Charles R
Well-known member
I've also thought about this product for awhile. I just don't have the time or money to follow through. So let me give you my thoughts on it.
There is a patent for auto levelling moto headlights already out there for some guy in Livermore. It was filed back in the '90's. The way I figure you could bypass his patent is that his is an integrated headlight, and it looks like both of our ideas are for a suplimentary light system.
I think you are overcomplicating the design with that many axis. In my opinion, it will work very effectively, although not "perfect", by just rotating the bulb and "cut-off" shield in projector type housing. The trick of course, and you are making designs for it, is letting the system know where level is. The patent that's out there uses two electronic range finders to determine the proximity of the ground on either side of the bike. by using this info, a program should be able to determine any lean angle by simply measuring which range finder is closer to the ground, and by how much.
Back to the rotating housing.
At level, you have a basic beam pattern with a sharp horizontal cut-off. The bike leans, the cut-off point leans, and you the rider have to look 'up' into the turn of course, right? So it's natual to think the way to compensate is to aim the bulb 'up' too. But all you really need to do is keep the cut-off horizontal to our relatively level roads. The UP aiming will compensate a little for the fact that the light housings will be getting closer to the surface of the road. But that adds a lot of complexity, and cost, to the design for relatively small gains. Further, you can even somewhat compensate for this by having the single action system slightly 'overcompensate' for the lean, which would then skew the leading edge of the light pattern up, and also drop the trailing edge down.
You make it a wide 'fog light' type pattern, and with just one mechanical action, and you've drastically improved the lighting in a turn while keeping the design simple (less parts to break) and affordable.
that's my version of the idea. I think it's long past time for this product, and personally, I think you'd make a ton of sales if you package and price it well enough.
There is a patent for auto levelling moto headlights already out there for some guy in Livermore. It was filed back in the '90's. The way I figure you could bypass his patent is that his is an integrated headlight, and it looks like both of our ideas are for a suplimentary light system.
I think you are overcomplicating the design with that many axis. In my opinion, it will work very effectively, although not "perfect", by just rotating the bulb and "cut-off" shield in projector type housing. The trick of course, and you are making designs for it, is letting the system know where level is. The patent that's out there uses two electronic range finders to determine the proximity of the ground on either side of the bike. by using this info, a program should be able to determine any lean angle by simply measuring which range finder is closer to the ground, and by how much.
Back to the rotating housing.
At level, you have a basic beam pattern with a sharp horizontal cut-off. The bike leans, the cut-off point leans, and you the rider have to look 'up' into the turn of course, right? So it's natual to think the way to compensate is to aim the bulb 'up' too. But all you really need to do is keep the cut-off horizontal to our relatively level roads. The UP aiming will compensate a little for the fact that the light housings will be getting closer to the surface of the road. But that adds a lot of complexity, and cost, to the design for relatively small gains. Further, you can even somewhat compensate for this by having the single action system slightly 'overcompensate' for the lean, which would then skew the leading edge of the light pattern up, and also drop the trailing edge down.
You make it a wide 'fog light' type pattern, and with just one mechanical action, and you've drastically improved the lighting in a turn while keeping the design simple (less parts to break) and affordable.
that's my version of the idea. I think it's long past time for this product, and personally, I think you'd make a ton of sales if you package and price it well enough.
Last edited: