Automatic Dynamic Headlight Aiming

Messages
3,100
Location
Idaho
Headlight aim has a big effect on headlight performance. A change of only 0.1 degrees vertical aim has visible consequences. A car in movement obviously has variations in headlight aim, and in the future we will have real time, dynamic automatic aiming of high accuracy. But it won't come cheap. https://www.drivingvisionnews.com/real-life-tolerances-degrade-headlight-aim/
Quote
...Good lighting requires a good headlamp, well aimed. This investigation [by Audi lighting engineers] looks at the effect on headlight aim of individual tolerance contributors from car body parameters like load, tire pressure, suspension as well as temperature parameters of chassis and plastic parts.... DVN : What technology of automatic aiming could solve the tolerance problem? Michael Hamm: In this case a possible correct answer would be rocket science. No joke—in missiles there are precise 3D positioning devices; we should think on something similar adopted in automotive. A kind of triple gyroscopic determination of the headlamp coördinate system, the car coordinate system, and the street coördinate system. Then we would have perfect aim everytime and everywhere. DVN: OK, but that would surely take a long time to perfect In the meantime? M.H.: We must continue in small steps. Improve awareness, improve aiming. We should try to increase automatic levelling to reduce glare and increase ADB systems penetration because they are less influenced by vertical aiming deviations. Wherever possible, decrease tolerances and improve sensor ability. A very big milestone would be any kind of closed loop between the aiming and the resulting light distribution on the street. This is an important task, also for future digital projections on the road.
 
Messages
1,296
Location
USA
I've driven vehicles with the self adjusting headlights and wow it makes a huge difference but the price to replace at least for now are expensive.
 
Messages
1,001
Location
Arizona
Ill hang on to my old fashioned statically aimed lights till they outlaw me off the driver-less roads. After 5G lands the driver-less cars will only need running lights so bitter clingers like me wont run into them. ...Car Windows will probably also be optional.
 
Messages
1,864
Location
Cincinnati, USA
More extra expense, weight, cost, and failure modes for people who either shouldn't be driving at night due to poor vision, or refuse to drive within the speed limits and keep their vehicle headlights functioning reasonably (which this can't fix either). It's kind of like equipping street vehicles with tires that can handle 200MPH. Something is wrong if that is any benefit, and usually more of a detriment in some way. More is not better unless we want to pretend this is safety related. If that's the case then it should be a prerequisite that any vehicle that gets these, has to have a proper roll cage and the driver wear a helmet, 4 pt harness and head/neck support. Then they should just be prevented from driving because nobody should be on public roads if they need their headlights to compensate for their poor driving. That is not a requirement on a driver's license so there is nothing that prevents these poor drivers from being legally able to drive a vehicle that doesn't compensate for their inability to drive safely without special help. Heh, maybe something like that will be a driver's license class some day, "Can't Drive but can play copilot for self driving vehicle".
 
Last edited:
Messages
3,094
Location
Chicagoland
My 2011 Durango had auto-leveling headlights, though you had to set the "home" position of them, and it was more to adjust for a heavy load or trailer. Expanding on that honestly wouldn't be that hard.
 
Messages
9,361
Location
MA
Originally Posted by 97prizm
I've driven vehicles with the self adjusting headlights and wow it makes a huge difference but the price to replace at least for now are expensive.
Both my Mercedes have the bixenon headlights. They both auto level and have the active curve illumination. I think the headlights list for around $1500 each. Haven't spent a dime on any of them. It's fun driving it on curves, you can sometimes see the beam swivel a little, they only turn about 12 degrees right or left. But there's a motor in the headlight which is why I guess they're $1500, but I think now they're down to $500-$700 for the Hella light which was the OEM maker of them. You could also get used ones in the $200 range. I don't intend to own the car forever and I'm hoping that they last for the next few years that I own it. It doesn't seem to be a very common failure item.
 
Messages
9,361
Location
MA
Originally Posted by PimTac
Adaptive LED headlights are the way to go. No mechanical leveling or swivel mechanism
The price of the headlamp assembly is about the same though. And technically I've read that the bixenons are actually brighter than the LEDs, which is why they were an option not standard. No failures on mine so far, but it's only been 12 years on one and 9 years on the other.
 
Messages
601
Location
Earth
Put me down in the "I'd rather fix up a 60's Impala or Chevelle or Vette and waste my money on that" column please. There is something fundamentally wrong with spending $1000-$2500+ per headlight on a disposable direct injected turbo 4 popper redacted censored-box that won't last as long as some pairs of boots I've owned.
 
Messages
601
Location
Earth
Also if every $25k-30k MSRP car is rolling around with $10-12k replacement cost of sensors, lights, camera's ect in the nose alone what's that mean for collision repair? I imagine we are coming up on a point where most any frontal collision pretty much totals the car.
 
Messages
9,361
Location
MA
Originally Posted by GZRider
Also if every $25k-30k MSRP car is rolling around with $10-12k replacement cost of sensors, lights, camera's ect in the nose alone what's that mean for collision repair? I imagine we are coming up on a point where most any frontal collision pretty much totals the car.
Don't forget those sensors include auto collision prevention. So not as many collisions to repair. Probably why insurance hasn't gone up. Plus if the driver isn't paying attention because they're texting, that's the fault of the driver and their insurance should go up if there is a collision. And put me in the party where I prefer my 4 wheel ABS/traction control/stability control, parking sensors/cameras, bluetooth, 7-9 airbags, keyless go, pano sunroof, etc. I did ride in a friend's 69 Firebird. Yeah, not even headrests although it did have lap belts. Just am/fm radio, had to bring our own bluetooth speaker. It was a convertible so I guess that trumps my pano roof. And for the record, IF anything happened, it would cost that much. Nothing has happened so far so it hasn't cost me anything. Plus I like the auto high beams too. Because bixenons use a shutter, it comes on and off very gradually, I have to look at the dash to see if the high beam indicator is on to tell if they're on or not as you don't notice if they've come on or not if you're not paying attention.
 
Messages
601
Location
Earth
You make a good point on the sensors reducing instance of accidents which in turn mitigates the increased costs of each repair or totaling out a 2-3 year old car. I do see the potential advantages of a lot of this new tech for new drivers, those that want added safety or that commute long hours and miles, but am personally not a fan don't want to see mandated in such a way that forces older (and sometimes cooler) vehicles off the road because they lack it.
 
Messages
362
Location
Pikes Peak region
As I have aged, I appreciate more and more good headlamps / design. I remember noting it on my 2002 Mazda Tribute that seemed to light up the road well and a good ways down the path. That was 15 or more years ago and from then on, I test drive at night when considering a vehicle purchase. If the factory or OEM lighting isn't up to par, it's a strong hit against consideration.
 
Messages
9,361
Location
MA
Originally Posted by GZRider
You make a good point on the sensors reducing instance of accidents which in turn mitigates the increased costs of each repair or totaling out a 2-3 year old car. I do see the potential advantages of a lot of this new tech for new drivers, those that want added safety or that commute long hours and miles, but am personally not a fan don't want to see mandated in such a way that forces older (and sometimes cooler) vehicles off the road because they lack it.
I don't think any new tech ever forced older cars off the road. The only car that comes to mind is the Crown Vic, there were new regulations that they had to meet and because of low volume rather than adding it, they decided to discontinue making the car. I think it was the stability control. I don't think any new tech forces older cars off the road, it just requires new cars made to meet the new requirement but does nothing about the older cars. That's how airbags, rear cameras, TPMS, stability control etc were all introduced. There is talk that it will eventually be required. My guess is that at some point so many cars will have it, when it becomes required, it won't be that much of a big deal to add it to the ones that don't have it. Mercedes has had it standard on their E class since 2014.
 
Top