voltage can the MC-E or SSC handle?

Cheers,
P


----------



## ocean breathes salty (Oct 1, 2006)

2calif said:


> I was wondering about using that high a voltage on these lights (14.8v).:skep: Wouldn't it POOF your LED? How much over voltage can the MC-E or SSC handle?
> 
> Cheers,
> P


The driver sorts it out. The driver will only give the LED the voltage it needs. That is why we use them (Buck driver if the Vin > Vf and boost if Vin < Vf).

Over volting was a technique that was used with Halogens to get more light but doesn't work with LED's.

Now if you got really keen and hooked the LED up direct drive to the battery... then you would get your POOF!!


----------



## Hack On Wheels (Apr 29, 2006)

2calif said:


> I was wondering about using that high a voltage on these lights (14.8v).:skep: Wouldn't it POOF your LED? How much over voltage can the MC-E or SSC handle?
> 
> Cheers,
> P


That is why you run with a buck converting driver (if battery V is higher than the total led Vf), or a boost converting driver (if the battery V is lower than the total led Vf). Many of these drivers also allow for changing the current to adjust brightness and power consumption.  The -flex drivers from TaskLED are my favourites so far!


----------



## 2calif (Dec 14, 2008)

Hack On Wheels said:


> That is why you run with a buck converting driver (if battery V is higher than the total led Vf), or a boost converting driver (if the battery V is lower than the total led Vf). Many of these drivers also allow for changing the current to adjust brightness and power consumption.  The -flex drivers from TaskLED are my favourites so far!


Yeah, but if I recall correctly achesalot is using buckpuck (1000ma @ whatever voltage) to drive the system with 14.8v (and 11.1v), at least that's what I captured from his last posting. I'm just curious about what he does to keep the LED from blowing out.


----------



## Hack On Wheels (Apr 29, 2006)

2calif said:


> Yeah, but if I recall correctly achesalot is using buckpuck (1000ma @ whatever voltage) to drive the system with 14.8v (and 11.1v), at least that's what I captured from his last posting. I'm just curious about what he does to keep the LED from blowing out.


Well, if the input voltage is 14.8V, but the Vf of the system is only 10.5 V, then the buck puck will buck (convert) the voltage down to 10.5 V for the LEDs... or am I misunderstanding your question/concern? The voltage fed into the buckpuck will be higher than what the buckpuck outputs to the series of LEDs. The LEDs will not be over-volted by this/


----------



## 2calif (Dec 14, 2008)

Hack On Wheels said:


> Well, if the input voltage is 14.8V, but the Vf of the system is only 10.5 V, then the buck puck will buck (convert) the voltage down to 10.5 V for the LEDs... or am I misunderstanding your question/concern? The voltage fed into the buckpuck will be higher than what the buckpuck outputs to the series of LEDs. The LEDs will not be over-volted by this/


Ah, I see.The buckpuck will buck down the voltage to meet the vf of LEDs. I didn't know it does that. Thatnks for clarifying, Hack on. I really want a buckpuck now  Forget about the DX 7135 driver, Imma buckpuck!!


----------



## Hack On Wheels (Apr 29, 2006)

2calif said:


> Ah, I see.The buckpuck will buck down the voltage to meet the vf of LEDs. I didn't know it does that. Thatnks for clarifying, Hack on. I really want a buckpuck now  Forget about the DX 7135 driver, Imma buckpuck!!


Yup! You're welcome. 

You might also want to check out the bFlex @ taskled.com, it's my preferred driver/converter. It bucks the voltage, has configurable dimming settings (whereas I believe the buckpuck requires external resistors or a potentiometer for dimming), and it even has a temperature sensor and configurable low battery warning! There is some amazing stuff available for making lights!


----------



## joebreez (Sep 10, 2005)

I don't think the buck or boost converter actually cares about voltage, the LED determines that. The converter actually worries more about the amount of current(amps) going into the system. The LED determines what it uses for voltage.
If you need more run time and only have AA's for a pack you can add a few more cells to increase the Wattage of the pack, add as many as you need as long as it doesn't go ever the converter's voltage capacity. That's what I've done, I have a 22v AA NiMh pack running into a quad Q5 setup. It gives me more watts without getting into buying new Li-ion batteries.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

Joebreeze is right. The buckpucks are current regulators, and for a given LED being driven at a given current (say 1000mA) , the forward voltage Vf might vary a little depending on the LED (usually in the range of 3.3 to 3.8v). Most buckpuck controllers will drive a series of LEDs as long as you supply at least the sum of the forward voltage of all the LEDs plus about another volt for the driver (up to 32v typically). The 3023 (and 3021) Buckpuck are durable (potted in epoxy) excellent drivers that I recommend for their simplicity (especially for beginners). The bFlex drivers are great as well, but require a little more care (exposed circuitry) and a fair amount of button clicks to set up the microprocessor to the varying settings. They offer more features and flexibility and are more expensive.

I had a bFlex until I fried it by shorting a mounting screw against the circuitry by accident. I must say that IMHO, it was more _fiddly _to push a momentary contact switch to cycle through the various brightness levels than to just turn a knob for brightness. But as mentioned they do offer some cool features like low battery warning, temp warning, flashing modes, various max current settings

_On another note_: I had my second ride tonight with the new Hybrid (MC-E/SSC P4) and I'm still pretty impressed by the light... especially when I shine it next to my friends' L&M HIDs  . Dang it, now they want one, and I gotta build more lights!


----------



## il2mb (Jan 27, 2005)

achesalot said:


> I took a ride with the new Hybrid (1xMC-E, 1xSSC P4) last week. It is a fairly good compromise between flood and throw. It's a nice light that I think most people would be happy with on the trails. It doesn't have as much of the impressive wow factor in the 0-30ft range as the Dual MC-E, but it has adequate flood and a noticeable spot for looking further down the trail. Pretty close to the beam of an L&M HID, maybe a little brighter.
> 
> Another plus is that it only draws about 10.5 watts and will work with an 11.1v Li-Ion pack that some might end up with when their HID lamp or ballast dies. I measured 0.66A being pulled from my 14.8v, 4A Li-Ion pack, so you could get decent runtime from even a smaller 2400mA pack.
> 
> I still like the super flood Dual MC-E as well, and it will always be a toss-up for me to choose which light to use... of course I should just use both! Unfortunately I only have one battery pack right now, as one of mine died


achesalot,

You could tee off one battery. I do that all the time. Just did a ride with a 2 2xMCE light head setup and a single 2400 mah battery. Lasted the 90 minute duration of the ride. I only fire up the second head on the fast descents.

Bob


----------



## Hack On Wheels (Apr 29, 2006)

joebreez said:


> I don't think the buck or boost converter actually cares about voltage, the LED determines that. The converter actually worries more about the amount of current(amps) going into the system. The LED determines what it uses for voltage.
> If you need more run time and only have AA's for a pack you can add a few more cells to increase the Wattage of the pack, add as many as you need as long as it doesn't go ever the converter's voltage capacity. That's what I've done, I have a 22v AA NiMh pack running into a quad Q5 setup. It gives me more watts without getting into buying new Li-ion batteries.
> Someone correct me if I'm wrong.


Well, yes, the LEDs do have a specific Vf for each of them and that is what determines the voltage that the driver outputs. However, I believe that the driver does play a hand in the voltage conversion, hence the buck (or boost) classification. I haven't bothered to look at how they do this, to be honest, but they obviously do it in a fairly efficient way, at least with the decent quality drivers. It's sure more sopisticated than just driving it with a couple of resistors in parallel, or with a potentiometer. Anyone know exactly how they work? I'd be keen to know!


----------



## tobymack (Nov 12, 2008)

well, no one else has attempted to describe how a buck converter works so I'll give it a go. 


the basics of a buck converter is a switch and a flywheel circuit. The flywheel circuit (a diode and an inductor) works like a car flywheel in that it smooths out and attempts to keep the current flowing, even when the switch is open.
So, what happens is that switch is closed and current starts flowing through the inductor and out to the LED. The inductor will not let the current instantly change so it ramps up. After a certain time the switch is then opened again. No more current can come from the battery but the inductor keeps it flowing round through the LED and a diode. As the energy in the induction drops then the current drops. Then the switch is closed again and the current starts increasing again. etc etc.
So, if you look at the current flowing into the LED you will see that is is like a sawtooth, constantly increasing (switch closed) or decreasing (switch open) but the average current should be what you want to drive the LED.
to increase the average current you need to increase the time the switch is closed and reduce the time it is open, to reduce the current you do the opposite. This control is done by sensing the current through a resistor in series with the load so in most circuits changing the value of that resistor will change the current to the LED.
The switching is done fairly fast so the ripple (size of the teeth on the sawtooth) is fairly small but it is always there which is why switch mode power supplies are "noisy" compared to linear regulators. The advantage is that theoretically they are very efficient in that all power going into the flywheel circuit when the switch is closed can then go out to the load when the switch opens. Unlike a linear regulator which is on all the time and just throws away the unwanted power as heat. of course no circuit is 100% efficient so energy is lost, both in the switch and the inductor (and probably elsewhere too), hence typical efficiencies of 80 to 90%.

hmm.. not sure how clear that is or whether it answers the original question......

Toby

EDIT: ps. I am not a switch mode expert, just a lapsed electronic engineer that has read a bit about them so hopefully someone will point it out if I got something badly wrong!


----------



## tobymack (Nov 12, 2008)

btw. to understand the efficiency thing then it might help to think of a electric car where the throttle is just an on/off switch.
To drive at constant speed you can do one of two things.
a) motor on full but use your brake to slow the car down to the correct speed.

b) throttle on to get up to speed, off to let the car coast then on again when the speed drops too much etc etc. Do this as fast as possible and you will get a roughly constant speed from the car.

Option a) is easy and gets a nice smooth ride. But you will waste loads of energy and burn out the brakes. 
Option b) will be a bit jerky but at least your brakes and battery survive 

and in case it isn't clear, option a) is a linear regulator or series resistor while option b) is the buck converter.


----------



## Hack On Wheels (Apr 29, 2006)

Awesome! Thanks for those explanations.  
The switching made me think about PWM regulation, but is that completely different?


----------



## tobymack (Nov 12, 2008)

it is very similar to PWM. The difference being that with straight PWM you don't have the flywheel circuit. So with PWM you probably need a big capacitor to smooth things out. Without the smoothing PWM will put very large peak currents into the LED which it probably would not like. 

BTW. I think what I refer to as a flywheel circuit is normally called a flyback circuit, I was probably taking the car analogy a bit to far


----------



## hesibudifabla (Jun 8, 2008)

*Lumen Calculations are all wrong with this light build*

Look on the Cree website and you will see a note under the "Product Selector" chart and you will see this:

"Note: Flux and chromaticity are measured with each LED die connected to independent drive circuits at 350 mA. Flux and chromaticity are measured with all LEDs lit simultaneously. "

What the heck does that mean? Well it's simple really. Cree treats the MC-E as a package of 4 individual LEDs. They rate the MC-E at 370lm-430lm with all 4 dies lit being driven by separate 350mA drivers. That means each individual die is producing 92.5lm-107.5lm. So for Achesalot to get 900lm out of 2 MC-E's, he'd need to drive them with 1400mA drivers per MC-E. That'd drain a battery quite fast. According to Cree's datasheet, by Achesalot driving two MC-E's with a single 1000mA driver, he's actually only feeding 125mA to each die. This is good for only 40% of RATED output according to Cree. Do the math, 40% of 100lm (approx) is a mere 40lm PER DIE. 40x8= 320lm total output. If you disagree with this then you haven't looked very closely at Cree's website. Achesalot has been inflating his lumen output for all his lights from the get-go. You'd be better off with a standard triple Cree Q5 with 3 separate 1000mA drivers. That's good for an honest 600lm ( I build 'em for my local customers here and they LOVE them). Sorry Achesalot, your lumen outputs should be reconsidered. Remember what Cree said:

"Note: Flux and chromaticity are measured with each LED die connected to independent drive circuits at 350 mA. Flux and chromaticity are measured with all LEDs lit simultaneously."


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

hesibudifabla said:


> ... he's actually only feeding 125mA to each die.


Read the first post again. 2 MCE driven in parallel, each MCE wired serially. 1A driver. Each die gets 500mA.

I expect he knows the difference between 300lm and 900lm too.


----------



## kuksul08 (Oct 8, 2006)

I'm curious to know why the LED star boards are mounted on the thick squares of aluminum, and why the XR-E version also had an extra layer of aluminum. 

I realize that the extra mass there will take longer to heat up, but isn't convection the method that heat is taken out of the light, through surface area? It makes sense to have the fins in that respect, but why the extra chunks underneath the stars?


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

kuksul08 said:


> I'm curious to know why the LED star boards are mounted on the thick squares of aluminum, and why the XR-E version also had an extra layer of aluminum.
> 
> I realize that the extra mass there will take longer to heat up, but isn't convection the method that heat is taken out of the light, through surface area? It makes sense to have the fins in that respect, but why the extra chunks underneath the stars?


The stars are fixed to the extra aluminium to transfer the heat from the led as quickly as possible to the casing and then to the air .

convection I believe does not work in the solid metal it relies on conduction and then the surface area and airflow come into play


----------



## kuksul08 (Oct 8, 2006)

troutie-mtb said:


> The stars are fixed to the extra aluminium to transfer the heat from the led as quickly as possible to the casing and then to the air .
> 
> convection I believe does not work in the solid metal it relies on conduction and then the surface area and airflow come into play


I suppose that makes sense about getting the heat away from the LEDs as quick as possible, giving it somewhere to go through conduction.

Convective and radiative heat transfer play a role on the surface of the metal where surface area is most important. The rate of convection is also going to equal the rate of conduction, but how that affects this... I can't quite connect the dots yet.

thanks for any help :thumbsup:


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

No you're right first up Kuksul, thats an extra thermal junction and insulates the hot LEDs from the cool air. Ideally even the star wouldn't be there (but thats bloody fiddly). Its ALL WRONG.  
Ok, its only a teeny weenie bit wrong. Still a fabulous build.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

In the case of my design, it also serves to give the front part of the housing an edge to overlap onto. This improves heat conduction to the front aluminum and also helps to seal and make it more waterproof.


----------



## kuksul08 (Oct 8, 2006)

Ahh very good to know :thumbsup: Nice work


----------



## kuksul08 (Oct 8, 2006)

I've got another question for achesalot...

Have you considered using the CMC optics instead of the reflectors? I have based my light off of yours and scars, and those optics seem to fit perfectly inside the 1" tubing. I just can't decide whether the SS, D or RS beam pattern would be best... from what I hear, nothing truly focuses the MC-E into a spot very well compared to the XR-E or the P4 single die LEDs.

Also how has the heat been for the hybrid MC-E/P4? I am thinking of doing that with an XR-E and an MC-E, but I don't know if my light body will dissipate enough heat....

Thanks, and once again awesome work 










I might have to add some heatsinks on top if I ran an MC-E in there


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

kuksul08 said:


> I've got another question for achesalot...
> 
> Have you considered using the CMC optics instead of the reflectors? I have based my light off of yours and scars, and those optics seem to fit perfectly inside the 1" tubing. I just can't decide whether the SS, D or RS beam pattern would be best... from what I hear, nothing truly focuses the MC-E into a spot very well compared to the XR-E or the P4 single die LEDs.


Yes, I have considered ordering the CMC optics and giving them a try, especially after Troutie and others have reported good results. Plus, they really do look nice and tidy inside the 1" aluminum tubing  I'll probably try a couple of SS or SS+D. I only have one more night of night riding this season, so I'll probably get around to trying the different optics next season. I haven't ridden for over a month  (out of town, then sick with a cold/flu), so it'll be good to get back riding again.


kuksul08 said:


> Also how has the heat been for the hybrid MC-E/P4? I am thinking of doing that with an XR-E and an MC-E, but I don't know if my light body will dissipate enough heat....
> 
> Thanks, and once again awesome work
> I might have to add some heatsinks on top if I ran an MC-E in there


The hybrid light is great and everyone loves it and wants one. It draws less power than the dual MC-E and runs slightly cooler. It should do fine with minimal heatsinking. I have about half the heatsink fins on my hybrid as the dual MC-E light and it stays plenty cool. I'll try to post a photo of the finished hybrid later...

Thanks for the kind words and good luck with your MC-E or hybrid.


----------



## kuksul08 (Oct 8, 2006)

achesalot said:


> Yes, I have considered ordering the CMC optics and giving them a try, especially after Troutie and others have reported good results. Plus, they really do look nice and tidy inside the 1" aluminum tubing  I'll probably try a couple of SS or SS+D. I only have one more night of night riding this season, so I'll probably get around to trying the different optics next season. I haven't ridden for over a month  (out of town, then sick with a cold/flu), so it'll be good to get back riding again.
> 
> The hybrid light is great and everyone loves it and wants one. It draws less power than the dual MC-E and runs slightly cooler. It should do fine with minimal heatsinking. I have about half the heatsink fins on my hybrid as the dual MC-E light and it stays plenty cool. I'll try to post a photo of the finished hybrid later...
> 
> Thanks for the kind words and good luck with your MC-E or hybrid.


Well that sucks about being sick  Thanks for the quick response  :thumbsup:


----------



## jim (Jan 27, 2004)

I recently finished a dual MC-E light almost identical to Achesalot's design. I purchased many different lenses and reflectors before deciding upon:

1 x Ledil LM1-D
1 x IMS20 (modified - enlarged hole at bottom and shortened to fit in the housing).

This gives me plenty of throw and a nice amount of flood. There is a small hotspot but overall I'm very happy. Sorry, no beamshots at this time 

I also had good luck with the CMC-D / CMC-SS and CMC-D / Boom-SS combinations.

Both MC-E's are M-Bin WH (430 lumen at 350ma) running off a 1000ma Buckpuck. Battery is a 14.8V 2600mah. Reckon I should get close to three hours runtime at 1000ma?


----------



## kuksul08 (Oct 8, 2006)

jim said:


> I recently finished a dual MC-E light almost identical to Achesalot's design. I purchased many different lenses and reflectors before deciding upon:
> 
> 1 x Ledil LM1-D
> 1 x IMS20 (modified - enlarged hole at bottom and shortened to fit in the housing).
> ...


Where did you get your MC-E's and how have you wired the dies on the MC-E?

Also is their much difference between the SS and D optics? They both have the same angle on the documentation from ledil. I'm guessing the D is a little softer?

Also... how's the heat? I wonder if the external fins are really necessary... looking forward to some pics of your eventually if you get a chance


----------



## larsep (Jan 24, 2009)

JIM - how did you wire your dual MC-E's?
I guess that it's 2p4s, that will give you a Vin about 14 volt and your battery is 14.8 volt. The buckpuck require min 2 volt for regulation, don't you get in trouble here?


----------



## jim (Jan 27, 2004)

larsep said:


> JIM - how did you wire your dual MC-E's?
> I guess that it's 2p4s, that will give you a Vin about 14 volt and your battery is 14.8 volt. The buckpuck require min 2 volt for regulation, don't you get in trouble here?


Wired 2p4s. No worries thus far. I believe Achesalot had his original dual MC-E light wired the same way.


----------



## larsep (Jan 24, 2009)

Hi Achesalot

Your configuration, 2p4s, will give a Vin about 14 volt and your battery is 14.8 volt. The buckpuck require min 2 volt for regulation, don't you get in trouble here?


----------



## wizbru (Feb 7, 2009)

Hi Achesalot

I have just finished building one of your triple SSC P4 lights - Awesome

I am now going to give the double MC-E ago using CMC optics (2 x SS)

Quick question though. In your first double did you wire the MC-Es similar to the diagrams you have posted for the hybrid but with the second MC-E configured the same as the first and in series?

Thanks again for a great design

Bruce


----------



## bielle (Aug 20, 2009)

*Dual MC-E with Copperhead design?*

First off, thank you for all of the great information and inspiration. This will be my first foray into DIY...well really DIY anything, but I am hopeful. This project looks like something I can manage, but the initial cost may be driven up by the fact that I posess no soldering tools or metal working tools, but I have a granpa who does . Anyhow, my question regards integrating the MC-E leds into the Copperhead design from your website. I prefer the styling of the copper to the aluminum but am worried about heat of course and as to whether or not three MC-Es would be either overkill or too demanding as far as wiring and battery life are concerned. Also, if you have any specific changes you would recommend making to the wiring for the copper setup when using the MC-E leds it would be greatly appreciated.

Please forgive me if I don't make any sense, but this is literally my first post to a forum. I just started commuting daily, and in anticipation of the night rides approaching, I am trying to sort out the lighting situation. While I wouldn't mind paying for the pre-fab lights out there, I would much prefer learn to something in the process and have a realitvely unique light I can be proud of...if I don't destroy it in the process.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

larsep said:


> Hi Achesalot
> 
> Your configuration, 2p4s, will give a Vin about 14 volt and your battery is 14.8 volt. The buckpuck require min 2 volt for regulation, don't you get in trouble here?


No problems. The Li-Ion pack actually starts out at about 16.8v when fully charged. I was a little skeptical at first myself, but the 14.8v Li-Ion pack runs it fine.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

bielle said:


> First off, thank you for all of the great information and inspiration. This will be my first foray into DIY...well really DIY anything, but I am hopeful. This project looks like something I can manage, but the initial cost may be driven up by the fact that I posess no soldering tools or metal working tools, but I have a granpa who does . Anyhow, my question regards integrating the MC-E leds into the Copperhead design from your website. I prefer the styling of the copper to the aluminum but am worried about heat of course and as to whether or not three MC-Es would be either overkill or too demanding as far as wiring and battery life are concerned. Also, if you have any specific changes you would recommend making to the wiring for the copper setup when using the MC-E leds it would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Please forgive me if I don't make any sense, but this is literally my first post to a forum. I just started commuting daily, and in anticipation of the night rides approaching, I am trying to sort out the lighting situation. While I wouldn't mind paying for the pre-fab lights out there, I would much prefer learn to something in the process and have a realitvely unique light I can be proud of...if I don't destroy it in the process.


You're welcome. Sorry, I haven't been around the forums in a while, other things going on. The MC-E would probably do OK in the Copperhead design, although I have not tried it. Bear in mind, the Copperhead light is going to be heavier. Maybe your grandpa can help you out with building the light... don't underestimate the knowledge of grandpas!

Three MC-E will require a good deal of power and voltage depending on how you wire them. I'd recommend trying a Copperhead with two MC-E and spacing them a little further apart, using the same size body as the triple (or nearly that wide). A dual MC-E puts out a good deal of light. A triple would be awesome, but the battery situation gets complicated unless you use a boost type of driver or move to an 18.5v battery pack.


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

wizbru said:


> Hi Achesalot
> 
> I have just finished building one of your triple SSC P4 lights - Awesome
> 
> ...


Sorry I didn't see this question earlier. In the dual MC-E light, each MC-E has four dies which are wired in series and the two MC-E (4-packs) are in parallel with each other... in other words, wired in parallel to the power supply.


----------



## konrod (Aug 26, 2009)

Hi Achesalot, do you think you can post, or point me to a good diagram/photo of how you wired the MC-E's in series, and also to the power supply? The photo you posted is a still a little confusing to me, as I cant see all the connections/wire colors clearly. (I am a dunce when it comes to reading schematics, so a photo would be great).

much obliged


----------



## HEY HEY ITS HENDO (Feb 23, 2008)

Hey Konrod... 
...the MCE is now available already series wired, much easier,










https://www.cutter.com.au/products.php?cat=Cree+MCE+Multichip


----------



## achesalot (Nov 8, 2005)

konrod said:


> Hi Achesalot, do you think you can post, or point me to a good diagram/photo of how you wired the MC-E's in series, and also to the power supply? The photo you posted is a still a little confusing to me, as I cant see all the connections/wire colors clearly. (I am a dunce when it comes to reading schematics, so a photo would be great).
> 
> much obliged


Yes, as HHIH says, you can buy them already pre-wired in series, which is much, much easier, because soldering and wiring the individual dies was a pain. The advantage of the un-wired ones is that you can configure them in other ways (ie. the series-parallel config that I used in the hybrid). But if you are just building a dual MC-E, buy two of them already wired in series, then wire those two stars in parallel with each other and connect to the output of the driver (1 amp driver). You'll be driving each LED at 500ma , which puts out plenty of light and doesn't get too hot if you heat sink them similarly to what I did.


----------



## Bartek (Jul 8, 2011)

Does anyone have a photo of these new MCE (series wired) soldered in parallel?


----------

