Red Light Answer

[Mike Taylor 3601]

Pat,
I'm sorry to hear about your loss,there is alot of things we never will know the answers to.
You and your family are in my prayers
Mike Taylor 3601

[Racin Mason]

Pat, thanks for all of the info. Can you tell me if it is normal for BOTH the pre stage and stage lights to go out when the red light comes on? I know it is rare that a car is still sitting there to turn on the stage lights when the red light comes on, but i would think that if I did rock out of the stage beam that the pre-stage light would still remain lit since the beam is still being broken.

[Jeff Stout]

Yes the pre stage and stage beams will go off when the tree has been activated and something happens such as leaving and going green or leaving and going red. Then when tower resets system for next pair of cars and your car was on starting line it registered that the next car was up to line ready to go with both beams lit. I think in Mike Rice comments it explained that portion of the lights going off and back on.
I didnt give it any thought about the time it takes for filament to stop illuminating like Bret describes but math wise it would make sense that we didnt see it on film or it was that fast on then off then on again that the filament never stopped being lit.. I know this sounds like a reach but to me its the only way I could see it happening with reason.
When checking roll out at Speedworld I was able to rock our test wheel and get light to flicker or be solid lit or off. It took time to do it but I was wanting to get accurate reading to make lanes equal. Also Sunday team race in time trials I had a car run faster ET then it ever had and a 524 MPH time slip. One of two reasons a piece of paper or the large wind gusts and dirt devils we had shook the foam reflector in center of track making the sensor think something stopped the reflection after he crossed 1/4 MPH start clock but before he crossed MPH finish. I know it has nothing to do with problem at hand but a explanation of reason why it happened. Never had problem before and the next 6 hours of racing that day.
Jeff

[Jason Oldfield]

I'm not an electro-optic engineer, but I have worked in the field of optics and electronics for 20+ years, and I currently work for a company that makes optical sensors (our sensor works with a VCSEL in the IR-A range at about 800nm). In short, you CANNOT say WITH CERTAINTY that the photographers flash did not effect the receiving sensor. Optical sensors are pretty simple devices really, and as Pat pointed out in his original post the receiving sensor (detector) is a semiconductor device that is "tuned" to a specific wavelength of light. This helps increase the signal to noise ratio, and improve overall signal quality.

However, the match between the detector and wavelength of light that it is trying to detect is not exact, i.e. a sensor that is looking for a wavelength of light predominantly at 800nm doesn't usually reject wavelengths at 799nm and 801nm (it would have to be a REALLY high-dollar sensor). Optical sensors are typically open to a range of wavelengths, with their peak wavelength being the specified wavelength, or the wavelength at the center of a gaussian curve, like so:



As you can see from the above graph, there is a rolloff that would happen with the wavelengths of light seen by the detector. The minimum and maximum wavelengths would be determined by the sensor manufacturer from the type of detector technology used, and the tolerances in manufacturing (which in the end is reflected in the cost).

The same is true for the emitter. Again, the output of wavelengths from the emitter is typically a gaussian curve with the predominant wavelength being the specified wavelength. This is even true for lasers, though with lasers the wavelength range is much smaller than non-collimated light. I don't know the exact type of light source that is used for the stage beams in the timing system, but I highly doubt that they are lasers.

So, how would the photographers flash possibly affect the detector? It all depends upon the wavelengths of light that is emits. What the human eye can see is light in the approximate range of 400nm to 750nm. Light with longer (IR, microwaves, etc.) or shorter (X-rays, UV, etc.) wavelengths than that range is invisible to the human eye. What we see from the flash is white light, which is made up of all of the colors of the spectrum over the visible wavelength range. This is why when you shine a white light into a prism you see the entire spectrum of colors (sunlight through water droplets forming a rainbow is the same thing).

So, from this fact alone you can see that the photographers flash does NOT output a finely tuned wavelength of light. What wavelengths does it output? Well, we can say with a high level of confidence that it outputs an approximately wavelength range of 400nm to 750nm, but wavelengths above or below that are unknown. You would only be able to tell ALL the wavelengths by looking at the output with a spectrometer. In addition, is it possible that the flash outputs the predominant wavelength that the timing system's detectors are looking for? In short, the answer is yes, but at what amplitude is unknown (one would expect that it wouldn't be a predominant wavelength, but again you'd need to analyze the output with a spectrometer to know for sure.)

What is also important to note is that just because the detector is mounted inside a box or tube does NOT mean that outside light sources can't impact their performance. Certain materials are invisible to certain wavelengths of light. The X-Rays are typically defined in the 0.1nm to 10nm range, and can pass through many materials. Most optical sensors use either visible light or IR, and IR can pass through materials as well (this is why the military uses IR sensors to image heat sources of bad guys inside buildings). A nice description of IR light can be found at the link below (take notice of the image of the guys arm inside a garbage bag).

http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/c..._ir/index.html

Now, does all this mean for certain that the photographers flash caused this event to occur? Absolutely not, but from a scientific standpoint, it seems awfully coincidental that the photographers flash goes off, and immediately afterwards the red light comes on. I'd have to see the original footage frame by frame (you can't do this on YouTube) to see what the timing difference is because optical sensors are fast acting. If the timing difference is long (i.e. more than a few tenths of a second), it would seem likely to me that something else must have caused this to happen. But, if it is literally the next frame as somebody else posted, stray IR light from the photographers flash is a distinct possibility.

Would that mean that we'd all need to demand instant changes to the timing system detectors? No, because IMHO it would need to be a near perfect storm for this to happen. With ALL the rounds of racing, and ALL the pictures taken, how often have you seen this happen? It is obviously NOT a common occurrence. But, at that point we could at least say that we believe that the system is NOT perfect, and try to work on a better, more fool-proof solution (rather than just burying our heads in the sand and saying, "It's not possible for this to occur.")

Science lesson over...

[Andys dad]

Originally Posted by Jason Oldfield

I'm not an electro-optic engineer, but I have worked in the field of optics and electronics for 20+ years, and I currently work for a company that makes optical sensors (our sensor works with a VCSEL in the IR-A range at about 800nm). In short, you CANNOT say WITH CERTAINTY that the photographers flash did not effect the receiving sensor. Optical sensors are pretty simple devices really, and as Pat pointed out in his original post the receiving sensor (detector) is a semiconductor device that is "tuned" to a specific wavelength of light. This helps increase the signal to noise ratio, and improve overall signal quality.

However, the match between the detector and wavelength of light that it is trying to detect is not exact, i.e. a sensor that is looking for a wavelength of light predominantly at 800nm doesn't usually reject wavelengths at 799nm and 801nm (it would have to be a REALLY high-dollar sensor). Optical sensors are typically open to a range of wavelengths, with their peak wavelength being the specified wavelength, or the wavelength at the center of a gaussian curve, like so:



As you can see from the above graph, there is a rolloff that would happen with the wavelengths of light seen by the detector. The minimum and maximum wavelengths would be determined by the sensor manufacturer from the type of detector technology used, and the tolerances in manufacturing (which in the end is reflected in the cost).

The same is true for the emitter. Again, the output of wavelengths from the emitter is typically a gaussian curve with the predominant wavelength being the specified wavelength. This is even true for lasers, though with lasers the wavelength range is much smaller than non-collimated light. I don't know the exact type of light source that is used for the stage beams in the timing system, but I highly doubt that they are lasers.

So, how would the photographers flash possibly affect the detector? It all depends upon the wavelengths of light that is emits. What the human eye can see is light in the approximate range of 400nm to 750nm. Light with longer (IR, microwaves, etc.) or shorter (X-rays, UV, etc.) wavelengths than that range is invisible to the human eye. What we see from the flash is white light, which is made up of all of the colors of the spectrum over the visible wavelength range. This is why when you shine a white light into a prism you see the entire spectrum of colors (sunlight through water droplets forming a rainbow is the same thing).

So, from this fact alone you can see that the photographers flash does NOT output a finely tuned wavelength of light. What wavelengths does it output? Well, we can say with a high level of confidence that it outputs an approximately wavelength range of 400nm to 750nm, but wavelengths above or below that are unknown. You would only be able to tell ALL the wavelengths by looking at the output with a spectrometer. In addition, is it possible that the flash outputs the predominant wavelength that the timing system's detectors are looking for? In short, the answer is yes, but at what amplitude is unknown (one would expect that it wouldn't be a predominant wavelength, but again you'd need to analyze the output with a spectrometer to know for sure.)

What is also important to note is that just because the detector is mounted inside a box or tube does NOT mean that outside light sources can't impact their performance. Certain materials are invisible to certain wavelengths of light. The X-Rays are typically defined in the 0.1nm to 10nm range, and can pass through many materials. Most optical sensors use either visible light or IR, and IR can pass through materials as well (this is why the military uses IR sensors to image heat sources of bad guys inside buildings). A nice description of IR light can be found at the link below (take notice of the image of the guys arm inside a garbage bag).

http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/c..._ir/index.html

Now, does all this mean for certain that the photographers flash caused this event to occur? Absolutely not, but from a scientific standpoint, it seems awfully coincidental that the photographers flash goes off, and immediately afterwards the red light comes on. I'd have to see the original footage frame by frame (you can't do this on YouTube) to see what the timing difference is because optical sensors are fast acting. If the timing difference is long (i.e. more than a few tenths of a second), it would seem likely to me that something else must have caused this to happen. But, if it is literally the next frame as somebody else posted, stray IR light from the photographers flash is a distinct possibility.

Would that mean that we'd all need to demand instant changes to the timing system detectors? No, because IMHO it would need to be a near perfect storm for this to happen. With ALL the rounds of racing, and ALL the pictures taken, how often have you seen this happen? It is obviously NOT a common occurrence. But, at that point we could at least say that we believe that the system is NOT perfect, and try to work on a better, more fool-proof solution (rather than just burying our heads in the sand and saying, "It's not possible for this to occur.")

Science lesson over...

"Now that's what I'm talking about - right there" - Larry the Cabel Guy

LMAO

Thanks


:-) peace

[billy leber]

Man, with all them big words I would expect another visit from authorities in the near future....

[Jeff Teuton]

I don't understand that even with the pictures.

[Mike Gray]

Originally Posted by Jason Oldfield

Now, does all this mean for certain that the photographers flash caused this event to occur? Absolutely not, but from a scientific standpoint, it seems awfully coincidental that the photographers flash goes off, and immediately afterwards the red light comes on. I'd have to see the original footage frame by frame (you can't do this on YouTube) to see what the timing difference is because optical sensors are fast acting. If the timing difference is long (i.e. more than a few tenths of a second), it would seem likely to me that something else must have caused this to happen. But, if it is literally the next frame as somebody else posted, stray IR light from the photographers flash is a distinct possibility.

...

If you look at the You Tube video in full screen then drag the small circle on the timing bar you can move ahead to the location of the run in question. Keep holding down your mouse and you can rock the picture back and forth. At 19:13 the 1st yellow is lit and the camera flash is visible at 19:14 it shows the 2nd yellow on and the red light on at the same time.
It may not be close enough to determine the length of time it took but I enjoyed the lesson.

[Doug McCue]

with your normal curve displayed, you have not given any evidence to say the flash has anything to do with the red light. You will have to do more research in order to make any statement of any kind.

[Carl Weisinger]

This is an interesting subject for sure. But, let's not overlook the obvious. What are the chances some electronic voodoo happened at exactly the same time this photographers
flash went off? About 14,000,000,000,000 to 1? (wait a minute, that's the national debt number). Anyhow, if they keep coming up with more doo-dads for the timing equipment
they will take away my last excuse for losing. Stage-Loc, Smage-Loc. Now, if we could just get back to the days of the crooked a## flag starter that would raise the green flag
when I left the starting line . . . . . . . . .