|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
SIX thousand and FIVE hundred lumens !!!!!!!!!!
On Thu, 04 Oct 2018 19:26:11 +0200, Emanuel Berg
wrote: Jeff Liebermann wrote: OK, so FL 1 is the "ANSI FL1 Standard" ("FL" is "flashlight", I take it) and cd is "candela". I suppose one has to read the article [1] to learn what sense to make of the 400cd specification. [1] http://www.led-resource.com/ansi-fl1-standard/ Maybe reading the definitions of candelas, lux, and lumens might help I don't think so I selected basic, short, simple, easy to understand web pages. If you can't, or won't, understand those, there is no hope. It doesn't get much simpler than this: https://www.jwspeaker.com/blog/lighting-terminology/ https://blog.1000bulbs.com/home/whats-the-difference-between-candela-lux-and-lumens https://www.knivesandtools.com/en/ct/torches-lux-candela-lumen.htm There are calculators for converting between these. Be sure to read about "solid angles". OK, I read the two web pages! (There is nothing on solid angles what I could see.) I was in a rush to leave for a service call and add the solid angle note without a link because I assumed that you would search for the term using Google. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=solid+angle You'll need to understand solid angles and steradians if you really want to measure candelas. What *I think* I understood is that LUX: lux is describing how bright the object will be, or how big an area (floor or wall) you can enlight, by pointing the flashlight at it. 1 lux = 1 lumen per square meter. If you have a flashlight that produces 1 lumen, and you illuminate a vertical wall or something similar so that the light spot on the wall is 1 square meter in area, a light meter will display a luminous intensity of 1 lux. LUMEN: lumen is how much light that comes from the light source, only this doesn't take into account if and how the light is obstructed or enforced/directed, e.g. because of the construction of the lamp, what lens there is and where, etc. Yeah, something like that except that you threw in a bunch of irrelevant rubbish. If you take a light source, ANY light source, and capture ALL the light it produces, in any direction, you have lumens. CANDELA: candela takes into account obstructions (various blockings of the light) Wrong. Wrong. Obstructions are not involved in any of the calculations or units of measure. but also the enforcing of it thru a lens. Wrong. No lenses are involved in any of the units of measure. This means that candela is a good unit to determine how far away the light will actually be visible, for example if you waive it to the sea from the beach of a deserted island... Wrong. All these measurements involve visibility in terms of the color sensitivity of the human eye, but have nothing to do with the visitibily of a reflected light (sand or ocean). Candelas uses the solid angle that I previously recommend that you study and includes the color sensitivity curve of the human eye. It would not do for a lamp to be bright at a color that the eye cannot see. The usual choice of color to make this measurement is 555 nanometers or green, which is where the human eye is most sensitive. This is a problem for white LED lights, which produce blue and yellow light, but no green. Same with LED grow lights that produce no green. In general, candelas have little use in bicycle lighting except by marketing to confuse the buyers. Stay with lux and lumens. Candelas are much like lumens, except that candelas are for spot illuminators like flashlights and bicycle lights that produce a spot. Lumens are non-directional, while candelas are directional. For bike applications, it seems for commuting in a well-lit city with traffic, you'd want candela, for MTB you'd want lux, and for touring, you'd want a combination No. Frank explained the basic requirements quite well. All the various specs are compromises. You can have a really bright (high lux) light, but the radiation angle will small and only illuminate a distant spot. You can have a huge number of lumens, but most of the light will be wasted blinding the rider, oncoming traffic, and objects that are not along your riding path. You can have an "focused" light, that will produce a hot spot that will trash your night vision. What you really want is an even light intensity across the area that is illuminated. That's not easy when the road is not flat and you're using a single point source of LED light. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
SIX thousand and FIVE hundred lumens !!!!!!!!!!
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
I selected basic, short, simple, easy to understand web pages. If you can't, or won't, understand those, there is no hope. It doesn't get much simpler than this: https://www.jwspeaker.com/blog/lighting-terminology/ OK, so lux is how bright an object or surface will be if you use the given light source to illuminate the object or surface. Specifically, 1 lux is the amount of light distributed over 1 square meter if you stand 1 meter away with 1 light source of 1 lumen. Lumen is how much light is produced in all directions. It is "measured using a photometric testing device". Candela is how much light is produced in one direction. Specifically, it is the intensity of the light that travels from the light source at 555 nanometers, which is green, and into the human eye. Did I ace it this time? -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
SIX thousand and FIVE hundred lumens !!!!!!!!!!
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
I was in a rush to leave for a service call and add the solid angle note without a link because I assumed that you would search for the term using Google. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=solid+angle Jeff, did you ever considered a career as a teacher? Your class could be called "teach your profession and be frustrated when people don't immediately understand it". -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
SIX thousand and FIVE hundred lumens !!!!!!!!!!
On 2018-10-05 08:33, Radey Shouman wrote:
Joerg writes: On 2018-10-04 18:13, Radey Shouman wrote: Joerg writes: On 2018-10-04 14:43, Radey Shouman wrote: Frank Krygowski writes: On 10/4/2018 2:12 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2018-10-04 10:40, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 10/4/2018 11:02 AM, Joerg wrote: On 2018-10-01 15:14, wrote: http://reviews.mtbr.com/magicshine-l...2018-interbike The beloved Magicshine brings us what we finally need in bike lights. Thanks to all the gods. 6500 lumens! I think you can have either 5000 or 1500 or all 6500 lumens. Thankfully now we will not only be able to blind everyone else on the road or trail, but we can now cause their eyeballs to burst into flames and maybe hopefully their heads will also explode. Yeah!!!!!! This one for their rear light is weird, quote "A sleep mode is triggered after one minute of inaction to save power, any vibration will immediately re-activate the unit". So the light will go out while waiting at an intersection? Really? Nobody raised their hand during the design review? Was there even a design review? First, their definition of "sleep mode" may not be "goes out." It could, I suppose, just become much dimmer. In any case, it would be easy enough to jiggle the bike a bit to turn it back on. Not very smart on the part of the design engineers. But it's probably not necessary. Ohio law specifically permits lights that go out when the bike is stationary, ... Not a smart decision by the lawmakers. ... and there's never been a report of a death or serious injury caused by that feature. Grandpa drove without a seat belt all his life and never go hurt, so ... Grandpa also rode his bicycle without a six foot tall safety flag, a siren, a bell constantly and automatically ringing every time he moved, pads on his knees, pads on his elbows, body armor protecting his spine. Why are you not using all those measures? (Actually, maybe you are. With you, we never know.) BTW, it even happens from the front, even by police officers: https://fox2now.com/2018/07/30/polic...hone-in-video/ Nothing can replace bright light other than even brighter lights. Which both of my bikes have. Joerg, you're the master of the worldwide search for the vanishingly rare exception. That is NOT a common crash type, as any dispassionate search of the literature would shoe. And you have no evidence that your daytime headlight would have prevented it. Looks like the video has been taken down, at least fox2now.com can't find it. Works fine here. Works for me now, no more "video unavailable". ... The accident happened in broad daylight, no vehicles save the cop SUV and the cyclist visible for miles, cyclist waiting at an intersection, I think for a stop sign. Total f*up on the part of the cop, who was more or less apologetic. A daytime running light would not have helped. Not true. I clearly found that drivers notice me much better with bright lights. Even in the corner of their eyes is enough because it "distracts" them in a good way. All it takes is noticing a cyclist a second or two earlier and a collision can be avoided. Seriously? The cop would have looked up from his phone if only the cyclist had had a light? Sounds like magic. Easy to try. While distracted with some chore in your home, have someone walk towards you pointing a bright but not blinding LED flashlight. It works. A human eye is not insensitive in the directions where one does not look, just less sensitive. The "muffling effect" needs to be overcome and intense light is just about the only method to achieve that. This wasn't inside, it was outside in bright daylight, looked like hardly a cloud in the sky. Try this in daylight. It works. ... A really bright light is required to make much difference in that case. Bingo! Now you know why I have bright lights on my bikes. I experienced it again yesterday. I had to ride through city streets for many miles, partially at max speed. With the light fully on nobody cut into my path. Without lights that is different. Other clue: You are driving a car, looking ahead into traffic as you are supposed to do. The dashboard becomes largely unnoticed except for the occasional glance at the speedometer. However, when the yellow check engine light, the red oil pressure light, the overtemp light or the low fuel light comes on it is immediately noticed. Same if someone behind you flashes their headlights even while you aren't looking into the rear view mirror. That only happens if you have the habit, perhaps not completely conscious, of scanning the dashboard. How do you know it's "immediate"? You notice it when you notice it, and if it's 10 seconds after the event that's not a big problem, unlike the case for traffic on the road. If bright enough or if a less bright light in flashing mode I see that immediately. An airline pilot could even lose his license if he didn't. Yet another one: Think about the reason why approaching emergency vehicles have very bright flashing lights. In my world they usually turn on their sirens when approaching busy intersections, especially if they intend to blow the light. When they approach from far up front or behind I am pulled over to the shoulder and stopped before they even get there, as is required by our law. Same for the drivers in front and behind me. The siren is only heard way later and often too late. IMHO if someone only notices an approaching fast police cruiser when they hear the siren they should not have a driver's license. There is a reason why DRL have been mandatory on US motorcycles for a long time. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
SIX thousand and FIVE hundred lumens !!!!!!!!!!
On 2018-10-05 09:51, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, October 5, 2018 at 7:28:43 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote: On 2018-10-04 18:13, Radey Shouman wrote: Joerg writes: On 2018-10-04 14:43, Radey Shouman wrote: [...] ... The accident happened in broad daylight, no vehicles save the cop SUV and the cyclist visible for miles, cyclist waiting at an intersection, I think for a stop sign. Total f*up on the part of the cop, who was more or less apologetic. A daytime running light would not have helped. Not true. I clearly found that drivers notice me much better with bright lights. Even in the corner of their eyes is enough because it "distracts" them in a good way. All it takes is noticing a cyclist a second or two earlier and a collision can be avoided. Seriously? The cop would have looked up from his phone if only the cyclist had had a light? Sounds like magic. Easy to try. While distracted with some chore in your home, have someone walk towards you pointing a bright but not blinding LED flashlight. It works. A human eye is not insensitive in the directions where one does not look, just less sensitive. The "muffling effect" needs to be overcome and intense light is just about the only method to achieve that. Other clue: You are driving a car, looking ahead into traffic as you are supposed to do. The dashboard becomes largely unnoticed except for the occasional glance at the speedometer. However, when the yellow check engine light, the red oil pressure light, the overtemp light or the low fuel light comes on it is immediately noticed. Same if someone behind you flashes their headlights even while you aren't looking into the rear view mirror. Yet another one: Think about the reason why approaching emergency vehicles have very bright flashing lights. Now imagine all of these riders with lights and sirens: https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.ne...png?1428427634 This is the daily commuter traffic into downtown. Now put all those people on the two-way cycle track on my way into work. https://bikeportland.org/wp-content/...ansit-bend.jpg Now live with that. As I've written several times, bright lights are not needed on bike paths. I turn them off there during the day. They are also not needed when there are lots of cyclists (safety in numbers). It's different out here, this is not Portland, Amsterdam or Copenhagen. Solid white lights in bright sunshine are almost universally irrelevant and annoying to other cyclists and drivers. No, they are not. Why do you think motorcycles have mandatory DRL? Just for fun? ... I see jerseys and body shape long before I register the light. That is totally contrary to my experience and that of just about anyone I know. ... And BTW, having driven ambulance for six years, I spent plenty of time sitting behind cars with my deafening Federal Q2B pegged before the dopey driver turned down the music and realized I was sitting there -- and then he freaks out, hits the gas, goes into the intersection and gets whacked. It can be a sh** show. Whatever giant light, siren, calliope, marching band you claim will save your life can only make a marginal improvement and proving that margin is hard if not impossible, and a blinding light can cause accidents or at least upset. That driver shouldn't have a license. What will really reduce accidents is being a good rider and knowing how to ride in traffic and with entering or exiting traffic. That's the problem. A lot of car drivers do not fall into that category and that is beyond my influence. What I can influence is how my ship is lit, so I do that. ... A DRL may help, but it is certainly not magical and is irrelevant in many situations. Lights are critical at night, obviously -- but mega lights are totally unnecessary on city streets in dry weather. What is "enough" at night varies depending on terrain, conditions, etc., but whatever is enough, it can't be blinding people. Again, my experience is very much contrary to that. And my experience seems to jibe with what national safety boards have found out about motorcycle lighting. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
SIX thousand and FIVE hundred lumens !!!!!!!!!!
On 2018-10-05 08:48, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/5/2018 10:32 AM, Joerg wrote: On 2018-10-04 20:34, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 10/4/2018 3:34 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2018-10-04 12:18, jbeattie wrote: It takes very little light to be conspicuous at night, and it takes no additional light to be conspicuous during the day -- assuming broad daylight without cloud cover or other low-light condition. My experience is clearly different. Your experiences are almost always unique, not just different. Yet strangely, it jibes with that of our government folks. Why do you think they mandate DRL on motorcycles? Joerg, you're arguing against yourself (again)! Please note, the government does NOT mandate daytime running lights on bicycles! They do on motorcycles, they don't care much about cyclists as we all know. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
SIX thousand and FIVE hundred lumens !!!!!!!!!!
On 2018-10-05 09:21, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, October 5, 2018 at 7:31:57 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote: On 2018-10-04 20:34, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 10/4/2018 3:34 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2018-10-04 12:18, jbeattie wrote: It takes very little light to be conspicuous at night, and it takes no additional light to be conspicuous during the day -- assuming broad daylight without cloud cover or other low-light condition. My experience is clearly different. Your experiences are almost always unique, not just different. Yet strangely, it jibes with that of our government folks. Why do you think they mandate DRL on motorcycles? And yet motorcycles are the one category of MVs in Oregon with increasing fatality rates. e.g. http://www.eastoregonian.com/eo/loca...king-this-year You of all people, having been an amulance driver, should know the reason. The reason is this behavior: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkWWVryT1UE That is the road where I was almost clipped by a motorcyclist. He didn't anticipate that there could be a mountain bike in a right turn, hugged the curve at high speed and ... "GAAAH!". I heard his engine screaming but didn't have anywhere to go because of a wall of rock to my right. He needed the full oncoming lane to get the situation somewhat under control. Imagine what would have happened if there'd been oncoming traffic. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
SIX thousand and FIVE hundred lumens !!!!!!!!!!
On 10/6/2018 11:11 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-10-05 09:51, jbeattie wrote: Â*Â*Â* ... I see jerseys and body shape long before I register the light. That is totally contrary to my experience and that of just about anyone I know. I _very_ much doubt you have examined this impartially. I've done thousands of miles of driving SAG for invitational bike rides. I've observed tens of thousands of cyclists. In all but a microscopic percentage of cases, the cyclist has been visible before a daytime light is visible. Since this popped up as the newest "Danger! Danger!" craze a few years ago, I've been observing cyclists on the road. I can recall only one time that I saw the light before I saw the daytime cyclist, and that was a case of an illegal light. A woman cyclist was riding a two-lane highway and she had some mega-bright white headlight facing backwards. It _was_ bright enough to be very, very irritating if not blinding. And it was illegal because white lights to the rear are forbidden in this state, except for "back up lights." In every other case, it's been "There's a cyclist." And later "Oh, and he's got a light on his bike." And in that woman's case and every other case I've observed, daytime lights have NOT been significant in preventing a crash or a near miss. Why on earth does someone riding a two lane highway with no intersections think they have to have a white light facing forward? It's a paranoia. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
SIX thousand and FIVE hundred lumens !!!!!!!!!!
On 10/5/2018 6:38 PM, wrote:
On Friday, October 5, 2018 at 11:22:00 AM UTC-5, jbeattie wrote: On Friday, October 5, 2018 at 7:31:57 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote: Yet strangely, it jibes with that of our government folks. Why do you think they mandate DRL on motorcycles? And yet motorcycles are the one category of MVs in Oregon with increasing fatality rates. e.g. http://www.eastoregonian.com/eo/loca...king-this-year -- Jay Beattie. But are increasing motorcycle fatalities due to 1. Motorcycles just being more dangerous, smaller, harder to see, or 2. Stupid, careless, reckless drivers of motorcycles, or 3. Fatal in crashes because the drivers are manly men who choose to NOT wear helmets? If you're going to ascribe increasing motocycle fatalities to any of those factors, you'll have to show how the relevant factor has increased over recent time. I don't believe they have. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Oculus reaches 3000 lumens | Barry Beams | Techniques | 8 | August 22nd 17 04:21 AM |
How to easily measure lumens | Jeff Liebermann | Techniques | 23 | March 26th 17 10:31 PM |
bye, bye postie, another few thousand less bikes! | Mrcheerful[_2_] | UK | 4 | July 29th 10 10:29 PM |
Worth a thousand words ....probably more | DirtRoadie | Racing | 8 | July 28th 09 07:57 PM |
day fifteen thousand and something | Triball | Unicycling | 0 | October 13th 07 04:27 PM |