[Mad] Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 In fact, every single time a Flashpod has "just stopped working" later was found to involve improper use of explosives.This sounds a little cumbersome, imho. Maybe: "In fact, every case involving a Flashpod malfunction was later attributed to improper use of explosives." Hm... I don´t think so. I see it as a joke of some kind. (Thinking of the Xcorps Soldiers bringing back damaged material: "Hm... strange, it just stopped working... and truely I have no idea why... *whistle*") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moriarty Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 (edited) Hm... I don´t think so. I see it as a joke of some kind. (Thinking of the Xcorps Soldiers bringing back damaged material: "Hm... strange, it just stopped working... and truely I have no idea why... *whistle*") that is exactly what I intended. is there any way to make it more clear? maybe it's that kind of "german" joke that just doesn't work well in english... ? @mad: originally, I'm from NRW (BI). currently studying in MVP (HRO), though. Edited March 10, 2005 by Moriarty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 (edited) Ahh... I understand now. (See, I do have a sense of humor! ) Maybe: "In fact, every single time a soldier has said, "my Flashpod just stopped working," it was later found to have involved the improper use of explosives." Edit- fixed verb agreement Edited March 10, 2005 by Astyanax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan2 Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 [...]The accumulator resides in the center of the round device and can be reloaded quickly using the Flashpod-QuickCharge system at the base. The factory-default 250Ah accumulator is capable of sustaining a light output of 1900 ansi lumens for at least 17 minutes, enough for most standard operations.[...] [...]In fact, every single time a Flashpod has "just stopped working" was later was found to involve improper use of explosives.[...]I see now they're using candela per square meter (cd/m2) for the new liquid crystal display monitors to say how strong the light is.What's an ANSI lumen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moriarty Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 I see now they're using candela per square meter (cd/m2) for the new liquid crystal display monitors to say how strong the light is.What's an ANSI lumen? ANSI stands for "American National Standards Institute", the guys who defined the unit of measurement, I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan2 Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 ANSI stands for "American National Standards Institute", the guys who defined the unit of measurement, I suppose.Do they work in pounds, inches, miles, yards, gallons and things like these? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Azrael Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 ANSI stands for "American National Standards Institute", the guys who defined the unit of measurement, I suppose.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Do they work in pounds, inches, miles, yards, gallons and things like these?<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Are "lumens" part of the Metric System? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moriarty Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 I don't have a clue. What's even more interesting is that the term "ansi lumen" appears to be used almost exclusively outside of the U.S.. "lumen" is definitely the correct SI unit of light intensity, while "candela" is the unit of light density (lumen/square meter). "ansi lumen" appears to be exactly the same as "lumen", but perhaps the more correct term. I am definitely confused. if I do a search for "ansi lumen", all I get is german websites. even when I'm searching global. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 (edited) I've looked up several sites, and they pretty much say that candelas are the SI unit. Here's one: http://www.ex.ac.uk/cimt/dictunit/dictunit.htm Edit- here's the wiki, which I think explains it better: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light#Measurement_of_light As far as I can tell, luminous intensity (measured by candelas) is defined as the energy of light of a certain frequency in a particular direction. Luminous flux (measured by lumens) is defined as the amount of light that hits an area from a 1-candela source. Illuminance (measured by lux, or lumen/sq. meter) "refers to the amount of incident light". I have no idea what that means. What it boils down to is that we're probably looking at joules for the amount of energy emitted, or possibly candela steradian/sq. meter (I haven't the slightest idea what the heck this is) Edited March 10, 2005 by Astyanax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Azrael Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 Ahh, the good old Metric System... not like your aberrant feet, inches, whatever system (actually, I've heard it's called Imperial System, is this correct?)I've found a nice place about metric units: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/units.htmlluminance unit is the candela per square meter.BUT!, the unit for luminous flux is the lumen.I suppose in this case the candela applies better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moriarty Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 and here I thought that I understood light. according to my physics formula compendium, candela is a unit describing the intensity of light (of a black body under certain conditions) emitted at a right angle to its surface ,while lumen is describing the light intensity of a 0-dimensional source emitting the equivalent of 1 candela in all directions (radially) ...since we can interpret our Flashpod as a single point in space emitting light, lumen would be appropriate... wouldn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 You might be right, but could you look up "lux" as well? I want to know this for myself, now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Azrael Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 and here I thought that I understood light. according to my physics formula compendium, candela is a unit describing the intensity of light (of a black body under certain conditions) emitted at a right angle to its surface ,while lumen is describing the light intensity of a 0-dimensional source emitting the equivalent of 1 candela in all directions (radially) ...since we can interpret our Flashpod as a single point in space emitting light, lumen would be appropriate... wouldn't it? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> If that's the definition, the lumen it is , I just took a wild guess there, writing the XML thing while I posted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moriarty Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 okay, according to my book, lux is a unit of illumination intensity (it describes the amount of light received by an object, not emitted). An area has 1 Lux if 1 square meter of it receives 1 lumen of light. ("lightcurrent" would be the direct translation of the term used here for what "lumen" describes... I don't know if there's a better word.) oh, I found another website backing my POV: it says The candela is a unit of intensity: a light source can be emitting with an intensity of one candela in all directions, or one candela in just a narrow beam. The intensity is the same but the total energy flux from the lamp, in lumens, is not the same. The output from a lamp is usually quoted in lumens, summed over all directions, together with the distribution diagram in candela, shown above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mad] Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 luminance unit is the candela per square meter.BUT!, the unit for luminous flux is the lumen.I suppose in this case the candela applies better.I don´t think so, because e.g. you also use lumen for bulbs etc., because for candela you need the angle in which the light is projected, since bulbs do not project the light to the same ammount in evry direction, one uses the lumen which characterizes the overall light output of the light source. Or am I mistaken? This site explains the difference (but, unfortunatly it´s in german language.. :/ http://home.germany.net/101-81660/li-grun2.htm )Well, nevertheless, if you want to calculate the cd value you do the following: Lumen = Candela * Steradiants where Steradiant is: Steradiants = 2 * ¶ (1 - cos (¶ / 360 * Degrees)) usually you just take a very small angle to calculate the cd value, otherwise you calcualte it for every angle and get a graph with level of ilumination at each point... hm... maybe I should order one of these jackets Asty was talking ´bout Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 Yes, here come the men in white coats to take the mad Mad away! Um, so are we all in agreement? That we use "lumens" in the text? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mad] Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 okay, according to my book, lux is a unit of illumination intensity[...] Yes, but AFAIK lux is no longer used... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 (edited) So we won't use it in our CTs. Case closed. I'm glad we've straightened out all this lumen/candela/steradiants/lux business. Now I can stay at the funny farm in peace. But wouldn't it be kinda neat if we could use "rads"? Edited March 10, 2005 by Astyanax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mad] Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 Yes, here come the men in white coats to take the mad Mad away! Um, so are we all in agreement? That we use "lumens" in the text? I´m for it (but actually, isn´t it spelled lumen? as it is latin AFAIK ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mad] Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 But wouldn't it be kinda neat if we could use "rads"? hm... let me think.. this IS the correct (SI) unit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Azrael Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 *eats some popcorn, watching the spectacle from a safe distance* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 But how many lux/lumens/candelas would your spectacles receive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mad] Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 (edited) *eats some popcorn, watching the spectacle from a safe distance*Soooo.. someone´s trying not to get involved, he? Watch this *throws snowball at himself... and one at Astyanax* Edited March 10, 2005 by Azrael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Azrael Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 *throws snowball at himself... and one at Astyanax*<{POST_SNAPBACK}>I wonder why would he do that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 This post has been edited by Azrael: Today, 01:31 PMSneaky, sneaky, Az. I thought you were a "safe" distance away... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mad] Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 *throws snowball at himself... and one at Astyanax*I wonder why would he do that... ehhh! not fair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Azrael Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 This post has been edited by Azrael: Today, 01:31 PMSneaky, sneaky, Az. I thought you were a "safe" distance away... <{POST_SNAPBACK}>The snowball attracted my attention... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mad] Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 This post has been edited by Azrael: Today, 01:31 PMSneaky, sneaky, Az. I thought you were a "safe" distance away... So this seems as it is gonna be a 2 against 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 This post has been edited by Azrael: Today, 01:31 PMSneaky, sneaky, Az. I thought you were a "safe" distance away... The snowball attracted my attention...I'm sure it did. Isn't it summer down there in Uruguay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Azrael Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 This post has been edited by Azrael: Today, 01:31 PMSneaky, sneaky, Az. I thought you were a "safe" distance away... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So this seems as it is gonna be a 2 against 1 <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Azrael Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 This post has been edited by Azrael: Today, 01:31 PMSneaky, sneaky, Az. I thought you were a "safe" distance away... The snowball attracted my attention...I'm sure it did. Isn't it summer down there in Uruguay? <{POST_SNAPBACK}>It's getting colder , the heat was killing me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mad] Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 This post has been edited by Azrael: Today, 01:31 PMSneaky, sneaky, Az. I thought you were a "safe" distance away... So this seems as it is gonna be a 2 against 1 *holds his bleeding nose*No hit no hit! (this is getting sort of out of control... ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 *slaps Mad* *slaps Azrael* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mad] Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 This post has been edited by Azrael: Today, 01:31 PMSneaky, sneaky, Az. I thought you were a "safe" distance away... The snowball attracted my attention...I'm sure it did. Isn't it summer down there in Uruguay? It's getting colder , the heat was killing me.Lucky bastard! At the time beeing I´m in Budapest (Hungary) and it´s freezing cold (wonder where I got the snow from heh? ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan2 Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 (edited) If I knew what I started, I would shut up from the begining.So candela is about the lamp's power output, no matter what angle (or 3D angle - steradian) is considered.And lumen is about.... where's that physics book? P.S. Strange enough, here on paralel 55, the sun was able to melt almost all the snow. I'm supposed to look behind northern building walls to find some dirty ice. And it's too dangerous to throw that at people. Edited March 10, 2005 by dan2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Azrael Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 *slaps Mad* *slaps Azrael* <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You are lucky I don't make you slap yourself , ok, let's stop the spam please, or I'll be forced to impose order Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mad] Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 (edited) If I knew what I started, I would shut up from the begining.So candela is about the lamp's power output, no matter what angle (or 3D angle - steradian) is considered.And lumen is about.... where's that physics book?You really think it is wise to pick this up again? Well, but lumen is about the amount of light a light source is emitting in total, and cd is the emission at a specified angle/spot. Edited March 10, 2005 by Mad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 All right, back to business. Is the candela/lumen issue reopened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mad] Posted March 10, 2005 Report Share Posted March 10, 2005 All right, back to business. Is the candela/lumen issue reopened?As you can see above... No, but I really hope we can close this... for now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moriarty Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 okay, now the lumen discussion has been finished, I re-worked the supposed-to-be funny part about flashpods being bombed could this actually be the final version? FLASHPODX-Net://Pegasus.net/Equipment/Flashpod With the Flashpod, our soldiers are able to efficiently illuminate selected areas. This battlefield lighting is important during nighttime missions, as it makes it easier for our soldiers to spot enemies while advancing towards the target. It also allows them to create a defense perimeter to prevent surprise attacks by enemies lurking in the shadows. Like its predecessors, this area illumination device uses phosphorus as its most important component. Unlike them, however, the system uses electrical stimulation to create a similar effect. This is a considerable improvement, as it means that the device is not only reusable, but also does not exhibit the exothermic side-effects involved in the use of the previous versions. "Well, this was long overdue. Those old flare-thingies kept going off inside my pockets." - Rookie Thomas "Firebutt" Richter Based on this new principle called Phosphorus Electro-Luminescence (PEL), the Flashpod is composed of just two parts: accumulator and PEL screen. The accumulator resides in the center of the round device and can be reloaded quickly using the Flashpod-QuickCharge system at the base. The factory-default 250Ah accumulator is capable of sustaining a light output of 1900 ansi lumen for at least 17 minutes, enough for most standard operations. The PEL screen has been made possible by recent advances in nanotechnology, allowing us to use a marvelous semiconductive polymer that is cheap to produce, moldable into any shape, lightweight, and capable of electricity-to-light conversion with unprecedented efficiency. The screen is composed of macromolecules that can be doped with various elements, each creating a unique spectrum of emitted wavelengths. After experimenting with several different combinations, a mixture of chromium, iridium and yttrium was chosen for its superior ability to produce a spectrum of emitted light which does not impair the night-vision of our soldiers. This is achieved by suppressing those wavelengths that trigger the human eye's light-adaptation. The resulting red glow is still more than sufficient to illuminate the surrounding area, allowing early spotting and identification of enemies. The PEL screen is integrated into the translucent envelope of the device. This tough, shatter-proof and fire-resistant polymer casing makes the Flashpod highly resilient to environment conditions. In fact, every reported case of "spontaneous loss of function" later was found to involve improper use of explosives. For easy de-activation, each Flashpod's casing has three concealed buttons situated at intervals easily accesible to human hands. When all three buttons are pressed simultaneously, the device is switched off until rethrown, allowing the same Flashpod to be used several times over the course of a mission as needed without revealing the position of the carrier to enemy fire. "Hey guys, check this out, I can make my face glow!" - Rookie Recruit Brian Malone, recently deceased from asphyxiation.Note: The original size of the casing was slightly enlarged to reduce the choking hazard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted April 6, 2005 Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 (edited) The PEL screen is integrated into the translucent envelope of the device. This tough, shatter-proof and fire-resistant polymer casing makes the Flashpod highly resilient to environment conditions. In fact, every reported case of "spontaneous loss of function" later was found to involve improper use of explosives.Minor nit-pick- "resilient" doesn't seem to be the right word here; the casing doesn't exactly "recover" from environmental stresses so much as it "resists" them.re·sil·ient ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-zlynt)adj. Marked by the ability to recover readily, as from misfortune. Capable of returning to an original shape or position, as after having been compressed."Resistant" would probably be the best alternative, but it's already used earlier in the sentence. Maybe: "This tough, shatter- and fire-proof polymer casing makes the Flashpod highly resistant to environmental conditions."? Edited April 6, 2005 by Astyanax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moriarty Posted April 6, 2005 Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 The PEL screen is integrated into the translucent envelope of the device. This tough, shatter-proof and fire-resistant polymer casing makes the Flashpod impervious to most environment conditions. In fact, every reported case of "spontaneous loss of function" later was found to involve improper use of explosives. ...how about this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted April 6, 2005 Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 (edited) it's a throwback to a previous version! The "resistant" adjective is currently making something "impervious" later in the sentence... which is weird because resistance doesn't ordinarily confer imperviousness. How about replacing "most" with "normal", "standard", or "the most prevalent" to make resistance confer imperviousness to normal conditions (but not extreme ones)? Ugh... talk about an unwieldy explanation. I'll try to clarify further if this is too convoluted... Edited April 6, 2005 by Astyanax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Azrael Posted April 6, 2005 Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 Looks good, I think this is nearly completed , just one comment.The accumulator resides in the center of the round device and can be reloaded quickly using the Flashpod-QuickCharge system at the base. The factory-default 250Ah accumulator is capable of sustaining a light output of 1900 ansi lumen for at least 17 minutes, enough for most standard operations.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Is there a way to rephrase this to not make sound the flashpod like a cellphone? I don't know if you get what I mean. When I read "Flashpod-QuickCharge system at the base" it evokes me memories of electrodomestics. I know there has to be a way to recharge, but this phrase makes it not sound like a piece of military equipment. Can it just be slightly rephrased? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted April 6, 2005 Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 (edited) Maybe: "and can be reloaded quickly using the Flashpod-QuickCharge system at the base" --> "and can be recharged via the Flashpod's ventrally-mounted QuickCharge port"? Edited April 6, 2005 by Astyanax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Azrael Posted April 6, 2005 Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 Maybe: "and can be reloaded quickly using the Flashpod-QuickCharge system at the base" --> "and can be recharged via the Flashpod's ventrally-mounted QuickCharge port"?<{POST_SNAPBACK}>"QuickCharge" is one of the things that makes it sound like a brand... maybe just "can be recharged bya the Flashpod's ventrally-mounted recharger port"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted April 6, 2005 Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 To avoid using "recharge" twice in the same sentence: "can be recharged quickly through the Flashpod's ventrally-mounted power port"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Azrael Posted April 6, 2005 Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 Oh, sorry, missing a lot lately .That sounds a lot better, let's see what Moriarty thinks of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exo2000 Posted April 6, 2005 Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 Why mention exactly where the power port is. You could just say; "can be recharged quickly through the Flashpod's power port" or... "can be recharged quickly through the Flashpod's built-in power port" or "can be recharged quickly through the Flashpod's integrated power socket" the variations are nearly endless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astyanax Posted April 6, 2005 Report Share Posted April 6, 2005 You're not the only one missing things today, Az, so am I, so am I... The "ventrally-mounted" aspect was an attempt to preserve a part of the original sentence, but Exo2000's "can be recharged quickly through the Flashpod's integrated power socket" sounds better, imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts