2004 to 2016 Mazda 3 Forum and Mazdaspeed 3 Forums banner

21 - 40 of 40 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,075 Posts
All of the isocandela chart I posted here is "measured data", and colored for better observation.
And all of the chart is data of currently available aftermarket bulbs, they aren't chart I made up., it's just a result in our Stanley H11 projector.
Consider those data are better in-depth version of graphical information, that beyond typical camera photo can explain. Camera photos only can capture so much, so you can't exactly tell if it is truly beneficial distribution or not. Very limited impression you can get.

Of course, those aren't commonly available infrastructures, equipment, but I have data I can share, so I shared for those who may be interested in. Please do not think this is made up painting, it is actual data.

if you don't want to believe the numbers, that's Ok, but do not deny those data existence comparing against your personal subjective impression. I have been providing measured data numbers, yet, so far, you have not provided any absolute candela information nor understanding how beam distribution contributes to driver view.

Photo with light ON, without lights ON only can give very rough general idea of how light looks to the driver in very very subjective impression, just does not tell how exactly benefitting or disbenefitting such information.
Because, there is no way for you to tell how bright those lights are. It's like stepping on the analog scale without scale grid number notation, telling, look needle pointing so far up. Compare to no light=0. Any number can be bigger than 0, you just showing light on and off, but not comparing how LED light on is brighter than halogen reference.
Telling shed in 500' away, and it is illuminated well in photo I took, you can change that impression simply by adjusting the exposure of the camera. But exposure detail was also not defined. You can't adjust exposure based on 0 illumination,, you got to adjust at highest illumination point, then, got to bring something to compare.
The pictures as I said were all at the same time and place, same camera, lens and settings. Camera set for manual exposure, f/0, 1/20 sec, ISO 6400.


Beam pattern 1~3 comparison are also actual projector's data, colored and scaled in grey, put into road simulations.
And it is hard to believe, but 1 and 2 fail to satisfy FMVSS safety standard. and 3 is the one satisfy FMVSS regulation( it is patchy looking because of data resolution for simulation was lower than other 2) Top 2 are HID projector, aftermarket. The main reason of failure is too much foreground illumination as low beam.

So your logic does not comply to a regulation minimum standard of how foreground illumination balance must be.
What you believe better is actually against what safety regulation defines "better"
That is very hard to tell just by those pictures, that the point I was bringing up here.

BTW, just because meeting the minimum requirement of regulation does not mean it gives you the best night view experience. In fact, I dislike how regulation is outdated!!

But regulation at least prevent bad lamp to disbenefit uses.

Aftermarket LED bulb product does not even have control or consideration to such sately standards,, so off course, they won't work properly.
I fail to see the logic of the 1st and 2nd picture failing due to too much foreground. #2 has virtually no light directly in front of the car, and #1 has enough to see by. If those are indeed low beam patterns, choosing between the 3 images I would much rather have the one shown in picture 1. Picture 3 is not really relevant though if as you say the resolution didn't allow full visualization of the pattern.
No, its not hard to believe that the standards would make this choice. I know about the standards, and I know that they are considered by many to be obsolete.
Yes, the regulations are supposed to keep substandard parts off the market. And no, the regulations don't actually prevent bad products from being sold. Its real easy to stamp anything with the letters DOT and call it good. Only a small percentage gets checked and only a few get caught. There are lots of substandard parts being made in the far east being sold to unsuspecting Americans. Nobody worries about it too much for some reason....Actual enforcement has really become a thing thats up to each state to decide rather than the federal government. There are a few states that have started using violations as a source of revenue...most don't care and can't be bothered....Thats why you see all those older cars with bright blue HID or LED lights that have zero control over light dispersion...:(



frankly speaking, so far, none of LED bulbs sample actually pass FMVSS safety regulation standards in Stanley H11 projector.
If you define " not suitable for on-street use" then, I must say all of them. ( for fog lamp application, and few high beam applications, there are Ok to use LED bulbs, but not for Low beams so far, unfortunately.
That not what I was referring to. "Unsafe" or "not suitable for street use" means they don't provide illumination thats proper for its intended use, not that they just aren't marked DOT. In other words, are they at least as good as OEM, do they put sufficient light where it belongs without blinding oncoming drivers and allow you to operate a vehicle in a safe manner....As you say, the standards are outdated and obsolete. Whats needed is a real comparison to see which LED designs are good and which aren't, all standards, or lack thereof, aside.




Back on OP, as arathol and I suggested, installed position should be LED to facing 3 and 9 o'clock.
And also, try double-check if LED position is close to what H11 filament position supposed to be.
Back surface of bulb base 3 tabs, that is reference surface, from there, start of filament should be positioned at 25mm of distance. And filament itself is 4.5mm

Your LED bulb has 4 x ZES, the illumination area is longer than 4.5mm, but if the start of the light-emitting surface edge is closer to 25mm specification, you get a better-controlled beam result in our projector.

View attachment 276710
[/QUOTE]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Arathol, I must admit, I shall use more commonly communicable terms, hope I can communicate my point better this way

Please take look at below images

This is beam pattern of some projector, distance to the wall is 5m but shoot some lowered angle. F/0 1/600sec ISO135
can this picture tell you any information about if this beam is brighter than H11 halogen projector of ours? and where is the brightest spot in the beam if it is properly distributed?

there is no way to tell, even exposure is given, there is no way to tell if that exposure range covers comparing target illumination level.
I can tell, cut off is sharp, but don't know if above cut off bleeding level is exceeding more than it should be.

Your explain stopped here, that's why I kept asking how I can tell if your output was brighter than halogen. How you can tell that had good distribution. Because there was no comparable halogen beam picture from you.
276717



Then, this image is ,, actually first image is a trimmed version of this full view. There is another reference beam in the same image. They are being observed in the same condition.
But can you tell which beam has stronger illumination?
There is still no way to tell, because,, exposure is not set properly. Masking intensity difference by overexposing the images.
276718



How about this, which beam carries a stronger hot spot? I evaluate the on the top has a stronger hot spot intensity.
In this kind of "scaled" comparison picture, you finally can tell the meaningful difference. By having an upper exposure limit set on higher illuminated target, then compare to reference, so you can see which is brighter or not.

276719


So if you can bring up to us the same setting road view image of Halogen bulb situation, then, we finally can tell if it's a brighter impression or not. That's what I meant by "scaled" photo to use as a comparison.

This is a typical way of comparing with camera photo, but have to at least have reference information like, side by side or same condition apple to apple comparison.


If you have lux meter, then beam on top can be said it registered 65,000 candela ( let's say, score, higher the number, brighter )
Bottom was 51,000candela


I did the same measurement test with our H11 low beam, and your LED bulb, and I originally posted, Halogen was scored 31200 point of brightness ( driven at 13.8V) at beam center, LED did 20600 points So LED was dimmer, that was what I said.

I will try to visualize using photo like this, maybe that way, it can provide information to more users easier without telling numbers or terms to explain.


If in any chance, if I can provide some in-depth, for those who needed, I want to be here to provide.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
661 Posts
I actually like the halogens that came on my '15 Mazda3. To me, they are more soothing to the old peepers as compared with LEDs.

I think a lot of folks want LEDs because they are stylish. Kind of like the 20-inch-and-larger wheels out there.

But the question is, does stylish mean better?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Better is very subjective, brighter not single factor for the driver to see better, where is brightest, how smooth the gradient is, all-important factor. That becomes too long to explain,, I must not over-explain lol
Ask me if you are interested.

Our projector does not shoot much intense output, but beam distribution is carefully designed, and balanced for halogen light source. I like our projector basic performance.
For Halogen projector, it is very well designed.

Color preference is one thing, but the reason some feel halogen illumination feel easier is,
Halogen lamp spectrum is much closer to the natural solar spectrum compare to LED, it is studied to feel more natural to eyes.

LED white is pretty much blue light, filtered with yellow ( bit of red and green mix) make us feel it is white light. There is lots to explain,, but in short, our eyes get tired more looking at LED white light compare to halogen illumination if it is about the same illumination level. Because seeing blue more than other 2, red and green

For properly made automotive-grade LEDs, they try to blend red in it, it actually had to be written in regulation to help reduce eye restraint, it achieves reasonable comfort, but not as smooth as halogen lamp spectrum.

Stylish or not is a preference of appearance, not necessarily better in illumination quality. 2 different categories.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,075 Posts
I know about scale and before and after comparisons. However, this was done a couple years ago. I don't have pics from before. I still have the OEM bulbs somewhere, I'll see if I can find them. When I do I'll put some pictures here.

That being said, you have posted a number of CG simulations. How do we know how well those simulations duplicate real life performance? You have already said that at least one of those graphics was not indicative of reality due to data error. Do you do live testing (not in a fixture on a bench, but in a car where there are points of reference in the distance to see how well the road ahead is actually illuminated) using the bulbs you have the specs for to see if reality corroborates the CG results, and do you have on the road photos of them actually installed in a vehicle to show actual performance? Just pointing a bulb at a wall doesn't mean much if you have no other points of reference to show how well the shoulder is illuminated, or how visible roadside signs are, or how well you can see the curbs and other obstacles in a parking lot. If the software is not capable of producing a graphic that is 100% correct and/or applicable to real world driving situations, is that graphic really of any value in the real world?

I actually like the halogens that came on my '15 Mazda3. To me, they are more soothing to the old peepers as compared with LEDs.

I think a lot of folks want LEDs because they are stylish. Kind of like the 20-inch-and-larger wheels out there.

But the question is, does stylish mean better?
Actually, having spent countless hours behind the wheel in foul weather conditions in vehicles using sealed beam lights, halogen lights and now LEDs, I find the LEDs, when done right, actually work better than the other two.
Many don't like the weak yellow appearance of the lights, thats a matter of preference, but once again poorly done LEDs can be hard on the eyes, both from the drivers point of view and on drivers of on coming traffic. Stylish certainly is not better, case in point the 20+" wagon wheels with rubber band tires....
Lots of people like them because they are the trend and are the "cool and popular" thing to do because everybody else is doing it too.....But functional, not in the least...


Oh, wait. I almost forgot....a before pic to show scale......:LOL:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Arathol, I am not sure if it is my English bad or you are not reading what I wrote, I am not good at English, please don't take this I try to over-explain.

I have been telling you,, it is measured, live tested result in almost all reply to you.
I do not know how else to explain that.

what you call CG is, MEASURED data put in graphics, so more controlled observation people can do so.
It is LIVE testing result made in report. '

What I gave here is "measured" candela reading ( candela is unit of how intense beam is projected to, in short, you can consider as INTENSITY unit)
Rather than listing every possible measuring point data in text, I use simulation platform to explain distribution color-coded. Just like thermo color-coded image, higher the intensity, set to certain color.
Would you say to thermo image, that's not real? because actual object does not show such color. therefore, it is meaningless? Because it does not look like representing real-life impression. What if one surface is too hot for you to touch, or can border line hotness, that can cause slow burn, if you try understand such concept, thermo color-coded image is far more informative compare to ,,well, it kind of feel hot, not hot enough to burn, but, it's kinda hot. or hotter than my coffee cup handle.
It's analyzed, color-coded for the purpose to understand how thermal distribution is. But the camera photo does not tell the temperature. In lighting, camera does greyscale in selected intensity, IF exposure is covering entire range of measures. To see where is the hot spot, color code it. But it does not tell you how intensely illuminated, only you can see relative to something you can capture in together.


if that's your logic, thermo colored image never be how it looks in real life, only way to tell is, it's kinda hot. And when I say, I checked with thermometer, you ignore this part and come back to me " how do we know your report with temperature mapping represent real-life performance" , if you can't trust thermometer,, what do you trust? or you are not understanding mapping image??
Your impression of "kinda hot" is a true impression of yours, and my measured temp by thermometers also true fact. I don't believe it is hard to accept that part.

I also displayed a greyscale that simulates camera photo view for a more familiar beam pattern look display too. Again, you can say this is not real, but representation of impression.
One of image, patchy, I explained it as resolution setting. I posted low resolution image. Overall spread displaying purse. I take that as my mistake, because I provided low resolution image.

We test over hundreds of different points within the projected beam pattern, using a device called lux/ candela meter, which tells how strong the illuminance at the measured point, kind of device photographer uses to take good pictures of models to check illumination, to check exposure optimization
UNDER absolutely controlled environment called a light tunnel. So every measurement is done at exactly the same condition, so wee can compare NUMBERS, not impressions.

Beam shape can be created calculating reflector surface curvature, lens refractive index etc,, Uggg I don't like to lay out those terms,, but I just do not know how to explain to you. Read about how optical simulation works.

How do we know if that represents actual performance? it's called calibration. I also wrote data is "aligned" to simulation to assure the result is accurate. Just like you select exposure of photo, measured data is aligned to show more understandable results.

I think you are just not familiar with optical simulation and how measurement is done.
I do not know how else to explain to you, you keep either ignoring " I measured" part or I am writing too much, you may not reading what I wrote..



Engineers had collected much more than you can observe the amount of information in the database and created optical simulation platform, that display the simulated result, yes, it is not real-life information.

But what you see in camera is not real-life information, you need to realize. it's a photo. Just like simulation, camera sensor is receiving ADJUSTED optical information into graphics, just camera photo does not capture every measured able point absolute illuminance information. It's to duplicate our eyes impression.

What you snapped in the picture of your beam pattern is a representation of the selected specific location of impression. But if someone take picture at different location, different ambient brightness, object around, your result can not be duplicated, so that's why controlled testing is created to log actual data. Not subjective to weather, road surface color, or darkness of ambient.

I am not against personal impression to the image, but if I know something much more underneath the surface image of photo can carry, I should be able to freely share information. I am not telling people here made up random information.

It is MEASURED number, live tested, data gathered, and turned into a report. try to make it easier to understand, visualized with what you calls CG.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,075 Posts
Yeah, I damned near wrecked my car the other day when I saw a Chevy roll by on Ferris Wheels.

Some really look dangerous.
Yup, I figure driving a car that is capable of 190 mph on wheels like that is sort of like driving my lawn tractor at 80 mph.....The wheels would probably come off at some point....
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,075 Posts
Arathol, I am not sure if it is my English bad or you are not reading what I wrote, I am not good at English, please don't take this I try to over-explain.........
Maybe you just aren't understanding what I am asking about.
I know what simulations are. What I want to know is if you actually confirm through live testing that your results are accurate, or do you place total reliability on your numbers? You can convert to greyscale or any other scale and produce what looks like a picture, but if the underlying data doesn't truly represent reality the resulting image won't be accurate, just as you say my pictures don't capture everything accurately.
You can't really get a good idea of how a light performs without actually putting it in a car and testing it. I know that you are an engineer and have been taught that numbers and testing and simulations can explain everything ( I know a bunch of engineers, they are all like that by the way. Nothing is ever good enough because the numbers say it isn't....don't ever go TV shopping at Best Buy with an OCD EE....o_O), but nothing beats real world use for testing. If as you implied earlier that the graphics you create don't always show whats going on because the resolution isn't sufficient, how can you or anyone else make an accurate prediction of performance based on that erroneous graphic? Showing how bright a light is at certain points doesn't tell the whole story. You need to get that light out into the real world to see how it performs when it is actually subjected to different sorts of weather and atmospheric conditions, different road surface colors and varying ambient light levels. That will tell you far more than pointing a bulb at a wall in a laboratory, isolated from all possible outside influences. Its those outside influences than can make or break a bulbs performance no matter how good you think your testing is. (I have a set of Sylvanias that laboratory testing assured me was far superior to my OEM bulbs...😕.....junk......)
So, do you use actual pictures of actual bulbs being used in the real world to confirm what your test results say?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Yes, sir!! ;)

On the road, tested measured
In the controlled room, tested measured
Parts by parts level, tested measured
Parts, 3D scanned at 50um resolution, measured number brought back into the computer, check with simulation result, making sure the measured number represents in simulation. Confirmed!


The reason I tried to show in simulation image is, those collected data can be displayed in much more depth way.
I can explain every spot measured number, how many % of brightness at where,
how it can look like,, IF aimed this angle, another angle, rather than snapping 20 different photos, and measure 100 each test point, that is why I used simulation.

And yes, the simulation result is carefully checked make sure it is representing the actual beam behavior. Fully calibrated. Luckily I own Mazda3 with Halogen lamp,, so I had all extra detail tested out!!

That's what I had been trying to say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Silvania Bulb you talking about the one posted earlier? one with blue coating top and base of the bulb?

Those bulbs are far less capable compare to standard average H11 bulbs!!
That's the kind of lab result you should not trust! I see why you can't trust "data"

I can't ask you to fully trust what I say about my data here, lol I know those fake data make people struggle.
but plz also take consideration of I am not here to make sales of the product or anything. I myself enjoy good lighting, the reason why I pursued a lighting engineer career.

This is how I observe to evaluate questionable product by one of simulation possibility
Quick draft here, if the bulb has coating like this, whatever the ray pass through blue-tinted lens loses a great amount of light power.
276728


And the reason why you observed much worse performance than OE H11 is,,

This is a corresponding beam distribution that passes through a blue-tinted surface. So basically, you losing important beam center intensity
276729

Basically, you are subtracting the above-simulated beam pattern out from the original H11 halogen bulb!!
That's why it was a poor performance.

Not actual result you say, cuz I didn't measure that bulb, but at least, good amount of prediction we can:)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,075 Posts
Now you are understanding......
Yes, that Sylvania....I found through my own research afterwards why it didn't work as well as advertised, and that there are many other similar bulbs that were claimed to be "better than the others".....Thats when I stopped looking at halogens and started looking into LEDs.
This type of thing is exactly why you can't go by what is said to be laboratory testing, at least the kind of testing thats used for advertising purposes. Every light bulb out there says it been lab tested on the box and has pretty colored graphics on the packaging to show why its better than the competition. Well, it seems much of it is crap. If anything they are most likely only designed to a bare minimum to meet the standards and nothing more. Remember when I said earlier that a lot of foreign junk was being imported to the US? You can't go by what a manufacturer tells you when they say they have test data and their product is "approved" by anybody. The only way to find out is use it and see for yourself so you can then maybe pass on the results to others so they can make a better decision. Unfortunately, that is how things are in the real world....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
I appreciate your contribution on this subject, upashi.

To me it seems straightforward that a reflector which is carefully designed to work with a light source of a specific geometry would be adversely impacted by a replacement light source with a dramatically different geometry; regardless of an increase in intensity or color modification.

Short of a double-blind study which measures target identification, reaction time, etc., the only conclusive way to assess the performance is through a careful engineering analysis (AKA Objective analysis). There are volumes of science on the subject.

Otherwise all you have are the individuals' perceptions (AKA subjective interpretation) which have no doubt been influenced by advertising and marketing; let alone the brain's (and ego's) need to rationalize that you just dropped $xxx on "upgrades" and it certainly looks different now, so it must be better!

There have been rows upon rows of these sorts of products at aftermarket parts stores for decades now whose very existence was dependent on a higher price point and glossy photos to improve their cachet. They certainly didn't cost that much more to manufacture (see also, APPLE).

Step Right Up!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
This may interest those who are into lighting, rough basic observation of how we analyze distance view evaluation.

Step by step, so it can enlighten how much we get confused, (Including myself!!! I didn't know until I study farther in depth)

Step 1, some LED bulb and original halogen bulb comparison

Given information
test is in Mazda3 halogen projector ( Stanley H11)
*LED bulb 2,400lm!!! advertised ( but I found it was 2,000lm!!! But still much more than H11 halogen)
*H11 halogen bulb 1,100lm on paper ( But at actual working voltage, new bulb can produce as much as1,450lm, but I made it bit older,, since halogen has shorter life,, 1,350lm here )
So we gonna compare 2,000lm LED bulb and 1,350lm Halogen in our projector.

Step 2, similar to on-road image by simulation Lamp height is set at 0.7m ( Mazda 3 headlamp height, driver view height is 1.2m)
Which is your choice at this point? Brighter, I like how beam looks, any reason is fine, just keep that in mind to continue.
This is called gray liner scale, no color information, just illumination level distribution.
276747



Step 3 Adjust color for the human eye impression emulation. This is just a graphical color temp adjust, so the illumination level remains the same.
The top is LED, and the bottom is halogen as you can tell from light color.
Color preference factor is now added,
Which do you like better?? Which do you see more preferable beam?
276748



Step 4 I apply this result in,, more associative driver view image, because, some of the illuminated road area isn't within driver view in many cases.
This is not exactly your personal viewpoint view, but generalized driver view. Did you opinion changed??
276749



Step 5
I split the image right in the middle, so we can do what is called side by side comparison.
What do you notice? Impression changed? I see halogen seems to be illuminating farther? maybe it's because of the adjusted color? But still not that much of different, or maybe, it seem like, still preference stage. I pick halogen at this point tho!
276750



Step 6
Adjust scale to reveal exposure difference, kill the color to eliminate color temp bias, so we can estimate how our eyes are actually responding to illumination.
276751



To me, this was a surprise, I thought LED seemed more full illumination impression, at this stage, halogen is illuminating in more distance better, I could not notice much difference until side by side, scale adjustment.
I am experienced in lighting technologies, but our eyes are that much not reliable I learned. Brain can adjust to think I am seeing better, but physics won't change, eyes receive less light.

in simulation, it can be done in one shot, it color codes analyze, it tells where is, what kind of hot spot it is projecting, help us evaluate how we should develop optics for better view.

3 boxes I drew in indicate, foreground zone, mid zone and distance zone.
You can clearly see the foreground box, LED has ore full and brighter impression.
This is what many seeing in LED bulb swap. It is TRUE, you are seeing more light here. just not seeing more light throughout entire beam coverage.
From mid to distance view, LED start losing intensity impression compare to halogen.

Distance box generally covers around 30m to 50m range when the headlamp is aimed correctly in our car.
Foreground zone is 3-15m range Mid is 15-30m range

50m of distance is 1.7sec at 65mph 15m is only 0.5sec at 65mph in LED illumination, your best view zone is only 0.5seconds away. You still see distance zones, but due to the highest illumination land at the near view, your eyes adjust its threshold at higher illumination, so you don't feel, " it's bright!!" result in distance impression even weaker.

At night time, the standard lamp should be a high beam, of course, it is to see farther. IF it does not distract others.
So in reality, many cases, low beam is the illumination selection.

Has your opinion about which light you want to use changed? You can still choose whichever you like of course, as long as you understand all of these.

In detail, there are tons more observation is done for development, glare level above cut off( how safely, yet sufficiently can illuminate street signs), how smoothly transition from foreground to distance impression, etc..
Those test points are specified about 30 points for low beam, if any of them failed to satisfy, simply no good.

And I am telling you,, so far, had been testing over 100 of LED bulbs, none of them satisfy basic safety standard.



With that said :) there is some LED bulbs illuminate better and, not necessary satisfy FMVSS regulation, but reasonably safely perform in good balance ( quiet few does a decent job, just, can not illuminate above cut off in controlled balance)
Some had massive power, but suffer too much foreground, some shoot wider beam, hot spot decent, but overall balance somewhat weak. And most of all, it's not that cheap. But they do exist.

So by me presenting this information here is not to smash down LED bulb users. I just wanted to layout information may be brought up, so someone may find it beneficial.
There are lots of irresponsibly designed LED bulb all around, the only way to avoid such, is to know or try to understand what those manufacturers are hiding, or not caring about.

BTW!!! hazy or dirty headlamp lens can reduce brightness easily as much as 20-30%! check older bulb, replace to new IF you are using halogen, HID also degrade, sometimes, simple maintenance like clean, restore lens ( properly tho!!!! not just sand, polish, and buff,, you got to coat with proper clear!!) are as important as choosing right light source.

I have Mazda3, I have optical study capability, if in need, I believe I can contribute for better lighting fun!
I just restored my headlamp lens :)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,075 Posts
Interesting, but there is one thing to consider.... assuming those are low beams because you mentioned the projector housing.....Low beams don't really need to project as far. They aren't for driving at speed like the high beams or auxiliary driving lights (not fog lights). They are for when there is oncoming traffic or when you are in a driving environment when you don't need the projection capability of the high beams, like in a parking lot where you need to see more of whats directly in front of you rather then 2 or 3 hundred feet away. The pictures of the halogens show 2 narrow beams with less illumination elsewhere. They look like sealed beams from the1980s..:sleep:..In bad weather, such as snow, rain or fog, having a low beam that projects way out like that might work against you, causing more backscatter and reducing forward visibility. I prefer to use that available illumination to fill in more of the foreground, which is what the LEDs do. Let the high beams do the distance projection work.
About that color....blue lights are very deceiving.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Don't worry too much about last post rendered color, computer screen render not always represent color well, literally, every monitor display different way. But that's 6,000K vs 3,700K in the same color scale. de-saturated greyscale shows the illumination level more.
6,000K range white LED color, blue: yellow ratio is about 2.5 : 1

With that information given, it is your preference, what you chose of course!
You have obtained underlying information you may have not heard, but it is now, you can use when you feel like that may be useful information to you in some point, that all I wish.

provide information many may not have, information may aid someone, some point, that's my desire since I am in lighting engineering, that's all.


Farther projection is nothing bad tho. Because most of the driving experience, well, this can be somewhat region-specific possibly? I can not use a high beam on freeway 99% of the chance. I am in CA near Los Angels, constant traffic, just enough to wish to use high beam for a few seconds, and switch off,, that kind of night driving situation.

Parking space like very slow speed situation, fog lamp ( if equipped make more sense- when properly aimed!!)
Also, a relatively weaker foreground on OEM H11 projector does not mean you are not seeing. You still will see the illuminated surface, just your primary comfort level of illumination is layout differently.

So, not to be mistaken, you still will see distance illuminated with your LED bulb. Just relatively weaker than the foreground in your application case.




Somewhat longer explain,, but having more foreground impact distance view even with high beam situation. Our headlamp uses both low beam and high beam ON, when high beam is triggered. What low beam is projecting remain in effect on the road illumination.

Not exact simulation of our lamp, but here is 2 types of Bi-xenon projector that shows difference in high high beam model. One with more foreground, and the other is more regulation complying foreground balance adjusted projectors.

Top is bi-xenon projector, it is actually from earlier post, beam you selected ( beam pattern 1) projector's high beam mode. This projector shoot 89,000cd ( illumination intensity unit) 0.3 degree above the dead center. ( it is very popular aftermarket Bi-Xenon projector, lots of people love it and retrofitting)
The bottom is some Bi-LED projector, that has better-controlled distribution. Peak is at -0.5 degree below dead center, and is about 88,000cd So both have about same absolute distance reaching capability
276756


And once this kind of beam projected on the ground, it will be translated to like this.

276757


Side by side,
276758



because beam 1 has too much foreground illumination capacity, even if it has max intensity shooting capacity nearly the same, ground illumination behavior changed completely.

it now is night and day, beam pattern 1 is not illuminating distance, because illumination impression strength is not liner parameter. if light has to reach x2 the distance, it needs 4 times the intensity to felt evenly illuminated. x3 time distance, then it needs 9 times of the intensity.
If hot spot layout at half the distance from farthest distance reaching point, illumination intensity must be less than 25% of farthest-reaching point, otherwise, you will see foreground more than distance.

So this is what I meant by, " it conflict distance vision" it's not how far you can see light is illuminating.
Balance is very important.

You can associate this effect concept in ,, let's say..
You are standing outside of warehouse, under the bright sunny day, so bright!!!
Your friend is calling you from inside of warehouse, inside of warehouse has lighting, but you just can't see well farther back of the warehouse inside. This is simply because your eyes are adjusting for bright outside sunny environment.
In exact same standing position, if this was after sunset, night time, you see inside of the warehouse more than outside.

So if a low beam has stronger foreground, you will need heck of a high beam that does not shoot much of foreground scatter, but shoot center to upward controlled beam. You're naturally comfortable illuminated zone still get pulled towards you, not in distance.

That's why I said it is important to have controlled foreground illumination, and FMVSS old, outdated regulation, which I believe, not working well anymore for modern lighting situation, yet, at least it prevents this negative effect by defining allowed max illumination level of foreground zone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Arathol!!! One thing to add for you.

If you are running similar kind of LED bulb in high beam, then you are OK!! Those LED bulb in high beam shoot rather strong focus in our specific high beam reflector luckily!! it scatter moderately,, but it is still strong.
it can compensate to ease additional foreground effect created by low beam :) Combined effect is OK!!

Above explanation is "general study of importance of foreground illumination balance"

So enjoy the performance of LED bulb and hope all extra information here can benefit many others!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,075 Posts
As you say, the HIDs are not what is in may car, and the beam patterns are nothing close....


The problem with this is that reasoning (less foreground to balance the view, let the fog lights fill it in) seems to be changing with newer designs. Newer cars, the Mazda 3 being one, more and more don't have fog lights installed as OEM equipment to fill in the foreground. Newer OEM LED headlight designs are illuminating where the fog lights normally would have in older cars, ie filling in the foreground, and as such the fog lights are seen as redundant so they being aren't offered. There are fewer and fewer cars these days with OEM fog lights, so how do you apply the "less light in the foreground" theory and still have the foreground illumination that used to be provided by fog lights? I see no reason why applying this to the Gen 3 Mazda headlights make things any different....


Arathol!!! One thing to add for you.

If you are running similar kind of LED bulb in high beam, then you are OK!! Those LED bulb in high beam shoot rather strong focus in our specific high beam reflector luckily!! it scatter moderately,, but it is still strong.
it can compensate to ease additional foreground effect created by low beam :) Combined effect is OK!!

Above explanation is "general study of importance of foreground illumination balance"

So enjoy the performance of LED bulb and hope all extra information here can benefit many others!
Yes, I know, thats what I have been saying but you never asked about the high beams....like I said, sometimes the actual experience of using things is useful....
I do have the same bulbs in the high beams, although they aren't plug and play, but thats a different story.....
I was just about to write the same thing as you did when your post came on line....
When the high beams are on, there is more than sufficient light projected ahead to compensate for the foreground. Thats why what I posted above concerning the new headlight designs seems to work...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
It's simple, I said, less foreground on our car main low beam does not mean there is no illumination. You still will see sufficient enough. it's the balance that I am talking about.
Having extra foreground, then, it can compromise distance. So consider OEM H11 to be just sufficient foreground.
Decent distance viewability.

Newer car, fog lamp aren't even functional in most of the case, it's style I must say.
Because low beam optics development came so far, it covers the foreground area just fine by itself.

Some older sealed beam, older projector, optics, they had to pan as much illumination capability to distance shoot, and they could not have enough efficiency to distribute to fog lamp region.


Beside!, I am sure you are not driving 80% of the time in parking space. And OEM projector is well considered for most majority of the driving situation.

Rest, I shall say, enjoy what you like ;) I am thinking what I want to do for my high beam next! Maybe laser powered giga white super long range high beam lol
 
21 - 40 of 40 Posts
Top