Repairing a TV remote control - new LED

Apart from cleaning my TV remote control (see other thread) I would like to put in a more powerful infrared LED

The remote control is about 10 to 15 years old. The spec is below. Note that I am in the UK.

I would guess I can get an LED nowadays which draws the same power as the orignal LED but with a noticeably better light output.

Q. What is the spec of the infrared LED I need to get? Here is one LED I came across. Is it ok?

formatting link
And here is a list of half a dozen other infrared diodes which I can get relatively easily:
formatting link

Q. Maybe I can put in a LED which actually draws a bit more power than the original one?

Q. Is the way to do it to put two LEDS in parallel?

COuld anyone kindly advise me. Thanks.

Zak

-------------- SPEC OF REMOTE CONTROL ------------

UK Sony television.

Remote control model is: Sony RM-657 3 volts Is original remote control

On circut board it says: 1-598-168-12 1-623-978-12 RC

RCW K PEI 208 02 K PEI 207 02.

Single chip on circuit board: BU3870F 033 079

For Sony TV model: KV-M19TU BE-1 chassis

Remote control Sony RM-694 also works on this TV but is not the original one.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Reply to
Zak
Loading thread data ...

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 14:31:12 GMT, Zak Gave us:

It is more complicated than that. It is designed for the one it has AND is likely not going to feed more power to a different one without adjusting the circuitry.

Not really how it works. The improvements made on some products, or components are only in the lifespan arena. Also, the circuit would likely have to push more.

I don't recommend the change, so I will stop here.

snip remainder.

Reply to
Roy L. Fuchs

Why not just try another new remote. May work better. You could try using the new LED. If it does not work, go backwards. Most new stuff has higher energy than the old stuff. Adding LEDs has 2 problems. Current capacity of the driver, and voltage drops.

greg

Reply to
GregS

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:07:16 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@pitt.edu (GregS) Gave us:

new

That would be the other point. How much is one's time worth? Buy the new $15 remote, and fix that one casually or just pitch it... :-]

Reply to
Roy L. Fuchs

Why not? There may indeed be LEDs with the same wavelength and much more output power at the same operating current.

But, probably not needed if the rest of the remote is working properly.

--- sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ:

formatting link
Repair | Main Table of Contents:
formatting link

+Lasers | Sam's Laser FAQ:
formatting link
| Mirror Sites:
formatting link

Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is ignored unless my full name AND either lasers or electronics is included in the subject line. Or, you can contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs.

Reply to
Sam Goldwasser

possible - but...

The most problematic case is where the handset uses two cells in series and you try to use Nicads which only provide 1.2Volts each instead of 1.5volts. This leaves the circuit short of voltage and the only solution is to use Alkalines to give the circuits their correct supply.

You can assess the brightness of the LED by observing it in the LCD viewfinder of a digital camera. HTH

--
Graham W   http://www.gcw.org.uk/ PGM-FI page updated, Graphics Tutorial
WIMBORNE   http://www.wessex-astro-society.freeserve.co.uk/ Wessex
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Graham W

If the OP finds an LED with a lower voltage drop than the original, then it will most assuredly have more current flowing thru it with no changes to the rest of the circuitry.

Hardly. LEDs are MUCH more efficient than they were 15 years ago. Not to mention that the LED in the remote may be below 50% of its original brightness due to being driven hard.

Good for you.

Reply to
Anthony Fremont

"Zak" schreef in bericht news:Xns976B93B4FCB264A18E@66.250.146.159...

HI,

Buy a cheap universal remote control (for Euro 3,- available at local drugstores over here )

Try if it works with your Sony equipment (at my place it works with all Sony equipment I have)

Be satisfied with this remote, or disassemble the remote control, steal the LED and use it in your original remote control.

Kind regards, Ben

Reply to
Ben

On 15 Feb 2006 11:31:29 -0500, Sam Goldwasser Gave us:

I see no reason for your assertion to be incorrect.

However I also see no reason for there to have been such "great strides" in said diode manufacturing efficiency such that it would be the case *at the same current*. Were it a transistor or FET perhaps, but a simple single junction device hasn't changed much. No?

Reply to
Roy L. Fuchs

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 17:46:25 GMT, "Anthony Fremont" Gave us:

The current fed to LEDs is typically controlled and limited for a reason. There is no reason for you to be correct if said circuit is one such regulated circuit.

Also, single junction diodes such as that discussed here have changed very little over the DECADES. The junction threshold voltage hasn't changed much at all. Do you have any examples?

Reply to
Roy L. Fuchs

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 17:46:25 GMT, "Anthony Fremont" Gave us:

They are also being fed more current. DOH!

May be? Do you know ANYTHING about the drive circuitry in question? "Driven hard"? Such remotes are designed to last at least a decade and their MTBF is NOT related to the LED.

Fuck you asshole! You don't get to claim to be diplomatic in one part of a post, then turn into an asshole at will without being called on it. Fuck off!

Reply to
Roy L. Fuchs

then

changes

If the current limiting is done with a resistor, as it often is, then the resistor would be forced to drop more voltage. This means more current thru the resistor and consequently more current thru the diode.

Then please tell me how an LED can now be blindingly bright with 20mA if they aren't more efficient? They're a far cry from the things of yesteryear. Examples abound, traffic lights, tiny flashlights etc....

Reply to
Anthony Fremont

Not necessarily.

original

Usually they die from a cracked resonator or worn keypad, but blown LEDs are not unheard of. It's common knowledge that LEDs driven by excessive currents will dim over time. Here's some info on it:

formatting link

You can change your nym all you want Darkmatter, but you're still the same ole same ole. BTW, I didn't claim to be diplomatic. After all the crap you've thrown at me over the years, I'll likely never be polite to you.

Reply to
Anthony Fremont

Go look at all the varieties of LEDs with essentially the same maximum current but output power all over the map.

In fact, LEDs in general is one of the hottest areas of R&D with efficiency being one of the most important considerations, especially for lighting applications.

I don't know whether the vanilla flavored IR LED has improved greatly though.

--- sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ:

formatting link
Repair | Main Table of Contents:
formatting link

+Lasers | Sam's Laser FAQ:
formatting link
| Mirror Sites:
formatting link

Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is ignored unless my full name AND either lasers or electronics is included in the subject line. Or, you can contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs.

Reply to
Sam Goldwasser

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 23:30:19 GMT, "Anthony Fremont" Gave us:

The discussion is about NON visible spectrum LEDs and no, IR remotes do NOT "typically use a resistor" for the current limiting, it is a controlled, driven circuit.

There has been no reason for IR LED makers to make versions that are like those of the visible spectrum arena, which is far more diverse, and has far more applications being addressed. That is why "high brightness" versions even ever came to be. It called demand. There has been no demand for making communications IR LEDs any more powerful than they are, though I am sure some are out there, one poster mentions buying an entire new unit and pulling the LED from it. It would likely be cheaper than digging one up somewhere.

How much is one's time worth?

Reply to
Roy L. Fuchs

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 23:35:55 GMT, "Anthony Fremont" Gave us:

As are you... you are the same old RETARD.

Hahahaha...

I was merely trying to put the shit where it belongs... on the shitpile.

Reply to
Roy L. Fuchs

On 15 Feb 2006 18:58:03 -0500, Sam Goldwasser Gave us:

That would be VISIBLE spectrum LEDs.

I don't think there has been much demand. Maybe in the machine vision arena, ie picker placers for PCB assembly contract manufacturing.

Reply to
Roy L. Fuchs

if

etc....

Elaborate on that if you would.

You're a lunatic and I'm quite sure that Vishay thinks so too.

Reply to
Anthony Fremont

You might consider a LED with a narrow beam angle - it concentrates its energy in a narrow(er) spot - like the difference between a spotlight and a floodlight. Of course, you'll have to aim the remote a bit more carefully.

But as others have said, a cheap universal remote is the easiest way to go. Are you try> Apart from cleaning my TV remote control (see other thread) I

Reply to
Bennett Price

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 17:38:21 -0000, "Graham W" Gave us:

Good call!

Reply to
Roy L. Fuchs

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.