F1technical.net

Perhaps the cheap lasers aren't as straight?

superdread wrote: Their (blinking) statement "These are NOT your TYPICAL "home store, handy man lasers! You DO NOT want to use conventional lasers to align your vehicle!" is extremely preposterous and I can't comprehend why they would write such crap on their website.

Look at the price, they try to charge for their system - they don't wont people heading down to the next hardware store and built their own for 1/10th of the price, so they have to claim something "special" about it.

In any case, the "magic" (precision) would be more in the lenses used, then in the actual laser I think (but I could be wrong).
I'm pretty sure Ferrari (or any other F1 team for that matter) would use a "better"/different system, if they thought the accuracy would be insufficient with the string. Cost is hardly an obstacle in their case.

gato azul wrote: Look at the price, they try to charge for their system - they don't wont people heading down to the next hardware store and built their own for 1/10th of the price, so they have to claim something "special" about it.

That's cheap for proper optical equipment (I would reckon 2k gets a medium-quality low-power HeNe).
On the other (sensible) hand it's very expensive for something you can do with construction surveying equipment.

gato azul wrote: In any case, the "magic" (precision) would be more in the lenses used, then in the actual laser I think (but I could be wrong).

In the extend of measuring something on a car, pretty much any laser and any lens will do, the bigger problem is having a mechanism to adjust the lens positioning and then fix it in place. But thats what laser modules are for (laser and a lens focused to infinity).
If you want real precision you spend most of the money on lasers (because lasers are not one continuous wave, they have multiple continuous waves that are not perfectly in sync and you need to prevent or filter them).

On a lighter note: laser safety goggles are the most useless, unnecessary, hindering piece of health and safety.
Put them on and you cannot see the laser, so no good for aligning. If you have aligned all laser rays should be accounted for so no need to wear them then. Also if you have a laser of sufficient strength, the glasses are sufficiently dark and in a blacked out room that leads to havoc on a hilarious and costly scale.

gato azul wrote: When do you do normally your alignment? - while the other guys are busy changing the gearbox or some other substantial things? Or when all is done and the car is in the final condition as it would go out on tack?

You can't really do alignment without the gearbox; the rear suspension attaches to it.

Reminds me of the days with the Formula Ford. I used the string method when I was re-attaching corners because it is dead easy to get a quick visual of the corner layout prior to the real business of setting up for testing/racing/post-crash etc.

superdread wrote:

gato azul wrote: Look at the price, they try to charge for their system - they don't wont people heading down to the next hardware store and built their own for 1/10th of the price, so they have to claim something "special" about it.

That's cheap for proper optical equipment (I would reckon 2k gets a medium-quality low-power HeNe).
On the other (sensible) hand it's very expensive for something you can do with construction surveying equipment.

gato azul wrote: In any case, the "magic" (precision) would be more in the lenses used, then in the actual laser I think (but I could be wrong).

In the extend of measuring something on a car, pretty much any laser and any lens will do, the bigger problem is having a mechanism to adjust the lens positioning and then fix it in place. But thats what laser modules are for (laser and a lens focused to infinity).
If you want real precision you spend most of the money on lasers (because lasers are not one continuous wave, they have multiple continuous waves that are not perfectly in sync and you need to prevent or filter them).

On a lighter note: laser safety goggles are the most useless, unnecessary, hindering piece of health and safety.
Put them on and you cannot see the laser, so no good for aligning. If you have aligned all laser rays should be accounted for so no need to wear them then. Also if you have a laser of sufficient strength, the glasses are sufficiently dark and in a blacked out room that leads to havoc on a hilarious and costly scale.

A class 1 He Ne, i.e. eye safe, is a good price/performance choice. LED is cheaper but doesn’t have the beam quality.

As illustrated, a laser has the advantage of quick setup assuming battery operation. Just plug the rig in the onboard receivers and go –though the illustration doesn’t appear to show alignment happening.

olefud wrote: A class 1 He Ne, i.e. eye safe, is a good price/performance choice. LED is cheaper but doesn’t have the beam quality.

As illustrated, a laser has the advantage of quick setup assuming battery operation. Just plug the rig in the onboard receivers and go –though the illustration doesn’t appear to show alignment happening.

Depends on how much you spend on your laser diodes, and how collimated your beam is more down to your optics.

I meant laserized surveying equipment, like that http://www.bosch-professional.com/gb/en ... ne-lasers/. Mounting three on tripods might be the easiest solution but would require aligning every time they are used (should be no problem using a rule to can get the error into sub-mm), otherwise building a rail-runner-system should be quite simple.

superdread wrote:

olefud wrote: A class 1 He Ne, i.e. eye safe, is a good price/performance choice. LED is cheaper but doesn’t have the beam quality.

As illustrated, a laser has the advantage of quick setup assuming battery operation. Just plug the rig in the onboard receivers and go –though the illustration doesn’t appear to show alignment happening.

Depends on how much you spend on your laser diodes, and how collimated your beam is more down to your optics.

I meant laserized surveying equipment, like that http://www.bosch-professional.com/gb/en ... ne-lasers/. Mounting three on tripods might be the easiest solution but would require aligning every time they are used (should be no problem using a rule to can get the error into sub-mm), otherwise building a rail-runner-system should be quite simple.

Good point. I should have said that LEDs can be cheaper but then won't have the beam quality.

olefud wrote: Good point. I should have said that LEDs can be cheaper but then won't have the beam quality.

HeNe has naturally a low divergence and few modes (depends on size), but it has a much lower efficiency.

So, depending on the quality requirements for your beam, it can be cheaper to use a cheap laser diode with a more optics or a expensive less powerful laser with less or no optics.

Or string