HDS "parasitic drain"

[wyager]

[Posts moved here from another thread - DM51]

Preflash is a glitch, not a needed feature (unlike parasitic drain, which actually serves a purpose)

>parasitic drain is a feature

Lol, what? Are you implying that parasitic drain is a needed/desired feature of a flashlight? It's as much a glitch as pre-flash. It would be best to get rid of it....


Also, as someone mentioned, the the HDS lights are almost 3x (or more) as expensive as a quark...

 

[HKJ]

Re: 47`s preflash issue, still a problem?

>parasitic drain is a feature

Lol, what? Are you implying that parasitic drain is a needed/desired feature of a flashlight? It's as much a glitch as pre-flash. It would be best to get rid of it....

Parasitic drain is a feature of most modern electronic equipment. It is decided by the designer that it is needed to fulfil the requested featured of the product.
Nobody designs a product and later discovers that it has parasitic drain, it has to be designed in from the start and usual there are done a lot of work to make it as small as possible.

A preflash is an unintended feature and might or might not be discovered during development. The problem is that it might require serious changes to a design to get rid of it.
My guess is that all new light designs from 4Sevens will be without preflash or with only a very small preflash.

 

[DM51]

Re: 47`s preflash issue, still a problem?

Are you implying that parasitic drain is a needed/desired feature of a flashlight? It's as much a glitch as pre-flash. It would be best to get rid of it...

You reveal your lack of knowledge. A microscopic current is required for the electronic switch - without it, the switch wouldn't work. Furthermore, the current is so tiny that it would take ~15 years to drain the cell, which means the cell would die of old age long before it was depleted by the switch.

 

[wyager]

Re: 47`s preflash issue, still a problem?

Parasitic drain is a feature of most modern electronic equipment. It is decided by the designer that it is needed to fulfil the requested featured of the product.
Nobody designs a product and later discovers that it has parasitic drain, it has to be designed in from the start and usual there are done a lot of work to make it as small as possible.

A preflash is an unintended feature and might or might not be discovered during development. The problem is that it might require serious changes to a design to get rid of it.
My guess is that all new light designs from 4Sevens will be without preflash or with only a very small preflash.

I see the distinction... but it's not as if parasitic drain is a plus. I'm pretty sure 4sevens knew pre-flash would be a possibility when they designed an efficient driver with such massive range, so it's as much a "feature" as the parasitic drain on an HDS.

You reveal your lack of knowledge. A microscopic current is required for the electronic switch - without it, the switch wouldn't work. Furthermore, the current is so tiny that it would take ~15 years to drain the cell, which means the cell would die of old age long before it was depleted by the switch.

My lack of knowledge? I've been programming MCUs on a hobbyist level for about a year now, I know how parasitic drain and intrinsically safe switches work... And while I'm aware that the current drain is tiny, all I was saying is that calling it a "feature", while calling pre-flash a "glitch" is kind of stupid...

 

[Woods Walker]

Re: 47`s preflash issue, still a problem?

I still can't believe people are talking about a drain that takes 15 years to suck a battery dry. Did I get that right? 15 years? Maybe there is something I am missing?

 

[pjandyho]

Re: 47`s preflash issue, still a problem?

I still can't believe people are talking about a drain that takes 15 years to suck a battery dry. Did I get that right? 15 years? Maybe there is something I am missing?

Precisely. It is like they intended to spend more than a $100 on a light to shelf-queen them. I am not saying that one can't do that but HDS lights are definitely not museum pieces.

wyager, if you claimed you have the relevant knowledge, could you have avoided parasitic drain on the HDS? How would you do it if you are the designer of HDS lights? Maybe you could share some ideas with us? Like I said on my previous post, and which I believed you have not read, the electronic switch was used to ensure durability of operation (read tested to one million cycle) and to allow all the switching of modes including on/off on HDS lights to be done on just the one button itself. No need to twist and turn the bezel as offered by many other manufacturers. I couldn't see how a mechanical clicky could have offered the same level of reliability and ease of use. There is nothing like being able to switch output using one handed clicking operation, especially when one of my hand is engaged. With durability and one handed operation in mind using an electronic switch, how would you have designed HDS lights without parasitic drain, and is it possible? Maybe you could share with us?

 

[wyager]

Re: 47`s preflash issue, still a problem?

wyager, if you claimed you have the relevant knowledge, could you have avoided parasitic drain on the HDS? How would you do it if you are the designer of HDS lights? Maybe you could share some ideas with us? Like I said on my previous post, and which I believed you have not read, the electronic switch was used to ensure durability of operation (read tested to one million cycle) and to allow all the switching of modes including on/off on HDS lights to be done on just the one button itself. No need to twist and turn the bezel as offered by many other manufacturers. I couldn't see how a mechanical clicky could have offered the same level of reliability and ease of use. There is nothing like being able to switch output using one handed clicking operation, especially when one of my hand is engaged. With durability and one handed operation in mind using an electronic switch, how would you have designed HDS lights without parasitic drain, and is it possible? Maybe you could share with us?

Again, I never said I could re-invent the driver or anything. ALL I SAID was that it's ridiculous to try and pass off parasitic drain as a "feature" while treating pre-flash like a glitch. I never contested the durability of electronic switches or their benefits, I only contested the unfair classifications of shortcomings.

On a side note, can anyone explain the HDS digital clicky hardware to me? Is it piston based like the nitecore lights?

 

[pjandyho]

Re: 47`s preflash issue, still a problem?

Again, I never said I could re-invent the driver or anything. ALL I SAID was that it's ridiculous to try and pass off parasitic drain as a "feature" while treating pre-flash like a glitch. I never contested the durability of electronic switches or their benefits, I only contested the unfair classifications of shortcomings.

On a side note, can anyone explain the HDS digital clicky hardware to me? Is it piston based like the nitecore lights?

I believe you said this?

Lol, what? Are you implying that parasitic drain is a needed/desired feature of a flashlight? It's as much a glitch as pre-flash. It would be best to get rid of it....

This is not a court of law and I believe not many here are native english speakers. I believe the word "feature" was used for lack of a better word. It is not a feature, neither is it a glitch. Henry from HDS personally did not sell it as a feature though. And I don't think the pre-flash in Quark is really a glitch but we can't stop what others are thinking. They have their rights to their own opinions. I apologize if I have misunderstood your previous post.

This is how the switch look like. It is not a piston design.

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showpost.php?p=3396138&postcount=915

If you want to know more about HDS and the construction, you may start reading the whole of Part 10 before continuing to Part 11