Carnegie Mellon Researchers Invent Smart Headlights That "See Through" Rain, Snow

Ronnie Schreiber
by Ronnie Schreiber

The problem with driving at night in the raining or snowing conditions is that your headlights work too well. They light up the rain and snow as much as they illuminate the road ahead, sometimes more so. In a novel approach using cameras, computers and DLP projectors to replace conventional headlight bulbs, researchers at Carnegie Mellon University have developed a “smart” headlight system that essentially shines light between the rain drops.

It turns out that less really can be more, at least in terms of night driving. By selectively reducing the amount of light projected, by not shining light on the computer predicted path of the rain drops or snow flakes as they enter the critical 3-5 meter space in front of the driver, there is significantly reduced glare.

Theoretically in a perfect system with minimal latency, illuminating 100% of rain drops would come at a cost of only a 2% reduction in total light projected. Precipitation is only a small fraction of the total visual field. So far in lab tests with real water drops falling at normal precipitation levels and slow (30KPH) travel speeds, they can reduce the visibility of rain almost 70% at a cost of only 5% loss of light. The system is less efficient with snowflakes, because they are larger and move more slowly, so there’s about about 15% loss of light, but it can still keep from illuminating more than 60% of the snow. At higher speeds it’s less efficient but lead researcher Srinivasa Narasimhan says that continued development for highway speed use is worthwhile, while stressing that the current system cannot account for wind, turbulence and that it needs to be more compact. Though the researchers stress the data capture and processing parts of the system, it couldn’t work without a DLP projector, one of our age’s unappreciated wonders. The microminiature mirror array in a DLP device can be precisely controlled as to where it shines light.

Ronnie Schreiber edits Cars In Depth, a realistic perspective on cars & car culture and the original 3D car site. If you found this post worthwhile, you can dig deeper at Cars In Depth. If the 3D thing freaks you out, don’t worry, all the photo and video players in use at the site have mono options. Thanks for reading– RJS


Ronnie Schreiber
Ronnie Schreiber

Ronnie Schreiber edits Cars In Depth, the original 3D car site.

More by Ronnie Schreiber

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 12 comments
  • Texan01 Texan01 on Jul 06, 2012

    I thought they solved it years ago? the '86 Pontiac 6000-STE that I owned had bright yellow foglights from the factory. These coupled with the white headlights were awesome for actually illuminating the road in conditions that the regular headlights couldn't.

    • See 1 previous
    • Texan01 Texan01 on Jul 07, 2012

      @Spartan I've often considered replacing the useless auxiliary lamps on my Explorer with yellow fog lamps, but haven't looked all that hard for a good replacement for the stock location.

  • Danwat1234 Danwat1234 on Jul 09, 2012

    Well for now I think i'll stick with my plug and play 55watt 4500K HID kit. Very bright, works pretty well in the rain with halogen reflectors. Only cost $70 with a lifetime warranty.

  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
  • Lou_BC "That’s expensive for a midsize pickup" All of the "offroad" midsize trucks fall in that 65k USD range. The ZR2 is probably the cheapest ( without Bison option).
  • Lou_BC There are a few in my town. They come out on sunny days. I'd rather spend $29k on a square body Chevy
  • Lou_BC I had a 2010 Ford F150 and 2010 Toyota Sienna. The F150 went through 3 sets of brakes and Sienna 2 sets. Similar mileage and 10 year span.4 sets tires on F150. Truck needed a set of rear shocks and front axle seals. The solenoid in the T-case was replaced under warranty. I replaced a "blend door motor" on heater. Sienna needed a water pump and heater blower both on warranty. One TSB then recall on spare tire cable. Has a limp mode due to an engine sensor failure. At 11 years old I had to replace clutch pack in rear diff F150. My ZR2 diesel at 55,000 km. Needs new tires. Duratrac's worn and chewed up. Needed front end alignment (1st time ever on any truck I've owned).Rear brakes worn out. Left pads were to metal. Chevy rear brakes don't like offroad. Weird "inside out" dents in a few spots rear fenders. Typically GM can't really build an offroad truck issue. They won't warranty. Has fender-well liners. Tore off one rear shock protector. Was cheaper to order from GM warehouse through parts supplier than through Chevy dealer. Lots of squeaks and rattles. Infotainment has crashed a few times. Seat heater modual was on recall. One of those post sale retrofit.Local dealer is horrific. If my son can't service or repair it, I'll drive 120 km to the next town. 1st and last Chevy. Love the drivetrain and suspension. Fit and finish mediocre. Dealer sucks.
  • MaintenanceCosts You expect everything on Amazon and eBay to be fake, but it's a shame to see fake stuff on Summit Racing. Glad they pulled it.
Next