The light looks promising. I've done bike rides with the guy, so I may chip in to support the project:
The light looks promising. I've done bike rides with the guy, so I may chip in to support the project:
I'm on the Bikecurrent bike light list, what little remains of it... so I'm familiar with Barry and have seen the announcement of the Kickstarter project. I've looked at the Kickstarter project page, but haven't really figured out how the light compares to other commercial bike lights. Any chance that you've seen the light and formed an opinion, or can share any observations?
Looks and sounds shockingly like a standard aspheric beam. Blinding and unsafe to other drivers? I hope I'm wrong!
" My patent pending beam lights up the whole road evenly. As with fine luxury sports car lights, high resolution optics project an even beam that's a few lanes wide by far enough ahead for high speed electric motorcycles ,without glare in oncoming drivers' eyes."
The beam shots I can find don't show much more than nearby glare and blackness ahead, but a bizarre false-color output pattern looks more like a triple optic than a single. Let's see what else comes out.
And what's the emitter?
I first raised this idea a couple of years ago in the "Let's design a road front light beam" thread, post #158. I've changed the beam design since then, but the idea looks very similar.
For me the biggest mistake of this project is 26650 cell - 4500mAh ok maybe reeal maybe not, but it's not a standard cell and biggest manuufacturers are not putting their money on some non standard cells. Now we are getting up to 3200mAh from 18650 branded cells, within a year up to 3500mAh i think and those 26650 will stay at the same capacity.
Beside that, looking on the driver and beam shape - double XM-L with recoil type reflector + lens.
Engineered for optimal brightness and efficiency, our Reverse
Offset Lens design launches the next generation in lighting
technology. ROL™ features a unique lens that focuses an LED
beam on our precisely-curved reflector, maximizing output by
eliminating non-controlled light.
by personal correspondence, Mr. Barry Beams tells me that he is using XPG's, and that he is being choosy about the tint and temp.
I suppose that means 3 XPGs, but then a max output of 1400 lumens is really pushing it, I'd think?
If he is choosing some nice tint - i.e. outdoor white 3C 4750K - he can only get R4 bin, then it highly depends how he is counting lumens. 1400 lumens from the lamp means 1600 lumens from leds, then he is much over reasonable currents (XP-G R4 @ 1,5A = 433 lumens, @2,5A = 540 lumens). If f from the leds - only a bit .
Joan Deitchman gave some feedback on the light:
I was fortunate enough to get to use several of the prototypes during SFR brevets and RAAM this year, and was quite impressed with several qualities/characteristics of the lights (multiple settings, wide and evenly distributed beam, integrated battery, etc.). The weight is 214g (including battery). The dimensions are: 116x40x45mm.
To expand on my earlier comment that I was familiar with Barry via the Bikecurrent list, you can look at the archives and draw your own conclusions. The Bikecurrent list is on Topica, and can be found here:
Barry's posts use just the letter "b" as the author name, although posts from a couple of years ago used "bbarry". He did mention his Barry Beams light in posts in Oct 2010.
The only beam shot I "think" I am seeing on the kickstarter page does not look good, but it is so confusing it is hard to tell. It certainly does not look asymmetric at which a "road" beam would be, i.e. less light to the left and up so you don't blind drivers.
I don't get the circuit board at all. It looks like at best its a resistive circuit. Not great for getting the most of out of the LEDs and certainly not best to adapt to difference LED forward voltages. Woopy do that is is gold plated. I do outdoor/automotive stuff all the time. Gold plated (ENIG) is really no better than any other board plating method and actually has some inferior properties. It really is not justified from a cost standpoint for something like this as it provides no benefits. ENIG has its place. When I use high density parts the surface planarity can become an issue. However, for LED drivers and certainly for this board, that does not come remotely into play.
Maybe someone should tell him about the lights in Europe? ... They already have asymmetric beams.
SWHS, fun reading ... I find the same issue with some posters on CPF ... they like to behave as experts, but when called on their "presumptions" they get all defensive and never can back up claims.
Steve K, looked at that link you provided. Barry seems to have startlingly little understanding of LED drive electronics even well into his Barry Beams project.
Unfortunately, many people will buy into this and end up with the same light they could have bought today for less money that works just as well.
Anyone think this looks like an over sized Planet Bike light?
It will be boosted version of Moon X-Power 500 :
With a custom optics and over-designed driver .
I have had thoughts about building a diy triple led bike light with a more even illumination, too, but this doesn't seem to be even close to what I have had in mind. I guess the description: "Looks like a pair of car headlights on the road right in front" refers to the 2 hotspots side by side. I also don't think that it is a good thing to light the feet and water bottle, it is just an unwanted source of glare and distraction. Not sure how it will do that either, but it is written in the goals and features. IMHO it doesn't seem to lights the ground right in front of the wheel very evenly either.
Anyway, this caught my attention:
What is this magical plastic that can be compared to aluminum in terms of heat conductance?The heat conducting plastic weighs half of aluminum and carries heat just as well.
Edit: I thought about this thousand backers thing he mentions in the Kickstarter home page ("If a picture is worth a thousand words, then can this video convince a thousand backers?"... "One thousand is the MOQ (minimum order quantity) reputable companies will produce"). What does he mean? I thought it was just casual talk, but let me quote the announcement email in the discussion group that Steve K provided:
link: http://lists.topica.com/lists/bikecu...=d&start=13366Originally Posted by b in lists.topica.com/lists/bikecurrent/read
A single Barry Beam costs $99 dollars in Kickstarter. The Kickstarter goal is $49500, which equals to less than 500 lights. Why?
Last edited by Esko; 10-08-2012 at 06:44 AM.
Titanium vs. Aluminum has a dramatically different thermal conductivity score, but not much difference in real heat management. He might get acceptable performance here, but not while driving hard. Perhaps plastic is a thin layer over the metal - in which case I am concerned over insulating voids as part of the production process.
I'm skeptical of a lot of things. Barry seems to denigrate every other light project (That old one is junk, this new one is a scam) he mentions... and has some not-quite-right in his design or presentation (suggest me a voltage splitter to use my Barry-Beams light on my 1916 Harley [Is this legal? Who knows?]). There is a dearth of beamshots, so I borrowed some for his videos. Since these videos are posted in support of his "The Future of Bike Lighting" project, I am quite permitted to use them to consider the performance of the lights.
I watched one of his 'check out my awesome car-headlight-pwning bike light' videos and grabbed a random screenshot. I wanted to have taillights and streetlights to show the near-field glare from this light. There doesn't appear to be enough discrimination between foreground and distant lighting for my liking. Here's one with less light pollution:
Note the poorly-visible pine tree - there is a real cutoff here, until you tilt the bike to turn. That's okay. What bothers me is that about four fence-posts ahead (fifty feet or so) there is a black abyss of darkness. I don't expect this sort of performance from a high-dollar light, I expect it at the $50 price point.
From Topica, Barry suggests interesting on-road lighting.
" Solving the antique motorcycle issue is part of a longer development
goal to produce an automotive Barry Beam to use as either fog/running
lights, or as the most kickass car headlights imaginable, if you can
imagine four of these screaming up the road, but still not blinding an
oncoming driver's eye."
I can't imagine he's gotten far enough into the vehicular lighting segment to realize the issues with having four lights on a car, much less matching output and directionality standards in civilized countries. I hope he doesn't take money before researching the issues inherent in his plan, so that he has a plan of action to proceed.
Your images are too large and have been replaced with links Please resize and repost.
See Rule #3 If you post an image in your post, please downsize the image to no larger than 800 x 800 pixels. - Thanks Norm
Norm - fixed pictures. Thanks kindly!
Last edited by AnAppleSnail; 10-10-2012 at 06:13 AM. Reason: Corrected picture size
The article mentions some of the improvements in thermally conductive plastics:
"Whereas unfilled thermoplastics have a thermal conductivity of around 0.2 W/mK (Watts/meter-°Kelvin), most thermally conductive plastic compounds typically have 10 to 50 times higher conductivity (1-10 W/mK). One firm, Cool Polymers, offers products with 100 to 500 times the conductivity of a base polymer (10-100 W/mK).... ... Thermal conductivity of extrusion-grade aluminum alloys is near 150 W/mK".
How do they do it? Here's some discussion of that:
"Among the most commonly used heat-conductive additives are graphite carbon fibers and ceramics such as aluminum nitride and boron nitride. Graphite fibers conduct electricity as well as heat, which suits them to applications where RFI shielding is required, such as hand-held communication devices. By contrast, the ceramic additives are electrically insulative. They are suited to applications that come into contact with electrical leads. Virtually all the suppliers of thermally conductive compounds offer both electrically conductive and insulative types. Thermally conductive compounds are usually formulated with crystalline engineering resins due to their high heat resistance and lower melt viscosities, but amorphous resins can also be used. Cool Polymers, for instance, has developed a thermally conductive polysulfone compound."
Pretty interesting stuff. Using thermally conductive plastics would let the manufacturer avoid the cost of machining parts, or more likely, the cost of tooling for die casting aluminum. OTOH, the cost of tooling for the injection molded plastic stuff is pretty expensive too. I can recall costs near $10k for plastic injection molds for a small sensor. If you only build 1000 units, that adds $10 to the manufacturing cost, and probably $20 to the wholesale cost.
Pretty interesting stuff. Using thermally conductive plastics would let the manufacturer avoid the cost of machining parts, or more likely, the cost of tooling for die casting aluminum. OTOH, the cost of tooling for the injection molded plastic stuff is pretty expensive too. I can recall costs near $10k for plastic injection molds for a small sensor. If you only build 1000 units, that adds $10 to the manufacturing cost, and probably $20 to the wholesale cost.[/QUOTE]
One niche here is to injection-mold standard billets and then machine the part. One problem with plastics, and especially ones with fibrous additives, is that these properties align to the direction of flow. So if I make a cylindrical billet for machining parts from, the thermal conductivity and strength will be greatest in whatever direction of flow filled each part of the mold. This leads to complex stress/strain profiles, as well as hard-to-predict thermal paths. Carbon-fiber fillers, for instance, are oriented during molding (One reason mold development is so critical for plastics). Some fillers are less sensitive to this orientation, and some mold designs are more resistant to creating anisotropic (Not the same in all directions) properties.
It seems that plastics are now at the point where a well-designed light can be machined from plastic stock and not be terribly handicapped by the material choice for thermal management. This is an exciting development, because it means that production-quality parts could be turned out by plastic lathe-work or perhaps someday 3d printers.
Regarding the novel plastic materials, thanks for the information, discussion and the links. Interesting materials and interesting times it seems.
Since people with first hand experience in race critical and life on the line bombing downhill and remote trail environments love using my lights, then if you live in the SF Bay area, get in touch to arrange a test ride.
@ttoshi, thx for spreading the word about the light.
Joan Dietchman had awesome night time speeds this past weekend at the Furnace Creek 508, and four other racers there also found a special advantage with my lights, further affirming that these lights really do give bikers something special on the road versus any other optical approach available. They know that its not only about making lumens, its what color are they and where do you put them?
Naysayers are one of the many chuckholes that come with an inventors' and innovators' turf.
Its curious seeing people expound on far reaching assumptions, yet not contact me directly for simples answers. The amusing speculations and "must be" assertions take conventional wisdom to extremes. These leave out needs of a viable commercial product, nor consider non-amortized thousands already invested in de$ign and tooling. Interesting that no one commented on the built in high power charging circuit, essential for recharging higher power internal cells.
Cool Polymer is awesome stuff. Yes it does extude directionally, and requires a particular touch to machine it without chipping or shattering. A $400. ingot + 80+ hours got me the CNC'ed test heatsinks that I made prototypes and did thermal measurements from.
The antique motorcycle solution would be a DC to DC regulator taken from the output of another device made by an electrical specialites company in place of the antique generator. The project needed more time and $$ than the customer's schedule and budget would allow.
Funny, also, to see an old troll still at it, after I needed to block him or he was removed from harrassing other lists. Certainly the monitors should address his use of demeaning language and slanderous portrayal at me.
Since most of the postings raise topics that the Kickstarter page covers, please read it before posting further.
Best way to see what a few years and a ton of money went into developing, is to place an order.
The demands of launching a startup take up more time than there are hours on the clock. I did want to respond to the thread, and thank you for the bandwidth and exposure.
This will be my only posting here til my brake/taillight is ready to launch in a few months. Please send further tech questions through the Kickstarter project site and I'll answer promptly, and please do keep spreading word about my project.
My advice, if you don't want to do that, from Mark Twain,
"Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can become great."
Helmet Side Up,
Barry, I hope you find success and your dreams do come true, but I will use another quote, "Put up or shut up".
Your post that I have quoted below is all hand waving. "People" ? ... please provide names and pedigree, i.e. accomplishments in professional cycle racing. Written letters with signatures go a long way.
You addressed virtually nothing in this forum hence you should expect that you will be considered less than sincere in your claims.
A photometrics reports with 2.5 degree resolution can be run by most photometric labs. All I personally would like to see is an independent photometrics report that shows the lighting distribution.
The beam shots we have available to us (us being people here who know lighting, automotive lighting, human perception, etc.) do not give us confidence the product meets your claims. Even the alluded asymetric beam pattern as one would expect in a road light is not evident.
I have been involved in quite a few startups, some succesful, some not so much .... always took the time to talk with prospective customers and those who could advocate for me.
We are "customers" and "experts". We have every right to be skeptical when the information that has been presented to us does not meet the product claims. You tell us we are making assumptions and leaps. WELL BARRY, YOU ARE TRYING TO GET INVESTMENT!!! Everything should be clear. There should be no room for leaps or assumptions.
I have read the Kickstarter page ... as difficult to follows as it is at times and as lacking as it is in verifiable information. I will not be placing an order as frankly, you have not sold me.
As one entrepreneur to another may I make a suggestion? As opposed to blowing off us naysayers... otherwise known as knowledgeable potential customers and critics, why not address the concerns we have raised. If you did that, you may find yourself with more sales and endorsements ...... just a thought.
The reason I did not say anything about the built in charger is that you are using a single cell battery and given there are any number of single chip off the shelf charge control ICs, it is not impressive to me. It also makes no impact on the efficiency. Want to impress me, tell me about your high performance LED driver, or provide a member a sample loan to test the approximate lumens claimed as well as the run time claims. People on here would even do it for free... what great value for your project. If you believe in it as strongly as indicated, then this is a no brainer.
I read some of the posts indicated by the person you claim to be slanderous. I did not find his tone slanderous and I actually felt that you were making attacks on him. He appeared to be using valid thought out arguments as opposed to conjecture which is what he was greeted with. I am independent, I have no stake in this either way so perhaps my opinion should be considered.
If you do choose to break your "vow" and post here, I encourage you ... to use nothing but facts ... objective, not subjective. You will find it gets you much farther with people that know what they are doing.
No small number of custom makers and new companies take advantage of the tremendous resources here on cpf to develop, test, and market their lights. Pass-arounds, reviews by some of the known users, and cold, hard facts convince us. To paraphrase a man who shaped modern industry, ”In God we trust. All others bring data.”
Good luck in your product. I'd love to hear your response to my concerns about the apparent beam patterns I captured from your video. If your data shows a good product, the assertions can't do any harm. Right now I've got our guesses and your videos to go by. Sell it!
Thanks for writing in the thread. $99 is not much for a 1400(?) lumen bike light (especially for one with non-circular beam), but I feel that there are too many questions for me to be interested. I agree that sending a pre-production sample to one of the CPF regular reviewers could have convinced many people both here and elsewhere (provided that the light was found out to be good of course).
Good luck with your projects and one comment about your post:
Hmm. Methinks Barry doth protest too much...
The more I read, the less I like.
Once again, if you care to ask questions directly instead of this behind my back slander fest as if I came out and proved that Jesus wasn't divinely conceived, then you can ask them on my Kickstarter, by clicking on the light blue colored box on the bottom of the project description titled "Ask a question."
This is contrary to Esko's mistaken claim that you have to place an order before you can ask a question.
Applesnail's video clips and erroneous interpretation got me curious. If you are the guy with antique Harley's, your sour grapes posting shows that I should not trust giving you lighting support on future events. Considering the strength of the direct introduction I was given to you, you really ought to know better than to claim against the first hand judgement of a guy who zipped around at night on a motorcycle with his only lighting coming from my light clamped to his handlebar.
The problem with those frame clips is omitting the source of the images. Frame capture of a 60FPS compact videocam in motion under high frequency road vibration with rapid image stabilization and exposure metering correction has obvious limits. I'm not into posting knowingly deceiving stationary shot from a high resolution camera on a tripod. The frame captures shows are misleading, whether that was done knowingly or not.
But I would expect a higher degree of common knowledge on this list than to not question the type of equipment and camera settings used for any night photography taken. I'll hand over a live light for the side by side lighting shootouts on MTBR. For reference, in their 2006 shootout, my setup at that point in LED lighting development was equal to the best of the test at any price, and couldn't be included because it wasn't a commercially available light. Those lights were the stone age compared to where I am now. While the rest of the industry continues to build the same basic light, based on the same conventional wisdom.
Contrary to Esko's attempt to stop any of you from asking questions to me through Kickstarter, anyone can ask a question on Kickstarter without needing to place an order.
To do so, click on the light blue colored box on the bottom of the project description titled "Ask a question."
The very few people who get prototypes are on rigid NDA agreements, including detailed burden of proof clauses that cover the Lawrence Livermore case criteria, and have demonstrated specific need to know. Anyone is welcome to buy a light and reverse engineer for their own personal and private use. The anxious enthusiasm to get wholesale quantities of my lights based on demos I gave at Interbike to well known and long established major bike equipment distributors states the high value my lights will have on the market.
For anyone studying usable visibilty and optical design, the almighty total lumen count is a false god. It seems that Candlepower Forums lives in a vacuum of self declared false authority to anoint or excommunicate according to what conforms to only your approved range of conventional wisdom. Since there is little about my lights that follows conventional wisdom, I don't expect much acceptance of my ideas on this list.
A better use of your collective braintrust would be to devise a usable visibility measurement which would provide accurate indication of the real usable visibility that a bicycle light provides. End lumens, beam lumens, and field lumens would be a start. A field lumen measure of the beam lumens on a German STVo type target might be a start.
Several people who I steered this thread to found the general attitude entertaining. The clearest portrayal was, "Wow...some of these guys need attitude adjustments...yikes!"
Now that I've responded to those single frame screen captures, and described where to ask a direct question through Kickstarter without making a purchase, I really am out of here. Either write me there, contact me privately, or schedule a night ride where I'll set you up with a light to try out yourself.
Helmet side up,
AS EXPECTED BARRY, YOU HAND WAVED ... AND SAID NOTHING! ... and yes I am shouting because you are not listening.
SO I WILL SPELL IT OUT CLEARLY --- HAVE A PHOTOMETRICS TEST DONE BY AN INDEPENDENT LAB AND POST THE RESULTS ... PERIOD! NOTHING ELSE REALLY CUTS IT
As I stated VERY CLEARLY, there numerous people on this forum with extensive knowledge of lighting for transportation purposes and can look at a photometrics report and tell very quickly how well it will work. We don't need to invest any time devising methods for "real usable visibility" ..... as a photometrics report coupled with well understood concepts regarding near field lighting and far field lighting for transportation exist.
So again, PUT UP OR SHUT UP ... respectfully of course.
Of course you could also address:
- Energy management and show how you actually achieve claims
But instead you choose to hand wave.
Why is that? I am guessing for one you have not had an independent optical test. Don't tell me that you have to have the mold made first, parts run, etc. as there are many companies that will machine optical prototypes ... heck a numerically accurate simulation as opposed to a too small to see color graph would work too.
If you think any of these things are too much to expect to be provided to an "investor". Just say so.
p.s. I have asked in a very professional, clear, and concise manner the questions as above and in my other post on Kickstarter. Based on your posts here, I expect .. yes expect an answer .... publicly please.
Last edited by SemiMan; 10-10-2012 at 04:35 PM.
So I went ahead and watched Barry's yt videos. I found them annoyingly devoid of informational content, and I gladly switched over to the beginning of David Lynch's Lost Highway. This movie at least features a fascinating soundtrack to make up for the short-reaching beams on-road ... Deranged. I'm almost tempted to put this label on someone who has spent significant money, time and effort on a product, and is choosing to risk a lot by displaying a defensive, unprofessional attitute toward peers here, however jealous, erroneous, disgruntled, culturally challenged, or indeed slanderous they might be.
(The most powerful light with StVZO approval is the Busch&Müller Big Bang HID light).
Last edited by Esko; 10-11-2012 at 12:38 AM.