Auto-dipping headlights

[LLL]

Originally Posted by Shashank.A

Potential savings for whom ?? have you ever heard about corruption !!

true...but our ministers are dumb idiots. They could have saved millions using this formula and pocketed the money. in fact, they could have made money by awarding the mfg contract to someone who gave them max kickbacks. someone tell the TN ministers of that time that they missed a huge money-making opportunity.

Originally Posted by netchef

Imagine millions of street lights switching on and off at just the optimum ambient light conditions and not a second before/later. Imagine knocking hundreds of 'lightmen' off the rolls in each city. I'd say ballpark savings could cross into hundreds of crores annually across the country.

true....and that would have meant more electricity available for commercial and residential use. means more votes for corrupt ministerji. someone pls tell the ministers of that time that not only did they miss a huge money making opportunity, they also missed a chance to get some free votes.

[SirAlec]

Everytime we start a post on auto, it leads somewhere else,

BTW we learn something new or the other....

[1100D]

But there was a problem. Whenever you were climbing up a slope and a car actually approached you from the top of the slope, the headlights on the lower car would dim, causing the driver to go blind on the upper region.

[Mayavi]

Originally Posted by netchef

Imagine millions of street lights switching on and off at just the optimum ambient light conditions and not a second before/later. Imagine knocking hundreds of 'lightmen' off the rolls in each city. I'd say ballpark savings could cross into hundreds of crores annually across the country.

This has been in use in Hyderabad for at least 10 years now.

[Ram]

Originally Posted by Sahil

BMW does offer this option abroad...called the High-Beam Assist.
It has a sensor mounted on the windscreen which shifts to low beam when it senses oncoming traffic and then goes back to high beam.
If your dad was manufacturing something like this in the 70/80s, i must say he was way ahead of his times!

1952 "Autronic Eye" system automated the switch between high and low beams.

As a kid in Bombay of the mid 1960s, I had purchased an Audel's Auto repair guide that described how auto-dippers worked. Still have that old book somewhere.

Automatic headlight dippers were available on 1952 Cadillacs and Oldsmobiles. GM called it the Autronic Eye. And it was advertised as feature of the year.

The next year in 1953 it was also available on Buick, Pontiac and Chevrolet models. A photo tube looking like the top eye of a periscope sat on the left side of the instrument panel inside the windshield.

In 1956, Ford featured their automatic headlight dipper AutoDim on Lincolns. Later also Ford Thunderbird and some Mercury models.

In 1959, GM had an improved automatic headlight dipping system called GuideMatic. This even had a thumbwheel that let drivers adjust the delay after which the headlights automatically returned to full-beam.

All 1959 Dodge, Plymouth, Chrysler, DeSoto and Imperials had this Automatic Beam Control dipper. And top line Chryslers for 10 years until 1969.

By the mid-1960s, this feature was dropped on all GM models except Cadillac. Cadillac continued to offering GuideMatic for 29 years until 1988).

Ram

[Ram]

The 1952 Autronic Eye (automatic headlight beam control) system consists of the

1. "Eye" unit mounted on the dashboard in a die-cast fairing,
2. Amplifier Unit located in a black box under the bonnet, and
3. Power relay/cutout also located under the bonnet.

The Amplifier Unit was the "brain" of the system. By today’s standards, its vacuum tube circuitry is outdated and unreliable. Failures would occur because the two vacuum tubes wore out, the capacitors leaked, and fungus and corrosion attacked the entire unit.

Cadillac dealerships used calibration fixtures by Sun and Kent-Moore.

Ram

[simplythebest]

Originally Posted by netchef

Sir, I do not agree. Photoreactive lenses do not block out all the light, just select frequencies of the spectrum. RayBan long ago made day-night lenses which were photosensitive...I believe they were called AmberMatic, and I've used them at night without compromising on visibility. In fact I've even watched movies in theatres with them on (and Bruce Willis did NOT look like Brooke Shields ).

I don't know how Polarised works.

I understand what you mean, but I don't know how it would work.

Your headlights as well as the opposing car's headlights will be in similar frequencies.

So if a glass blocks the opposing car's light, then your's must be partially reduced as well.

I read somewhere that using the yellow tinted glasses for night driving is not a great idea because although it appears that you see more, you are actually missing out on some detail.

check this out Laramy-K Optical Lab - The Dangers of Night Driving Glasses

[SirAlec]

these old design had a major flaw that, it used to often flicker when it sensed the street lights, hence was avoided in most of the cars.

[netchef]

Originally Posted by directinjection

A product like this was introduced in 1978 in North India. However, it was not mounted on the dashboard but under the RHS headlight. It was a small box-like thing with a light sensor in the middle. It would lower the headlight beam automatically whenever light fell on it from the opposite direction. As soon as the light disappeared, it would restore high beam. The only car fitted with this device that I actually saw was my dad's official Ambassador but the driver wasn't too happy with it because it over-reacted at times, the sensor being too sensitive. The automatic beam dipping could be overcome by using the manual beam-dipping switch which in the case of Ambassador was foot operated in those days.

Much later, in late 1990s a similar device was talked about in press once again. This was named BHARAT RAKSHAK. From what I know, even this did not see the light of the day.

Given the moronic driving habits in this country, such a device would prove very useful provided:

1. Its fitment is made compulsory at the manufacturers' end itself
2. No manual over-riding is possible

directinjection: I don't know if they could legislate such technology, but if a consortium of manufacturers decided to go the route, I'm sure a lot of mishaps could be averted.

Originally Posted by trrk

Hi,

In the early 70's, one of our Ambassadors was fitted out with a smilar device. The sensor was in the front grille.

It used to work nicely. It also had a switch which would switch high / low beams in succession for overtaking purposes.

If available, I would fit one to all my vehicles.

trrk: I hope you find one soon.

Originally Posted by LLL

true...but our ministers are dumb idiots. They could have saved millions using this formula and pocketed the money. in fact, they could have made money by awarding the mfg contract to someone who gave them max kickbacks. someone tell the TN ministers of that time that they missed a huge money-making opportunity.



true....and that would have meant more electricity available for commercial and residential use. means more votes for corrupt ministerji. someone pls tell the ministers of that time that not only did they miss a huge money making opportunity, they also missed a chance to get some free votes.

Originally Posted by SirAlec

these old design had a major flaw that, it used to often flicker when it sensed the street lights, hence was avoided in most of the cars.

SirAlec: dad's device had the sensitivity thing fixed. I can remember running experiments on it as a kid, using a flashlight.

Originally Posted by simplythebest

I understand what you mean, but I don't know how it would work.

Your headlights as well as the opposing car's headlights will be in similar frequencies.

So if a glass blocks the opposing car's light, then your's must be partially reduced as well.

I read somewhere that using the yellow tinted glasses for night driving is not a great idea because although it appears that you see more, you are actually missing out on some detail.

check this out Laramy-K Optical Lab - The Dangers of Night Driving Glasses

Something thought-provoking there, Sir.

Originally Posted by ram

The 1952 Autronic Eye (automatic headlight beam control) system consists of the

1. "Eye" unit mounted on the dashboard in a die-cast fairing,
2. Amplifier Unit located in a black box under the bonnet, and
3. Power relay/cutout also located under the bonnet.

The Amplifier Unit was the "brain" of the system. By today’s standards, its vacuum tube circuitry is outdated and unreliable. Failures would occur because the two vacuum tubes wore out, the capacitors leaked, and fungus and corrosion attacked the entire unit.

Cadillac dealerships used calibration fixtures by Sun and Kent-Moore.

Ram

Wow, Ram. How did you lay your hands on this ancient brochure? Dad's device had a very similar cast aluminium pod to house the eye, and it mounted on the dashboard as well.

Originally Posted by ram

1952 "Autronic Eye" system automated the switch between high and low beams.

Attachment 8084

As a kid in Bombay of the mid 1960s, I had purchased an Audel's Auto repair guide that described how auto-dippers worked. Still have that old book somewhere.

Automatic headlight dippers were available on 1952 Cadillacs and Oldsmobiles. GM called it the Autronic Eye. And it was advertised as feature of the year.

The next year in 1953 it was also available on Buick, Pontiac and Chevrolet models. A photo tube looking like the top eye of a periscope sat on the left side of the instrument panel inside the windshield.

In 1956, Ford featured their automatic headlight dipper AutoDim on Lincolns. Later also Ford Thunderbird and some Mercury models.

In 1959, GM had an improved automatic headlight dipping system called GuideMatic. This even had a thumbwheel that let drivers adjust the delay after which the headlights automatically returned to full-beam.

All 1959 Dodge, Plymouth, Chrysler, DeSoto and Imperials had this Automatic Beam Control dipper. And top line Chryslers for 10 years until 1969.

By the mid-1960s, this feature was dropped on all GM models except Cadillac. Cadillac continued to offering GuideMatic for 29 years until 1988).

Ram

Originally Posted by Mayavi

This has been in use in Hyderabad for at least 10 years now.

One progressive city, I'd say.

Originally Posted by 1100D

But there was a problem. Whenever you were climbing up a slope and a car actually approached you from the top of the slope, the headlights on the lower car would dim, causing the driver to go blind on the upper region.

Originally Posted by SirAlec

Everytime we start a post on auto, it leads somewhere else,

BTW we learn something new or the other....

Ha ha. Very true.

[trrk]

Hi,

> trrk: I hope you find one soon.

Thanks.

The only problem area would be to do the wiring part with todays harnesses, ECUs and the like!

[netchef]

Originally Posted by trrk

Hi,

> trrk: I hope you find one soon.

Thanks.

The only problem area would be to do the wiring part with todays harnesses, ECUs and the like!

Th old systems mounted the eye in star wars pod on the dashboard, and this won't be viable as those old cars had metal dashboards while the new ones are plastic. That said, there's no restriction on moving the eye elsewhere like near the headlights in the grill area.
I agree wiring would pose its own set of issues.
Perhaps the eye gadgetry is so miniaturised now it could simply be glued inside the windscreen.

[BaCkSeAtDrIVeR]

Looks like this thing was mandatory for some time, but is not now. See this pdf file.

http://www.dorth.gov.in/writereaddat...8681978288.pdf


THe title says "Auto dipper"; but there is no mention of it in the body. Seems the earlier post about govt. discarding the requirement is true.

[netchef]

Originally Posted by BaCkSeAtDrIVeR

Looks like this thing was mandatory for some time, but is not now. See this pdf file.


http://www.dorth.gov.in/writereaddat...8681978288.pdf


THe title says "Auto dipper"; but there is no mention of it in the body. Seems the earlier post about govt. discarding the requirement is true.

Thanks. How did you lay your hands on that Government document?

[BaCkSeAtDrIVeR]

Originally Posted by netchef

Thanks. How did you lay your hands on that Government document?

Hey, it ai'nt a classified top secret design for a nuke sub. Just the law of the land, which teh government is bound to publish.

Start from here MORTH

There is a link which says about rules and acts implemented by the department. Have a look at the link titled "Central Motor Vehicle Rules".


:- IF the law says your product should conform to ISI specification 1234, and you need to pay Rs.Rs.Rs. to the BIS for access to the specifications, it ai'nt a good law, IMHO. Citizens have a right to know the law without having to pay for it. (It is a different matter you have to hire a lawyer to understand them).

[netchef]

Originally Posted by BaCkSeAtDrIVeR

Hey, it ai'nt a classified top secret design for a nuke sub. Just the law of the land, which teh government is bound to publish.

Start from here MORTH

There is a link which says about rules and acts implemented by the department. Have a look at the link titled "Central Motor Vehicle Rules".


:- IF the law says your product should conform to ISI specification 1234, and you need to pay Rs.Rs.Rs. to the BIS for access to the specifications, it ai'nt a good law, IMHO. Citizens have a right to know the law without having to pay for it. (It is a different matter you have to hire a lawyer to understand them).

BaCkSeAtDrIVeR: "Hey, it ai'nt a classified top secret design for a nuke sub..."

Sir, you've got me wrong. I meant that in the best way possible- in fact I was quite impressed by your sputniking.
Please don't misconstrue me.

"(It is a different matter you have to hire a lawyer to understand them)."

BTW, what is IMHO? I've seen it used in other places on team-bhp and always wondered.