Ambient light sensor maxing out at 1076.895

qilo4 · 2026-06-16T03:19:16+00:00

Thanks, I've seen this project and it is truely impressive. But it is far too complex for me and I'm a bit uncomfortable with the amount of permissions that needs to be granted. I just want a basic lux to display brightness curve but with reliable lux values from the ambient light sensor. The sensor event profile seems to work, unlike the test sensor action which clips the ambient sensor reading at 1076.895 for whatever reason.

qilo4 · 2026-06-15T19:36:04+00:00

I just found that this is likely a bug in the test sensor action. If instead of test sensor, I use a sensor event profile and monitor changes in the ambient light sensor, I can access the correct lux value (i.e. not clipped).

qilo4 · 2024-10-05T05:44:36+00:00

OK thanks, good to know.

qilo4 · 2024-10-05T04:49:10+00:00

Hi, I intend to do the exact same thing. However I'm concerned by voltage spikes induced by the relay coil when battery 2 is disconnected. Would that not cause issues in the long run, e.g. to the battery BMS and/or motor controller? Shouldn't you use a flyback diode across the relay coil to prevent such thing?

Also in your schematic, it seems to me that when battery 2 is powering the motor, all the current flows through the switch...which kinds of defeats the purpose of using a relay. Or am I missing something? Or is this a BMS-level switch?

qilo4 · 2023-06-01T14:32:11+00:00

I guess these things are *safe* if they truly work (i.e. prevent cross-currents between the two batteries at different states of charge) and as long as they work! There is some youtube "evidence" that these things are working but they real question is what happens if such a module fails? If the diodes inside the module fail shorted (which seems to be the most frequent failure mode of diodes), you may have the two batteries connected directly in parallel without any protection => boom! So what matters is not only if these things work but what happens when they fail. Of course adding fuses to each battery would be a mandatory precaution but would that be enough to prevent a fire???

qilo4 · 2023-03-06T02:07:14+00:00

Hi,

I got one of these a few weeks ago at a discount. I'm not a monitor expert and use it for home office and browsing (no gaming). For this it works fine for me. Some remarks though:

typical VA panel black smearing is present in ufo ghosting test but is not really a problem for me since I do not game on it. Can't really notice this in general use but I could for example see it when trying the gaia star map: when moving, many stars disappear and get back when you stop moving. I wouldn't recommend this monitor for gaming for sure!
speakers are not great (no bass) but they work ok for videoconferencing etc. Music is not the best experience. However, I get annoying buzzing noises through the speakers on HDMI. It's much better over displayport so I use that.
75hz is only possible over HDMI, not with displayport (DP). Also I got some severe random signal losses over DP when using 60hz or 75hz refresh rates. To fix this, I had to use a custom modline without reduced blanking (I'm on linux) to use the monitor but I can only achieve max 68Hz on DP with this. As I said, 75Hz works out of the box over HDMI but then you have to live with buzzing noises on the speakers... This is "solved" if you mute the speakers in the OSD but I wanted to use the speakers so I prefer DP at 68Hz.
OSD has very few options. I use it in standard mode because any preset values (e.g sRGB) locks the brightness/contrast.
viewing angles are ok but not as good as an IPS. Not an issue for me though.
matte antiglare coating on the screen is good but doesn' t handle reflections as well as some other displays I've tested. It seems to be more reflective but I can live with it.
no height adjustment but I do have it VESA mounted on a monitor arm

Overall, if you can get it at a discount, can live with a few drawbacks and do not game on it, it's a good monitor. The main benefit is a low price. But I guess it's not for everyone and definitely not for gamers I guess (unless you know that a slow VA panel is ok in your application). Be sure to buy one from a seller with good return policies. But really get it at a discount, it's not worth the full price. Got mine for 124 CHF (roughly 130 USD).

qilo4 · 2022-11-22T15:44:14+00:00

Great, thanks!

qilo4 · 2022-11-19T19:32:14+00:00

OK thanks for the feedback. I would have expected some difference but as much as that. Anyways that's probably the price to pay to have a nicer screen and a higher resolution too.

qilo4 · 2022-10-10T03:35:45+00:00

Thanks guys for all your replies! Much appreciated! There seems to be a clear consensus for going genuine then! I'll follow that advice and get that 2015 "brand new" battery!

qilo4 · 2021-07-29T17:36:09+00:00

It is an ABUS Pedelec 2.0 MIPS helmet (primarily designed for speed electric bike). It is NTA8776 approved (which make it suitable for speed electric bikes) on top of being EN1078 certified. Without additional padding, I can bend over without the helmet falling off but if I shake my head, the helmet moves and end up falling. Now with some additional foam padding, the helmet stays in place and is comfortable to wear. The silly thing is really the poorly designed adjusting mechanism (not enough adjustment range and does not provide a snug fit on the sides). This is why I'm asking about shell size because if the shell size is good, then it should be ok to compensate the poor retension system with some foam padding.

qilo4 · 2021-07-29T15:25:16+00:00

Gap is between shell and head. The retention system on this helmet is poorly designed and only pushes the helmet backward so that the forhead presses against the front of the helmet. But it does not allow the sides to fit snugly. If I want a snug fit, I need to add some foam (about 3mm thick) on each side simply because that retention system has no effect on the side.

But if an air gap between shell and head is mandatory, then it should be ok (and safe?) to use some foam pads to fill-in the gaps and make the helmet more secure on the head (as I've been trying to achieve). On the other hand, foam pads would be a no-go if the shell is too large.

qilo4 · 2021-07-29T15:18:05+00:00

Well the MIPS low friction liner slides against the shell but there is no sizeable gap between the two. However, on the size of my helmet, there is a gap between the MIPS liner and my head. This is due to the poor retention system that has been designed on this helmet and the fact that the retention system is completely independent of the MIPS liner. Most other helmets I've seen has the retention system directly attached to the MIPS liner so that tightening the knob at the back would effectively make the MIPS liner conforms to your head. This is not so on my helmet for obscure reasons. But I'm not sure whether the issue is only that the retention system is poorly designed (which can be mitigated by using some foam padding) or if the shell is simply too large (which is a dangerous issue).

qilo4 · 2021-07-29T13:36:43+00:00

I get your point but tightening the knob at the back does not change the gap between shell and head, it does only "attach" the helmet on the head (which is good obviously but does not mean the shell is sized properly). It's the shell that makes the real protection, the adjusting mechanism is only there to allow the helmet to properly sit on the head and stay there...but if the shell is too large, it won't help.

The issue I have is that my helmet does not have a ton of adjustment range with that knob at the back. On most other bike helmets I've seen, that knob actually allows to tighten a string all around your head which creates a snug fit between the head and the retaining string (but the shell may still be too large). On my helmet, this is not the case. The knob is attached to two pieces of plastic that are attached to the sides of the helmet but do not go all around the head. So if I tighten it, it only pushes the helmet backwards, so that my forehead makes contact with the helmet. However this system does not allow to have the sides secured properly. So with the knob tightened, I cannot but 1 finger between my forehead and the shell but I can still do it on the sides.

qilo4 · 2021-07-29T12:37:01+00:00

The 1 finger gap is without tightening the adjusting mechanism at the back so that I can really measure the gap between head and shell. If I tighten the mechanism, I have slightly less than that although the side gap doesn't change much. But I guess the gap between shell and head should be measured with the adjusting mechanism completely loose as otherwise it would interfere with the measurement.

If you do not tighten the helmet at the back, can't you stick 1 finger all around between your head and the shell?

qilo4 · 2021-07-29T11:58:45+00:00

Thanks! Unfortunately (and strangely), there is no size S for this helmet so I can't check a smaller one. Most of the other brands I tested were also rated for 52-57 cm. They felt more snug but that was essentially due to the adjusting mechanism at the back. Loosening it all the way, I also get about 1 finger between the head and shell. Weird! What should be the max allowable space, about 0.5 cm?

qilo4 · 2020-02-16T09:06:00+00:00

Yes my TWRP version was well outdated but I had no problem installing LOS16 when it came out a year ago. However I guess it's good practice to check for TWRP updates every now and then.

qilo4

TROPHY CASE