On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 10:47:12 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote:



wrote:

I am looking to putting in an LED but I keep seeing limitations
referring to "leading edge dimmers". What is this?

Good grief!!! Don't you even know how to use Google!!! Here is the
first of 151,000 hits on 'leading edge dimmer'.
http://sound.westhost.com/lamps/dimmers.html


** Rod ( of ESP ) has been testing high efficiency lighting products for
some years now - beginning with my suggestion that the truth about CFLs was
begging to be published somewhere on the net.

What is abundantly clear is that with very few exceptions, the products
being offered to the public and industry are wholly incompatible with
standard AC circuit protection methods and dimming equipment long used with
incandescent lamps.

Egs

1. As little as 100 watts worth of CFLs or LED lights will regularly trip
breakers installed in lighting circuits designs to accept 2000 watts. The
tripping occurs at switch on due to unsuppressed surge spikes.

2. The same CFLs and LED lights cannot be successfully dimmed with common
triac dimmers as installed in millions of premises and WORSE STILL must
never be used in a circuit containing such a dimmer.

I doubt you will find this crucial information on any site other than ESP.



... Phil

OK, so neither you nor Rod know what a 'leading edge dimmer' is, and
aren't either smart or ambitious enough to look it up for yourself. I
had a pretty good idea, and decided to do a little research before
spouting nonsense. To bad you haven't done the same.

Point 1. A conventional circuit breaker would certainly be imune to
any type of transients; a GFCI breaker should be immune to transients,
but I will admit a poorly designed one might not be. Since an AFCI
breaker is designed to detect and trip on transients, it should be
obvious that a dimmer for LEDs would be likely to trip one.

Point 2. The incompatibility between conventional dimmers and CCFL /
LED lighting is well known, documented on most packages of the
lighting products, as well as the first few of the sources I found in
by the search. Anyone who is surprised by this fact can only be
described as 'willfully ignorant'.

Further, I am amused by the idea that someone purporting to be an
expert would rely on anecdotal information on something critical to
his area of expertise.

PlainBill