*LIVE* Arc-LS Power Utilisation Curves *LIVE*

[The_LED_Museum]

X-AXIS: Elapsed time, in H:MM format.
* How long the Arc has been left on.

Y-AXIS: Milliamps generated by the photocell.
* Directly correlates with optical energy output.

Lower graph is a continuation of the 2 Lithium AA configuration - the damn thing's still going.

UPDATES BEGINNING 9:30AM PST.
TODAY, ONE ENERGIZER L91 'DOES' ITSELF!

All 123 tests on the prototype are finished, and AA tests are now underway.

Graphs are plotted in real-time, pixel by pixel, using Photoshop**
The same program was also used to manually draw out the template... sorry if I haven't answered any mail today, but this is what I've been doing since 11am.

** Plots for the Energizer E2 and Surefire batteries were extrapolated from the data I recorded last week.

 

[**DONOTDELETE**]

From your graph it appears that 123 lithium battery current levels at 13mA - 15mA for 2 1/2 hours which is presumably the highest LS brigthness with the circuit design and type of battery, while with alkaline battery it levels at 5mA - 7.5mA for 3 hours.

How do alkaline (1.5v) and lithium 123 (3v) type batteries differ in brightness as shown in the graph? Is it like tha Arc-LS vs Nightbuster 8x as shown on your website?

Photo comparison of Arc-LS, Nightbuster 8X, and Expedition 300 shows the Arc-LS beating the other 2 lights but it did not say what type of battery was used for the Arc-LS in that photo comparison.

- verge -

 

[The_LED_Museum]

>while with alkaline battery it levels at
>5mA - 7.5mA for 3 hours.

The "AA" test is *still running*.
I'm plotting new data approximately once every 45 seconds, and uploading the updated graph every five minutes or so.
The "AA" just won't f%*$&ing die.

>How do alkaline (1.5v) and lithium 123 (3v)
>type batteries differ in brightness as
>shown in the graph? Is it like tha Arc-LS
>vs Nightbuster 8x as shown on your website?

Brightness is *directly porportional* to the current measured on the photovoltaic cell.
The lithium appears to be approximately 3x brighter than the single AA setup, when they are compared during their prime (the first couple of hours).


>Photo comparison of Arc-LS, Nightbuster 8X,
>and Expedition 300 shows the Arc-LS beating
>the other 2 lights but it did not say what
>type of battery was used for the Arc-LS in
>that photo comparison.

Unless otherwise stated, I believe I was using two moderately used lithium "AA" cells when those photographs were taken.

Time to upload the graph again...

 

[Go Go Gadget Flashlight]

How are you generating the data for the graph? That's SO cool!

Is the graph generation a part of Photoshop, or something you wrote for the c64???

VERY nicely done!

EDIT: Almost forgot, what are you using for the photocell? The RS solar panel from way back when with the LS just sitting directly on it?

 

[The_LED_Museum]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Go, Go Gadget Flashlight:
How are you generating the data for the graph? That's SO cool!

Is the graph generation a part of Photoshop, or something you wrote for the c64???

VERY nicely done!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Believe it or not, I've been sitting here since 11 this morning individually plotting the pixels as the meter reading changes.
It's just an ordinary .GIF opened in Photoshop, and magnified approximately 1,200% so i can individually drop pixels in place every few seconds.

Even the template for the graph itself was drawn pixel-by-pixel, as I do not have that Encarta or whatever the heck it is that creates those unreadable .XLS files I keep seeing on here.

Doing it this way, at least I will go to bed tonight knowing *everybody* will be able to view my results.

I've already plotted five more points just while typing this in.

Damn single AA configuration just won't die either, so I might be at this for awhile.

P.S.
I'll be up bright and early tomorrow to do this all over again... I want to try to do two more batteries - both of the two-AA configurations if possible.
So keep your eye on the graph.

 

[Gransee]

Wow Craig, I really appreciate your dedication!

I am going to send you something in the mail that should help in future plots. It's not expensive or anything, but it has saved me a lot of work.

Btw, it looks like the single AA is about to take its dive from the look of your plot.

Peter

 

[Go Go Gadget Flashlight]

Ah, OK. I thought you had some automated process that was updating the values, the graph, and re-saving the file at set time interval.

THAT would be really cool.

Just a thought, wouldn't it have been easier to use 10 pixel vertical spacing instead of 12?

Still, your dedication to this is worrisome.

Amazing. Nuff said.

 

[flashfan]

Great graph. Very informative. Thanks for sharing it, Stingmon!

 

[The_LED_Museum]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Go, Go Gadget Flashlight:
Ah, OK. I thought you had some automated process that was updating the values, the graph, and re-saving the file at set time interval.

THAT would be really cool.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope... just me sitting in this chair for 12.5 hours with my left hand planted firmly on the mouse, and my right on a coffee cup. :0


<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Go, Go Gadget Flashlight:
Just a thought, wouldn't it have been easier to use 10 pixel vertical spacing instead of 12?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure it would, but I couldn't get a font size that would match up with a 10-pixel spacing. Had to take what I could get.

 

[The_LED_Museum]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gransee:
Wow Craig, I really appreciate your dedication!

I am going to send you something in the mail that should help in future plots. It's not expensive or anything, but it has saved me a lot of work.

Btw, it looks like the single AA is about to take its dive from the look of your plot.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks - and yup, it tanked not too long ago.
Fast enough I had to sit there and crank out pixels every five seconds or so to keep up with it.

Now it's in a very dim moon mode, falling *very* slowly at this point.
Not too bright, but still very usable.

 

[The_LED_Museum]

Say Peter... what happens when the batteries inside an Arc-LS start to fume and get all pissy? Where does the hydrogen go?

I didn't see a catalyst in there, and I'm a bit concerned that when things get toasty during my 2-AA tests that something might go pow, or that I'm sitting a mere 16" away from a pipe bomb with a lit fuse!

 

[Gransee]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stingmon:
Say Peter... what happens when the batteries inside an Arc-LS start to fume and get all pissy? Where does the hydrogen go?

I didn't see a catalyst in there, and I'm a bit concerned that when things get toasty during my 2-AA tests that something might go pow, or that I'm sitting a mere 16" away from a pipe bomb with a lit fuse!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good question sir!

In the two cases of flashlight explosion that I found, they both occurred with a light that had both platinum catalysts and pressure release valves. It still went boom. Check out this report at NIOSH. Two things that may have contributed to this where a plastic housing and larger batteries (3 C's). But even so, the explosions cited where fairly low power.

The point is, that putting pellets in the design is not the best way to limit explosions. Trusting the user never to put the batteries in the wrong way is not the best way to eliminate explosions (although the Arc-LS does prevent electrical contact from improperly inserted batteries). The best way is to keep the batteries small and make the light beefy as you can.

Peter Gransee

Btw, would you change the thread title please?

 

[The_LED_Museum]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gransee:
Good question sir!

In the two cases of flashlight explosion that I found, they both occurred with a light that had both platinum catalysts and pressure release valves

Btw, would you change the thread title please?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for the info.
Good to know I'm not sitting next to a miniature torpedo.

BTW never eat Cheerios with urine in them.

I changed the topic title to something more utilitarian for you.
Please get rid of the damn Cheerios.

 

[roguesoul]

I think it's obvious.

The two lithium AA's.

 

[The_LED_Museum]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by roguesoul:
I think it's obvious.

The two lithium AA's.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If these batteries keep going like this, I'm going to have to add more slots to my graph, or it will just sail right off the edge and then we'll *never* know how long those Energizer lithium AA's really last.

 

[Brock]

I like the black graph because it is easier to tell the colors apart, but it does make it harder judge where they actually fall. I would vote for the black graph anyway.

 

[The_LED_Museum]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Brock:
I like the black graph because it is easier to tell the colors apart, but it does make it harder judge where they actually fall. I would vote for the black graph anyway.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I like black myself because the white background is really hard for me to see - but I used it because a lot of other people claim it's easier.

So I'll just do them both. A simple "invert" in Photoshop takes care of that.

I'll even lighten up the grid in the final product so it's easier to see where the plots are going.


hmmmm... looks like those two lithium AA's are finally starting to 'knee out'.
Better go use the can while I still have a chance now.

 

[Cyclops942]

The black-background graph makes the colors easier to identify, but w/o being able to see the grid lines, it's pretty useless. My vote would be to either make the grid lines visible against the black background, or to use both graphs.

 

[Gransee]

I agree, black w/brighter grid makes the colors easier to distinguish.

Notice how the alkalines have a more rapid transistion than the lithiums. The lithiums also have a more pronounced pulse (or heavy sag depending on how you look at it) in the first 5-10 minutes of operation. This pulse indicates heavy loading, especially on the type-123 cells. Of those cells, the Surefires seem to handle the load best (less sag, recouped in the longer burn).

The Duracell type-123's seem to be able to deliver a larger initial current but sag in 5-10 minutes. This would lend well to pulse type loads (as you find in cameras- which they are intended for). If the light was only used for 5-10 minutes with each use, the Duracells would be brighter than the other brands during that time.

Peter

 

[The_LED_Museum]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cyclops942:
The black-background graph makes the colors easier to identify, but w/o being able to see the grid lines, it's pretty useless. My vote would be to either make the grid lines visible against the black background, or to use both graphs.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmmm... I already did that before finishing up.
So I made the grid lines 66 points lighter, and uploaded it again.
Better?