# LFlex for XML and Li-ion



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Hi folks, I've been working on new flex driver prototype and since I've kicked off a run of boards I figure I may as well let you know what's going to be available in a few weeks...

LFlex is a Linear Regulator style driver. It is NOT a stack of AMC7135 regulators but instead uses a high performance FET along with a uController to provide standard Flex features with constant current output care of the FET.

The whole idea is to provide a solution for a single XML run for a single Li-ion cell where a buck driver would not be able to run effectively.

The LFlex will have a few current tables to choose from with the highest at 3A for the XML. With an XML and its low Vf a single Li-ion cell will give good runtime and regulation throughout the useful battery voltage range. Dimming will be via adjustable current output with the lowest levels likely to be a PWM of a low current output - yet to be determined once I have production boards and port the flex UI-UNI2 firmware to them.

LFlex will have battery monitoring (but no STAT output), it can warn via the main LED just like my other flex drivers. It'll have all the medium/low/cutoff settings as well. Given I'm thinking this would be a good helmet light solution, not having a separate STAT LED wouldn't be too much of a loss. The reason I can't provide the STAT is a) lack of pins on the uC and b) even if I use a higher pin count uC there is a lack of board real estate to fit it all while still keeping it a single sided board.

LFlex will have the standard temperature monitoring of the other Flex drivers.

Basically you can think of the LFlex as a D2Flex except the LFlex is regulated and provides voltage monitoring.

LFlex will operate to at least 9V (likely higher after more testing of the current regulation scheme), so running 2 li-ion with 2 XML is also feasible.

Size will be a hair under 20mm and components only on one side, bottom side should be thermally mounted to the housing/heatsink.

Target cost is close to d2flex pricing since this doesn't have the expense of the switcher regulator core.

I'll post up pictures when I get the production boards. I may post a picture of a kludged up d2flex mule - but it just looks like a d2flex with some bits and wires hanging all over it 

cheers,
george.


----------



## scar (Jun 2, 2005)

Hey George, thanks for offering up yet another great driver option. :thumbsup: 

20mm is still quite large to some people  You ever think about making something smaller with maybe just two modes - 100% / 50%?? 

Thanks again for all of the different options :thumbsup: 



****


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

This is great news George.
I'm glad you posted as I was about to order a bunch of 7135 boards.
I'll hold out for the LFlex for sure.
Put me down for at least a few.


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

Now I'm happy! I'll take a few too. Can't wait to get my hands on them.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

scar said:


> 20mm is still quite large to some people  You ever think about making something smaller with maybe just two modes - 100% / 50%??
> ****


20 mm is pretty good size wise bearing in mind most usefull optics for th XML will be 20 mm or larger .

and the heat handling properties of a case will determine the size of the light if you want to go to the max .

Marvellous I see this being a cool driver for some pretty ace lights and single sided for ease of mounting . 
Thanks George :thumbsup:


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

sounds bloody good to me... my search is over..
I can run 2s1p with this new board george?

If is a helmet light, who needs a stat led..
cant see on top of my head


----------



## langen (May 21, 2005)

troutie-mtb said:


> 20 mm is pretty good size wise bearing in mind most usefull optics for th XML will be 20 mm or larger .


Agree 100%

Very good news, George!!

Can you say anything about efficiency when running it from 1S vs 2S li-ion?


----------



## MtbMacgyver (Jan 23, 2007)

It's a linear regulator so the input current will be the same as the output current, except for the low modes where it gets more complicated due to the PWM. So efficiency will be Vout / Vin. Vout will be the Vf of the LED in most cases.

For 1 li-ion cell with an XML at 3A

3.3 / 3.7 = 89% efficient. 

Obviously it'll be less efficient in the first part of discharge of the battery when the voltage is above 3.7, and more efficient near the end when voltage is below 3.7. You also wouldn't want to run a single LED off a 2s pack. That would be terribly inefficient. Running 3 or 4 LEDs off 3 or 4 li-ion cells would start to get quite a bit less efficient as well because of the bigger difference between Vin and Vout.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

1s2p?


----------



## cytoe (Jan 20, 2004)

George, is there a prepay list? in for 2


----------



## Vancbiker (May 25, 2005)

Microlight v3.0 just got a bit smaller!


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

MtbMac has the efficiency info correct. This is a Linear (hence LFlex) driver and is a great single LED / single Li-ion solution. Efficiency is basically output voltage/ input voltage.

Dimming will of course extend runtime since it will lower output current.

Anyhow, it's not the perfect driver (haven't figured out how to make an arbitrary 100% efficient buck/boost that's 12mm in diameter yet  ), but it ain't half bad either.

2 LEDs and 2 Li-ion is likely the most I'd recommend from an efficiency/heat loss perspective, beyond that a true buck or boost driver will do a better job. It would be hard to beat the efficiency of a h6flex pushing 3A to 3 XML's from 4 li-ion cells.

The key to this design is small size and single sided for ease of mounting to a heatsink to dump excess heat from the current regulating FET versus a bucket of 7135 chips. The other benefit is dimming is via lower output current so more efficient than PWMing a bunch of 7135 chips.

Total headroom to regulate at 3A output is about 0.15V (less at lower currents), so it is what I would consider a very low drop out regulator design.

No prepay list - I've NEVER done prepays and never will. If you are interested, email me and I'll add you to a first come/first served contact list that I'll email to before offering the drivers for general sale.

It'll be around 3 weeks before they are available, I'll have boards in about 1 1/2 weeks and then I need to port the production code and test and characterize the current tables etc etc.

Thanks for your interest,
cheers,
george.


----------



## bravellir (Nov 24, 2008)

nice.. two xmls with to cells will be a good combination :thumbsup:


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

Sounds good George. Will it have reverse polarity protection?


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

JezV said:


> Sounds good George. Will it have reverse polarity protection?


Yes, ALL my drivers have had reverse polarity protection for several years now.

cheers,
george.


----------



## yetibetty (Dec 24, 2007)

I'll join the queue and I bet it will be long one.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

wow, this is awesome! Simply awesome! I could knock out single XM-L + Regina helmet lamps like nobody's business with this driver using a simple 1in.sq "sled" design. I was going to try a Quazzle board, but this should be as efficient, throw better and be ~1/2 the price.

could you list the differences between the h6flex and the Lflex? Largely so I can justify to myself that getting the h6flex was a good idea  but also so I can think about future dual XM-L builds as this will seriously simplify housing design over the h6flex (and even the b2flex).


----------



## Andy13 (Nov 21, 2006)

I just sent a PM but basically put me in for two when available.
thanks


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

H6Flex is a damn fine driver - it is very robust. It is a buck driver, it will do DC/DC step down conversion and is very efficient. It can output up to 6.7A fully current regulated. It CAN'T operate from a single l-ion cell.

The LFlex is a Linear regulator style driver - it BURNS excess voltage as heat, i.e. it does not do DC/DC conversion. Where it will excel is when input voltage is reasonably well matched with output voltage. It will also operate to low voltages before dropping out. I doubt you'll find a switcher based LED driver that can run from a single li-ion and drive a single white LED at 3A and do it efficiently. Such a switcher based driver would be very challenging to design and then to try and fit it into a 20mm envelope etc etc....

So, the LFlex will fill in nicely where you have a single LED and single li-ion or 2 LEDs and 2 li-ion running at up to 3A.

I don't see the LFlex stealing the H6Flex thunder, rather it filling in a gap at the single/double LED/cell end of the lighting spectrum. It will allow for a fully regulated and dimmable compact helmet type light where weight/size is an issue. It will provide voltage monitoring/warning/protection and thermal monitoring/protection while still having the same identical user interface as the rest of the flex drivers. So, you could have a bar mounted light and a helmet mounted light and operating the two would not require thinking what interface is on what light...

The real comparison is the LFlex versus the D2Flex.

cheers,
george.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

georges80 said:


> H6Flex is a damn fine driver - it is very robust. It is a buck driver, it will do DC/DC step down conversion and is very efficient. It can output up to 6.7A fully current regulated. It CAN'T operate from a single l-ion cell.
> 
> The LFlex is a Linear regulator style driver - it BURNS excess voltage as heat, i.e. it does not do DC/DC conversion. Where it will excel is when input voltage is reasonably well matched with output voltage. It will also operate to low voltages before dropping out. I doubt you'll find a switcher based LED driver that can run from a single li-ion and drive a single white LED at 3A and do it efficiently. Such a switcher based driver would be very challenging to design and then to try and fit it into a 20mm envelope etc etc....
> 
> ...


never doubted the pedigree of the h6flex, I don't regret buying it at all. I do now understand the whole linear regulator thing better though - they key, as you say, is matching LED and cell no., i.e. 1 LED, 1S; 2 LED, 2S. I'm guessing that you can't do 3 LED/ 3S as the power burned as the Vin/Vout difference at that LED no. would be too great to safely dissipate, correct?

I think this will make designing single LED lights (commuter or helmet) so much easier - I wish this was around when I started ordering parts for a bunch of commuter lights I'm building  Still, there's finally a reason for people not to use those somewhat suspect DX/KD 7135 drivers


----------



## cagliari (Aug 9, 2010)

George

this is the good news my new year needed. Just started a new xml project but the most suitable driver I could find was from Shining Beam, and this was the best of a bad bunch!! I now have no excuse not to stand at the lathe in the cold workshop and get the basic housing sorted. Cheers.:thumbsup:


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

Now all we need is a source for a cheap 4p li ion battery pack


----------



## zemike (Sep 3, 2007)

IMHO the diameter is too big. It should be matched with the cell - 18mm


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

zemike said:


> IMHO the diameter is too big. It should be matched with the cell - 18mm


The diameter is what it is to fit the electronics on board. If you want 18mm, then I can leave off the bits that make it work and make the solder pads tiny or I can put components on both sides of the board and you can kiss away a good thermal path. Then you would end up with a kludge like a multi AMC7135 board with components on both sides and no good way to get rid of the heat.

I already squeezed to make things fit well on this board AND to provide a good thermal path AND to allow the average person a chance of soldering the leads on that can carry 3A in/out of the driver. A round board is already a challenge from a layout perspective since you basically have square/rectangular components.

Given the size of the optics needed and that the driver would have to be in that housing anyway if you want thermal protection and to minimize voltage drops in the system - i.e. a remote battery pack would not be a good idea either unless you are running THICK wires to deal with the up to 3A current draw... That light housing itself can't be too tiny - you will be dealing with upwards of 10 - 12W of heat you need to dissipate with a single XML at 3A....

Here's a CAD layout of the board. Take it into photoshop etc and scale it to 0.78" and print it one to one and then see how tight everything is. Then draw an 18mm circle on it and that's what would have to be removed from the design 










cheers,
george.


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

*georges80*
George, am I right thinking that LFlex will work properly with 2 serial XML from 2s (7.4 v) LiIons?


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

klynk said:


> *georges80*
> George, am I right thinking that LFlex will work properly with 2 serial XML from 2s (7.4 v) LiIons?


Yes, it will work fine.

cheers,
george.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

What current tables do you folk think I need to implement in the LFlex?

To let the cat out of the bag, with the existing current sense resistor I can support 4A output (the FET can do way more than that - but heat losses are IxIxR so I really don't want to go stupid with the current).

I'm thinking the following tables:

4A overdriven XML or underdriven SST50 etc
3A XML at spec (or a P7 or MCE)
2A XML conservative or XPG overdriven
1.5A XPG at spec
1A XPG conservative or for any of the other "3W LEDS".

Obviously all the dimming stuff will be there as per the standard Flex UI-UNI2 firmware, I'm just wondering what/how many current tables to provide - without going stupid 

thoughts?

cheers,
george.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

sounds good to me. Are you limited to 5 entries? As a 350/500mA level might be useful as a single mode XP-G/E commuter light. Then again, why wouldn't anybody set the Duomode to L5=1A and choose L2 or 3 for low if they were going to do that. It's what I'll be doing with the b(2)flex powered commuter lights I'm making at the moment.


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

+ 1 for 500 mA "commuting" level.


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

Sounds right to me to. 4A should do the trick with both XML and MCE.


----------



## langen (May 21, 2005)

georges80 said:


> I'm thinking the following tables:
> 
> 4A overdriven XML or underdriven SST50 etc
> 3A XML at spec (or a P7 or MCE)
> ...


How about skipping 1A and adding 2,5A?

My impression is that the "3W" LEDs with 1A max are already made obsolete by XPG (except maybe XPE), so the 1A table would therefore sort of be made to suit old tech.

And I said above: The size is great!! 
Optic size will be the driving factor of making XML lights as small as possible, and I would very much like to see sub-20mm optics that work with the XML....


----------



## mtbikerTi (Jan 15, 2004)

I know some people like the round profile boards, but I wouldn't care if the boards were rectangular... I really wouldn't care if the boards were rectangular and had the option of an external temperature sensor, something like a thermocouple or DS18B20.


----------



## ortelius (Dec 6, 2007)

klynk said:


> + 1 for 500 mA "commuting" level.


IMHO, having 500 mA as one of available highest current level for a driver ment primarily for XML and similar high power leds, seem plain silly to me.What would you then do with other 5 (or 8) lower levels with 500 mA top current? I really wouldn't sacrifice one of the available driving levels for such an unsuitable one, as the number of drive levels is limited and must not be unrealistically high.

For 500 mA commuting level, You you can simply choose setting with 1 A or 1.5 A as top driving current and the next lower level with this setting will be right around 500 mA, as _mattthemuppet_ allready mentioned.

I'd rather support_ langen_'s proposal to even skip 1 A and use 2.5 A instead.


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

ortelius said:


> IMHO, having 500 mA as one of available highest current level for a driver ment primarily for XML and similar high power leds, seem plain silly to me.What would you then do with other 5 (or 8) lower levels with 500 mA top current? I really wouldn't sacrifice one of the available driving levels for such an unsuitable one, as the number of drive levels is limited and must not be unrealistically high.
> 
> For 500 mA commuting level, You you can simply choose setting with 1 A or 1.5 A as top driving current and the next lower level with this setting will be right around 500 mA, as _mattthemuppet_ allready mentioned.
> 
> I'd rather support_ langen_'s proposal to even skip 1 A and use 2.5 A instead.


+1 on that

And 20mm round, single sided board sounds perfect to me. Shame we'll lose the stat connection but can't argue with physics


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

The number of current tables is not limited to 5. Note, the h6flex has a choice of 9 current tables.

I'm just looking for some feedback on what tables you think are USEFUL without creating so many that it becomes a pain to make a choice...

Thanks to folk that have posted their thoughts so far. I won't need to make a decision for about a week, so plenty of time for comments and justifications to be made.

The LFlex firmware will be the SAME C source code that generates all the other Flex drivers - I just need to add the LFlex specific 'stuff' with appropriate #ifdef's etc to generate the LFlex specific programming files. This means that creating the LFlex firmware isn't a huge task and very little testing needs to be done except for the LFlex specific changes.

cheers,
george.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5
I thought the idea of this small board was aimed at helmet lights
I don't think 4 is needed.. that's going to be overkill for a helmet light, especially from a battery perspective and heat sinking..
3.5 is probably overkill too..but nice to have that boost to show off 

With regard to sst-50 there £18 each, not a great selection of optics... its not a cheap option.. I still haven't seen many people use it, apart from in dive lights.


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

I would go even for 5A possibility if the board can take it  GD you don't need to set your board to full power if you don't need it, but I would like to drive my XML at 4A and even 4P MCE's at the same current. For a helmet light you can take Lflex+XPG+regina set to 2A and single or double XML at 3-4A for hadlebars.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Toaster79 said:


> I would go even for 5A possibility if the board can take it  GD you don't need to set your board to full power if you don't need it, but I would like to drive my XML at 4A and even 4P MCE's at the same current. For a helmet light you can take Lflex+XPG+regina set to 2A and single or double XML at 3-4A for hadlebars.


If you have 4P MCE surely your best off with a H6flex??

Thanks for clarifying that i dont need to set the board to max


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

Lflex will be cheaper and it will suit my needs. 4P I ment as 4 parallel dies on one chip.


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

georges80 said:


> I'm just looking for some feedback on what tables you think are USEFUL without creating so many that it becomes a pain to make a choice...


IMO, for XML - 1A, 2A, 3A (3 modes is enough).
for XPG - 0,6A, 1A, 1,5A (again, 3 modes).
4A for XML would be TOO hot, IMO. I don't think that having such a heater on helmet is a good idea.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Toaster79 said:


> Lflex will be cheaper and it will suit my needs. 4P I ment as 4 parallel dies on one chip.


You want to put 4 amp's through each die? thought they could only handle 700ma each?


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

No, I want to put 1 amp through each die, so that's 4 amps for four dies in parallel wiring.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Toaster79 said:


> No, I want to put 1 amp through each die, so that's 4 amps for four dies in parallel wiring.


Im with you, wasn't paying attention..to the parallel part.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

ortelius said:


> IMHO, having 500 mA as one of available highest current level for a driver ment primarily for XML and similar high power leds, seem plain silly to me.What would you then do with other 5 (or 8) lower levels with 500 mA top current? I really wouldn't sacrifice one of the available driving levels for such an unsuitable one, as the number of drive levels is limited and must not be unrealistically high.


well, George did list different levels and their matching LEDs, so this driver doesn't _have_ to be used with high powered LEDs. 500mA top current then L3 or L4 as low would make a neat XP-G commuting light. ~150lm on high, 50-75 on low - double the run time of 1A and most likely more than enough light for the street and bike paths.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

I am with George`s suggestion I thing it covers the bases real well 

Dont see a need for 500 ma as that is covered in the 1 amp setting there is enough sub settings to get the commute setting low enough 
and why build a light that is only for commuting it may as well be useable both on and off road .


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Agreed Troutie.
But what if we had half steps.....
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1

I dunno if it really is needed, but a 2.5 setting would be nice for running it slightly underdriven.


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

troutie-mtb said:


> I am with George`s suggestion I thing it covers the bases real well
> 
> Dont see a need for 500 ma as that is covered in the 1 amp setting there is enough sub settings to get the commute setting low enough
> and why build a light that is only for commuting it may as well be useable both on and off road .


500mA is a good level for endurance adventure riding where people probably just want an on/off solution (some guys go all night on 50lm petzl headlamps).

0.5
1
1.5
2.3 
3
4

not sure about the 2.3 but 2 isn't much of a bump from 1.5 and 3 is tecnically out of spec for MCE & P7


----------



## ortelius (Dec 6, 2007)

klynk said:


> IMO, for XML - 1A, 2A, 3A (3 modes is enough).
> for XPG - 0,6A, 1A, 1,5A (again, 3 modes).
> 4A for XML would be TOO hot, IMO. I don't think that having such a heater on helmet is a good idea.


You are not talking about the same thing George is asking. We are not discussing about different levels (modes) that you can have on your light, once you program it. We are talking about available *max current settings* that the board can offer. You then choose one of this and this is the max current your light can have. The number of modes you have is another choice when you program it, but you do not explicitly set their currents in absolute numbers, they are predefined in firmware, based on choice of your max current and number of levels (UI choice).


----------



## klynk (Apr 18, 2010)

ortelius said:


> You are not talking about the same thing George is asking. We are not discussing about different levels (modes) that you can have on your light, once you program it. We are talking about available *max current settings* that the board can offer. You then choose one of this and this is the max current your light can have. The number of modes you have is another choice when you program it, but you do not explicitly set their currents in absolute numbers, they are predefined in firmware, based on choice of your max current and number of levels (UI choice).


Thanks, now I get the point.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

troutie-mtb said:


> Dont see a need for 500 ma as that is covered in the 1 amp setting there is enough sub settings to get the commute setting low enough
> and why build a light that is only for commuting it may as well be useable both on and off road .


as they say, horses for courses troutie. The commuter light I'm building for myself won't be used off road - that's what my 2x XP-G helmet light and soon to be built 2x XM-L bar light is for. So for a cheap and simple commuter light, which this driver would suit perfectly, a <1A maximum drive level would be very useful. An XP-G @1A is seriously bright on the road, possibly too much so, and I'd rather have the low level for a "be seen" level when the lights come on but before it gets dark. Plus, battery life becomes more important than absolute light output when commuting - I really don't want to have to recharge my light ever night (or even every other night).

Anyway, it's up to George. If he can fit a <1A max drive level in without buggering anything else up, I don't really see the harm in it. _You_ might not use it, but that doesn't mean others won't.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

mattthemuppet said:


> as they say, horses for courses troutie. The commuter light I'm building for myself won't be used off road - that's what my 2x XP-G helmet light and soon to be built 2x XM-L bar light is for. So for a cheap and simple commuter light, which this driver would suit perfectly, a <1A maximum drive level would be very useful. An XP-G @1A is seriously bright on the road, possibly too much so, and I'd rather have the low level for a "be seen" level when the lights come on but before it gets dark. Plus, battery life becomes more important than absolute light output when commuting - I really don't want to have to recharge my light ever night (or even every other night).
> 
> Anyway, it's up to George. If he can fit a <1A max drive level in without buggering anything else up, I don't really see the harm in it. _You_ might not use it, but that doesn't mean others won't.


Hey up Mattthemuppet what I was meaning is in the sub settings you will get any level you wish so max 1 amp steps down to 50 ma drive .

if you use the UIP setting then you can set it at what ever level you want at the time you switch it on and click on click off Simples  and short press goes to max for the warning flash to the knob head driver


----------



## Ofroad'bent (Jul 10, 2010)

OK, asbestos suit on- what would happen if you wanted to drive 1 XM-L using a 7.4v battery?

I know there are other -flex drivers, but not this small, and I'd like to use my nice collection of waterproof 7.4v Lithium battery packs.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Ofroad'bent said:


> OK, asbestos suit on- what would happen if you wanted to drive 1 XM-L using a 7.4v battery?
> 
> I know there are other -flex drivers, but not this small, and I'd like to use my nice collection of waterproof 7.4v Lithium battery packs.


You would burn the excess voltage in heat - totally useless waste of energy...

The LFlex is a LINEAR regulator style driver, any excess voltage goes to heat.

If you set the drive level to 3A you would (fresh off the charger) be pulling 3A from 8.4V to drive a 3.3V LED.

It would be the equivalent of having a 1 litre container and pouring 2 litres of beer into it - the other litre would spill on the floor and that is CRIMINAL unless we're talking Fosters or Budweiser or ...

cheers,
george.


----------



## Ofroad'bent (Jul 10, 2010)

georges80 said:


> You would burn the excess voltage in heat - totally useless waste of energy...
> 
> The LFlex is a LINEAR regulator style driver, any excess voltage goes to heat.
> 
> ...


Damn, that's what I thought but I'd hoped I got it wrong. What's Dr George's prescription fro something as small that would run a single XM-L from 6.0-7.4v?


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

troutie-mtb said:


> Hey up Mattthemuppet what I was meaning is in the sub settings you will get any level you wish so max 1 amp steps down to 50 ma drive .
> 
> if you use the UIP setting then you can set it at what ever level you want at the time you switch it on and click on click off Simples  and short press goes to max for the warning flash to the knob head driver


ah, I get you now. I wasn't familiar with the UIP setting - I was working my approach off UIB, where you can't do that.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Ofroad'bent said:


> Damn, that's what I thought but I'd hoped I got it wrong. What's Dr George's prescription fro something as small that would run a single XM-L from 6.0-7.4v?


It doesn't currently exist and likely won't. To run 2 li-ion would require a buck driver and that means an inductor, switcher IC and the rest of the control baggage.

It could be feasible to fit into a 20mm board but would need components on both sides and that becomes somewhat of a mounting challenge because a good thermal path would still be essential. To make it all fit it would need to use the smallest packages (QFN's etc) and that means assembly house setup costs etc etc and only makes sense if the driver sells in decent (1000's) volumes.

The LFlex is my attempt to address single XML in a compact form factor and the tradeoff is that you run ONE li-ion cell or 2P (or 3P etc for longer runtime).

cheers,
george.


----------



## odtexas (Oct 2, 2008)

georges80 said:


> It would be the equivalent of having a 1 litre container and pouring 2 litres of beer into it - the other litre would spill on the floor and that is CRIMINAL unless we're talking Fosters or Budweiser or ...
> 
> cheers,
> george.


Harsh.........


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

mattthemuppet said:


> ah, I get you now. I wasn't familiar with the UIP setting - I was working my approach off UIB, where you can't do that.


Its worth having a play with the UIP I have been using it for a while now and liking it for the easy use it gives .

currently using it for the stupid bright quad xml

from off you hold the button until your desired light level and then let go 
then click and it is off click again and it is on at that level

press and it goes to max  press and it goes back to the preset level .

perfect for a commuter light :thumbsup:


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

troutie-mtb said:


> Its worth having a play with the UIP I have been using it for a while now and liking it for the easy use it gives .
> 
> currently using it for the stupid bright quad xml
> 
> ...


thanks for the headsup troutie, I'll look into that for definite. The ones I'm making for friends/family I'll probably stick with UIB+Duomode, just because I don't have to explain anything to them


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

odtexas said:


> Harsh.........


considering that Fosters is crap beer that Australia exports because no self-respecting Australian would drink it, I think it's pretty fair. I'd say the same about anything with Miller or Coors in the name..


----------



## hecs_ru (Feb 14, 2009)

May be George can build module with leds, similar Quazzle L33 , but for XM-L and 35мм CUTE-3 optics. It would be fine with simple DX housing.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

hecs_ru said:


> May be George can build module with leds, similar Quazzle L33 , but for XM-L and 35мм CUTE-3 optics. It would be fine with simple DX housing.


Sorry, but I don't plan to make modules. That's something other folk can do if they wish.

The problem with modules, for a lot of folk:

1) whatever LED you have on there is already obsolete when you release the module or has the wrong tint or lumens/watt.2) whatever number of LEDs you have uses is too many or not enough
3) whatever size you have made the module is too big or too small or the wrong shape
4) you've locked yourself into a small choice of optics due to the module/board size.

From a business perspective, if you are targeting a savvy customer base you are at risk building something that the key component is in a technology improvement cycle. I've seen it happen at CPF for years, a guy buys a reel of the latest and greatest LEDs for $N, before he sells 1/2 the reel at a profit a new LED hits the market and his remaining 1/2 reel is yesterdays flavour of the month. Now he has to sell the remaining 1/2 at a loss for a net $0 if he's lucky.

Now compound that with it being a finished module with 3 LEDs and driver electronics and you now have a board that no one wants to spend premium money on. To make financial sense you probably ran 500 modules (or more) and you now have to sell the remainder at a discount or over a year or two versus a month or two...

If one was to make a complete module then you may as well go the whole way and put it into a housing and supply a battery pack and call it done.

Anyhow, that's my position on a complete module and why it's not something I plan to provide.

cheers,
george.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Just keep doing what you're doing George, cause you are doing it right.
I can't wait to get my hands on the LFlex boards.
It's exactly what I've been needing.
And at the projected price, I think I'm gonna get at least 5.
Lots of my buddies need lights......= )


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Just a quick update. My PCB house has shipped boards to me and they should arrive Monday (based on current tracking). I just received the fancy power FETs today, so at this point things are looking good to have some boards done next week so I can port the UI-UNI2 firmware and start testing various current tables etc.

cheers,
george.


----------



## DanneRe (Jun 18, 2009)

georges80 said:


> You would burn the excess voltage in heat - totally useless waste of energy...
> 
> The LFlex is a LINEAR regulator style driver, any excess voltage goes to heat.


I think cooling is very essential with these drivers?

With a fully charged cell the initial heat will be aprox (4.2V-3.35V) x 3A = 2.55W.

I was planning to make a "clean" LED-lamp without integrated driver. With an external driver my plan was to make it easier to upgrade parts in the future. Maybe I need to put the driver together with the led cooler to handle the excess heat?


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

Another vote for a 4A maximum current option. Perfect for my XM-L twin with beam cutoff for commuting. Unless I go triple ...


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

DanneRe said:


> I think cooling is very essential with these drivers?
> 
> With a fully charged cell the initial heat will be aprox (4.2V-3.35V) x 3A = 2.55W.
> 
> I was planning to make a "clean" LED-lamp without integrated driver. With an external driver my plan was to make it easier to upgrade parts in the future. Maybe I need to put the driver together with the led cooler to handle the excess heat?


Yes, cooling is important, that's why the board has no components on the bottom side and has an excellent thermal path from the FET to the bottom of the PCB for mounting via the supplied double sided adhesive thermal tape to the housing.

Do note that the 4.2V will only last a few minutes at most at 3A. It will drop down to 3.7V very quickly, though obviously one must design for the worst case dissipation.

It makes sense to put the driver in the housing so that it can sense overall 'system' temperature and protect itself AND the LED...

cheers,
george.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

lFlex production PCB's arrived today. Here's what it'll look like finished. Now I need to work on porting the ui-uni2 firmware to it. I'll keep you folk updated as I get the code running on a test mule.










cheers,
george.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

as the Welsh say, "tidy"


----------



## random walk (Jan 12, 2010)

Still flirting with 20mm?


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Nice, can't wait!!!
Looks good.


----------



## langen (May 21, 2005)

georges80 said:


> lFlex production PCB's arrived today. Here's what it'll look like finished. Now I need to work on porting the ui-uni2 firmware to it. I'll keep you folk updated as I get the code running on a test mule.
> 
> cheers,
> george.


Nice!

Do you have a confirmed diameter of the boards?


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Diameter is per the initial spec in this thread - 0.780" or just a hair under 20mm.

I have a fair bit of the firmware source code modified so likely today I'll download a trial and see if some of the basic UIP code functions (easier to test than UIB).

For historical reasons the UIP/UIF core is totally separate to the UIB core, so testing the UIP first makes sense.

cheers,
george.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Ok, making some progress with the firmware porting. A bunch more stuff has to be added/changed, but I do at least have the basic firmware running and the current regulation core functional.

I've only tested the 20mA to 400mA range of output current at this point, but don't foresee any issues going higher - it's the lower end that is more problematic from a regulation perspective.

I'm pleased to see that the current regulation is stable even at 20mA. I was originally thinking I may have to run a PWM of 200mA for the lower ranges, though it appears that won't be necessary.

Anyhow, early times still and a lot more work to do.

cheers,
george.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Been making some good progress with the firmware port. I have UIP & UIB2 functional and tested. I still need to test UIF, but it should just 'fall out' of the UIP testing.

I have the voltage monitoring/warning working and tested. Still need to test the thermal monitoring but no reason it shouldn't work.

What I've spent quite a bit of time on is the current regulation algorithm at the low end (<200mA). With sense voltage in the 0.05 x 0.015 = 0.75mV range, things get a little tricky. Fortunately the uC I'm using has an internal 20x gain stage that I'm using to get things in the 15mV range and higher.

Still at those levels, even one PWM count is "visible" to the human eye. Unfortunately (for me), the human eye is very sensitive to small intensity changes at the low end of the range...

Anyhow, I've got a scheme in place that has pretty well eliminated flicker at the low end by dithering the PWM output that feeds the poor mans D/A converter that drives the gate of the power FET.

I now have to just finish adding in the rest of the code to deal with autocalibration of the voltage reference etc.

Given most pictures on this site are folk doing machining with a variety of tools from dremels to CNC's I figured I'd put up a picture of my 'work area' and some of my toys (I mean tools) 










cheers,
george.


----------



## P220C (Jan 31, 2011)

Looks awesome! (Both the board and the workspace.)

I'm really liking the idea of this board, and I am very glad that you are working to smooth out flicker on the PWM in the ultra-low end. Reading or working up close with an LED set to low with visible flicker is a major annoyance. 

Looking forward to getting mine when you are done with your work. This board will be an integral part in reaching my goal of a home-brewed, sub-100-gram, headlamp (including the strap and battery). It's going to be a near-run thing, but I think it's doable.


----------



## brad72 (Jun 12, 2009)

georges80 said:


> the other litre would spill on the floor and that is CRIMINAL unless we're talking Fosters or Budweiser or ..


As long as it's not the afore mentioned beers I'm happy to take one for the team and lie on the floor with my mouth open to collect the overspill:thumbsup:

Love the workbench. You can never have enough meters etc.

Brad


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

Very interested to see how this progresses - looks very interesting.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

( voice from the jaws film ) I think you need a bigger desk


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

troutie-mtb said:


> ( voice from the jaws film ) I think you need a bigger desk


It's surprising to a lot of folk that for the board sizes I work with, I really only need a clear area about 3' wide and 8" deep to do all my work. With all the test equipment arranged around the work 'area' it becomes a very productive environment.

Now for another status update:

I've been tuning the current table entries for the past little while.

There's 5 entries per current table for UIP and UIB and 8 entries per current table for UIF, so well over 100 entries. I run an excel spreadsheet to place the individual points on a curve and then take those values and put them into the firmware. I use the same curve for all the flex drivers, so the relative step changes appear consistent.

At this stage I'm settling on 7 current tables for the initial LFlex release:

500mA, 1000mA, 1500mA, 2000mA, 2500mA, 3000mA and 3500mA.

The L1 (low) on all of the tables will be 50mA.

These are nominal values and as I test more LFlex (later) I'll get an idea of the +/- % spread over many boards.

The 4A has been dropped for now since it requires a sense resistor value change (and that would then impact all the other current table entries). So, if the 4A is a big deal for some folk, that will be rolled out in a future run of boards.

I've done some temperature versus time testing with the 3.5A range, running 4.2V in and 3.2V out that mimics a fully charge li-ion cell driving a low Vf XML. That means 1V x 3.5A = 3.5W dissipation in the FET.

Using an inferior thermal pad material (non-adhesive for ease of testing), the FET case reaches about 45C with 20C heatsink temperature.This is well within the capabilities of the FET. With the supplied Bergquist adhesive thermal tape, temperature will be lower since the Bergquist material has over 2x the thermal conductivity of the non-adhesive material I'm using to test with.

UIF is the last part of the code that still needs to be tested, but I'm not expecting any issues to crop up since most of the UIF code 'co-exists' with the UIP code that has already been tested.

I've tested the temperature monitoring/auto-dimming code and it is also functional.

So, we're getting close. I'm expecting to release LFlex drivers later next week and will do so by first contacting the folk that emailed me showing interest. After that I'll do a general release.

Anyhow, a VERY nice sunny day here - so I need to go and make a couple of wheels spin... 

cheers,
george.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Awesome news George!!!!
I'm thrilled with the current table options....Perfect!
Sounds like everything is going to plan. Good stuff.
Can't wait to get that email from you stating they are ready for purchase.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Running some more tests at 3A and 3.5A to characterize the FET thermal path. Figured I'd measure the headroom needed for the LFlex to remain in regulation.

I'm using quite an impressive little FET on the LFlex and it has some pretty amazing specifications for its size. But then it is quite an expensive component relative to the rest of the board - it is the singularly most expensive part of the drive.

Anyhow, at 3A I adjusted the input voltage until it transitioned to direct drive at which point the FET is turned on 100% and measured 0.08V drop across the driver. That's a pretty impressively low dropout at 3A. That 0.08V implies a total driver resistance of 0.08/3 = 0.027 ohms which is reasonable given that there is a 0.015 ohm sense resistor in series with the FET (which has an RDSon of 0.006 ohms with 2.5V gate drive) for a total of 0.021 ohms. Factor in a few milliohms for the copper traces and it all makes sense. I have a nice Fluke 6 1/2 digit bench meter, so measuring such low voltages accurately it quite trivial.

I'm using the same FET on the Hallsw board - or at least its non-identical twin. It's a TI FET and I noticed that the one on the LFlex had very similar specs to the one on the Hallsw board... when I ordered the LFlex FET I received notice that it's a factory sort of the other FET (for guaranteed and documented performance at 2.5V gate voltage). So, the over-achievers get their own part number

If anyone is chasing a pretty amazing FET (especially for its size) and can deal with surface mount etc, it's a TI CSD16340Q3

cheers,
george.


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

George, I haven't a clue what a FET is but if you're happy then I'm happy  Like everyone else on this thread I'm looking forward to the lflex with anticipation and your excitement makes me excited without really knowing why, like mass hysteria


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

JezV said:


> George, I haven't a clue what a FET is but if you're happy then I'm happy  Like everyone else on this thread I'm looking forward to the lflex with anticipation and your excitement makes me excited without really knowing why, like mass hysteria


:lol: Me too not a clue what George is talking about and happy to let it stay that way .
what I could glean from the bits I did understand was things are going well and we can look forward to the release of a good product . and by the sound of it at a good price too .

I have just been back over the thread to recap .

am I right here

it will drive 1 xml from 1 or more parallel cells but not 2 series .cells

it will drive 2 xmls from 2 series cells but not 3 or 4

it will will be hotter in the early running from fully charged cells .

does the light then dim when it drops out of reg

will it be heating up more if using low settings from full cells


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

George is talking about really high quality part of the driver (FET= Field Effec Transistor) which is also the heart of the driver. It's resistance in direct drive is much lower than resistance of the copper traces on the board.



troutie-mtb said:


> does the light then dim when it drops out of reg
> 
> will it be heating up more if using low settings from full cells


The light will eventually get dimmer as it goes in direct drive, or maybe not, as long as you set the cut off voltage to 3V which is actually around the Vf of XM-L.

I think it won't heat up more at lower settings, because the driver burns excess voltage, and it doesn't behave like resistor, which burns excess power. But someone who is more in to electronics should correct me if I'm wrong.

Hope I get an email soon, saying "Order shipped"


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

JezV said:


> George, I haven't a clue what a FET is but if you're happy then I'm happy


*chuckles* For my sake it's dragging back memories from a long past degree in electronic engineering. Is one reason I'm interested in all this stuff to be honest!

Having seen the thread on CPF about the limits of overdriving an XM-L I'm now more than happy with the current tables proposed for the LFlex - thanks George.


troutie-mtb said:


> it will drive 1 xml from 1 or more parallel cells but not 2 series cells


Correct.



> it will drive 2 xmls from 2 series cells but not 3 or 4


Also correct.



> it will will be hotter in the early running from fully charged cells


Indeed it will, as it is dropping more voltage, and power, across itself in order to present the same steady voltage to the LED to operate at the same current.



> does the light then dim when it drops out of reg


Exactly as Toaster79 says.



> will it be heating up more if using low settings from full cells


Low settings as opposed to high on the same cells? Shouldn't do. Yes, it is a linear regulator so in effect you're putting a clever resistor in series with the LED. However the decrease in overall current has more of an effect on driver power wastage than the increase in effective resistance value, so the power wasted in the driver should drop at lower settings.

Michael


----------



## cagliari (Aug 9, 2010)

JezV said:


> George, I haven't a clue what a FET is but if you're happy then I'm happy
> 
> Brings back some long faded college memories! A lot of what George is saying makes some sense but I'm glad he's doing all the thinking for me. I'm just glad there is someone out there who is willing to put in the hours to produce a good quality product at a good price who asks & listens to what we want & doesn't take 12 months to get the finished item to market! This is what keeps our interest up & keeps us ahead of the big light manufacturers.


----------



## P220C (Jan 31, 2011)

MFJ, I believe you to be right on all counts.

Your right on the last one, too, but I think you overlooked one small issue: the low settings are regulated by pulse wave modulation (PWM), not resistance. So technically, the heat issue should all but go away at this setting (save and except the FET, but even this will not be working hard at this point either).

I'm self taught in the study of electrical theory, so please take my ramblings with a grain of salt.


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

True, true, good point P220C.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Glad that some of my posts are entertaining you guys - some more than others 

I suppose I need to explain a few things to try and set straight how the LFlex regulates current.

Firstly, it uses the PWM hardware to create a D/A. Basically it runs very high speed PWM (>100KHz) and then varies the on/off time (duty cycle) of that 100KHz pulse train. That pulse train is the run through an R/C filter to convert the pulse train into an analog voltage.

Secondly, the FET never sees PWM, what it sees is the analog voltage (from 0V to 2.5V). As that voltage varies (fed into the Gate of the FET) the FET can be turned from fully off to fully on and many levels in between.

The FET is in series with the LED. So, now we can treat the FET as a resistor that we can vary from 0 ohms to infinite (or close to it) ohms.

So, one of the questions in this thread is power dissipation and how it varies from high current to low current.

It's pretty easy, consider worst case, we have a freshly charged li-ion cell at 4.2V and an XML with a Vf of say 3.2V at 3A and lets say 2.7V at 1A.

So, at 3A drive we have 3A running through the LED and through the FET. The FET drops the battery voltage from 4.2V to 3.2V. So, we have 1V at 3A which means 3W being dissipated in the FET and 3.2Vx3 = 9.6W being dissipated in the LED.

Now at 1A we have 1A running through the LED and through the FET. The FET drops the battery voltage from 4.2V to 2.7V. So, we have 1.5V at 1A which means 1.5W being dissipated in the FET and 2.7 x 1 = 2.7W being dissipated in the LED.

Obviously with the battery (li-ion) dropping to 3.7V pretty quickly, the power losses in the FET will be less, since it will have to only drop 3.7V to the LED Vf (at the specific LED current).

Anyhow, hope this helps shed some light (tee hee) on how the LFlex works. As mentioned above, think of the FET as a variable power resistor. The firmware adjusts the resistance in real time to maintain a constant current flowing through the resistor and hence the LED as the battery voltage varies and the LED Vf varies. 

cheers,
george.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

Thanks George Its nice to know how stuff works 

though the fact that it does work is more important 
and looking forward to some arriving in the UK


----------



## JezV (Oct 31, 2009)

georges80 said:


> Glad that some of my posts are entertaining you guys - some more than others
> 
> I suppose I need to explain a few things to try and set straight how the LFlex regulates current.
> 
> ...


Translation for non-EEs:

lflex + 3.7v Li Ion + XML = lots of light
lflex + 7.4v Li Ion + (2 x XML) = lots and lots of light

Stop me if I'm being too technical...


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

JezV said:


> Translation for non-EEs:
> 
> lflex + 3.7v Li Ion + XML = lots of light
> lflex + 7.4v Li Ion + (2 x XML) = lots and lots of light
> ...


 Very good summary!

George, could the PWM signal be sent direct to the FET and use the FET as a high-speed oscillating switch, switching between on and off to regulate all brightness levels (even full power)? That way you wouldn't have the resistive losses across the FET, although you would of course need to be driving the gate current through all the switching. I don't know what that would do to the LED though - mind you, could you put an R/C filter after the FET? Might be a bit big though as you might need a sizeable capacitor I guess.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

mfj197 said:


> George, could the PWM signal be sent direct to the FET and use the FET as a high-speed oscillating switch, switching between on and off to regulate all brightness levels (even full power)? That way you wouldn't have the resistive losses across the FET, although you would of course need to be driving the gate current through all the switching. I don't know what that would do to the LED though - mind you, could you put an R/C filter after the FET? Might be a bit big though as you might need a sizeable capacitor I guess.


Umm... we're talking LEDs here, not hot wire lights....

With a LED if you turn the FET on 100% then you will have direct battery to LED connection, i.e. fresh 4.2V applied to a LED with say a 3.2V Vf at 3A... With 4.2V applied from a battery capable of driving many amps you would blow the LED (likely >> 10A would flow).

A sizeable capacitor will do nothing with a battery connected directly (FET 100% on). Talking about R/C filtering or big caps or..... may as well throw an inductor in there too and let's call it a buck driver  Hmm - let's call it a b2flex or h6flex 

The simple summary is that if you want a scheme like you outlined - get a d2flex - that is EXACTLY how a d2flex works. It dims by varying PWM duty cycle - but it does NOT regulated the current (only the average current).

Here's a simple example of what PWM with a 4.2V freshly charged battery (even worse with say 2P) feeding a low Vf XML:

Pretend your head is the LED, pretend a baseball/cricket bat is the battery going through the PWM FET. By varying the PWM duty cycle you are varying the duration of your head being hit by the bat - but NOT the intensity. The intensity will be VERY high while the battery is at 4.2V. This is the d2flex example.

Now, instead, we have the lflex, it varies the drive current (by dropping excess voltage across the FET that is acting as a resistor), think of the FET resistance as a pillow on top of your head. Your head will now only see a mild 3A constant pressure being applied versus high impact short pulses of the d2flex.

You may now go and rest your head 

The lflex functionally works like an AMC7135 that seems to be oh so popular with a lot of folk building single cell/single LED lights. The AMC7135 burns excess voltage resistively across its internal transistor - basically we're talking linear regulator. The lflex has several advantages over the AMC7135: a) the lflex output current is adjustable from 50mA to 3.5A b) lflex uses a FET so the dropout is much smaller c) the lflex FET has an excellent thermal path through the PCB for cooling. To achieve 3A (or 2.8A for the AMC7135), 8 x AMC7135's are needed - so it would be a double stacked board with all sorts of cooling problems due to the stack. But functionally, they act the same - excess voltage -> resistive heat.

cheers,
george.


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

*chuckles* Knew there had to be a reason! Thanks George. 

*goes and tends sore head after baseball bat experiment*


----------



## aTomOfAllTrades (Apr 22, 2010)

georges80 said:


> Here's a simple example....
> 
> Pretend your head is the LED, pretend a baseball/cricket bat is the battery going through the PWM FET. By varying the PWM duty cycle you are varying the duration of your head being hit by the bat - but NOT the intensity.


That's the greatest analogy for a PWM circuit I have ever heard. Wow.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Very close to releasing the LFlex driver. So, in preparation I've put up the preliminary product/tech/manual onto my website:

http://www.taskled.com/lflex.html

and

http://www.taskled.com/techlflex.html

It's a work in progress, so more information to add. If you notice any obvious errors I'd like to hear of them.

cheers,
george.


----------



## bryceorama (Jul 14, 2009)

georges80 said:


> If you notice any obvious errors I'd like to hear of them.


Hey George,

I think you have a typo on the product info page...0.780" ~ 19.8mm...you put down 22 by accident.

Can't wait to order a couple.  How would these work in a triple AAA (3.5v ?) Alot of small flashlights use that config...could be a simple mod.

Bryce


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Bryce, I took it as meaning less than 22mm. The way that the boards are manufactured, they all come off of one large sheet of fiberglass, and each board is broken away from the master sheet. Kind of like a saltine cracker.
Well, where the boards are broken away from eachother, there can be some hair left behind that will make the board measure a big larger. This is easily fixed in about 10 seconds with a small file. Hence the <22mm.
I'm not sure if I explained that right, but it sounds good to me....= )

George, looking good. Can't wait.


----------



## P220C (Jan 31, 2011)

"Yessss...."

-Napoleon Dynamite


----------



## P220C (Jan 31, 2011)

Small typo on http://www.taskled.com/techlflex.html

SWB wired to momentary action switch (*electically *the same as IN-).


----------



## Itess (Feb 22, 2009)

georges80 said:


> Very close to releasing the LFlex driver. So, in preparation I've put up the preliminary product/tech/manual onto my website:
> 
> http://www.taskled.com/lflex.html
> 
> ...


George, what do you think about such use of your LFlex with 3*XML @ 3*18650?


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Thanks for catching the typos - just corrected them.

Board is DEFINITELY <20mm in diameter - I was fixating on the # 22 for some reason...

3 XML/3 li-ion is too much when fresh off the charger.

Consider if Vf is 3.2V and you have 4.2V, that's 1V to drop per LED/Li-ion. So, 3W per each LED/Li-ion in the string. So, for 3 it would be 9W. Obviously as the batteries discharge pretty quickly to 3.7 - 3.8V things get better - but it's too toasty if the batteries hold up or you are running BIG li-ion cells or in parallel.

LFlex was really intended for 1 LED/ 1 Li-ion. It can be pushed to 2 LED/ 2 Li-ion, but that's pretty well the limit (at 3A). After that you're burning too much heat and need to seriously be looking at a buck driver.

For lower current LEDs, then you could have 3 XPG and 3 li-ion at say 1.5A max drive, since you're then looking at around 4.5W heat loss with fresh charged li-ions and low 3.2V Vf XPG's.

cheers,
george.


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

webpage states max 3A drive current, when the list of current tables next to it goes up to 3.5A

webpage states that the driver has only duomode or multimode, whereas the manual states duo/three/tri/multi

couldn't see any more with a quick scan.
I did notice that you don't recommend that the LED and the lflex share a common heatsink, as the temp protection is to protect the driver, not the LED(s). Is there a major problem doing this, as long as that common heatsink has a good thermal path to the housing?


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

mattthemuppet said:


> webpage states max 3A drive current, when the list of current tables next to it goes up to 3.5A
> 
> webpage states that the driver has only duomode or multimode, whereas the manual states duo/three/tri/multi
> 
> ...


Thanks, fixed and updated.

It's never good to mount any driver to an already hot surface like the LEDs. If necessary it can be done, but it's not the best choice from the driver's perspective.

Obviously thermal monitoring is primarily to protect the driver and secondarily to protect the LEDs.

If the LEDs have a GOOD thermal path to the body of the light then in theory the body is the same temperature as the LED heatsink and the driver can mount to that. Obviously the temperature of the housing will be a combination of LED heat losses and driver heat losses. Turning on the temperature monitoring and setting it to a reasonable level is then an exercise left to the user and his/her sensitive "pinky finger".... 60C is what I consider too hot to comfortably keep holding onto for more than a few seconds.

cheers,
george.


----------



## troutie-mtb (Sep 20, 2007)

OK George is now shipping the beasties who and where will the first one turn up ??

I guess about wednesday from a US person .

Quickest time to the uk has been 5 days from George to me 

first one with a pic of a live one wins a virtual prize


----------



## KBARK (Aug 7, 2007)

Hopefully I'll be one of the first to get one delivered, but I doubt I'll have it up and running before next weekend.


----------



## Ofroad'bent (Jul 10, 2010)

mattthemuppet said:


> SNIP
> I did notice that you don't recommend that the LED and the lflex share a common heatsink, as the temp protection is to protect the driver, not the LED(s). Is there a major problem doing this, as long as that common heatsink has a good thermal path to the housing?


Matt, I was just thinking that too. Hopefully the Matt Sled will be OK with the good thermal path from sled to body and a 60C setting.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

troutie-mtb said:


> OK George is now shipping the beasties who and where will the first one turn up ??
> 
> I guess about wednesday from a US person .
> 
> ...


I've got a dual XML rig waiting here for the driver to show up......it's pretty much done. Besides getting the Lflex in, I just need to do a few things to it.
I'm hoping to get it built up and finished tuesday after work.
I've got 5 of the beasties on the way.

On a side note, I just finished up a dual 3up XPG today, using one of Matt M.'s housings.
Great little rig. Perfect for the bars!!!
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=258699


----------



## P220C (Jan 31, 2011)

troutie-mtb said:


> OK George is now shipping the beasties who and where will the first one turn up ??
> 
> I guess about wednesday from a US person .
> 
> ...


:thumbsup:


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Nice. 
My LFlex boards are sitting at work waiting for me, and I am sitting at home with the day off.
Dare I go down there to pick them up, and possibly get sucked into that craziness?


----------



## KBARK (Aug 7, 2007)

savagemann said:


> Nice.
> My LFlex boards are sitting at work waiting for me, and I am sitting at home with the day off.
> Dare I go down there to pick them up, and possibly get sucked into that craziness?


Sweet, maybe mine will be at home waiting for me...


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

Cutter now has them listed, albeit with errors on the detail page but they are also on Cutter's Taskled Driver page


----------



## brad72 (Jun 12, 2009)

savagemann said:


> Nice.
> My LFlex boards are sitting at work waiting for me, and I am sitting at home with the day off.
> Dare I go down there to pick them up, and possibly get sucked into that craziness?


That is a dilemma I am all too familiar with. Just keep the car running out the front, run in, run out and look panicked. No-one will stop to ask you to work.


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

Thats pretty much what I did Brad.
Left the lady in the car so I would have an excuse to need to leave fast........= )

Proof..................


----------



## savagemann (Jan 14, 2008)

In case anybody is interested. Here is the average diameter.


----------



## WeLight (Aug 12, 2007)

emu26 said:


> Cutter now has them listed, albeit with errors on the detail page but they are also on Cutter's Taskled Driver page


Ouch fixed, sometimes 
cut and paste just dont work


----------



## P220C (Jan 31, 2011)

In order to save some room and wiring in the housing, it is acceptable to mount a 6mm momentary switch directly to the LFlex board? The leads of the switch fit directly into 'IN-' and 'SWA' and the push button extends out through the housing. 

This would give me switched negative to 'SWA', which I think should allow me to control the board.

Any known issues with this?


----------



## Vancbiker (May 25, 2005)

According to the tech documents it might work. 

The old bflex had the ability to mount the switch on the board. I used it that way on my first MCE light a couple years ago.

edit: read the manual a little further and found that even though IN- and SWB are noted to be "electrically the same" it recommended that they not be mixed. I absolutely can see not wanting to connect the battery - to the SWB as the trace to IN- would be too small for the current. I don't see why there would be a problem with connecting one side of the switch to IN- though if it and SWB are "electrically the same".


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Vancbiker said:


> According to the tech documents it might work.
> 
> The old bflex had the ability to mount the switch on the board. I used it that way on my first MCE light a couple years ago.
> 
> edit: read the manual a little further and found that even though IN- and SWB are noted to be "electrically the same" it recommended that they not be mixed. I absolutely can see not wanting to connect the battery - to the SWB as the trace to IN- would be too small for the current. I don't see why there would be a problem with connecting one side of the switch to IN- though if it and SWB are "electrically the same".


The issue is that even though SWB and IN- are electrically the same, they are the same from an AC perspective. Transient load changes will temporarily 'bounce' one end of a trace to a different level than another end.

At high currents (especially short fast changes), fairly large DC offsets can occur. This short variations in voltage can be seen as a button click. Maxflex in particular due to the higher currents of a boost driver can show problems if the switch ground is NOT connected to SWB.

For LFlex it is less of an issue where the switch is grounded since the current ramps up over many microseconds due to the software current regulation scheme.

I always recommend that the switch connect via SWB since it is a ground connection that is made close to the uC and away from large current paths.

Anyhow, one can try to wire the switch ground side to IN- and see if it works well for you, no risk of damage is present, it will just either work 100% or somewhat less than 100%...

cheers,
george.


----------



## P220C (Jan 31, 2011)

This board is a definite winner, in my book. 

Mine's wired up, and cozy (read, very cozy) in it's tight little space within the housing of my light. 

Odd as it may sound, I am most impressed with the L1 (50 mA) setting. There is no visible PWM at all. Just a perfectly dimmed light. Bravo! I know most folks here aren't going to use their bike light as a reading or tent night light, but a full pack would run nearly 58 hours in a pinch. It's a nice amount of light to have if you are working on a repair.

The lFlex functions flawlessly. The programming is well thought out, and the temperature protection works great. Granted, in my setup, I only get to use high for one minute before it's throttled back, but it's nice to have this option for a quick look down the road. 

I noticed one nuance in the hardware that doesn't negatively impact it's use; for instance, the L1 setting draws exactly 50.0 mA when everything is cool, but if the lFlex and emitter is ~50C, L1 draws 65 to 70 mA. I assume this is the simple result of the emitter and MOSFET being less resistive at the elevated temperatures. Again, I don't view this as a negative issue at all, but rather a simple nuance of the hardware. Especially since the difference is not visible to the eye. 

I'm going to play with it in multi-mode for a while, and see what setting I use most. I expect that I will settle at 2,500 mA high (short bursts of use only), 1,100 mA medium, and 50 mA low. The 2,500 setup gives me just the right drop after thermal protection kicks in, so I get good visibility, and the housing starts to cool. 

My only 'gripe' is that I can't use 3,000 mA as high, since I need the thermal protection to drop to the level provided in the 2,500 mA setup. I'm an atypical use-case, since I'm using the high setting in short bursts. Thermal regulation occurs in the same time frame (~1:00) whether using 3.0 A or 2.5A, so I'd just as soon have that little extra 'oomph.' I do not view this as a negative issue.

Part of me wishes I had not used this board, because I like the interface so much that I want to make more lights with an lFlex in it. 

Thank you, George, for the good work.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Glad to hear you're happy with the lflex.

The slight variation is regulated current at the low end is to be expected as the board changes temperature. The reference that is used by the a/d that senses output current is a little temperature dependent. Also, resistors etc have temp coefficients.

Current regulation is performed in software and there is a 'dead band' to prevent sudden changes along with a dithering algorithm. So, depending on the temp coefficients of components/references and how they interact with the dead band, you could have a different output current at different times that is a larger percentage step at the very low levels.

At 50mA the voltage sensed across the sense resistor is VERY small. I'm using a 0.015 ohm sense resistor, so 0.05A x 0.015 ohm = 0.00075V (less than 1 millivolt). A shift of just fractions of a millivolt will affect output current by a large percentage at the low end.

Anyhow, just some behind the scenes explanation of the output current variation you're seeing at low versus high temperature. You'll also see it at the same temperatures - just due to the dead banding. As you say, it doesn't impact actual operation and without having a meter connected at all time, you wouldn't even be aware of it 

If you like the interface, then you should like all the other flex drivers - it's all the same user interface...

cheers,
george.


----------



## Ofroad'bent (Jul 10, 2010)

Would it be possible to use a backup 3V battery pack made up of some alkaline D-cells with an L-flex?

I know the voltage cut-off would have to be reduced below 3.0, but can this be set at a level to allow alkaline battery use without damaging protected lithium cells if they get down to this level?

I have friends who would like to use alkaline D-cells for backup and inexpensive long burn time, but I'm afraid to have them re-program the L-flex.

Thanks!


----------



## P220C (Jan 31, 2011)

Don't alkaline batteries dip down to 1.2v under load? I know that I've always had to run 3+ alkaline to get full power out of an LED, but those were slightly higher Vf LEDs (3.3V). I only get L1 and L2 around 3V with Li-Ions. Would be interesting to see if the current capacity of the alkaline batts at that low of a voltage can make up the difference.


----------



## siven (Nov 4, 2009)

if you can run 2series li ion cells over 2 xmls you burn of more energy in the driver then with 3 alkaline cells in series over one xml so it shouldnt be a problem should it?


----------



## Ofroad'bent (Jul 10, 2010)

OK, how about a 3XAA holder as a backup? I was going to suggest lithium primaries, but I think they run pretty close to 1.5v.


----------



## P220C (Jan 31, 2011)

3x AA makes alot of sense as a backup based on the weight savings, plus you can find them at a corner store if need be.


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

George is there any limitations on wire length from the board to the momantay switch?
I know there is on the hipflex, so wondered if the same rules applied?

Thanks


----------



## Andy13 (Nov 21, 2006)

another back up battery question. What about NiMh cells? 1.2v so 3x = 3.6v, 4x = 4.8v. Wouldn't they have a better discharge curve than alkalines? or does this not matter w/ the Lflex? I am in need of 6 hours of light for a race and don't want to buy another li-ion pack just for the race. Thanks in advance.


----------



## scar (Jun 2, 2005)

Looks like George may be out. His website says he is not shipping anything from April 9th -April 18th

***


----------



## rschultz101 (Oct 5, 2009)

wanted, small boost driver, 25mm diam 10mm high , or less

thanks to georges80, one more driver for the DIY!

dabbling with the idea, to design a driver !?
biggest stumbling block, to get a dimming circuit ?!
and I'am not a programmer .
usually , there is not enough room, to put a separate dimmer in.
any hints, alternatives ?


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

rschultz101 said:


> wanted, small boost driver, 25mm diam 10mm high , or less
> 
> thanks to georges80, one more driver for the DIY!
> 
> ...


Maxflex? 5 levels via mom switch.


----------



## rschultz101 (Oct 5, 2009)

thanks !
had my head, to deep in the hyperboost,... did not see the maxflex .

quabble:
wish there was a little picture showing all those drivers,
and there size listed underneath ,... after 10 min,
your head starts spinning with all those technical terms,...
would be actually nice, to have a 3D model of it ,...


Toaster79 said:


> Maxflex? 5 levels via mom switch.


----------



## znomit (Dec 27, 2007)

Just a little bump here.
Did anyone else not see the XM-L EasyWhite?
Its a quad die XML package available as either 4s(12V) or 2s2p(6V).

2s2p ideal for driving off MS batteries. 2A max and bins up to U4 (over 700lm @ 2A). 

Binning is now at a realistic 85C(represents around a 15% jump over 25C binning). :thumbsup:


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

I make that about 735 lumens for the 6v @ 2amps..
I was hoping that each die was putting out 350 lumens, then we would have some competition for the SST-50


----------



## mfj197 (Jan 28, 2011)

Certainly hadn't seen that - good find znomit! The 12V one only needs a 1A driver too (small). Should this be in the XM-L thread, or even in its own?
Shame it isn't specced for driving harder!


----------



## rschultz101 (Oct 5, 2009)

George, cudos for 20mm size.
still don't like linear regulators .
what makes it neat, is if you have room for 3 x 20mm star,
you can opt, to use 1 spot for the driver.
have to revisit my housing options.
Think, this will cover a lot's of designs, 1-3 LED's,...
and I wan't 3D cad files from those drivers,.... buzz, buzz, anybody home ?
cheers, Rob


----------



## arnea (Feb 21, 2010)

*Current levels for L2, L3 and L4?*

What are the current levels for L2, L3 and L4? I found that L1 is always 50mA and L5 is the max level, configured via menu. But what about the others?

Arne


----------



## mattthemuppet (Jul 16, 2004)

A rough rule of thumb is that the power halves with each lower level. So if L5=3A, L4=~1.5A, 
L3=~0.75A and L2=~0.3A. Those are very very rough figures (I'm pretty sure L4=1.7A) and the real ones were posted up on this forum _somewhere, but it's something to work off.

I find that there's a noticeable difference between L4 and L5 with one [email protected], less so with 2. The difference with 2 LEDs and L5=1.2A is more noticeable though._


----------



## arnea (Feb 21, 2010)

*Problem with setting the voltages*

I found a problem when setting the cut-off, low and medium voltages. The built in values seem to work, but when I tried to change them, the input was processed incorrectly.

I set my cut-off voltage to 2.9V and it was never triggered. Battery went down to 2.4V (unloaded, measured after disconnection) before I noticed it. I also set all other voltages and I did not get any notification. And yes, I set the voltage warning status to 30 seconds.

I reset the configuration and the warnings and cutoff worked as described.

I recharged the battery, manually entered 3.2V to low level warning and retested. I did not get the warning.

I made some trial and error testing and found out that in order to get the warning out of the battery that was below 3.2V I had to enter the value 055. It means 5.5V.

So watch out when you change the voltage values - you might toast your battery.

Arne


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

A bug is present in lFlex drivers shipped prior to July 22, 2011. Shipments on and after that date have corrected firmware.

The firmware bug can be worked around and only affects people that want to enter their own voltages in via Menu 6, 7 and 8. i.e. if you are using a single li-ion cell and are happy with the default values, then the voltage monitoring will work correctly.

Basically, you need to scale the value you enter into Menu 6,7 and 8 as follows.

1) Choose the voltage you want to enter, let's assume 6.4V for this example.
2) Calculate the scaled value as 6.4 x (700 / 403) = 11.1
3) Enter 11.1 into the menu (instead of 6.4).

If you choose to return your driver for updating, the corrected firmware can be flashed into the driver.

Sorry for the inconvenience. I had forgotten to update the manual entry scaling factors for the lflex version - so they inherited the old nflex scaling factor, which is obviously not correct for the lflex.

cheers,
george.


----------



## Ofroad'bent (Jul 10, 2010)

georges80 said:


> A bug is present in lFlex drivers shipped prior to July 22, 2011. Shipments on and after that date have corrected firmware.
> 
> The firmware bug can be worked around and only affects people that want to enter their own voltages in via Menu 6, 7 and 8. i.e. if you are using a single li-ion cell and are happy with the default values, then the voltage monitoring will work correctly.
> 
> ...


George, not to be dense here, but if I'm running a 2-cell pack in paralell (1S2P) would the default voltage cut-off and other settings be sufficient? Can you remind us what menu items 6,7 and 8 are?

I assume you'd need the boards completely de-soldered to update the firmware, no?


----------



## Toaster79 (Apr 5, 2010)

Ofroad'bent said:


> I assume you'd need the boards completely de-soldered to update the firmware, no?


I doubt. There are some "not to be touched" connections on the board, so I think the board could be programmed without dissassembling it.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

Batteries in parallel still have the same voltage, so 2 li-ion in parallel will appear as 1 li-ion from a voltage perspective. This means the default voltage settings that lflex ships with will be just fine.

To reprogram the firmware I need access to the back of the board - that's where the various programming pads are. Soldered wires could be left in place since the programming jig uses spring loaded pins that can deal with some of the pads having solder/wires in them.

BUT, as long as you use the scaling factor I supplied above, the voltage sensing will work correctly. I personally wouldn't bother sending a driver back to be reprogrammed, since the bug has an easy work around and it's not like you would be changing voltage levels all the time.... i.e. the bug is a one time inconvenience that can be worked around and after that you never need to access that part of the menu again.

cheers,
george.


----------



## Ofroad'bent (Jul 10, 2010)

georges80 said:


> Batteries in parallel still have the same voltage, so 2 li-ion in parallel will appear as 1 li-ion from a voltage perspective. This means the default voltage settings that lflex ships with will be just fine.
> 
> cheers,
> george.


George, it would probably benefit all of us if you'd post the default settings. 
For those who don't have the 27 page manual memorized  here are the voltage setting modes:

5 Clicks- Voltage Warning Status 
Six Clicks - Voltage Cut Off Setting 
→ Cutoff (driver will turn off) - shipping default 
Seven Clicks - Voltage Warning Low Setting (Default?)
Eight Clicks - Voltage Warning Medium Setting (Default?)


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

georges80 said:


> A bug is present in lFlex drivers shipped prior to July 22, 2011. Shipments on and after that date have corrected firmware.
> 
> The firmware bug can be worked around and only affects people that want to enter their own voltages in via Menu 6, 7 and 8. i.e. if you are using a single li-ion cell and are happy with the default values, then the voltage monitoring will work correctly.
> 
> ...


Hi George, (or welight if you see this)

I have just ordered a couple of LFlex V1.0 from Cutters, that's all they have listed, and I notice on your site that you have a V2.0 released in April. From this and the above, is it correct to assume that the ones I get from Cutters will have the bug present and I will need to do the scaling when I program in my voltages? I am planning on doing a 2 XML build driven from a 7.4v Li-Po battery.

Thanks


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

All V1.0 boards will have the firmware bug. The bug was fixed after V2.0 was released. V2.0 drivers shipped AFTER 22nd of the July 2011 do NOT have the voltage scaling bug.

cheers,
george.


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

Thanks George.

So just to confirm that what ever voltage I want to enter, I'll be using a 2S pack with 2 LEDs, I simply multiply that voltage by (700 / 403).

What are the differences between V1 and V2? I had a feeling I had read it here somewhere but can't seem to find it anywhere.

Thanks again


----------



## Magnum9 (Jun 8, 2011)

Cutters website is out of date, they are stocking v2, I got some a couple of weeks ago. I don't know if they are post July versions though.


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

Thanks Magnum9, that could be a costly mistake to program in the wrong value.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

emu26 said:


> Thanks George.
> 
> So just to confirm that what ever voltage I want to enter, I'll be using a 2S pack with 2 LEDs, I simply multiply that voltage by (700 / 403).
> 
> ...


Yes, if you are using lflex with the firmware bug, you scale the voltage you enter by the factor above. There is no hardware component difference between the V1 and V2 boards. All that changed was some minor tweaks to the ground plane cuts and thermal path for the power FET - i.e. just minor performance improvements.

To verify whether you have the new firmware you can try to enter 20.0V into say the medium voltage warning menu. If it does the 5 flash (error message) then you have the new firmware. If it accepts the 20.0V entered value, then it is the older (with scaling bug) firmware and you will need to enter the value in after manually scaling.

cheers,
george.


----------



## Magnum9 (Jun 8, 2011)

Just checked mine (v2.0 from Cutter) and they accepted 20.0 volts so must be old firmware still.


----------



## emu26 (Jun 23, 2008)

when did you get it?


----------



## Magnum9 (Jun 8, 2011)

Around 4 Weeks ago, the bug is no big deal though, just set the voltage cutoff as if the bug is present - if it is newer firmware your light will just turn off straight away.


----------



## toysareforboys (Feb 3, 2012)

Hey George. I am unable to PM you due to my low post count so I will just post my question here 

I am just getting into modding flashlights and am looking for a 20mm driver for my XML that can do 3 amps. It would be great if it has a super low low, like 5-10ma or so, medium and high. If it doesn't have mode memory, it would need to start in high mode.

Do you think your LFlex would work well in my flashlight host (Keygos M12). Pics here: likestuff.globat.com/FlashlightStuff/]Index of /FlashlightStuff

You can see the back of the pill here: likestuff.globat.com/FlashlightStuff/LensSize_L.jpg

If you think it'd be a good fit let me know how to purchase one from you 

-Jamie M.


----------



## [jsl] (Sep 20, 2007)

Jamie, have you checked taskled.com yet?


----------



## bikerjay (Sep 16, 2007)

Any one know the height of the mounting tape + Lflex. I am hoping I can shoe horn a Lflex and a Hall sw into the back of a easy2led housing. Its a very tight space. I dont think I will need to mount the hall sw to a thermal path since it will really only see the current present at swa/swb which should be very small. In case George sees this before I E-mail him I am also wondering how tall the hall sw is.


----------



## georges80 (Jan 5, 2010)

bikerjay said:


> Any one know the height of the mounting tape + Lflex. I am hoping I can shoe horn a Lflex and a Hall sw into the back of a easy2led housing. Its a very tight space. I dont think I will need to mount the hall sw to a thermal path since it will really only see the current present at swa/swb which should be very small. In case George sees this before I E-mail him I am also wondering how tall the hall sw is.


Thickness info for the lflex & hall boards has been updated in their product description sections on my website. Basically 0.115" max for the hall boards and 0.120" max for the lflex.

Thermal pad thickness info is also documented in the tech section. It is nominally 0.011" thick.

cheers,
george.


----------

