blinded by light

On 9/30/2019 2:20 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 09:02:05 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Interesting post!
- Frank Krygowski

Y'er welcome. Some more reading of interest. Like I said, this is
nothing new and has been demonstrated that it works repeatedly. The
problem is dealing with upgrading millions of existing headlights. The
best that can be done is use them on new cars.

More generally, the problem of headlight (etc.) glare could be addressed
in other ways. One would be to mandate that all headlights be mounted at
more or less the same height. Here I'm speaking about pickup trucks,
SUVs and other commercial trucks that put headlights at double or more
the height of car headlights. Those put car driver's eyes in the hot
part of the beam.

Another strategy would be to apply the same cutoff standards to all
auxiliary driving lights. I've seen ones that appear to be factory
original but glare almost as much as high beam headlights. And of
course, there's the idiot pickup-driving contingent that goes out of its
way to buy MFFY lights of all descriptions. Make it so they can't
(easily) buy blinding lights just for fun.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 9/30/2019 2:32 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 09:25:24 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

It's not clear to me how Adaptive Beams will work. Cresting hills and rounding
curves, it takes a bit of intelligence and foresight to dim high beams before
they blind someone. I watch for early signs, such as reflections off roadside
telephone lines. I doubt these systems will do that.

I saw a patent that uses a camera to detect the horizontal line made
between the background and the roadway. The algorithm was quite
complexicated. I don't think that's going to fly. What makes more
sense is attaching the headlight elevation control to a GPS mapping
system that includes the tilt angle of the roadway. For most major
roads in the USA, the road is quite flat and the database would be
fairly small. Maybe convince Google Maps and similar mapping services
to measure the road angle and add it to their database. Connect the
GPS mapping thing to an elevation servo and you have a headlight that
is always aimed at the roadway ahead. Eventually, the technology
would trickle down to bicycle headlights, but the big need and market
is for automobiles. Of course, be sure to wave the "safety first"
flag when mentioning the idea. How many head on collisions caused by
headlight blinded drivers would the technology save?

I also doubt these systems will prevent blinding of oncoming bicyclists.

It so happens that last night, I was driving home through rural Ohio on
a very scenic road - hilly and curvy - that passed through an Amish area.

We passed a fair number of horse-drawn buggies, plus some Amish riding
bicycles. Eventually, I was driving in full darkness, and for the first
time in a long time I was passed Amish buggies after dark.

The lighting systems they were using were much, much brighter and more
conspicuous than what I remember. At least in this area, some had yellow
flashing safety beacons on the buggy roof. There were also multiple red
blinking taillights. And from the front, at a distance the headlights
looked just like car headlights. Only a much wider spacing was a visual
clue that it was a buggy and not a car.

The few bikes we passed after dark were also nicely lit, but nothing as
extreme as the buggies. All I noticed were headlights of adequate
brightness and ordinary-looking taillights.

The last time I was in that particular area (Holmes County, Ohio) was
maybe 20 years ago. I remember stopping in an Amish bike shop and
finding a good selection of generators, plus replacement bulbs of every
conceivable type.

But Amish rules, customs and practices vary a lot from parish to parish.
I recall reading about one area where the Amish fought against a
requirement to install a standard "slow moving vehicle" triangle on the
back of their buggies. To them, it smacked of a lack of modesty.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Monday, September 30, 2019 at 8:43:46 AM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:


If you're looking for additional failure modes, using IPS LCD displays
in automobile dashboard displays, tablets, and smartphones are big
problems. My Google Nexus 7 (2013) tablet goes black if I wear
polarizing (anti-glare) glasses:

I had a cell phone that did that, but only when I rotated the screen for 'landscape' orientation (example of polarization in action). Also, my old Polar 720 HRM (yes, I'm still using it) washes out with polarized glasses, I can make it out, but just barely.

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 05:43:37 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 13:15:35 +0700, John B.
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 20:57:39 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 06:13:05 +0700, John B.
wrote:

And, I might add, eliminate the complaints of "lights in my eyes".

There's a better and easier way that has been proposed many times and
rejected every time. Install a horizontally polarizing screen over
all headlights, and require riders, drivers, and pedestrians to wear
vertically polarized glasses, which blocks the horizontally polarized
light from the lights. As an added bonus, the glasses would also
eliminate most forms of glare.

Sounds great.... but what about bright street lamps, light from
buildings. windows, etc., hand held spot lights, flashing directional
lights (red arrow sort of things), warning lamps on obstructions,
lamps at railway crossings, and so on?

How many of those light sources are mounted on vehicles or bicycles?
Probably none.
How many are located in the middle of the road where they might impair
a drivers or riders vision? Probably none.
Street and traffic lights are designed to be usable by drivers wearing
anti-glare polarized glasses.

Are you trying to say that nothing might shine in an individual's eyes
except for something mounted on a vehicle or a bicycle (ignoring for
the moment that a bicycle is classified as a vehicle in most states?

And another point, are bicycles or auto's for that matter now
traveling "in the middle of the road"? I thought that they both
travelled in their lane, noticeably NOT in the middle of the road. :-)

--
cheers,

John B.

On Monday, 30 September 2019 12:30:22 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Monday, September 30, 2019 at 10:11:05 AM UTC-4, duane wrote:
Here lights are required at
night. There's no specification except one white in front and one red
behind.

I think the NHTSA codes and most U.S. state codes say the bike lights must be
visible from 500 feet. It's true that's a pretty vague spec. Visible under what
conditions? Total darkness or surrounded by city glare? And it's high time we
had upper limits, as well.

- Frank Krygowski

Visible under all conditions. Thus it'd be both total darkness and city glare.

Cheers

On Monday, September 30, 2019 at 7:11:30 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 05:43:37 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

How many of those light sources are mounted on vehicles or bicycles?
Probably none.
How many are located in the middle of the road where they might impair
a drivers or riders vision? Probably none.
Street and traffic lights are designed to be usable by drivers wearing
anti-glare polarized glasses.

Are you trying to say that nothing might shine in an individual's eyes
except for something mounted on a vehicle or a bicycle (ignoring for
the moment that a bicycle is classified as a vehicle in most states?

This is a bit off topic, but: I dislike light pollution in general. Now that
LEDs have made bright light less expensive, I've noticed more houses with
"artistic" lighting and "security" lighting blazing away. I'm aware of two
businesses I drive by from time to time that have parking lot lights about as
bright as aircraft landing lights. But almost every parking lot is fully lit
almost all the time, for no good reason I can see. Many street lamps don't shine
down and out; many instead shine upward as well, because someone liked the
style of a round-ish glass globe.

All these cause light to be reflected up into the sky. In a lot of the U.S. it
takes an hour drive or more - behind bright headlights! - to get to a spot that's
dark enough to be able to see the Milky Way. (I've seen the Milky Way only twice
this year, while on a camping vacation.)

I fondly remember lying on a dark lawn as a teen, gazing at the majestic night
sky and pondering the incredible distances, along with other mysteries of life
(like, for example, girls). I'm afraid few teens get that experience these days.

We need less glaring light, we need less light wasted upward, and we need less
"Danger! Danger!" fear of the dark.

- Frank Krygowski

On 9/30/2019 6:11 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 05:43:37 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 13:15:35 +0700, John B.
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 20:57:39 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 06:13:05 +0700, John B.
wrote:

And, I might add, eliminate the complaints of "lights in my eyes".

There's a better and easier way that has been proposed many times and
rejected every time. Install a horizontally polarizing screen over
all headlights, and require riders, drivers, and pedestrians to wear
vertically polarized glasses, which blocks the horizontally polarized
light from the lights. As an added bonus, the glasses would also
eliminate most forms of glare.

Sounds great.... but what about bright street lamps, light from
buildings. windows, etc., hand held spot lights, flashing directional
lights (red arrow sort of things), warning lamps on obstructions,
lamps at railway crossings, and so on?

How many of those light sources are mounted on vehicles or bicycles?
Probably none.
How many are located in the middle of the road where they might impair
a drivers or riders vision? Probably none.
Street and traffic lights are designed to be usable by drivers wearing
anti-glare polarized glasses.

Are you trying to say that nothing might shine in an individual's eyes
except for something mounted on a vehicle or a bicycle (ignoring for
the moment that a bicycle is classified as a vehicle in most states?

And another point, are bicycles or auto's for that matter now
traveling "in the middle of the road"? I thought that they both
travelled in their lane, noticeably NOT in the middle of the road. :-)

--
cheers,

John B.

In their own lane? Sure from time to time, but annoyingly
often wandering into or across mine.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 06:00:24 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 13:26:05 +0700, John B.
wrote:

The problems with all the modern, marvelous, systems is, "sometimes
they don't work".

True. However, no system works 100% of the time in 100% of all
possible (contrived) situations. A bicycle that is quite suitable for
riding on pavement would probably do badly in dirt, mud, rain, etc.
One has to design for either a specific situation, or as in this case,
the greatest number of reasonable situations, and rely on the
intelligence of the operator to know when to disarm the monster. It
is impossible to design out clueless operators because we continue to
produce better clueless operators.

As the driver who appeared sound asleep in his self driven car
(recently highlighted here) demonstrates , "rely on the
intelligence of the operator" may not be the best path to take.

In fact, as I think Frank will testify, industrial safety is largely
concerned with eliminating "reliance on the intelligence of the
operator" :-)


I remember driving a bloke's Cadillac car with it's
automatic dimming light system. Meet a car with your lights on "high
beam" and the car would automatically switch them to "low beam".
Wonderful, wonderful.

We were driving from Florida to Massachusetts and somewhere in N.
Carolina or thereabouts we hit an area with huge advertising signs.
We'd be happily cruising down the road and hit one of these advert
areas and the head lights would go mad. Down, up, down,up again, down
and every which way except sideways. I can assure you that if you were
feeling a bit sleepy that the light fandango would weak you up.

My fathers 1985(?) Cadillac Seville did that. I thought it was fun
when it happened. My father didn't and turned it off.

Today, we have Adaptive Driving Beam (ADB) headlights, which work
better than previous generations of high/low headlight switchers, but
are still not perfect for every possible situation.
https://www.koito.co.jp/english/technology/koito/system.html
https://www.google.com/search?q=adb+headlights&tbm=isch

"It’s Time to Bring U.S. Headlight Standards Out of the Dark Ages"
https://newsroom.aaa.com/2019/04/research-european-headlight-technology-us-low-beam-safety/
--
cheers,

John B.

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 08:46:26 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Monday, September 30, 2019 at 2:26:09 AM UTC-4, John B. wrote:


We were driving from Florida to Massachusetts and somewhere in N.
Carolina or thereabouts we hit an area with huge advertising signs.
We'd be happily cruising down the road and hit one of these advert
areas and the head lights would go mad. Down, up, down,up again, down
and every which way except sideways. I can assure you that if you were
feeling a bit sleepy that the light fandango would weak you up.

So, it was a "feature" and not a bug!

- Frank Krygowski

"Back in the day" everything that Cadillac did was considered a
feature. Remember the tail fins? Caddy had them first :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 09:30:18 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Monday, September 30, 2019 at 10:11:05 AM UTC-4, duane wrote:
Here lights are required at
night. There's no specification except one white in front and one red
behind.

I think the NHTSA codes and most U.S. state codes say the bike lights must be
visible from 500 feet. It's true that's a pretty vague spec. Visible under what
conditions? Total darkness or surrounded by city glare? And it's high time we
had upper limits, as well.

- Frank Krygowski

Visible from a stated distance is a fairly standard specification.
Marine navigation lights have used this standard for more than a
hundred years.
--
cheers,

John B.