Scam? 300-hours @ 300lm.. on 1 D-cell. (Triatholight)

I came across a somewhat suspcious/interesting flashlight on Kickstarter claiming to get 300hrs @ 300lms on a single D-cell.. called the Triatholight.

https://www.kickstarter.com/project...s/triatholighttm-by-enduring-technologies-llc

It goes without saying that anything claiming to get 300+ hours w/ 300 lumens with ANY light is a little suspicious, let alone a single D-cell.
I'm the first one to defend new technology, but when you add to that the lack of any specifics, science or explanation behind their "Battery Assist Module" (which appears to just be a driver) and refusal to elaborate, you have pretty good cause for suspicion.
(Also somewhat suspicious is the fact that someone who claims to have a Masters in Physics uses the word "Ampheres" [sic] multiple times..)



I'm really curious to hear what people think about this.
Of course there are already plenty of people in the Kickstarter comments more than happy to point small things like the fact that "you can't get more energy out than you put in."

(Kickstarter isn't a vendor, so I'm pretty sure it's okay to link.. don't think anyone will have to worry about this as competition heh.. If not though apologies mods.)

ETA:
(For anyone couldn't find the output/runtime claim, it's in the "comments" section - you have to click the "show older comments" button at the bottom. But here it is to make things simpler )

300 hours at .003 lumens, sure..

Chops said:

I came across a somewhat suspcious/interesting flashlight on Kickstarter claiming to get 300hrs @ 300lms on a single D-cell.. called the Triatholight.

It goes without saying that anything claiming to get 300+ hours w/ 300 lumens with ANY light is a little suspicious, let alone a single D-cell.
I'm the first one to defend new technology, but when you add to that the lack of any specifics, science or explanation behind their "Battery Assist Module" (which appears to just be a driver) and refusal to elaborate, you have pretty good cause for suspicion.
(Also somewhat suspicious is the fact that someone who claims to have a Masters in Physics uses the word "Ampheres" [sic] multiple times..)

I'm really curious to hear what people think about this.
Of course there are already plenty of people in the Kickstarter comments more than happy to point small things like the fact that "you can't get more energy out than you put in."

(Kickstarter isn't a vendor, so I'm pretty sure it's okay to link.. don't think anyone will have to worry about this as competition heh.. If not though apologies mods.)

Click to expand...

They don't say "lumens" - has this changed? There's no mention of lumens on the page or in the video. 300 lumens of white light is at least 1.2 watts in theory and closer to 3 watts for practical LEDs, for 300 hours is 360 watthours. Energizer says their alkaline D cell is good for about 20 amperehours at 25 mA discharge, but that's only about 24 watthours, so 300 * 300 is not possible from a single alkaline D cell. However, that's not what they claim.

It's a "fly eye" cluster of 32 LEDs - trouble is, millicandelas without the photometrics of the beam is useless for calculating total output. I suspect it's closer to 30 lumens than 300, still quite useful and within striking distance of being practical for 300 hours on a single D cell, though I bet they'd get better efficacy using a single power LED instead of the fly-eye cluster of 5 mm LEDs.

I hope someone voids the warranty and posts a tear down, but as long as we take |"300 lumens" off the table, there may be no violation of the laws of physics.

Bill

Chops said:

@ 300lms

Click to expand...

*Citation needed*
Ok thx Chops! I'd like to see some of those lights they were comparing against.

Going through the webpage, I think it's a kind of battery vampire thingie, with LED brightness set such that a D cell lasts for weeks. Probably tapering off as the cell empties. Some quotes makes me think this dude isn't aware of the current state of the art in flashlights:

No other flashlight with 32 20,000 MCD Led's can even turn on with a single D battery, let alone a battery with only 1 remaining volt.

Click to expand...

Put 32 LEDs + resistors in parallel, add a "Joule thief" circuit, and presto: light. This is old tech by now. "20,000 MCD Led's" means nothing if those LEDs are driven at a really low level. The rest is a matter of conversion efficiency, cutoff voltages, and drive levels.

Most flashlights overdrive the Led's to provide their brightness, which greatly reduces the Led life.

Click to expand...

My flashlight collection is up to 14 or so now, and to my knowledge *none* of those overdrive their LEDs. Yes a few are driven hard, but not outside spec. Which is fine if cooled accordingly (which they are). I don't care what manufacturers do in all those cheapies out there.

As you can see in the video, even with the low power, it provides sufficient light for a power outage or emergency.

Click to expand...

Again that says nothing. You don't need much light to navigate in the dark, and I have several lights that will run in moonlight mode for a week+ on a single battery.

Due to popular demand we have decided to offer the Triatholight with a waterproof rating of IPX-5.

Click to expand...

Oh goodie... that means waterproof, right? Very impressive.

While working on an unrelated project, we made the discovery that led to our Battery Assist Module, which is the heart of the Triatholight™.

Click to expand...

"discovery" = DC boost converter? Is this guy educated in electronics at all?

The Battery Assist Module is an advanced proprietary circuit that gets the most out of a battery and allows the Triatholight™ to have the best runtime in a flashlight that has ever been provided.

Click to expand...

Never heard of the Predator Pro, then? :thinking: (that's ignoring specialized / home builds which may do even better)

It also has the added benefit of not drawing on the battery when it isn't in use which maximizes battery longevity.

Click to expand...

Ehm... tail clicky? Btw standby current on some lights is low enough to last for decades (well in theory, if battery doesn't leak before that).

The vast majority of competitors don't even list the runtimes of their flashlights

Click to expand...

Huh? :duh2: Must be talking about lights in the hardware store, not proper lights.

there is no real standard for the flashlight industry when it comes to battery runtimes.

Click to expand...

Recollecting something about time-to-10 percent output level, tbh kind of deceiving in many cases. Oh that's not a "standard"? Okay...

The body of the Triatholight™ is unique. It has been made custom for this application, there isn't another flashlight like it in the world. It's made of anodized aluminum.

Click to expand...

If he thinks that anodized aluminium = unique, that would border on idiocy. Unique design? Okay... yes... and?

After many years of testing, we have found that alkaline batteries work better and last longer.

Click to expand...

Compared with what? No mention of lithium batteries at all (either rechargeable or primaries).

In short: either this guy isn't aware of the state of the art in flashlights, or he's ignoring that which would make him an idiot at best, scammer at worst. Might be a nice and even unique light he's made, but "doing what no other light can do"? NOPE.

They do claim 300 lm: "We have done the mathematical equation to calculate our lumens output. We don't have the official equipment to test the actual lumens. We have compared the brightness that we have to other flashlights that have specified their lumens and we are comfortable saying that we are in the range of 250-300 lumens."
This has to be a scam.

Just did the math, results are "enlightning":

Let's say an alkaline D cell can provide 12000 mAh (Wikipedia), say at an average of ~1.35V, and say a light drains it empty at constant output over 300 hours. Yeah this light's output is probably not regulated, and it may draw a battery empty beyond what's usually considered empty, so it may get even more mAh's out of a D cell. And from the description it says it'll still be running 300 hours in. But let's keep things simple.

That's 12 Ah x 1.35V = 16.2 Wh for the D cell (better than an 18650 Li-ion, btw! :huh: ). Over 300 hours that's 0.054W or 54 mW.

Let's say that conversion circuit is close to 100% efficient, and the LEDs put out ~130 lm/W. They'll probably do worse, maybe they're more efficient at very low drive levels. Who cares.

That would give 130 lm/W x 0.054W = ~7 lumens average output.

Now 7 lumens is brighter than moonlight mode on lights I have, in the same ballpark as low mode on my S10-L2 Baton. Having used that (low mode) even as a bicycle light once or twice (!), I can see where this is heading: it might be all there is to it! Plenty bright enough to navigate in the dark during emergencies, and "bright light" for some people who don't know any better. But why use 32 LEDs where a single small power LED (like a Cree XP-E2) would probably do better, is beyond me.

So still think this dude is an idiot. If not a scammer...

I was also thinking some kind of Joule Thief 'tech' was being implemented...

3-4 lm sounds about right.

Am I missing something, or is this amazing "Battery Assist Module" just a typical boost driver?

Kitchen Panda said:

They don't say "lumens" - has this changed?

Click to expand...

Apologies Bill (and anyone else requesting a citation) - that quote came from the creator in the comments section..
I'll try to amend the OP .

Creator Brett D'Onofrio on Apr 22

We took those pictures by request and we got the best light when showing it outdoors. Our patio was a great place to take it but the street lights DID interfere. We never claimed that our light, lights up the whole backyard as pictured. We posted those with the knowledge that people would look at the light beam shining on the aluminum wall.
If that picture threw you off at all, it was not intended.

As far as the lumens go, we did the calculation and compared it with lights that list their lumen output. 250-300 was the number we felt comfortable posting. It is closer to the 300 on a new battery and closer to the 250 after 300 continuous hours.
If you are caught up on the exact lumens of our light, don't be. We cannot measure the exact number and we never claimed that we could. Furthermore, the lumen output is only a general indicator of the brightness. The average consumer does not know what 300 lumens looks like off the top of their head.

We never wanted to get into the lumens debate from the beginning but I wanted to answer every question to the best of our combined ability so as not to leave any unsure details or questions.

Click to expand...

30 lm for 300 minutes? But than we are forgetting the miraculous "Battery Assist Module" which is able to convert air directly into energy....
My 1050 lumens flashlight runs for 1.585 hrs (66 days and nights) on one single 18650 battery charge so its much more efficient.. (it´s a thrunite TN12 2014, did I tell I put it in 0,3 lm moonlight mode?)

I heard that if you use several of those modules in series you can power your house on 2 D cells for up to 300 hours.

Random Dan said:

Am I missing something, or is this amazing "Battery Assist Module" just a typical boost driver?

Click to expand...

The term battery assist module says to me something that assists the battery. So plugging it into a wall socket could be a module as that will assist the battery.

Unlikely of course as that would imply some electronics ability

3-2-1 gone.

He just said that he compare his lights to a 300lumen-light but not in which way. If I compare one of my XM-L light with a XR-E light by looking directly into them the both look pretty bright . Joke aside, I would asume that the light really lasts that long but the lumen ratings are rather low. I can't imagine how you can get 250-300lumens for 300h of a single D-battery with the current LED-technology but he would be the first promising exaggerated features of kickstarted products. A look at the comment section of the project is pretty interesting too. In the end I would say he just uses the inexperience of people that aren't that much into this matter to sell his light.

rayman

rayman said:

I can't imagine how you can get 250-300lumens for 300h of a single D-battery with the current LED-technology

Click to expand...

With current led technology or with any future led technology either. Theoretical limits come to play a lot before that. Future battery technologies may make it possible but it wouldn't be alcaline D-cell any more, and we don't know if that becomes reality in year 2025 or 2100.

dc38 said:

I was also thinking some kind of Joule Thief 'tech' was being implemented...

Click to expand...

A quote from the comments section: "rechargeable batteries are counterproductive to the way the Battery Assist Module works." This could mean joule thief implementation. Joule thief would deep discharge the rechargeable batteries which would greatly shorten their useful life.

Anyway, there are plenty of patent references mentioned (tens of patents by his close relatives and the circuit is said to be based on one of those patents, too). Why oh why is it (almost) always so that when inventor/sales guy refers to patents, there is NO single patent number presented. Patents are public. Do not make any patent claims in your advertizing unless you are ready to reveal which patents you are talking about. Without it, I just assume no numbers = no patents.

(Which reminds me about Barry Beams Bike light Kickstarter project. I guess I need an update on that, too.)

"We cannot measure the exact number and we never claimed that we could."
A flashlight designer without any means to measure output? Not even a home-made integrating sphere?

"The average consumer does not know what 300 lumens looks like off the top of their head."
Maybe they're depending on that.

...and I would cut them some slack with regards to the lumen output if they didn't exaggerate by 2 orders of magnitude.

Hey guys, here's the patent information for anyone who is curious. (Just got it from my buddy who originally told me about the project and thought this is something a few of you might be interested in)
Keep in mind this is just a part of the "module" as a whole.
I assumed since he's a flashlight developer he's already a member of CPF, but someone told him about this thread in the comments just to make sure, so hopefully we'll be hearing from the creator himself at some point.

https://www.google.com/patents/US4449075

Thx for that tidbit, Chops! For non-electronics ppl here: that's a timer IC (555 ?) used as a PWM driver to regulate power of a lamp...

Many patents are (or are supposed to be ) granted on the grounds of "you have pre-existing X, you have pre-existing Y, you combine X and Y in a way that is non-obvious to someone familiar with the state of the art". Doesn't matter how complicated, if to an expert it would be an obvious way to do things, it should be non-patentable. Unfortunately there's many BS patents like these on the books...

Note that once in a while, someone does come up with an entirely new X or Y. But that is very rare. And usually results in a whole slew of patents along the lines of "new X + A = patent", "new X + B = patent", "new X + C = patent", etc, etc. :laughing:

Above circuit could have come straigth out of a 70's electronics textbook, stuff like this has been done 1000's of times before. So if that patent hasn't expired already, it's pretty much non-valid anyway. In the year of the Lord 2014, one would check out eg. Maxim (or TI, or NXP, or ...), who have a whole bunch of IC's built exactly for applications like this. Add a miniature coil, a few tiny resistors / capacitors and presto: done.

Not saying this "Battery Assist Module" isn't a nice circuit, interesting, or wouldn't be a good way to drive LEDs. But patent-worthy? "Invention"? NOPE. If that dude spent months or a year+ developing that, he wasted his time. In a well-equipped electronics lab, I could work that out in a day... (perhaps a few days tops if in my bedroom ). And no that's not because I had a look at above circuit. Given a rough idea how to drive a LED, requirements -> circuit would be straightforward to anyone who knows this kind of stuff.