h a l f b a k e r yExperiencing technical difficulties since 1999
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
This is an idea for a device that faithfully reproduces the feeling of being around a campfire, but is safe for the indoors.
The device would use current techniques for simulating the appearance and sound of fire. The main addition is a battery of infrared LED's around the edges to simulate the heat.
This would allow it to be placed pretty much anywhere without a fire risk.
Artificial fireplace
http://www.walmart....e-Chestnut/14668562
[Voice, Sep 04 2013]
[link]
|
| |
If it simulates heat, then isn't it...hot? Making it not a simulation? |
|
| |
"Caution: Simulated heat may be hot" |
|
| |
Would it give out twice as much heat if you set fire to it? |
|
| |
[norm...] most fires are hotter than they feel. They radiate
heat randomly in three dimensions. Convectionally, they
are hotter above, but that is another storey...
This is why your handheld IR thermometer has a distance
laser on it. It computes its received reading against the
distance it is
from the heat source. The IR LEDs around this 'fire' will
presumably be directional. Therefore won't be as hot as
you feel them. Or, rather, will feel as hot as a hotter fire. |
|
| |
So this fire will only be hot, not hotter than it feels. |
|
| |
It will still be hot, though, right? Kind of like a "Digital Camp fire with simulated heat", except that the heat it produces will be...well, kind of hot? Much like the non-simulated heat, just - oh, never mind. Thanks. |
|
| |
Yes, it's still %100 genuine heat. It's about as simulated as a
rhinoceros. |
|
| |
maybe the heat could be produced by a real fire
behind, and then "ducted" around the screen? |
|
| |
As digital displays have 3 LEDs per "pixel" (RGB), adding a 4th (IR) to each "pixel" shouldn't be too hard, it even gives a better layout for repeating (4 in a square). Then you can have the parts of the image that look hot, actually are hot, in a "live" way.
And as most digital cameras are quite happy to detect IR anyway, recording your fire/heat-source sould be easy. |
|
| |
Simulated heat could involve red and yellow glowing lights embedded in nearby objects; dry ice issuing from the furniture; trickles of mercury dripping from concealed pipes at the edges of metal objects; a special headpiece that is concealed in the hair and exudes droplets of salty water at the top of your forehead. |
|
| |
That sounds more like 'artificially induced coolth'. |
|
| |
Maybe a wood fired source could boil water and make steam in order to spin a turbine to generate power to run the LEDs. Of course you'd need to vent off the excess heat somewhere. |
|
| |
The whole technical point of LEDs is that they don't give off heat (IR radiation). That is why they are are efficient for lighting. Heat-emitting LEDs is an oxyconundrum. |
|
| |
well you could use ultraviolet LED's for tanning... |
|
| |
//The whole technical point of LEDs is that they don't give off heat (IR radiation).// |
|
| |
I think we need to be a little more precise. |
|
| |
To equate heat with IR radiation is a popular misconception. What (ordinary, not white) LEDs do is give off radiation in a fairly narrow frequency band, and they do so fairly efficiently, and the radiation is not produced from heat. That radiation can be visible, IR, or UV, depending on the LED. |
|
| |
But IR is not heat any more than blue or red light is heat. And LEDs certainly do produce heat as a byproduct (since they are not completely efficient). That heat needs to leave the LED, and some of it does so in the form of IR radiation. |
|
| |
To be clear:
- IR LEDs produce non-thermal, narrow-band IR radiation.
- All LEDs produce thermal IR radiation, although less than most other light sources. |
|
| |
Perhaps it is a spelling mistake and it should read stimulated heat. |
|
| |