Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets
Reload this Page >

Moore's laws for lights?

Search
Notices
Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets HRM, GPS, MP3, HID. Whether it's got an acronym or not, here's where you'll find discussions on all sorts of tools, toys and gadgets.

Moore's laws for lights?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-05-15, 11:51 AM
  #26  
Senior Member
 
Redhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Posts: 372

Bikes: Dahon fold-up, '12 Giant Talon 29 ER 0, '16 Giant Toughroad SLR1.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked 97 Times in 52 Posts
Originally Posted by boobymcgoo
As a resident computer nerd...Moore's law doesn't apply here. The law states the number of transistors in an integrated circuit doubles every two years. (An LED is a single transistor.)
Actually, a LED is a diode, two layers of silicon: one deficient in electrons, the other with a surplus. A transistor has 3 layers: if you like it's two diodes glued back-to-back (i.e. deficient parts together, forming NPN or surplus parts together forming PNP).

(But we're now splitting hairs here. Yes, some might describe me as a "computer nerd", also an "electronics nerd".)

I think the OP was referring to the fact that the lumens light output seems to be racing ahead much like the number of transistors in ICs (i.e. Moore's law) and much like transistor density, eventually we're going to hit some brick wall where we reach a limit and have to use parallel LEDs to gain further brightness. (Like todays CPUs: going to multiple cores)
Redhatter is offline  
Old 03-05-15, 08:12 PM
  #27  
I am a caffine girl
 
colleen c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,815

Bikes: 2012 Stumpjumper FSR Comp...2010 Scott CR1 CF...2007 Novara FS Float2.0...2009 Specialized Hardrock Disc...2009 Schwinn Le Tour GSr

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by dougmc
Let's look at this another way ...

One amp at 8.4 volts is 8.4 watts. 3000 lumens/8.4 watts = 357 lumens/watt, which is significantly higher than the theoretical limit for a white LED, and significantly more efficient than any light of any sort in the real world.

Either 8.4 volts, 1 amp or 3000 lumens is a lie ... they can't all be true simultaneously.
I think DX is quoting the 1 amp spec as the driver current for each LED. If that is the case then each Led is drawing 1amp at the emitter. The Cree spec for 1 amp at the LED will yield 388 lumens. The light has 7 led and thus the total lumens should be about 2716 lumens. The claim 3000 lumens is close enough for me considering how wild some other company or seller will claim exponential lumens from their light.

I am guessing each LED with be consuming about at least 3 watts of power since the forward volt is at about 3v when the emitter is driven at 1 amp. The light might be consuming at least 21 watts of power. The claim on the runtime may be accurate depending on the size of the battery use. I see the 2-3 hrs runtime claim as possibly true only if the 1 amp claim is the spec for the drive current of each emitter and not actually the draw from the power pack.

Last edited by colleen c; 03-05-15 at 08:16 PM.
colleen c is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 02:13 AM
  #28  
Senior Member
 
Redhatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Posts: 372

Bikes: Dahon fold-up, '12 Giant Talon 29 ER 0, '16 Giant Toughroad SLR1.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked 97 Times in 52 Posts
Originally Posted by colleen c
I think DX is quoting the 1 amp spec as the driver current for each LED. If that is the case then each Led is drawing 1amp at the emitter. The Cree spec for 1 amp at the LED will yield 388 lumens. The light has 7 led and thus the total lumens should be about 2716 lumens. The claim 3000 lumens is close enough for me considering how wild some other company or seller will claim exponential lumens from their light.

I am guessing each LED with be consuming about at least 3 watts of power since the forward volt is at about 3v when the emitter is driven at 1 amp. The light might be consuming at least 21 watts of power. The claim on the runtime may be accurate depending on the size of the battery use. I see the 2-3 hrs runtime claim as possibly true only if the 1 amp claim is the spec for the drive current of each emitter and not actually the draw from the power pack.
Sounds feasible, in which case someone who wrote their specs up forgot about Kirchoff's Current Law, there are probably in a couple of strings of LEDs that are then parallelled. Maybe 3 pairs of LEDs then one lone one on its own PSU channel?
Redhatter is offline  
Old 03-06-15, 07:27 PM
  #29  
I am a caffine girl
 
colleen c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,815

Bikes: 2012 Stumpjumper FSR Comp...2010 Scott CR1 CF...2007 Novara FS Float2.0...2009 Specialized Hardrock Disc...2009 Schwinn Le Tour GSr

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Redhatter
Sounds feasible, in which case someone who wrote their specs up forgot about Kirchoff's Current Law, there are probably in a couple of strings of LEDs that are then parallelled. Maybe 3 pairs of LEDs then one lone one on its own PSU channel?
Most likely the 7 led are in series. I have seen advertised drivers that can power 7 led in series by using a booster circuit. They claim a 23 volt output and with 7 led in series, that will put each one in the correct spec for the voltage. However what I am not sure of is the claim on these driver quoting to be 2 to 3 amps. That is much higher than what the Trustfire lumen claim if each LED is driven at those current. What I suspect is that they are clamping the Mode so that it will not go into High mode and just use the Mid mode. Either that or they have driver custom made for their light.
colleen c is offline  
Old 03-07-15, 08:34 PM
  #30  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
dougmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,040

Bikes: Bacchetta Giro, Strada

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by boobymcgoo
As a resident computer nerd...Moore's law doesn't apply here.
I didn't say or even imply that it did. I also invoked the largely tongue-in-cheek suggestion that number of blades in a razor blade might follow a similar progression, to further suggest that it would be absurd.

All of that was really just a joke, one that I thought was quite obvious ... but the seven emitters in this ugly beast certainly is quite an oddity.
dougmc is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
slvoid
Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets
502
05-10-21 05:45 PM
BadBurrito
Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling
26
07-30-16 08:21 PM
claystevens
Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets
13
01-22-14 10:00 PM
corrado33
Commuting
50
12-14-13 10:22 PM
dougmc
Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets
6
08-05-11 06:44 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.