Don Mcleish on the history of the PD
The
PD came about because PK informed me that the MCE2S switch was likely
an infringement on one of SF's patents. I wanted a clean way to access
two levels of light output and it couldn't be via the tail switch as it
had been. Push for momentary and twist
for lock was similar to the UI in the SF lights but with the addition of
a second level via a deeper push or further twist. Initially it was
used for two levels of current drive to the same LED. I took it down a
new road with the LunaSol lights where one level was with a low level
flood and the second level with a collimated beam. But as the LED's got
brighter and approached 100 lumens, in my opinion it was time for three
levels of output. I played with an additional contact in the PD design
but felt it was not dependable or friendly in the momentary mode and
only reasonable in the twisty mode. Fortunately three (or even more)
levels of output could be accessed with a quick on-off-on cycling either
in momentary switch activation or latched switch activation thanks to
some new converter designs.I left the PD system and went to the
McClickie activation of 3 level converters.
I don't have a patent on the PD and would be surprised to find that some company actually has a patent on it. I was approached by Nitecore years ago with an offer to pay me a one time fee in exchange for using the PD design in what was to be a one time run of some lights.I thought the gesture was considerate and I appreciated it.
One feature of the PD which I played with but never integrated was that of a limit on the stroke of the piston so that the light could be locked out in the same manner or function as the SF LOTC. But I wasn't designing tactical lights and frankly preferred a clickie switch to the LOTC. In fact as an aside, McClickie was a name PK started calling me because I gave him so much grief about coming out with a clickie switch for the E-series lights for those of us who didn't need or want tactical but did want an easy to latch on light design. When I designed the McClickie switch, it's name was a no brainer. It was also designed with the ability to be retrofit in the SF E-Series LOTC as well as the tail caps I was using which were also E-Series based.
I can appreciate the look and feel of the PD and it was cool to be able to install a trit in the end of the piston. Now having some of these around with near dead trits I am less enamored with the design.I can appreciate the desire to have some solid metal back there as opposed to rubber or silicone covering a plastic switch but realistically, if the rubber covered switch provides a better means to activate and use the light then let function dictate, IMHO. I played with the idea of a metal shroud covering the switch instead of rubber but you can't get away from some form or rubber seal if you want the light to be protected. And if the metal cap adds complexity as well as potential friction or more required force then function is compromised. For looks?
I made one prototype 2x123 PD which somebody now got through the garage sale handled by Ben. I think it has a better feel to it than the 1x123 PD paks. With the AquaRam and AquaMule, I have considered a PD pak option for them as the design is well suited mechanically but I opted to go with the Terrapak using the McClickie because I think it is just that much easier to use and navigate through the levels.
I don't pretend to be aware of all the drivers now available and perhaps some would be well served with a PD system of activation.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don't have a patent on the PD and would be surprised to find that some company actually has a patent on it. I was approached by Nitecore years ago with an offer to pay me a one time fee in exchange for using the PD design in what was to be a one time run of some lights.I thought the gesture was considerate and I appreciated it.
One feature of the PD which I played with but never integrated was that of a limit on the stroke of the piston so that the light could be locked out in the same manner or function as the SF LOTC. But I wasn't designing tactical lights and frankly preferred a clickie switch to the LOTC. In fact as an aside, McClickie was a name PK started calling me because I gave him so much grief about coming out with a clickie switch for the E-series lights for those of us who didn't need or want tactical but did want an easy to latch on light design. When I designed the McClickie switch, it's name was a no brainer. It was also designed with the ability to be retrofit in the SF E-Series LOTC as well as the tail caps I was using which were also E-Series based.
I can appreciate the look and feel of the PD and it was cool to be able to install a trit in the end of the piston. Now having some of these around with near dead trits I am less enamored with the design.I can appreciate the desire to have some solid metal back there as opposed to rubber or silicone covering a plastic switch but realistically, if the rubber covered switch provides a better means to activate and use the light then let function dictate, IMHO. I played with the idea of a metal shroud covering the switch instead of rubber but you can't get away from some form or rubber seal if you want the light to be protected. And if the metal cap adds complexity as well as potential friction or more required force then function is compromised. For looks?
I made one prototype 2x123 PD which somebody now got through the garage sale handled by Ben. I think it has a better feel to it than the 1x123 PD paks. With the AquaRam and AquaMule, I have considered a PD pak option for them as the design is well suited mechanically but I opted to go with the Terrapak using the McClickie because I think it is just that much easier to use and navigate through the levels.
I don't pretend to be aware of all the drivers now available and perhaps some would be well served with a PD system of activation.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Comments
Post a Comment