Industry Standard Flashlight Test {ANSI FL-1} & CPF tests

[orbital]

+

The necessity of factoring a flashlights Lux reading, and the Light Box Lumen readings together is key
in determining a flashlights true Total Output number.

Anyone who's done a ceiling bounce test with a dedicated thrower, knows its never as bright a floody light...(LED driven the same)
A floody light throw may 100ft.,.. a dedicated thrower may throw 1000ft.

A formula for calculating both Lux readings and Light Box style Lumen readings together is needed,
to give dedicated throwers the acclamations they deserve.

 

[strinq]

Re: Industry Standard Flashlight Test needed

The only problem is, who would want to regulate the standards?
Lots of work to be done there.

But it would definitely be great if there was a standard in testing lights.
Eg: Lux, lumens, drops, water proofness, working temperature range, etc etc.

Then a whole lot of debates would be solved. But then again, it's fun debating.

 

[Pook]

Re: Industry Standard Flashlight Test needed

Indeed, that's the problem.....why pay for an expensive test when you can just say it's 3million lumen..

 

[mn_doggie]

Re: Industry Standard Flashlight Test needed

Indeed, that's the problem.....why pay for an expensive test when you can just say it's 3million lumen..

Why stop at 3 million?

 

[papajoe]

Re: Industry Standard Flashlight Test needed

This title caught my attention. With the recent debacle at Thrunite (and the number of potential customers waiting in the wings) and the incredible interest in the subject, this thread could become a record breaker,eh ? - We'll see.

A testing standard is needed, but two issues will cause a delay in my opinion. Costs and enforcement are tough issues. I don't see a widespread use of an industry standard any time soon. The main reason is Joe-public doesn't really care about precise readings when they purchase a flashlight.

Nevertheless, I/we have learned alot after reading the Thrunite saga. Of course, there is a huge difference between emitter lumens and OTF. Window material, heat, voltage drop, lense coatings, reflector type, material, and depth, and more reduce OTF.

Emitters produce light according to voltage, current, and circuitry. Most of these parameters serve to reduce from the maximum the actual output from any emitter.

We can take the vendor specs on an emitter, calculate the actual predicted output from current and voltage, estimate reduction from voltage losses, predict a reduction from heat, reduce the output from the window, reduce output from the reflector coatings, apply a fudge factor, and determine an approximation of the actual output. What a PITA !

Soooooo, the thread title is correct. We need a standard ! In the mean time . . . .caveat emptor.

BTW - I'm going to purchase a Catapult V2 despite the issues.

 

[jirik_cz]

Re: Industry Standard Flashlight Test needed

There is a need for an Industry Standard with testing Flashlights.

It already exists...
http://flashlightnews.org/story2595.shtml

 

[Ragiska]

Re: Industry Standard Flashlight Test needed

you seem to be talking about a "cpf standard", as industry doesn't use homemade light boxes.

a true industry standard does exist, ANSI FL-1

 

[orbital]

Re: Industry Standard Flashlight Test needed

you seem to be talking about a "cpf standard", as industry doesn't use homemade light boxes.

a true industry standard does exist, ANSI FL-1

+

Yes,..thanks Ragiska

 

[Ragiska]

Re: Industry Standard Flashlight Test needed

and just so you know, there is already a discussion thread for FL-1

 

[papajoe]

What's with changing the name of the thread ? That messes with continuity. Changing the thread title shouldn't be allowed IMHO. Whaddya think Mr. Moderator ?

 

[saabluster]

What's with changing the name of the thread ? That messes with continuity. Changing the thread title shouldn't be allowed IMHO. Whaddya think Mr. Moderator ?

The OP changed it and since this is his thread he can do what he wants. This topic is already dealt with at length in other threads anyway so I see no need to go over this again.

 

[papajoe]

Thank you . . .

 

[Size15's]

Post a link to an existing thread and if it's appropriate I'm sure a Mod or Admin will merge this thread to it to continue the discussion.

 

[Ragiska]

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=244611

 

[orbital]

+

Thinking more on the lines of a formula for LUX to be multiplied in addition to Lumen readings,
to give a more complete reflection of the Total Output.
{like listing torque and horsepower readings for a vehicle}

Just for the sake of discussion,...consider multiplying the Lumen Reading by .05 for every 2500 LUX over 15,000, for the Total Output

Example: If a light had a 300 Lumens Reading and a LUX of 30,000
then the Total Output number = 390

This is simply giving gravity to the LUX reading not fully accounted for.

~ If there was an extreme thrower with 400 Lumens Read and a LUX of 50,000,.. there's a need to recognize its output in a different way.

 

[Ragiska]

+

Thinking more on the lines of a formula for LUX to be multiplied in addition to Lumen readings,
to give a more complete reflection of the Total Output.
{like listing torque and horsepower readings for a vehicle}

Just for the sake of discussion,...consider multiplying the Lumen Reading by .05 for every 2500 LUX over 15,000, for the Total Output

Example: If a light had a 300 Lumens Reading and a LUX of 30,000
then the Total Output number = 390

This is simply giving gravity to the LUX reading not fully accounted for.

~ If there was an extreme thrower with 400 Lumens Read and a LUX of 50,000,.. there's a need to recognize its output in a different way.

torque and horsepower are DIFFERENT measurements for a car. what you suggest would be to somehow COMBINE them into a single meaningless number.

lumens is THE measure of TOTAL OUTPUT. period. making a flashlight of a given lumen output give more throw does NOT increase the "total output".

lux DOES account for an "extreme thrower" by means of a high lux value. if you make the light brighter with the same throw characteristics, the lux value will increase, correctly describing the increased throw.

people have in the past attempted to come up with the exact same measure you are attempting to, but in the end they realized that they measure two DIFFERENT things, and looking at each number SEPARATELY tells you MUCH more about a light than some skewed meaningless number that is biased towards throwers (or flooders, whatever your preference in setting up the "score"). does a large factor mean the light has massive flood, or simply a high lux number? a dim laser would totally obliterate your system of a single number.

it's no more useful than attempting to describe a person based off a single number derived from shoe size and weight. does a large "person factor" mean they had big feet, or were fat? by merging the numbers instead of leaving them separate, there is no way to tell.

 

[saabluster]

torque and horsepower are DIFFERENT measurements for a car. what you suggest would be to somehow COMBINE them into a single meaningless number.

lumens is THE measure of TOTAL OUTPUT. period. making a flashlight of a given lumen output give more throw does NOT increase the "total output".

lux DOES account for an "extreme thrower" by means of a high lux value. if you make the light brighter with the same throw characteristics, the lux value will increase, correctly describing the increased throw.

people have in the past attempted to come up with the exact same measure you are attempting to, but in the end they realized that they measure two DIFFERENT things, and looking at each number SEPERATELY tells you MUCH more about a light than some skewed meaningless number that is biased towards throwers (or flooders, whatever your preference in setting up the "score"). does a large factor mean the light has massive flood, or simply a high lux number? a dim laser would totally obliterate your system of a single number.

it's no more useful than attempting to describe a person based off a single number derived from shoe size and weight. does a large "person factor" mean they had big feet, or were fat? by merging the numbers instead of leaving them seperate, there is now way to tell.

Agreed.

Sorry Orbital but he is correct. Unless there is something that you just haven't managed to get across correctly as yet I'd have to say this line of thinking is a dead end.

On a side note merging this with the other threads on standards would just create unneeded confusion in the other threads.

 

[orbital]

+

Light Box Lumen Readings are a type of bounce test.

The exact same 'pill' taken out of a P60 drop-in gives less in a ceiling bounce test when placed in a SMO reflector DBS.
that simple, relative test is exactly my point.
Never will I try to create something from nothing..

~ I'll take this one further, an OP reflector will give more in a ceiling bounce test than a SMO in the same light,...

The Lumen Readings in CPF are valuable and I'm not discrediting them at all, actually I'm trying to support.

Regarding torque and horsepower,..of course they are different.
you can't just look at one.}
There is no argument to say you can't create a formula to factor both in, to recognize overall performance.
It just hasn't been done yet.


Consider:
Lumen Reading = Horsepower
LUX Reading = Torque

 

[MrGman]

+

The necessity of calculating a flashlights Lux number, along with Light Box style Lumen readings is absolutely key
in determining a flashlights true output number.

Anyone who's done a ceiling bounce test with a dedicated thrower, knows its never as bright a floody light...(LED driven the same)
A floody light throw may 100ft.,.. a dedicated thrower may throw 1000ft.

A formula for calculating Lux readings along with Light Box style Lumen readings is not only needed,
its the only fair way to give dedicated throwers the acclamations they deserve.

Lux is not a calculated number its a measured number. there is a standard methodology using a properly calibrated lux meter at 1 meter distance or by publishing the distance from the light source to the sensor.

Lumens is also not a calculated number but a measured number if done with a real integration sphere. There is no way to standardized these so called "light box" readings since they are not proper "lumens" readings in the first place.

There is no need to make a new merit factor of lumens X lux to give the value of a light. Simply measuring and publishing the real lumens and real lux tells you total output and throw of a light. You are trying to reinvent the wheel which is quite unnecessary.

A decent lux meter can be had starting at no less than $175.00 and typically really at $1000 or more. If you have the lux meter you can take honest Lux measurements, plain and simple, no calculations need to be applied. Lights can all be compared at the same distances, 1 meter, 3 meters, 5 meters and so on.

There are standardized testing for all of this, none of which include a milk carton or a painted white wood rectangular "box" or a texured ceiling.

 

[orbital]

+

I fully understand LUX & Lumen Reading are measured.

My use of the word calculating is to factor both of them together.
Post #18 givers a slightly better description than my OP.