Run-Time Plot - ARC-AA

[Roy]

This runtime plot is for an ARC-AA (factory second)using an Everactive alkaline battery.

Equipment used is a Extech mdl 401021 Light Meter Adapter into a Radio Shack 22-805 multimeter with a PC interface that is using Scopeview software (V 1.08).

The vertical axis is in mVDC and is equivalent to one foot candle per mVDC. The horizontal axis is in one hour per division.

Be aware that your actual battery milage may vary from that indicated by this runtime plot.


The runtime to 50% max brightness = 10 hours 12 minutes

 

[Roy]

Here's a side by side by side compairison of the Ultra-g, Arc-AA and Arc AAA.

 

[this_is_nascar]

Thanks Roy. Can we get a side-by-side runtime test plot comparing the 3-lights?

 

[Roy]

Nascar....You'll get no side by sides from me. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif A spreadsheet program is needed for that and I don't have one. I will be more than happy to furnish the text files for any runtime plot that I have done to anyone that wants to make side by side charts. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinser2.gif

 

[PaulW]

Roy,

Thanks for both the plot and the comparative pictures. The three lights look like the papa bear, the mama bear, and the litt . . . . /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif

Paul

 

[KC2IXE]

Looking at the 2 side by side, they are approximately the same brightness (WELL within binning), and have curves that look the same, with one detail diference

The scale on the "time" axis is double what it is on the AAA - AKA, the AAA is in 30 min/division (and drops into Moon mode at about 7.5 hours), and the AA is in 60 minutes/division, and drops into moon mode at about 13.5 hours

 

[Roy]

Here are some measurment I made earlier today at one foot from the light meter. The measurments were made in the brightest part of the beam pattern.

Arc-AA 27.4Fc @ 1ft
Arc-AAA 17.7Fc @ 1ft
Ultra-G 16.2Fc @ 1ft

 

[Quickbeam]

Roy, Send me the text files and I'll make the graph.

 

[Roy]

"Houston, we have a problem!"

Overlaying the plots for the Ultra-G, Arc-AAA and the Arc-AA would be like compairing apples and oranges. I have changed my test hardware and the vertical axis is now in mVDC not mA. The Arc-AA was plotted with the new light meter and is in mVDC.

 

[brightnorm]

Roy,

Are you planning to test the ARC with a lithium AA?

Brightnorm

 

[paulr]

Roy, maybe you can take a quick brightness reading (no need for a full length runtime test) of the three lights all using the same equipment and a brand new battery. That will allow correctly scaling the three runtime graphs that have already been made using differing measuring equipment.

 

[radellaf]

Still seems odd the AA doesn't run 3x as long as the AAA.

 

[this_is_nascar]

[ QUOTE ]
radellaf said:
Still seems odd the AA doesn't run 3x as long as the AAA.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't forget, that's a single light that's being measured. I have an ARC-AAA that rides on my keychain that runs for 6-hours before dimming to the point where it's noticable.

 

[Moat]

Yes - slight component value variations between lights of the same run could result in these observed/expected runtime and brightness differences.

Plus, I remember Peter mentioning a month or so back that he was tweaking the circuit - for what he didn't say - but I presume it may have been for a slight increase in brightness/current draw, as many folks (myself included) appear to have noticed a significant output increase compared to older AAA's.

That alone may explain the "not 3X runtime" some of us kinda' expected to see. (AA's are closer to 2.3X the capacity of AAA's, anyways) I have no problem with that tradeoff.

Somebody mentioned their new CPF AAA was as bright as the AA - maybe Peter incorporated the "tweaks" into the AAA line as well? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thinking.gif

Roy - thanks for the graphs!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bowdown.gif Your continued contribution to the CPF with these is truly appreciated!!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif

Bob

 

[John N]

[ QUOTE ]
Roy said:
Nascar....You'll get no side by sides from me. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif A spreadsheet program is needed for that and I don't have one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Consider Openoffice. It's a full featured replacement for MS-Office. It reads and writes MS-Office files and the best part is the cost. Zero.

Run on MS-Windows, Linux, Solaris and MacOS X (X windows).

The only downside is a rather long download if you have dialup.

-john