Author Topic: Schmidt Edelux II angle  (Read 2309 times)

Schmidt Edelux II angle
« on: December 10, 2020, 11:35:47 am »
I find that with the edelux II at the optimum angle for lighting up the road for 'see where I'm going ' purposes, it seems to dazzle oncoming cars, as they often seem to flash.
This is with the front face angled* about 6 degrees up. With it about 3 degrees up, oncoming cars don't seem to flash, but the bright part of the beam is too near, i.e. it doesn't seem to penetrate into the middle distance enough.

So I made a "hood" for it. (yes, basically just some foil round a bit of plastic.) Not tested it in dark yet.

but not sure whether i've just not tweaked the angle accurately enough.
Curious as to others' experiences around the same.

* Measured by holding the sprit level app of phone against the front face. What is anyone else's angle? I appreciate the accuracy relies on the ground being level.

It is what it is. It's not what it's not, so it must be what it is.

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #1 on: December 10, 2020, 04:22:08 pm »
I would think as long as the bright part of the beam is directed down onto the road, it shouldn't dazzle, maybe try 4 degrees?

That's assuming the light's got a shaped beam with a horizontal cut off. I don't think the hood would make much of a difference.

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #2 on: December 10, 2020, 04:23:55 pm »
I would think as long as the bright part of the beam is directed down onto the road, it shouldn't dazzle, maybe try 4 degrees?

That's assuming the light's got a shaped beam with a horizontal cut off.

yeah that's what I thought, but it's just how much light 'leakage' above the main beam there is that I wasn't sure about.
It is what it is. It's not what it's not, so it must be what it is.

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #3 on: December 10, 2020, 04:38:44 pm »
You shouldn't need to do that. The beam is cut off pretty well vertically, with sufficient "leakage" that you can still see retro-reflective signs. The best way to check is to aim it at a wall a few metres away, the top cut off should be on  the wall slightly below the height of the light itself. If you ride behind a car you should see the cut off just above the number plate and know that you are not dazzling anyone.

For reference, mine is set at 4 degrees.

I did get one numpty get angry with me - I was on a hill and he was lower down  ::-) - but no issues on the flat.
Quote from: tiermat
that's not science, it's semantics.

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #4 on: December 10, 2020, 05:03:00 pm »
When I had one I found it needed to be angled ‘up’ to light at an appropriate distance, and that does create a bit of spill. I never really got flashed much by cars although occasional pedestrians on bike paths commented. I suspect that it probably is a bit bright when set to show you where you’re going, but the pedestrians were of the unreasonable, assuming I was a laser equipped mountain bike, type.


Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #5 on: December 10, 2020, 05:08:06 pm »
You shouldn't need to do that. The beam is cut off pretty well vertically, with sufficient "leakage" that you can still see retro-reflective signs. The best way to check is to aim it at a wall a few metres away, the top cut off should be on  the wall slightly below the height of the light itself. If you ride behind a car you should see the cut off just above the number plate and know that you are not dazzling anyone.

For reference, mine is set at 4 degrees.

I did get one numpty get angry with me - I was on a hill and he was lower down  ::-) - but no issues on the flat.

You could do that, possibly numpty question but how do you shine the light on a wall with the bike stationary?
You could lift the front wheel up to spin it, but then you've changed the angle.
It is what it is. It's not what it's not, so it must be what it is.

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #6 on: December 10, 2020, 05:15:47 pm »
Always thought it’d be good to have marking on the brackets so easy to reset alignment if knocked. No idea what angle of mine is. I just take the bike down a bike track down a dark park and adjust with Allen key till beam seems about right.

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #7 on: December 10, 2020, 05:28:07 pm »
Mine is set up in accordance with the German STVZ0 requirements which say that the centre of the beam should drop to half height at  a distance of 5 metres.  (about 2/3 rds the way down the following link) Pretty sure there was a recent thread about this.  No problem that I know of to any motorist and enough penetration for 25-30 mph in pitch black lanes descents.  Looking at the light in situ, the glass is vertical or very slightly tilted up.
 https://swhs.home.xs4all.nl/fiets/tests/verlichting_analyse/verkeersregels/de_stvzo/index_en.html

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #8 on: December 10, 2020, 05:38:15 pm »
You could do that, possibly numpty question but how do you shine the light on a wall with the bike stationary?
You could lift the front wheel up to spin it, but then you've changed the angle.
Simple, the standlight is easily bright enough to be able to set the angle.  Just need to go for a short ride first.

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #9 on: December 10, 2020, 05:51:42 pm »
Mine is set up in accordance with the German STVZ0 requirements which say that the centre of the beam should drop to half height at  a distance of 5 metres.  (about 2/3 rds the way down the following link) Pretty sure there was a recent thread about this.  No problem that I know of to any motorist and enough penetration for 25-30 mph in pitch black lanes descents.  Looking at the light in situ, the glass is vertical or very slightly tilted up.
 https://swhs.home.xs4all.nl/fiets/tests/verlichting_analyse/verkeersregels/de_stvzo/index_en.html

How do you manage to get it that precise since the front wheel needs to be turning for the light to be on? Which means generally riding along and seeing roughly how far ahead the beam falls. I look for the bright horizontal bit of beam for my calibration.

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #10 on: December 10, 2020, 06:36:46 pm »
I think all bicycle lights since the demise of the Never Ready look 'too bright' for oncoming road users, particularly pedestrians using night vision.  Reckon it's a combinations of the relatively small surface area of the lens making it seem more intense for a given lux than a car or motorcycle headlight would, combined with the expectation that being dazzled by motor vehicle headlights is normal and ordinary, but BloodyCyclists are antisocial scofflaws who are offensive and should be banned.

Fortunately, this is becoming less of an issue as car headlights adopt more of the irritating properties of bicycle light design...
Careful, Kim. Your sarcasm's showing...

slope

  • Ride Fettle Ride
    • Current pedalable joys
Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #11 on: December 10, 2020, 06:41:25 pm »
I think all bicycle lights since the demise of the Never Ready look 'too bright' for oncoming road users, particularly pedestrians using night vision.  Reckon it's a combinations of the relatively small surface area of the lens making it seem more intense for a given lux than a car or motorcycle headlight would, combined with the expectation that being dazzled by motor vehicle headlights is normal and ordinary, but BloodyCyclists are antisocial scofflaws who are offensive and should be banned.

Fortunately, this is becoming less of an issue as car headlights adopt more of the irritating properties of bicycle light design...

 :thumbsup: Spot on!

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #12 on: December 10, 2020, 08:04:42 pm »
k, cheers for that, I'll try the centre-of-beam-at-half-height-at-5m method then I'll be confident that any driver who flashes is just anti cyclist and can thus shove their full beam up their arse :)
It is what it is. It's not what it's not, so it must be what it is.

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #13 on: December 10, 2020, 08:13:42 pm »
You could do that, possibly numpty question but how do you shine the light on a wall with the bike stationary?
You could lift the front wheel up to spin it, but then you've changed the angle.
Simple, the standlight is easily bright enough to be able to set the angle.  Just need to go for a short ride first.

I check them against a smudge on our kitchen door that's about right for where the top of the beam should be when you bring the bike in through the front door after a ride.  Very convenient.  Unless someone cleans it.
Careful, Kim. Your sarcasm's showing...

FifeingEejit

  • Not Small
Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #14 on: December 10, 2020, 09:42:24 pm »
You shouldn't need to do that. The beam is cut off pretty well vertically, with sufficient "leakage" that you can still see retro-reflective signs. The best way to check is to aim it at a wall a few metres away, the top cut off should be on  the wall slightly below the height of the light itself. If you ride behind a car you should see the cut off just above the number plate and know that you are not dazzling anyone.

For reference, mine is set at 4 degrees.

I did get one numpty get angry with me - I was on a hill and he was lower down  ::-) - but no issues on the flat.

You could do that, possibly numpty question but how do you shine the light on a wall with the bike stationary?
You could lift the front wheel up to spin it, but then you've changed the angle.

I find you can get enough light from Standlights to give you the beam pattern on the wall at around 1m, you can mark that up after doing the 5m on the road thing.

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #15 on: December 10, 2020, 11:44:42 pm »
Mine's currently at 2° up, according to the phone app.
That's low enough to be inoffensive, and OK for regular flat road riding (~16-18 mph), but for optimal rider use (ignoring cars) would best be tweaked upwards a bit. My belief is that high enough for fast downhills is also high enough to be offensive, so it's necessary to be able to adjust the angle on the fly. My bracket is set such that this is possible.

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #16 on: December 10, 2020, 11:55:21 pm »
Mine's currently at 2° up, according to the phone app.
That's low enough to be inoffensive, and OK for regular flat road riding (~16-18 mph), but for optimal rider use (ignoring cars) would best be tweaked upwards a bit. My belief is that high enough for fast downhills is also high enough to be offensive, so it's necessary to be able to adjust the angle on the fly. My bracket is set such that this is possible.

Really, how? Is it just slightly loose?
It is what it is. It's not what it's not, so it must be what it is.

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #17 on: December 10, 2020, 11:58:49 pm »
Mine's currently at 2° up, according to the phone app.
That's low enough to be inoffensive, and OK for regular flat road riding (~16-18 mph), but for optimal rider use (ignoring cars) would best be tweaked upwards a bit. My belief is that high enough for fast downhills is also high enough to be offensive, so it's necessary to be able to adjust the angle on the fly. My bracket is set such that this is possible.

Really, how? Is it just slightly loose?

The advanced version of this (for velomobiles, where the light is extremely difficult to reach) involves a spring-loaded pivot and a friction shifter...
Careful, Kim. Your sarcasm's showing...

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #18 on: December 11, 2020, 09:11:45 am »
Mine is set up in accordance with the German STVZ0 requirements which say that the centre of the beam should drop to half height at  a distance of 5 metres.  (about 2/3 rds the way down the following link) Pretty sure there was a recent thread about this.  No problem that I know of to any motorist and enough penetration for 25-30 mph in pitch black lanes descents.  Looking at the light in situ, the glass is vertical or very slightly tilted up.
 https://swhs.home.xs4all.nl/fiets/tests/verlichting_analyse/verkeersregels/de_stvzo/index_en.html

The author of that article actually disagees with StVZO's requirement for aiming the light! At least that's how I read, as it's a very long winded article.

I do think StVZO's requirement aims too high and does result in dazzling. It's like a car's full/high beam pointing almost straight ahead.

This is where lit and unlit roads need different aiming. For lit roads, I want the beam to light up the road surface ahead of to reveal pot holes, glass etc. I don't need to light the side edges of the road, junctions etc. Therefore I aim my light so the cut off (top of the beam) is several metres ahead, ie all of the beam falls onto the road surface, and I can see the cut off on the road surface. For faster speeds, the aim is a bit further at the cost of reduced brightness, if I'm going slower then I can point it down more with increased brightness.

On unlit roads, you do need to aim higher to see where you are going and also just in case a deer suddenly appears in front of you. If you are lighting up what's in front of you and not the road surface then it's going to dazzle.

I've only used StVZO battery lights, on my bars, and set the bracket just tight enough so that I can aim the light up and down.

Also I would think the height of the light makes a difference.

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #19 on: December 11, 2020, 03:41:58 pm »
I set mine to the equivalent of a slightly high car dipped-headlight.  At a rough estimate, that means the beam cut-off is about 30 metres ahead of me.

Cudzoziemiec

  • Eating all the pies and drinking all the tea.
Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #20 on: December 11, 2020, 05:51:56 pm »
This thread is a reminder that I ought to change the bracket on one bike. The current bracket is great at holding the headlight but unfortunately it squashes the brake and gear cables into a position in which they rub on the head tube, so a slightly lower and longer bracket might be better.
Faster than a walk, slower than a train, often slightly higher than a person. (David Byrne)

Cudzoziemiec

  • Eating all the pies and drinking all the tea.
Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #21 on: December 11, 2020, 05:54:25 pm »
I'd be a tiny bit wary of using the standlight to get the angle right. On many headlights – I don't know if the Edelux is one – the standlight is provided by separate LEDs, so the angle will be different. I'd do it by riding the bike slowly, or pushing it, towards a suitably distant vertical surface.
Faster than a walk, slower than a train, often slightly higher than a person. (David Byrne)

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #22 on: December 11, 2020, 05:57:31 pm »
I think, simply put, if the top of the beam is not below other road users' eyes, then it will dazzle.

The top of the beam of the beam is actually the brightest part of the beam.

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #23 on: December 11, 2020, 06:00:51 pm »
I'd be a tiny bit wary of using the standlight to get the angle right. On many headlights – I don't know if the Edelux is one – the standlight is provided by separate LEDs, so the angle will be different. I'd do it by riding the bike slowly, or pushing it, towards a suitably distant vertical surface.

IIRC the Edelux II shares optics with the IQ-X.  On that, there's one LED for main upper part of the beam (the bit with the horizontal cutoff), which also functions as the standlight.  There's a second LED for nearfield illumination, which is only used in darkness, and goes out when you stop.  Therefore the standlight can reasonably be used to adjust the alignment, as long as you have a sufficiency of darkness to see the dimmer beam.

You certainly couldn't align the beam of a Cyo T by using the standlight, thobut.  The be-seen LEDs don't have any focusing optics at all.
Careful, Kim. Your sarcasm's showing...

Re: Schmidt Edelux II angle
« Reply #24 on: December 11, 2020, 06:04:24 pm »
I'd be a tiny bit wary of using the standlight to get the angle right. On many headlights – I don't know if the Edelux is one – the standlight is provided by separate LEDs, so the angle will be different. I'd do it by riding the bike slowly, or pushing it, towards a suitably distant vertical surface.

I did think the standlight only provided a low powered being seen light, different to the normal beam, for when you are not moving therefore you don't need to light up the road, although I might be wrong about that.