Relative Runtime Graphs of Various Lights Req.

Hi All,

After Looking at various Sections of the forum... I learnt that
1) We Do Battery Test for Various Batteries...
2) @ Various Current Drains
3) & of Various Sizes.....
To Determine True Quality / Power of Battries

But There is No Such thing (after searching through Runtime Plots)... for Flashlight...

I mean lets take Nuwai QIII & Compare that with HDS / LionHeart or other High End Lights... for Relative Output V/S Runtime

I always Seen A Flashlight Against Itself... and guys declare it as a Winner!... (runtime aginst time @ Various O/P Levels)

How can I compare Myself with Myself?... and then Declare that I am the Winner /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif ... Ofcourse.. I will be the winner all the time /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif

A Proper Comparison should be against taking some Bench Mark... like comparing Nuwai QIII Light (Price, Performance, Runtime) and then overall quality... compared with the Similar Shaped / Luxeoned Lights like HDS, Peak, Streamlights... and others...

Do we have such comparisons ?

Feel that there should be some sort of index (number) that will be a true representative over various factors...

Another Idea is... making a Excel File as a Database available... that will contain Relative Output & Time Data for Standard Sample time @ Standard Distance (light) measured. then... Individuals may compare acording to their likes/ dislikes for various lights... Adding the Battery Drain (Current) Data as the time passes by will be an added advantage...

I want to build up an Online Application that will Dynamically generate Graphs based on the various selectable parameters against time for various lights... .. problem is that.. i do not have anything to start with (especially the realistic Data)...

The problem with flashlights is that they do have a beam. Different beam for each one. So ... to correctly measure the output of the light you'd need an Ulbricht Kugel (Integrating Sphere) which we do not have. A luc value is of no value here.

AND ... the current runtime graphs do not announce a winner but simply show the output over time to be able to judge regulation, brightness at a given time etc.. They are relative starting at 100% output of the given light or ... some are absolute with lux-readings, which have to be eaten with a grain of salt due to the beam spread issue.

bernhard

Viren,

What Bernhard said, plus:

One of the advantages of using % output over time in a runtime graph is that you can take the initial Lux at one meter reading and Overall Output reading (from my site - all of my readings are "initial") and apply it to the graph.

If a light reads 1000 lux at one meter initially and the graph says 50% at 1 hour, in one hour it will be putting out about 500 lux at one meter.

If a light reads 1000 for Overall Output initially and the graph says 50% at 1 hour, in one hour it will be putting out about 500 Overall Output.

Of course, these are not 100% accurate readings, but it'll give you a general idea of performance.

[ QUOTE ]
"Another Idea is... making a Excel File as a Database available... that will contain Relative Output & Time Data for Standard Sample time @ Standard Distance (light) measured. then... Individuals may compare acording to their likes/ dislikes for various lights... Adding the Battery Drain (Current) Data as the time passes by will be an added advantage..."

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with this is that it would be a HUGE undertaking requiring enormous TIME and EFFORT. Consider my site for example - I provide as much as I can for someone to make an informed decision about a purchase. I just don't have the time to do something like you are requesting. However, you can consider the information I have on the site (and from others) and make your own comparisons in as much detail as you like.

I think right now flashlight enthusiasts have it better than they ever have. We have a pretty dedicated team of volunteers (like myself, Craig, this_is_nascar, Roy, just to name a few) that are freely sharing an unbeliveable amount information with anyone who would like it. If you look at the combined man-hours alone used to generate this information it would probably be in the hundreds of thousands of hours.

Once we provide the data, it's your turn to take that information and manipulate it as needed to make the comparisons that you require to make a good decision. We simply can't do it all for you, since we don't know what your particular needs/desires are. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Now that I've posted, I have to do my Moderator thing...

(moderator hat on)

Since this is not a review, we need to move this thread. I think it best to go to general light discussion.

(moderator hat off)

Sure /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif this needs to be moved in General Light Discussion Thread... I almost forgot while posting... which group i was posting to... I am sorry for the trouble caused.

I was thinking to volunteer myself to make an Web Based Application.... so that users can make a comparitive Output Analysis.... ... Also.... I needed one premission... Is it OK if i pull up some data from the web pages for making a application (Of Course.. I will mention .. that the data has been provided / pulled from FLR.com)...

I want to create a Comparitive Table For I,III & (Probably IV) Luxeon Based lights with parameters such as Runtime, Throw, Overall Output (milk carton-method), Battries used, ... etc such parameters... and Most Importantly including Cost Factor...

Hello ViReN,

Just when I thought most of the bases were covered... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif you have come up with another angle on it.

I agree with Bernhard and Doug that there is already a lot of information out there, but I can see your point that it could be brought together under one heading.

This sounds like a huge undertaking, and I will try to assist you in any way I can. Unfortunately, time is limited and the requests on that time seem to be unlimited. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

I know Doug and Bernhard spend a lot of time moderating this site (thanks guys) and I can not imagine the amount of hours Doug and Craig (and others) spend evaluating flashlights and sharing this information with the rest of us.

I can, however, give you some perspective on battery testing. A typical single NiMh AA cell requires about 8 hours of testing not including break in cycles, charging time, and graph publication. This round of testing is repeated, a minimum of 2 times, for each cell to make sure the results are valid. AAA cells require less time, and D cells require a lot more time. Before I feel comfortable in publishing a graph, I need to test a minimum sample of 2 cells, but prefer 4 for better statistics.

Fortunately most of this is automated, but safety issues require a constant watchful eye. So for every cell I publish data for, there is around 64 hours of actual testing involved, not including break in and charging time. Thank goodness for computers and multi-tasking... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

As you can see, this testing seems to use up a good portion of my "spare" time. I am sure that Doug, Bernhard, Craig, Roy, Ray, KJ and others doing reviews and evaluations find themselves in a similar situation. My personal feeling is that most of the pieces are available and a little time spent in research will reveal most of what you need to know to make an informed decision.

With that said, I must admit that the efforts Don (McGizmo) has put together on the possible combinations of the Aleph are most informative. Perhaps you could put together similar information on other lights…

Tom