New Vero Cob?

S

Shugglet

Well-Known Member
Rahz said:
Agreed, but how do they pull off 120 watts at 161 LPW when they can only pull off 80 watts at 161 LPW in a chip that logically should run cooler and more efficient than it's 120w counterpart?
Click to expand...
Doesnt it have to do with the differences in die patterns? Or is there something inherently more efficient about running more voltage through a COB rather than pumping more current through it? Just spitballin here.
 
Rahz

Rahz

Well-Known Member
Could be die pattern, but I'm skeptical of the numbers. If they have a die pattern that gives them 161 LPW at 120 watts then I would expect better performance in the 80 watt version unless they are saving a buck using old technology in the lower wattage chips. It's a mystery that needs to be tested.
 
JorgeGonzales

JorgeGonzales

Well-Known Member
Rahz said:
Agreed, but how do they pull off 120 watts at 161 LPW when they can only pull off 80 watts at 161 LPW in a chip that logically should run cooler and more efficient than it's 120w counterpart?
Click to expand...
If I understand you correctly, isnt the answer simply "more leds run at less current in the same LES size"?
 
S

Shugglet

Well-Known Member
Rahz said:
Could be die pattern, but I'm skeptical of the numbers. If they have a die pattern that gives them 161 LPW at 120 watts then I would expect better performance in the 80 watt version unless they are saving a buck using old technology in the lower wattage chips. It's a mystery that needs to be tested.
Click to expand...
Youre referring to the different voltage versions, not wattage. Correct? Also, maybe the pattern is designed to run at a higher voltage wont necessarily work as well in a lower voltage situation. The fact is ~70v+ COBs really limit the available driver opportunities compared to even the ~50v version. Efficiency trade off for having a much wider array of available drivers.
 
Rahz

Rahz

Well-Known Member
JorgeGonzales said:
If I understand you correctly, isnt the answer simply "more leds run at less current in the same LES size"?
Click to expand...
Shugglet said:
Youre referring to the different voltage versions, not wattage. Correct?
Click to expand...
Sure, voltage and current are different, but that doesn't change the fact that one is using 150% the power of the other. It doesn't make sense especially when you consider the LPW for both is exactly 161. I want to see some spot testing to confirm the numbers.
 
JorgeGonzales

JorgeGonzales

Well-Known Member
Rahz said:
Sure, voltage and current are different, but that doesn't change the fact that one is using 150% the power of the other. It doesn't make sense especially when you consider the LPW for both is exactly 161. I want to see some spot testing to confirm the numbers.
Click to expand...
There are some obvious mistakes in the data sheet, but that would be a doozy.
 
robincnn

robincnn

Well-Known Member
The Gen 6 vero has bigger diodes and not as many. was easier to count. I cannot count on the new veros. Dies are much smaller and more.

The 52v version has longer straight led to led connections.
The 37v vero has long straight led to led connections in center but has more zig-zag led to led connections.

37V is more like honeycomb
upload_2016-9-1_17-7-18.png

52 more like
upload_2016-9-1_17-7-33.png
I think the straight led arrangement and less zig-zag connections in 52V allow it to pack more diodes than the 37V Vero.
That is why the 52V has same lm/w as 37V
upload_2016-9-1_17-20-11.png

Will try out the 70V version too. I am curious to see how the leds are packed

@Rahz @JorgeGonzales
upload_2016-9-1_17-1-34.png


Anyone wants to count
o_O

upload_2016-9-1_17-16-20.png

upload_2016-9-1_17-16-49.png
 
Stephenj37826

Stephenj37826

Well-Known Member
robincnn said:
The Gen 6 vero has bigger diodes and not as many. was easier to count. I cannot count on the new veros. Dies are much smaller and more.

The 52v version has longer straight led to led connections.
The 37v vero has long straight led to led connections in center but has more zig-zag led to led connections.

37V is more like honeycomb
View attachment 3770810

52 more like
View attachment 3770811
I think the straight led arrangement and less zig-zag connections in 52V allow it to pack more diodes than the 37V Vero.
That is why the 52V has same lm/w as 37V
View attachment 3770817

Will try out the 70V version too. I am curious to see how the leds are packed

@Rahz @JorgeGonzales
View attachment 3770805


Anyone wants to count
o_O

View attachment 3770814

View attachment 3770815
Click to expand...
I came up with 472,324.275. Should I recount?
 
guod

guod

Well-Known Member
Rahz said:
Agreed, but how do they pull off 120 watts at 161 LPW when they can only pull off 80 watts at 161 LPW in a chip that logically should run cooler and more efficient than it's 120w counterpart?
Click to expand...
lm/W is set by the single die on the COB, and in the Datasheet the Temperature is fixed (25°C / 85°C)
 
PicklesRus

PicklesRus

Well-Known Member
Hey I'm going to sound like a total noob by asking this, (I promise it's related to all of this) but I'm looking at some Vero 13 Gen7 cobs and I'm trying to figure out how much heatsink I need.

I went through the old posts to figure out how to calculate efficiency and I am at the point of extracting the numbers from the SPD graph and saw some of those comments here. That is a little over my head - at this point I kind of just want to run these passively and don't want to buy too much heatsink if it's unnecessary.

http://www.futureelectronics.com/en/Technologies/Product.aspx?ProductID=BXRC35E2000D73BRIDGELUX4073511&IM=0

Can someone point me back on track please?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top