|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
New 1920s Technology... Today!
On Fri, 09 Apr 2021 20:35:09 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 18:02:40 -0700, sms wrote: On 4/8/2021 5:43 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: snip Pathetic? The idea doesn't go far enough. That was the dynamo I was thinking of when I suggested that it be used on disk wheels. The idea was to move the dynamo along the radius of the disk wheel to adjust the dynamo's rotational speed and thus obtain a constant output output voltage at any speed. A CVT inside the dynamo would be a better design, whether a rim, tire, or hub. But of course it's really unnecessary to have a constant voltage out. I was looking for simplicity. A CVT (continuously variable transmission) is not a simple device to build into a small dynamo housing. There are already dynamo powered lights with a USB port for charging devices. If someone is really going to spend $300 then they'd be better off buying a dynamo hub wheel and one of those lights, or a battery powered light that can be charged and/or operated from a dynamo. For the latter, I put together a Google Doc document that explains how to do it https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UVk_yelr5UxrcKqDtGgsHTBVa3eWoUdpqDKhbZSHO_E Very nice but I screwed up. The DC output voltage from a bridge is NOT: DC_out = 1.414 * AC_Vrms_input More correctly, the DC output is: DC_out = 0.9 * AC_Vrms_input For the calcs, see: https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/diode/diode_6.html For such a low voltage dynamo, the Schottky diode voltage drop should also be included in the calculations. Another problem is you're ignoring the original problem(s) and solving one that was not even mentioned (USB devices). Jay arbitrarily decided that an 800 lumen light would be nice if it could be powered by a dynamo. Without questioning the decision to specify such a high power light, I went into what is necessary to power an 800 lumen light solely on dynamo power. It was generally assumed that building a battery operated 800 lumen light, where the battery is charged by the dynamo, is possible. I later estimated the percentage of power produced by the typical cyclists at 15 mph using a commodity 3 watt dynamo light, and a higher power light suitable for delivering 800 lumens. While there was an increase in drag, it was within the abilities of most cyclists. All that was needed was a dynamo that delivered both higher output power at higher efficiency. I then arbitrarily decided that removing one of the key features of most bicycle dynamos would offer better efficiency at high RPM. The early dynamo power lights ran incandescent lamps. These lamps were very sensitive to over-voltage. Even a little over their rated maximum power, and the filament would fuse open. The resulting dynamo included an inductor (saturable reactor) which would reduce the voltage to the incandescent lamp at high RPM, where the voltage was highest. This formed a crude and cheap voltage/current regulator and is responsible for the "flat" voltage and power curve of the dynamo. What I proposed was to remove the inductors and allow the dynamo to produce more output power at high RPM. However, Frank offered a good question. Does this also improve efficiency at high RPM. I assumed that it does, but I'm not sure and won't know without some testing. Another item that was mentioned was operating the headlight at low bicycle speeds, where the dynamo is unable to deliver sufficient output. This can be in various ways such as a CVT, PWM (pulse width modulation) light dimmer to reduce the load, switch to fewer LED's, etc. Of course, a battery/dynamo hybrid will solve the problem as long as the battery can be recharged, but for now, batteries are not part of the dynamo problem. My best guess(tm) is that a higher power dynamo can only work if the losses are reduced. That means, much higher voltages, no saturable reactor regulators, very wide input range boost converter on the input, high efficiency buck converter to drive the LEDs, and high RPM for high operating frequencies (about 50KHz) so that ferrites can be used instead of powdered iron. In other words, start from scratch and design something that will drive a modern LED headlight, not an adaptation of something designed to drive an ancient incandescent light bulb. The solution? Just stick an internal combustion engine on that two wheel device and you can have all the lights that you want :-) -- Cheers, John B. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
New 1920s Technology... Today!
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 18:02:40 -0700, sms wrote: On 4/8/2021 5:43 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: snip Pathetic? The idea doesn't go far enough. That was the dynamo I was thinking of when I suggested that it be used on disk wheels. The idea was to move the dynamo along the radius of the disk wheel to adjust the dynamo's rotational speed and thus obtain a constant output output voltage at any speed. A CVT inside the dynamo would be a better design, whether a rim, tire, or hub. But of course it's really unnecessary to have a constant voltage out. I was looking for simplicity. A CVT (continuously variable transmission) is not a simple device to build into a small dynamo housing. There are already dynamo powered lights with a USB port for charging devices. If someone is really going to spend $300 then they'd be better off buying a dynamo hub wheel and one of those lights, or a battery powered light that can be charged and/or operated from a dynamo. For the latter, I put together a Google Doc document that explains how to do it https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UVk_yelr5UxrcKqDtGgsHTBVa3eWoUdpqDKhbZSHO_E Very nice but I screwed up. The DC output voltage from a bridge is NOT: DC_out = 1.414 * AC_Vrms_input More correctly, the DC output is: DC_out = 0.9 * AC_Vrms_input For the calcs, see: https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/diode/diode_6.html For such a low voltage dynamo, the Schottky diode voltage drop should also be included in the calculations. Another problem is you're ignoring the original problem(s) and solving one that was not even mentioned (USB devices). Jay arbitrarily decided that an 800 lumen light would be nice if it could be powered by a dynamo. Without questioning the decision to specify such a high power light, I went into what is necessary to power an 800 lumen light solely on dynamo power. It was generally assumed that building a battery operated 800 lumen light, where the battery is charged by the dynamo, is possible. I later estimated the percentage of power produced by the typical cyclists at 15 mph using a commodity 3 watt dynamo light, and a higher power light suitable for delivering 800 lumens. While there was an increase in drag, it was within the abilities of most cyclists. All that was needed was a dynamo that delivered both higher output power at higher efficiency. Exposure sell such a light https://exposurelights.com/products/bike/dynamo-lights/revo-dynamo At a quick look do need to be traveling at a reasonable speed, ie 15mph, it’s half that at 10mph according to the guide. Which certainly for my uses, ie on my commute the faster sections are well lit, and it’s the slower sections that if not need, certainly it’s useful to have a reasonably powerful light. Lot depends on your use case, if it’s urban or suburban on roads well to be honest probably only need a light to be seen by. My commute has a few woods and what not, which 600 Lumens in a fairly wide flat beam is great, on gravel or otherwise roads it’s equally fine. Once into MTB trails it’s shape more than anything let’s it down, as the beam can’t cover the dips and angles, where as my MTB light which is fairly modest as these go, *only* 1000 Lumens is much better able to light the trail even on low settings. You still can outpace the light but generally I take it easy on night rides as certainly do so few MTB night rides, that stumping up for a 3000 or so (which seems to be the sweet spot) Lumens MTB light for the 1/2 times I might ride per year! Snips Roger Merriman |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
New 1920s Technology... Today!
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 22:41:02 -0000 (UTC), Roger Merriman
wrote: Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 18:02:40 -0700, sms wrote: On 4/8/2021 5:43 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: snip Pathetic? The idea doesn't go far enough. That was the dynamo I was thinking of when I suggested that it be used on disk wheels. The idea was to move the dynamo along the radius of the disk wheel to adjust the dynamo's rotational speed and thus obtain a constant output output voltage at any speed. A CVT inside the dynamo would be a better design, whether a rim, tire, or hub. But of course it's really unnecessary to have a constant voltage out. I was looking for simplicity. A CVT (continuously variable transmission) is not a simple device to build into a small dynamo housing. There are already dynamo powered lights with a USB port for charging devices. If someone is really going to spend $300 then they'd be better off buying a dynamo hub wheel and one of those lights, or a battery powered light that can be charged and/or operated from a dynamo. For the latter, I put together a Google Doc document that explains how to do it https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UVk_yelr5UxrcKqDtGgsHTBVa3eWoUdpqDKhbZSHO_E Very nice but I screwed up. The DC output voltage from a bridge is NOT: DC_out = 1.414 * AC_Vrms_input More correctly, the DC output is: DC_out = 0.9 * AC_Vrms_input For the calcs, see: https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/diode/diode_6.html For such a low voltage dynamo, the Schottky diode voltage drop should also be included in the calculations. Another problem is you're ignoring the original problem(s) and solving one that was not even mentioned (USB devices). Jay arbitrarily decided that an 800 lumen light would be nice if it could be powered by a dynamo. Without questioning the decision to specify such a high power light, I went into what is necessary to power an 800 lumen light solely on dynamo power. It was generally assumed that building a battery operated 800 lumen light, where the battery is charged by the dynamo, is possible. I later estimated the percentage of power produced by the typical cyclists at 15 mph using a commodity 3 watt dynamo light, and a higher power light suitable for delivering 800 lumens. While there was an increase in drag, it was within the abilities of most cyclists. All that was needed was a dynamo that delivered both higher output power at higher efficiency. Exposure sell such a light https://exposurelights.com/products/bike/dynamo-lights/revo-dynamo £240.00 or $331 not including the hub dynamo. Ouch. Thanks, but that seems rather expensive. I like the idea, but there needs to be some cost reduction for wider acceptance. Thanks for the link. At a quick look do need to be traveling at a reasonable speed, ie 15mph, it’s half that at 10mph according to the guide. Presumably, adding a CVT (continuously variable transmission) to the dynamo would provide more power at slow speeds. I haven't seen that being done with hub or bottle dynamos. In effect, the dynamo would produce a fairly constant output at speeds above some minimum, and possibly eliminate the need for a voltage regulator in the light. Which certainly for my uses, ie on my commute the faster sections are well lit, and it’s the slower sections that if not need, certainly it’s useful to have a reasonably powerful light. Lot depends on your use case, if it’s urban or suburban on roads well to be honest probably only need a light to be seen by. My use case is minimal and probably not representative of most cyclists in this newsgroup. Whether a bicycle light can be properly designed by someone who doesn't ride much or on different types of machines and roads is an open question. For me, the main problem is price and theft of the light, which haven't entered this discussion yet. For lighting, the only times I've really needed a decent light was when trying to read street signs and house numbers. I also had a problem with being seen. My current headlight (Cygolite Streak 280) allegedly delivers 280 lumens or about 175 lumens by my measurements. My commute has a few woods and what not, which 600 Lumens in a fairly wide flat beam is great, on gravel or otherwise roads it’s equally fine. Once into MTB trails it’s shape more than anything let’s it down, as the beam can’t cover the dips and angles, where as my MTB light which is fairly modest as these go, *only* 1000 Lumens is much better able to light the trail even on low settings. Do you have a lux meter? Something like one of these? https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=lux+meter If so, and your light an produce a roughly circular spot on a wall, I have a way to measure lumens without an integrating sphere (or integrating pipe). These are early versions (in desperate need of editing) of how it might be done: https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/UJdJQFTDgl8/m/NgOZUloVCwAJ https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/YQOILUCqIH8/m/StNB3J0_EAAJ https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=rec.bicycles.tech/UJdJQFTDgl8/NgOZUloVCwAJ You still can outpace the light but generally I take it easy on night rides as certainly do so few MTB night rides, that stumping up for a 3000 or so (which seems to be the sweet spot) Lumens MTB light for the 1/2 times I might ride per year! 3000 lumens? Assuming 100 lumens/watt efficacy, such a light would require 30 watts of power to drive. For the typical bottle dynamo, that would require 10 dynamos. For the average riders at 15 mph, who normally provides about 200 watts, that would produce approximately a 15% increase in drag to maintain the same speed. If you want battery power, I can grind the numbers for you later. However, if you only need that much light 1 or 2 times per year, a 2nd headlight, or some kind of adaptation might be more effective: http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/bicycle-flashlight.jpg -- Jeff Liebermann PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
New 1920s Technology... Today!
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 22:41:02 -0000 (UTC), Roger Merriman wrote: Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 18:02:40 -0700, sms wrote: On 4/8/2021 5:43 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: snip Pathetic? The idea doesn't go far enough. That was the dynamo I was thinking of when I suggested that it be used on disk wheels. The idea was to move the dynamo along the radius of the disk wheel to adjust the dynamo's rotational speed and thus obtain a constant output output voltage at any speed. A CVT inside the dynamo would be a better design, whether a rim, tire, or hub. But of course it's really unnecessary to have a constant voltage out. I was looking for simplicity. A CVT (continuously variable transmission) is not a simple device to build into a small dynamo housing. There are already dynamo powered lights with a USB port for charging devices. If someone is really going to spend $300 then they'd be better off buying a dynamo hub wheel and one of those lights, or a battery powered light that can be charged and/or operated from a dynamo. For the latter, I put together a Google Doc document that explains how to do it https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UVk_yelr5UxrcKqDtGgsHTBVa3eWoUdpqDKhbZSHO_E Very nice but I screwed up. The DC output voltage from a bridge is NOT: DC_out = 1.414 * AC_Vrms_input More correctly, the DC output is: DC_out = 0.9 * AC_Vrms_input For the calcs, see: https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/diode/diode_6.html For such a low voltage dynamo, the Schottky diode voltage drop should also be included in the calculations. Another problem is you're ignoring the original problem(s) and solving one that was not even mentioned (USB devices). Jay arbitrarily decided that an 800 lumen light would be nice if it could be powered by a dynamo. Without questioning the decision to specify such a high power light, I went into what is necessary to power an 800 lumen light solely on dynamo power. It was generally assumed that building a battery operated 800 lumen light, where the battery is charged by the dynamo, is possible. I later estimated the percentage of power produced by the typical cyclists at 15 mph using a commodity 3 watt dynamo light, and a higher power light suitable for delivering 800 lumens. While there was an increase in drag, it was within the abilities of most cyclists. All that was needed was a dynamo that delivered both higher output power at higher efficiency. Exposure sell such a light https://exposurelights.com/products/bike/dynamo-lights/revo-dynamo £240.00 or $331 not including the hub dynamo. Ouch. Thanks, but that seems rather expensive. I like the idea, but there needs to be some cost reduction for wider acceptance. Thanks for the link. At a quick look do need to be traveling at a reasonable speed, ie 15mph, it’s half that at 10mph according to the guide. Presumably, adding a CVT (continuously variable transmission) to the dynamo would provide more power at slow speeds. I haven't seen that being done with hub or bottle dynamos. In effect, the dynamo would produce a fairly constant output at speeds above some minimum, and possibly eliminate the need for a voltage regulator in the light. Which certainly for my uses, ie on my commute the faster sections are well lit, and it’s the slower sections that if not need, certainly it’s useful to have a reasonably powerful light. Lot depends on your use case, if it’s urban or suburban on roads well to be honest probably only need a light to be seen by. My use case is minimal and probably not representative of most cyclists in this newsgroup. Whether a bicycle light can be properly designed by someone who doesn't ride much or on different types of machines and roads is an open question. For me, the main problem is price and theft of the light, which haven't entered this discussion yet. For lighting, the only times I've really needed a decent light was when trying to read street signs and house numbers. I also had a problem with being seen. My current headlight (Cygolite Streak 280) allegedly delivers 280 lumens or about 175 lumens by my measurements. I don’t as such have problems been seen, I run my commute light at low, and only flick it to high as and when I need it, ie generally going though the big parks you get these parts or woods and what not. My commute has a few woods and what not, which 600 Lumens in a fairly wide flat beam is great, on gravel or otherwise roads it’s equally fine. Once into MTB trails it’s shape more than anything let’s it down, as the beam can’t cover the dips and angles, where as my MTB light which is fairly modest as these go, *only* 1000 Lumens is much better able to light the trail even on low settings. Do you have a lux meter? Something like one of these? https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=lux+meter If so, and your light an produce a roughly circular spot on a wall, I have a way to measure lumens without an integrating sphere (or integrating pipe). These are early versions (in desperate need of editing) of how it might be done: https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/UJdJQFTDgl8/m/NgOZUloVCwAJ https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/YQOILUCqIH8/m/StNB3J0_EAAJ https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=rec.bicycles.tech/UJdJQFTDgl8/NgOZUloVCwAJ I used to years back ie light meter for various cameras. But no longer. The MTB light is roughly circular though the commute light is shaped it’s a exposure Strada so intended for road use, so has a lower flatter profile even running on high, with both LEDs running. To be honest I’m used to Lumens which gives a reasonable measure of how much power the light has, plus beam shape/usage. Not thus far been convinced that Lux as way of measuring is better, most seem to be measured at 10m again you need to know the beam shape to make any meaningful measure. You still can outpace the light but generally I take it easy on night rides as certainly do so few MTB night rides, that stumping up for a 3000 or so (which seems to be the sweet spot) Lumens MTB light for the 1/2 times I might ride per year! 3000 lumens? Assuming 100 lumens/watt efficacy, such a light would require 30 watts of power to drive. Sounds about right my MTB light claims it kicks out 1000 Lumens/10watts For the typical bottle dynamo, that would require 10 dynamos. For the average riders at 15 mph, who normally provides about 200 watts, that would produce approximately a 15% increase in drag to maintain the same speed. If you want battery power, I can grind the numbers for you later. However, if you only need that much light 1 or 2 times per year, a 2nd headlight, or some kind of adaptation might be more effective: http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/bicycle-flashlight.jpg I don’t need it I rarely take the MTB out for night rides, more likely to be the gravel bike which I tend to stick to roads be they tarmac/dirt/battered farm tracks but either way at that Strada at 600 Lumens is quite capable, what it can’t do is MTB trails which tend to twist and dip and so on, and you end up riding into un lit sections, where as the MTB light this is where it shines! Even at low settings it covers the ground and low branches however the land might twist and drop off! Low on the MTB light is approximately same as full on the Strada, in terms of perceived brightness. Roger Merriman. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
New 1920s Technology... Today!
On Thursday, April 15, 2021 at 6:41:46 p.m. UTC-4, Roger Merriman wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 22:41:02 -0000 (UTC), Roger Merriman wrote: Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 18:02:40 -0700, sms wrote: On 4/8/2021 5:43 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: snip Pathetic? The idea doesn't go far enough. That was the dynamo I was thinking of when I suggested that it be used on disk wheels. The idea was to move the dynamo along the radius of the disk wheel to adjust the dynamo's rotational speed and thus obtain a constant output output voltage at any speed. A CVT inside the dynamo would be a better design, whether a rim, tire, or hub. But of course it's really unnecessary to have a constant voltage out. I was looking for simplicity. A CVT (continuously variable transmission) is not a simple device to build into a small dynamo housing. There are already dynamo powered lights with a USB port for charging devices. If someone is really going to spend $300 then they'd be better off buying a dynamo hub wheel and one of those lights, or a battery powered light that can be charged and/or operated from a dynamo. For the latter, I put together a Google Doc document that explains how to do it https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UVk_yelr5UxrcKqDtGgsHTBVa3eWoUdpqDKhbZSHO_E Very nice but I screwed up. The DC output voltage from a bridge is NOT: DC_out = 1.414 * AC_Vrms_input More correctly, the DC output is: DC_out = 0.9 * AC_Vrms_input For the calcs, see: https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/diode/diode_6.html For such a low voltage dynamo, the Schottky diode voltage drop should also be included in the calculations. Another problem is you're ignoring the original problem(s) and solving one that was not even mentioned (USB devices). Jay arbitrarily decided that an 800 lumen light would be nice if it could be powered by a dynamo. Without questioning the decision to specify such a high power light, I went into what is necessary to power an 800 lumen light solely on dynamo power. It was generally assumed that building a battery operated 800 lumen light, where the battery is charged by the dynamo, is possible. I later estimated the percentage of power produced by the typical cyclists at 15 mph using a commodity 3 watt dynamo light, and a higher power light suitable for delivering 800 lumens. While there was an increase in drag, it was within the abilities of most cyclists. All that was needed was a dynamo that delivered both higher output power at higher efficiency. Exposure sell such a light https://exposurelights.com/products/bike/dynamo-lights/revo-dynamo £240.00 or $331 not including the hub dynamo. Ouch. Thanks, but that seems rather expensive. I like the idea, but there needs to be some cost reduction for wider acceptance. Thanks for the link. At a quick look do need to be traveling at a reasonable speed, ie 15mph, it’s half that at 10mph according to the guide. Presumably, adding a CVT (continuously variable transmission) to the dynamo would provide more power at slow speeds. I haven't seen that being done with hub or bottle dynamos. In effect, the dynamo would produce a fairly constant output at speeds above some minimum, and possibly eliminate the need for a voltage regulator in the light. Which certainly for my uses, ie on my commute the faster sections are well lit, and it’s the slower sections that if not need, certainly it’s useful to have a reasonably powerful light. Lot depends on your use case, if it’s urban or suburban on roads well to be honest probably only need a light to be seen by. My use case is minimal and probably not representative of most cyclists in this newsgroup. Whether a bicycle light can be properly designed by someone who doesn't ride much or on different types of machines and roads is an open question. For me, the main problem is price and theft of the light, which haven't entered this discussion yet. For lighting, the only times I've really needed a decent light was when trying to read street signs and house numbers. I also had a problem with being seen. My current headlight (Cygolite Streak 280) allegedly delivers 280 lumens or about 175 lumens by my measurements. I don’t as such have problems been seen, I run my commute light at low, and only flick it to high as and when I need it, ie generally going though the big parks you get these parts or woods and what not. My commute has a few woods and what not, which 600 Lumens in a fairly wide flat beam is great, on gravel or otherwise roads it’s equally fine. Once into MTB trails it’s shape more than anything let’s it down, as the beam can’t cover the dips and angles, where as my MTB light which is fairly modest as these go, *only* 1000 Lumens is much better able to light the trail even on low settings. Do you have a lux meter? Something like one of these? https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=lux+meter If so, and your light an produce a roughly circular spot on a wall, I have a way to measure lumens without an integrating sphere (or integrating pipe). These are early versions (in desperate need of editing) of how it might be done: https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/UJdJQFTDgl8/m/NgOZUloVCwAJ https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/YQOILUCqIH8/m/StNB3J0_EAAJ https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=rec.bicycles.tech/UJdJQFTDgl8/NgOZUloVCwAJ I used to years back ie light meter for various cameras. But no longer. The MTB light is roughly circular though the commute light is shaped it’s a exposure Strada so intended for road use, so has a lower flatter profile even running on high, with both LEDs running. To be honest I’m used to Lumens which gives a reasonable measure of how much power the light has, plus beam shape/usage. Not thus far been convinced that Lux as way of measuring is better, most seem to be measured at 10m again you need to know the beam shape to make any meaningful measure. You still can outpace the light but generally I take it easy on night rides as certainly do so few MTB night rides, that stumping up for a 3000 or so (which seems to be the sweet spot) Lumens MTB light for the 1/2 times I might ride per year! 3000 lumens? Assuming 100 lumens/watt efficacy, such a light would require 30 watts of power to drive. Sounds about right my MTB light claims it kicks out 1000 Lumens/10watts For the typical bottle dynamo, that would require 10 dynamos. For the average riders at 15 mph, who normally provides about 200 watts, that would produce approximately a 15% increase in drag to maintain the same speed. If you want battery power, I can grind the numbers for you later. However, if you only need that much light 1 or 2 times per year, a 2nd headlight, or some kind of adaptation might be more effective: http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/bicycle-flashlight.jpg I don’t need it I rarely take the MTB out for night rides, more likely to be the gravel bike which I tend to stick to roads be they tarmac/dirt/battered farm tracks but either way at that Strada at 600 Lumens is quite capable, what it can’t do is MTB trails which tend to twist and dip and so on, and you end up riding into un lit sections, where as the MTB light this is where it shines! Even at low settings it covers the ground and low branches however the land might twist and drop off! Low on the MTB light is approximately same as full on the Strada, in terms of perceived brightness. Roger Merriman. Right. Use different lights for different needs/terrain. What I like best about a good external powered battery light is the simplicity to move it from bike to bike. Plus in winter when it's extremely cold I can keep the battery tucked inside my jacket and thus keep the run time high. Cheers |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
New 1920s Technology... Today!
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 22:41:43 -0000 (UTC), Roger Merriman
wrote: Jeff Liebermann wrote: Do you have a lux meter? Something like one of these? https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=lux+meter If so, and your light an produce a roughly circular spot on a wall, I have a way to measure lumens without an integrating sphere (or integrating pipe). These are early versions (in desperate need of editing) of how it might be done: https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/UJdJQFTDgl8/m/NgOZUloVCwAJ https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/YQOILUCqIH8/m/StNB3J0_EAAJ https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=rec.bicycles.tech/UJdJQFTDgl8/NgOZUloVCwAJ I used to years back ie light meter for various cameras. But no longer. The MTB light is roughly circular though the commute light is shaped it’s a exposure Strada so intended for road use, so has a lower flatter profile even running on high, with both LEDs running. To be honest I’m used to Lumens which gives a reasonable measure of how much power the light has, plus beam shape/usage. Not thus far been convinced that Lux as way of measuring is better, most seem to be measured at 10m again you need to know the beam shape to make any meaningful measure. Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I'm not trying to switch from lumens to lux. I'm trying to use a lux meter to measure lumens. The problem is that to properly measure lumens, one needs an integrating sphere, where you capture and measure ALL the light produced by the headlight under test. Integrating spheres are not cheap or easy to use. In general, they require a trained operator to obtain accurate results. "Bike Light Lab Testing and Verification | Mountain and Road Bike Lights | Integrating Sphere" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEz34lxUL6I "Measuring light output with an integrating sphere" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvyptpA-BmY The problem is that most of the lumens claimed by headlight manufacturers and vendors are little better than science fiction. It wouldn't be a problem if everyone had a test lab measure their lights, but that isn't going to happen. What my method does is provide an easier and cheaper method of approximating lumens output by using the light measured over a small area with a Lux meter, and extrapolating that area over a known spot size. It makes a few marginal assumptions (circular spot pattern and rapid fade to black at the spot margin) and assumes some comparison factors that are not necessarily identical for different headlights (operating temperature, color temperature, DC input power, lens and reflector losses, bicycle air cooling, manufacturing variations, LED brightness bin count, etc). Still, it provides a MUCH better approximation of reality than most of the advertised lumens numbers. You still can outpace the light but generally I take it easy on night rides as certainly do so few MTB night rides, that stumping up for a 3000 or so (which seems to be the sweet spot) Lumens MTB light for the 1/2 times I might ride per year! 3000 lumens? Assuming 100 lumens/watt efficacy, such a light would require 30 watts of power to drive. Sounds about right my MTB light claims it kicks out 1000 Lumens/10watts Yep. If I know the LED type, LED temperature, type of optics, and power consumed by the LED, I can make a fairly good guess(tm) for the efficacy (lumens/watt) and estimate the lumens output. The 100 lumens/watt is typical for commodity LED's and optics. I don’t need it I rarely take the MTB out for night rides, more likely to be the gravel bike which I tend to stick to roads be they tarmac/dirt/battered farm tracks but either way at that Strada at 600 Lumens is quite capable, what it can’t do is MTB trails which tend to twist and dip and so on, and you end up riding into un lit sections, where as the MTB light this is where it shines! Even at low settings it covers the ground and low branches however the land might twist and drop off! Well, this is a tech newsgroups. Let's design a light that goes around corners. Buy a small drone with a camera. Program it for a "follow me" type mode to fly about 5 meters ahead of your bicycle. The drone camera is aimed in the direction of travel by the position of the handlebars. Video is transmitted from the drone back to a HUD (heads up display), smartphone, or video display mounted on your helmet or handbars. The drone has an LED light that illuminate the field of view. I can see plenty of potential problems that will need to be solved before this is a workable solution for partially blind bicycle riding. For example, if you're riding in a group, the riders ahead will receive an unwanted hair cut from the drone. Maintaining a constant altitude or track is difficult in areas with hills and canyons because they block the view of the sky needed for GPS. Soon everyone will be riding behind a drone "pace car" with lights and perhaps a camera. For safety, of course. Low on the MTB light is approximately same as full on the Strada, in terms of perceived brightness. Roger Merriman. -- Jeff Liebermann PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
New 1920s Technology... Today!
On 4/15/2021 7:52 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 22:41:43 -0000 (UTC), Roger Merriman wrote: Jeff Liebermann wrote: Do you have a lux meter? Something like one of these? https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=lux+meter If so, and your light an produce a roughly circular spot on a wall, I have a way to measure lumens without an integrating sphere (or integrating pipe). These are early versions (in desperate need of editing) of how it might be done: https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/UJdJQFTDgl8/m/NgOZUloVCwAJ https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/YQOILUCqIH8/m/StNB3J0_EAAJ https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=rec.bicycles.tech/UJdJQFTDgl8/NgOZUloVCwAJ I used to years back ie light meter for various cameras. But no longer. The MTB light is roughly circular though the commute light is shaped it’s a exposure Strada so intended for road use, so has a lower flatter profile even running on high, with both LEDs running. To be honest I’m used to Lumens which gives a reasonable measure of how much power the light has, plus beam shape/usage. Not thus far been convinced that Lux as way of measuring is better, most seem to be measured at 10m again you need to know the beam shape to make any meaningful measure. Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I'm not trying to switch from lumens to lux. I'm trying to use a lux meter to measure lumens. The problem is that to properly measure lumens, one needs an integrating sphere, where you capture and measure ALL the light produced by the headlight under test. Integrating spheres are not cheap or easy to use. In general, they require a trained operator to obtain accurate results. "Bike Light Lab Testing and Verification | Mountain and Road Bike Lights | Integrating Sphere" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEz34lxUL6I "Measuring light output with an integrating sphere" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvyptpA-BmY The problem is that most of the lumens claimed by headlight manufacturers and vendors are little better than science fiction. It wouldn't be a problem if everyone had a test lab measure their lights, but that isn't going to happen. What my method does is provide an easier and cheaper method of approximating lumens output by using the light measured over a small area with a Lux meter, and extrapolating that area over a known spot size. It makes a few marginal assumptions (circular spot pattern and rapid fade to black at the spot margin) and assumes some comparison factors that are not necessarily identical for different headlights (operating temperature, color temperature, DC input power, lens and reflector losses, bicycle air cooling, manufacturing variations, LED brightness bin count, etc). Still, it provides a MUCH better approximation of reality than most of the advertised lumens numbers. You still can outpace the light but generally I take it easy on night rides as certainly do so few MTB night rides, that stumping up for a 3000 or so (which seems to be the sweet spot) Lumens MTB light for the 1/2 times I might ride per year! 3000 lumens? Assuming 100 lumens/watt efficacy, such a light would require 30 watts of power to drive. Sounds about right my MTB light claims it kicks out 1000 Lumens/10watts Yep. If I know the LED type, LED temperature, type of optics, and power consumed by the LED, I can make a fairly good guess(tm) for the efficacy (lumens/watt) and estimate the lumens output. The 100 lumens/watt is typical for commodity LED's and optics. I don’t need it I rarely take the MTB out for night rides, more likely to be the gravel bike which I tend to stick to roads be they tarmac/dirt/battered farm tracks but either way at that Strada at 600 Lumens is quite capable, what it can’t do is MTB trails which tend to twist and dip and so on, and you end up riding into un lit sections, where as the MTB light this is where it shines! Even at low settings it covers the ground and low branches however the land might twist and drop off! Well, this is a tech newsgroups. Let's design a light that goes around corners. Buy a small drone with a camera. Program it for a "follow me" type mode to fly about 5 meters ahead of your bicycle. The drone camera is aimed in the direction of travel by the position of the handlebars. Video is transmitted from the drone back to a HUD (heads up display), smartphone, or video display mounted on your helmet or handbars. The drone has an LED light that illuminate the field of view. I can see plenty of potential problems that will need to be solved before this is a workable solution for partially blind bicycle riding. For example, if you're riding in a group, the riders ahead will receive an unwanted hair cut from the drone. Maintaining a constant altitude or track is difficult in areas with hills and canyons because they block the view of the sky needed for GPS. Soon everyone will be riding behind a drone "pace car" with lights and perhaps a camera. For safety, of course. Low on the MTB light is approximately same as full on the Strada, in terms of perceived brightness. "most of the lumens claimed by headlight manufacturers and vendors are little better than science fiction. " I am indebted to Mr Scharf for the very useful term, 'chilumens'. In our industry, management usually decrees something like, 'competitor says his gizmo is 950 lumens. Make our our package say 1000 lumens at least.' -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
New 1920s Technology... Today!
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 22:41:43 -0000 (UTC), Roger Merriman wrote: Jeff Liebermann wrote: Do you have a lux meter? Something like one of these? https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=lux+meter If so, and your light an produce a roughly circular spot on a wall, I have a way to measure lumens without an integrating sphere (or integrating pipe). These are early versions (in desperate need of editing) of how it might be done: https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/UJdJQFTDgl8/m/NgOZUloVCwAJ https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/YQOILUCqIH8/m/StNB3J0_EAAJ https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=rec.bicycles.tech/UJdJQFTDgl8/NgOZUloVCwAJ I used to years back ie light meter for various cameras. But no longer. The MTB light is roughly circular though the commute light is shaped it’s a exposure Strada so intended for road use, so has a lower flatter profile even running on high, with both LEDs running. To be honest I’m used to Lumens which gives a reasonable measure of how much power the light has, plus beam shape/usage. Not thus far been convinced that Lux as way of measuring is better, most seem to be measured at 10m again you need to know the beam shape to make any meaningful measure. Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I'm not trying to switch from lumens to lux. I'm trying to use a lux meter to measure lumens. The problem is that to properly measure lumens, one needs an integrating sphere, where you capture and measure ALL the light produced by the headlight under test. Integrating spheres are not cheap or easy to use. In general, they require a trained operator to obtain accurate results. "Bike Light Lab Testing and Verification | Mountain and Road Bike Lights | Integrating Sphere" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEz34lxUL6I "Measuring light output with an integrating sphere" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvyptpA-BmY The problem is that most of the lumens claimed by headlight manufacturers and vendors are little better than science fiction. It wouldn't be a problem if everyone had a test lab measure their lights, but that isn't going to happen. I found while that’s certainly the case with the eBay specials, if it’s known manufacturers then it’s broadly in the same area, clearly measured from the led, so no losses from lens etc, but it’s close enough to use a a measure. What my method does is provide an easier and cheaper method of approximating lumens output by using the light measured over a small area with a Lux meter, and extrapolating that area over a known spot size. It makes a few marginal assumptions (circular spot pattern and rapid fade to black at the spot margin) and assumes some comparison factors that are not necessarily identical for different headlights (operating temperature, color temperature, DC input power, lens and reflector losses, bicycle air cooling, manufacturing variations, LED brightness bin count, etc). Still, it provides a MUCH better approximation of reality than most of the advertised lumens numbers. You still can outpace the light but generally I take it easy on night rides as certainly do so few MTB night rides, that stumping up for a 3000 or so (which seems to be the sweet spot) Lumens MTB light for the 1/2 times I might ride per year! 3000 lumens? Assuming 100 lumens/watt efficacy, such a light would require 30 watts of power to drive. Sounds about right my MTB light claims it kicks out 1000 Lumens/10watts Yep. If I know the LED type, LED temperature, type of optics, and power consumed by the LED, I can make a fairly good guess(tm) for the efficacy (lumens/watt) and estimate the lumens output. The 100 lumens/watt is typical for commodity LED's and optics. I don’t need it I rarely take the MTB out for night rides, more likely to be the gravel bike which I tend to stick to roads be they tarmac/dirt/battered farm tracks but either way at that Strada at 600 Lumens is quite capable, what it can’t do is MTB trails which tend to twist and dip and so on, and you end up riding into un lit sections, where as the MTB light this is where it shines! Even at low settings it covers the ground and low branches however the land might twist and drop off! Well, this is a tech newsgroups. Let's design a light that goes around corners. Buy a small drone with a camera. Program it for a "follow me" type mode to fly about 5 meters ahead of your bicycle. The drone camera is aimed in the direction of travel by the position of the handlebars. Video is transmitted from the drone back to a HUD (heads up display), smartphone, or video display mounted on your helmet or handbars. The drone has an LED light that illuminate the field of view. It’s why helmet lights started, as you can use a relatively low powered spot to track the trail. Coupled with a bar mounted flood, I personally don’t need such as I tend to stick to the tamer stuff at night! Another reason that I tend to use the Gravel vs the MTB for such stuff. some of the MTB brothers of the Strada have enough power to light up the Forest but for my uses it’s not needed, though if you do ride manmade trails at night doesn’t take much to reach the limit of my MTB light hence why you get the such lights pushing out between 3000/5000 Lumens. I can see plenty of potential problems that will need to be solved before this is a workable solution for partially blind bicycle riding. For example, if you're riding in a group, the riders ahead will receive an unwanted hair cut from the drone. Maintaining a constant altitude or track is difficult in areas with hills and canyons because they block the view of the sky needed for GPS. Soon everyone will be riding behind a drone "pace car" with lights and perhaps a camera. For safety, of course. Low on the MTB light is approximately same as full on the Strada, in terms of perceived brightness. Roger Merriman. Roger Merriman |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
New 1920s Technology... Today!
Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Thursday, April 15, 2021 at 6:41:46 p.m. UTC-4, Roger Merriman wrote: Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 22:41:02 -0000 (UTC), Roger Merriman wrote: Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2021 18:02:40 -0700, sms wrote: On 4/8/2021 5:43 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: snip Pathetic? The idea doesn't go far enough. That was the dynamo I was thinking of when I suggested that it be used on disk wheels. The idea was to move the dynamo along the radius of the disk wheel to adjust the dynamo's rotational speed and thus obtain a constant output output voltage at any speed. A CVT inside the dynamo would be a better design, whether a rim, tire, or hub. But of course it's really unnecessary to have a constant voltage out. I was looking for simplicity. A CVT (continuously variable transmission) is not a simple device to build into a small dynamo housing. There are already dynamo powered lights with a USB port for charging devices. If someone is really going to spend $300 then they'd be better off buying a dynamo hub wheel and one of those lights, or a battery powered light that can be charged and/or operated from a dynamo. For the latter, I put together a Google Doc document that explains how to do it https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UVk_yelr5UxrcKqDtGgsHTBVa3eWoUdpqDKhbZSHO_E Very nice but I screwed up. The DC output voltage from a bridge is NOT: DC_out = 1.414 * AC_Vrms_input More correctly, the DC output is: DC_out = 0.9 * AC_Vrms_input For the calcs, see: https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/diode/diode_6.html For such a low voltage dynamo, the Schottky diode voltage drop should also be included in the calculations. Another problem is you're ignoring the original problem(s) and solving one that was not even mentioned (USB devices). Jay arbitrarily decided that an 800 lumen light would be nice if it could be powered by a dynamo. Without questioning the decision to specify such a high power light, I went into what is necessary to power an 800 lumen light solely on dynamo power. It was generally assumed that building a battery operated 800 lumen light, where the battery is charged by the dynamo, is possible. I later estimated the percentage of power produced by the typical cyclists at 15 mph using a commodity 3 watt dynamo light, and a higher power light suitable for delivering 800 lumens. While there was an increase in drag, it was within the abilities of most cyclists. All that was needed was a dynamo that delivered both higher output power at higher efficiency. Exposure sell such a light https://exposurelights.com/products/bike/dynamo-lights/revo-dynamo £240.00 or $331 not including the hub dynamo. Ouch. Thanks, but that seems rather expensive. I like the idea, but there needs to be some cost reduction for wider acceptance. Thanks for the link. At a quick look do need to be traveling at a reasonable speed, ie 15mph, it’s half that at 10mph according to the guide. Presumably, adding a CVT (continuously variable transmission) to the dynamo would provide more power at slow speeds. I haven't seen that being done with hub or bottle dynamos. In effect, the dynamo would produce a fairly constant output at speeds above some minimum, and possibly eliminate the need for a voltage regulator in the light. Which certainly for my uses, ie on my commute the faster sections are well lit, and it’s the slower sections that if not need, certainly it’s useful to have a reasonably powerful light. Lot depends on your use case, if it’s urban or suburban on roads well to be honest probably only need a light to be seen by. My use case is minimal and probably not representative of most cyclists in this newsgroup. Whether a bicycle light can be properly designed by someone who doesn't ride much or on different types of machines and roads is an open question. For me, the main problem is price and theft of the light, which haven't entered this discussion yet. For lighting, the only times I've really needed a decent light was when trying to read street signs and house numbers. I also had a problem with being seen. My current headlight (Cygolite Streak 280) allegedly delivers 280 lumens or about 175 lumens by my measurements. I don’t as such have problems been seen, I run my commute light at low, and only flick it to high as and when I need it, ie generally going though the big parks you get these parts or woods and what not. My commute has a few woods and what not, which 600 Lumens in a fairly wide flat beam is great, on gravel or otherwise roads it’s equally fine. Once into MTB trails it’s shape more than anything let’s it down, as the beam can’t cover the dips and angles, where as my MTB light which is fairly modest as these go, *only* 1000 Lumens is much better able to light the trail even on low settings. Do you have a lux meter? Something like one of these? https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=lux+meter If so, and your light an produce a roughly circular spot on a wall, I have a way to measure lumens without an integrating sphere (or integrating pipe). These are early versions (in desperate need of editing) of how it might be done: https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/UJdJQFTDgl8/m/NgOZUloVCwAJ https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/YQOILUCqIH8/m/StNB3J0_EAAJ https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=rec.bicycles.tech/UJdJQFTDgl8/NgOZUloVCwAJ I used to years back ie light meter for various cameras. But no longer. The MTB light is roughly circular though the commute light is shaped it’s a exposure Strada so intended for road use, so has a lower flatter profile even running on high, with both LEDs running. To be honest I’m used to Lumens which gives a reasonable measure of how much power the light has, plus beam shape/usage. Not thus far been convinced that Lux as way of measuring is better, most seem to be measured at 10m again you need to know the beam shape to make any meaningful measure. You still can outpace the light but generally I take it easy on night rides as certainly do so few MTB night rides, that stumping up for a 3000 or so (which seems to be the sweet spot) Lumens MTB light for the 1/2 times I might ride per year! 3000 lumens? Assuming 100 lumens/watt efficacy, such a light would require 30 watts of power to drive. Sounds about right my MTB light claims it kicks out 1000 Lumens/10watts For the typical bottle dynamo, that would require 10 dynamos. For the average riders at 15 mph, who normally provides about 200 watts, that would produce approximately a 15% increase in drag to maintain the same speed. If you want battery power, I can grind the numbers for you later. However, if you only need that much light 1 or 2 times per year, a 2nd headlight, or some kind of adaptation might be more effective: http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/bicycles/bicycle-flashlight.jpg I don’t need it I rarely take the MTB out for night rides, more likely to be the gravel bike which I tend to stick to roads be they tarmac/dirt/battered farm tracks but either way at that Strada at 600 Lumens is quite capable, what it can’t do is MTB trails which tend to twist and dip and so on, and you end up riding into un lit sections, where as the MTB light this is where it shines! Even at low settings it covers the ground and low branches however the land might twist and drop off! Low on the MTB light is approximately same as full on the Strada, in terms of perceived brightness. Roger Merriman. Right. Use different lights for different needs/terrain. What I like best about a good external powered battery light is the simplicity to move it from bike to bike. Plus in winter when it's extremely cold I can keep the battery tucked inside my jacket and thus keep the run time high. Cheers Can’t say I’ve noticed much reduced run times, though the Strada is all in one so would generate some heat, and London winters are never that cold -10 at absolute limit, mostly +3 or so. Plus short winter days mean I’m running on high more, this said my old light ran off AA batteries and that definitely did dip in winter! The old battery for the MTB does dip a bit, it’s a external one you mount to the bike frame, though new one I haven’t noticed. I do like the Strada as it just clips on and off, no straps and whatever so can just clip on to either the Commute or Gravel bike, and remove if I park up somewhere etc. Roger Merriman |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
New 1920s Technology... Today!
On 4/15/2021 5:52 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
snip The problem is that most of the lumens claimed by headlight manufacturers and vendors are little better than science fiction. That is true for most of the no-name lights from Amazon, eBay, or Aliexpress. But there have been independent tests of some of the more reputable manufacturers' lights that show pretty accurate lumen claims, at least when the battery is fully charged. For example, the Magicshine Monteer 8000s claims 8000 lumens and it was measured at 7800 lumens https://www.mtbr.com/threads/magicshine-monteer-8000s-bike-light-review.1173672/. Look at the graphic at https://www.mtbr.com/attachments/rn1200-ranger-1400-allty1500-jpg.1368263/ where they test three lights at maximum power and lower power. The Magicshine RN1200 actually exceeded its lumen rating for the first 80 minutes. Some manufacturers take the rating of each LED, add them up, and claim a theoretical number of lumens. If you had active nitrogen cooling you might reach the theoretical number, but you'd never reach it in normal use. Here's someone that tested some of the Chinese lights https://youtu.be/m1vFMbSEkdQ?t=957. Not all of them are super-cheap, some cost $100 or so. Two of the better ones he tests are the Towild Professional 1800 ($65) https://www.wild-fires.com/bike-front-light-br1800/ and the Gaciron V9D-1800 ($100, which I have) https://www.gaciron.com/V9D-1800bule.php. The Towild is one of the few LED lights I've seen that have two independent beams, spot and flood. You used to see this long ago with MR11 and MR16 lights where they'd have two separate beams for spot and flood. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Technology advances, to where exactly? | AMuzi | Techniques | 25 | October 3rd 17 03:57 AM |
new light technology | AMuzi | Techniques | 15 | March 17th 17 03:05 PM |
Yet More Technology | John B. | Techniques | 189 | August 24th 15 01:25 AM |
RAAM technology | [email protected] | Racing | 5 | June 4th 10 12:24 AM |
New helmet technology | [email protected] | Techniques | 6 | August 3rd 09 09:26 PM |