Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Yeah... where, exactly?

Examples:
- Neither changes the thermodynamic state of the Universe (sum potential and
kinetic energy).
- If you instead meant local to the house it's in, neither, 40W is 40W.
- If you meant from power station to end user, the halogen will incur
slightly higher losses due to the low power factor in transmission (the
difference will be on the order of 5%).
- If you meant the energy which is not serving a useful purpose (i.e.,
visible light used for illumination before it, too, is absorbed and
downgraded to a lower heat grate), then the incandescent will win by 15-20%.

But a Good Engineer would know this already.

Tim

--
Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk.
Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms

"Jim Thompson" wrote in
message ...
Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:53:26 +1000, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

Technically the incandescent. The both consume 40 watts but the halogen is
more efficient at converting power to light (and hence not to heat). I
said 'technically' because you are unlikely to notice the difference in
heat.

--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 16:53:26 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Only today?

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?
...Jim Thompson

Overly simplistic reply for today....

Hint: Infrared oven lamps are halogen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halogen_lamp#Safety
"Halogen lamps get hotter than regular incandescent lamps
because the heat is concentrated on a smaller envelope surface,
and because the surface is closer to the filament. This high
temperature is essential to their operation. Because the
halogen lamp operates at very high temperatures, it can pose
fire and burn hazards."

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 7/29/2012 6:53 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

You would be helpless without this group, wouldn't you?

The one with the higher temperature, of course. Do you know how to
measure temperature?

Do you know about efficiency and how to look up these things? Do you
know how to research?

Jim Thompson wrote:
Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson


General Grant!

--
Les Cargill

On 7/30/2012 2:42 AM, John S wrote:
On 7/29/2012 6:53 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

You would be helpless without this group, wouldn't you?

The one with the higher temperature, of course. Do you know how to
measure temperature?

Do you know about efficiency and how to look up these things? Do you
know how to research?

Jim-out-of-touch-with-reality-Thompson went to MIT, but seems only to
have absorbed a rather narrow education. He may be able to research
stuff relevant to designing integrated circuits, but any skills that
might have covered a broader spectrum - say physics - seem to have
atrophied and dropped off a very long time ago.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Jim Thompson wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?


A 40W liberal. Tell them they have to find a job, and they overheat.

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 16:53:26 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

An Incandescent will produce about 5 % of visible light, a halogen
about 7 %, the rest is heat as IR radiation and conducted heat. With
40 W electric input, the Incandescent will produce about 38 W heat,
while the halogen about 37 W of heat.

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:15:48 +1000, "David Eather"
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:53:26 +1000, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

Technically the incandescent. The both consume 40 watts but the halogen is
more efficient at converting power to light (and hence not to heat). I
said 'technically' because you are unlikely to notice the difference in
heat.

My thoughts, too. I have a fixture rated for three 40W miniature base
incandescents, presently loaded with three 40W Halogens. My
temptation is to go up to three 60W Halogens.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:42:52 -0500, John S
wrote:

On 7/29/2012 6:53 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

You would be helpless without this group, wouldn't you?

The one with the higher temperature, of course. Do you know how to
measure temperature?


Um, temperature is not heat.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 17:16:41 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 16:53:26 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Only today?

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?
...Jim Thompson

Overly simplistic reply for today....

Hint: Infrared oven lamps are halogen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halogen_lamp#Safety
"Halogen lamps get hotter than regular incandescent lamps
because the heat is concentrated on a smaller envelope surface,
and because the surface is closer to the filament. This high
temperature is essential to their operation. Because the
halogen lamp operates at very high temperatures, it can pose
fire and burn hazards."

That's a weenie answer. I suppose you'd say I should use CFL's ?:-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:25:34 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:42:52 -0500, John S
wrote:

On 7/29/2012 6:53 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

You would be helpless without this group, wouldn't you?

The one with the higher temperature, of course. Do you know how to
measure temperature?


Um, temperature is not heat.

Not to worry, it's only John asS ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:31:04 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:25:34 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:42:52 -0500, John S
wrote:

On 7/29/2012 6:53 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

You would be helpless without this group, wouldn't you?

The one with the higher temperature, of course. Do you know how to
measure temperature?


Um, temperature is not heat.

Not to worry, it's only John asS ;-)

...Jim Thompson

If they ever taught you any physics, electromagnetics, or thermo at
MIT, you clearly forgot it all.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:26:44 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

That's a weenie answer.

Simplistic questions deserve simplistic answers. You forgot to supply
any context, such was what you were trying to accomplish. Are you
concerned about temperature rise in some sort of package? Do you have
any efficiency or total power consumption compliance specifications?
Are you experiencing problems with one or the other technology?
Inquiring minds want to know.

I suppose you'd say I should use CFL's ?:-)
...Jim Thompson

Nope. LED lighting would be too easy. For your unspecified
application, methinks burning torch, propane, kerosene wick, or
Coleman white gas illumination might be equally appropriate. Why
loose efficiency converting fossil fuels to electricity and then to
mostly heat in your lamps, when you can produce the light directly?
Think of all the possible applications for MEMS miniature propane
illuminators.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 20:41:37 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:26:44 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

That's a weenie answer.

Simplistic questions deserve simplistic answers. You forgot to supply
any context, such was what you were trying to accomplish. Are you
concerned about temperature rise in some sort of package? Do you have
any efficiency or total power consumption compliance specifications?
Are you experiencing problems with one or the other technology?
Inquiring minds want to know.

I suppose you'd say I should use CFL's ?:-)
...Jim Thompson

Nope. LED lighting would be too easy. For your unspecified
application, methinks burning torch, propane, kerosene wick, or
Coleman white gas illumination might be equally appropriate. Why
loose efficiency converting fossil fuels to electricity and then to
mostly heat in your lamps, when you can produce the light directly?
Think of all the possible applications for MEMS miniature propane
illuminators.

Sno-o-o-ort! Old office fan with light fixture, one single 150W
Halogen, 18 years old, fails. New weenie fixture made impotent by
leftist rules takes 3 x 40W incandescent... strange, eh? I'm trying
to get light output up. I may end up rolling my own LED... multiples
on a round PCB to fit the "globe".

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:43:27 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:31:04 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:25:34 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:42:52 -0500, John S
wrote:

On 7/29/2012 6:53 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

You would be helpless without this group, wouldn't you?

The one with the higher temperature, of course. Do you know how to
measure temperature?


Um, temperature is not heat.

Not to worry, it's only John asS ;-)

...Jim Thompson

If they ever taught you any physics, electromagnetics, or thermo at
MIT, you clearly forgot it all.

Shove it, Larkin. I forgot nothing. (If you could read and
comprehend, you'd know I was barbing John S, not you.) I just have no
lab handy to measure thermals on incandescent versus Halogen. I
thought Halogens might throw less heat... true, but not as much less
as I hoped. I'll probably roll my own LED structure if I can't find
something OTS to stuff in the globe from 1000bulbs.com

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 16:53:26 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

An Incandescent will produce about 5 % of visible light, a halogen
about 7 %, the rest is heat as IR radiation and conducted heat. With
40 W electric input, the Incandescent will produce about 38 W heat,
while the halogen about 37 W of heat.


What about the light, if it doesn't leave the room?

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 21:02:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Sno-o-o-ort!

Ok, you're forgiven (this time only).

Old office fan with light fixture, one single 150W
Halogen, 18 years old, fails. New weenie fixture made impotent by
leftist rules takes 3 x 40W incandescent... strange, eh?

The eco-leftist commie liberal green rules are for your own good. It
saves energy by requiring you to buy 3 times as many fixtures, 3 times
as many lamps, and pay 3 times as much for them. You're going to save
energy even if it costs you extra cash. Think of it as part of job
creation.

I'm trying
to get light output up. I may end up rolling my own LED... multiples
on a round PCB to fit the "globe".
...Jim Thompson

By coincidence, I had a similar problem. I needed overhead
illumination from a fixture known to trap heat and burn out CFL bulbs.
CFL bulbs just didn't last running with the fluorescent tube heating
the electronics. Taking a step backwards, I found myself illuminating
the ceiling rather than the area below the lamp fixture. A screw type
LED "bulb" repeated this mistake by also lighting the ceiling. I
eventually found that three 45 degree LED flood lamps put most of the
light in the desired area. With your arrangement, a similar
arraignment might be suitable (unless you enjoy looking at an
illuminated ceiling).

With 3 fixtures, you might look into "flood" type lighting. 45
degrees beam width is fairly common. 60 degrees can be found, but is
more expensive:
http://www.ledlight.com/spot-flood-led-lights.aspx
http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/catalog/servlet/Search?storeId=10051&langId=-1&catalogId=10053&keyword=led%20flood%20lights&Ns= None&Ntpr=1&Ntpc=1&selectedCatgry=SEARCH+ALL

However, that's too easy and rather boring. Since you have a ceiling
fan, I think it would be cool to attach a row of LED's (LED tape) to
each flan blade, for illumination. It won't be very bright, but it
would be much more fun to build and watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dG72BEmQgi0

Maybe some color?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB_DnG49JiM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW031O9JFtY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKKqVn5K714

I think these are LED's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JcqgtDNCtA

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 21:46:33 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 21:02:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Sno-o-o-ort!

Ok, you're forgiven (this time only).

Old office fan with light fixture, one single 150W
Halogen, 18 years old, fails. New weenie fixture made impotent by
leftist rules takes 3 x 40W incandescent... strange, eh?

The eco-leftist commie liberal green rules are for your own good. It
saves energy by requiring you to buy 3 times as many fixtures, 3 times
as many lamps, and pay 3 times as much for them. You're going to save
energy even if it costs you extra cash. Think of it as part of job
creation.

I'm trying
to get light output up. I may end up rolling my own LED... multiples
on a round PCB to fit the "globe".
...Jim Thompson

By coincidence, I had a similar problem. I needed overhead
illumination from a fixture known to trap heat and burn out CFL bulbs.
CFL bulbs just didn't last running with the fluorescent tube heating
the electronics. Taking a step backwards, I found myself illuminating
the ceiling rather than the area below the lamp fixture. A screw type
LED "bulb" repeated this mistake by also lighting the ceiling. I
eventually found that three 45 degree LED flood lamps put most of the
light in the desired area. With your arrangement, a similar
arraignment might be suitable (unless you enjoy looking at an
illuminated ceiling).

With 3 fixtures, you might look into "flood" type lighting. 45
degrees beam width is fairly common. 60 degrees can be found, but is
more expensive:
http://www.ledlight.com/spot-flood-led-lights.aspx
http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/catalog/servlet/Search?storeId=10051&langId=-1&catalogId=10053&keyword=led%20flood%20lights&Ns= None&Ntpr=1&Ntpc=1&selectedCatgry=SEARCH+ALL

However, that's too easy and rather boring. Since you have a ceiling
fan, I think it would be cool to attach a row of LED's (LED tape) to
each flan blade, for illumination. It won't be very bright, but it
would be much more fun to build and watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dG72BEmQgi0

Maybe make it wind-powered ?:-)


Maybe some color?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB_DnG49JiM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW031O9JFtY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKKqVn5K714

I think these are LED's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JcqgtDNCtA

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 21:50:06 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Maybe make it wind-powered ?:-)
...Jim Thompson

Only if you have a suitable source of rising hot air directly under
the fan blades. However, without a ducted fan arrangement, it will be
rather inefficient.

You might be thinking of an outdoor wind turbine. You could install
it on a rooftop tower, run a speedometer cable to the indoor fan
through the ceiling, and drive the indoor fan directly.

Powering the LED's on the fan blades is fairly easy. Attach iron core
solenoid coils near the ends of the fan blades. Install a circular
ring of magnets with alternating polarities around the circumference.
Such a generator should provide sufficient capacity to run the LED's.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:15:48 +1000, "David Eather"
wrote:

Technically the incandescent. The both consume 40 watts but the
halogen is more efficient at converting power to light (and hence
not to heat). I said 'technically' because you are unlikely to
notice the difference in heat.

My thoughts, too. I have a fixture rated for three 40W miniature base
incandescents, presently loaded with three 40W Halogens. My
temptation is to go up to three 60W Halogens.

But everybody has heard about low-power halogn floor lamps falling over and
starting fires, and their power is in the same common range of 40-100W.
Those things do get hotter than incandescents, and not just because the heat
is concentrated in a smaller bulb since the whole lamp head gets hot. This
is just based on my sense of touch of course but they seem to run hotter.


--

Reply in group, but if emailing add one more
zero, and remove the last word.

On 2012-07-30, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 21:02:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Sno-o-o-ort!

Ok, you're forgiven (this time only).

Old office fan with light fixture, one single 150W
Halogen, 18 years old, fails. New weenie fixture made impotent by
leftist rules takes 3 x 40W incandescent... strange, eh?

Assuming you mean a ceiling fan with co-axial lumiere,
try fittin the old lumiere to new fan, AIUI it's a standard thread.

The eco-leftist commie liberal green rules are for your own good. It
saves energy by requiring you to buy 3 times as many fixtures, 3 times
as many lamps, and pay 3 times as much for them. You're going to save
energy even if it costs you extra cash. Think of it as part of job
creation.

More likely some designer decided that the three smaller globes would
allow a more streamlined package, possibly this was a compromise after
a T9 was ruled out on cost.

how about 60W T9? (ring shaped rluorescent tube) might fit in the
existing package.


--
š‚šƒ 100% natural

--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to ---

On 2012-07-30, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 21:02:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Sno-o-o-ort!

Ok, you're forgiven (this time only).

Old office fan with light fixture, one single 150W
Halogen, 18 years old, fails. New weenie fixture made impotent by
leftist rules takes 3 x 40W incandescent... strange, eh?

Assuming you mean a ceiling fan with co-axial lumiere,
try fittin the old lumiere to new fan, AIUI it's a standard thread.

The eco-leftist commie liberal green rules are for your own good. It
saves energy by requiring you to buy 3 times as many fixtures, 3 times
as many lamps, and pay 3 times as much for them. You're going to save
energy even if it costs you extra cash. Think of it as part of job
creation.

More likely some designer decided that the three smaller globes would
allow a more streamlined package, possibly this was a compromise after
a T9 was ruled out on cost.

how about 60W T9? (ring shaped fluorescent tube) might fit in the
existing package.


--
š‚šƒ 100% natural

--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to ---

On 30/07/2012 03:25, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:15:48 +1000, "David Eather"
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:53:26 +1000, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

Technically the incandescent. The both consume 40 watts but the halogen is
more efficient at converting power to light (and hence not to heat). I
said 'technically' because you are unlikely to notice the difference in
heat.

There are two forms of heat involved here. Thermal radiation and warm
air the relative proportions vary with the type of lamp.

You haven't defined what you mean by "heat" but taking it to be
thermally damaging radiation capable of scorching lampshades.

The *peak* emission even of the quartz halogen lamp is still in the near
infrared even for a halogen bulb run at 3300K so the flux of thermal IR
from a quartz halogen is more likely to start fires. The small red hot
envelope and tendency to explode adds to the excitement.

More short wave visible photons are emitted by the quartz halogen
filament at a higher temperature but well over half of them are high
temperature thermal IR (anything characteristic of 600K and above).

http://zeiss-campus.magnet.fsu.edu/a...enhalogen.html

Has graphs of the BB radiation curves for 2500K through 3300K.
This applet will let you plot some suitable curves as a function of
temperature set Tmax=3300 (tungsten isn't quite a black body)

http://www.phy.ntnu.edu.tw/ntnujava/...p?topic=1037.0

Mains quartz halogens come with a warning that they are unsuitable for
desk lamps in part for this reason (they are double glass envelope).

Once it has thermalised in the room 40W total dissipation is 40W of heat
ignoring any light that escapes out of the windows. You can feel the
beam of heat radiation from a directional quartz halogen fitting.

More light and heat radiation is emitted from a quartz halogen lamp as a
proportion of the electricity consumed and a higher percentage is at
visible wavelengths but the peak emission is still around 900nm.

An ordinary filament lamp loses a larger proportion of its heat by
convection of warm air from the physically larger but cooler glass envelope.

My thoughts, too. I have a fixture rated for three 40W miniature base
incandescents, presently loaded with three 40W Halogens. My
temptation is to go up to three 60W Halogens.

...Jim Thompson

Well if you want to set fire to the lampshades and burn your house down
go right ahead. I take it you flunked physics at MIT.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 02:46:40 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
wrote:


Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:15:48 +1000, "David Eather"
wrote:

Technically the incandescent. The both consume 40 watts but the
halogen is more efficient at converting power to light (and hence
not to heat). I said 'technically' because you are unlikely to
notice the difference in heat.

My thoughts, too. I have a fixture rated for three 40W miniature base
incandescents, presently loaded with three 40W Halogens. My
temptation is to go up to three 60W Halogens.

But everybody has heard about low-power halogn floor lamps falling over and
starting fires, and their power is in the same common range of 40-100W.
Those things do get hotter than incandescents, and not just because the heat
is concentrated in a smaller bulb since the whole lamp head gets hot. This
is just based on my sense of touch of course but they seem to run hotter.

This is in an enclosed fixture.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:25:15 +0100, Martin Brown
wrote:

On 30/07/2012 03:25, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:15:48 +1000, "David Eather"
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:53:26 +1000, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

Technically the incandescent. The both consume 40 watts but the halogen is
more efficient at converting power to light (and hence not to heat). I
said 'technically' because you are unlikely to notice the difference in
heat.

There are two forms of heat involved here. Thermal radiation and warm
air the relative proportions vary with the type of lamp.

You haven't defined what you mean by "heat" but taking it to be
thermally damaging radiation capable of scorching lampshades.

The *peak* emission even of the quartz halogen lamp is still in the near
infrared even for a halogen bulb run at 3300K so the flux of thermal IR
from a quartz halogen is more likely to start fires. The small red hot
envelope and tendency to explode adds to the excitement.

More short wave visible photons are emitted by the quartz halogen
filament at a higher temperature but well over half of them are high
temperature thermal IR (anything characteristic of 600K and above).

http://zeiss-campus.magnet.fsu.edu/a...enhalogen.html

Has graphs of the BB radiation curves for 2500K through 3300K.
This applet will let you plot some suitable curves as a function of
temperature set Tmax=3300 (tungsten isn't quite a black body)

http://www.phy.ntnu.edu.tw/ntnujava/...p?topic=1037.0

Mains quartz halogens come with a warning that they are unsuitable for
desk lamps in part for this reason (they are double glass envelope).

Once it has thermalised in the room 40W total dissipation is 40W of heat
ignoring any light that escapes out of the windows. You can feel the
beam of heat radiation from a directional quartz halogen fitting.

More light and heat radiation is emitted from a quartz halogen lamp as a
proportion of the electricity consumed and a higher percentage is at
visible wavelengths but the peak emission is still around 900nm.

An ordinary filament lamp loses a larger proportion of its heat by
convection of warm air from the physically larger but cooler glass envelope.

My thoughts, too. I have a fixture rated for three 40W miniature base
incandescents, presently loaded with three 40W Halogens. My
temptation is to go up to three 60W Halogens.

...Jim Thompson

Well if you want to set fire to the lampshades and burn your house down
go right ahead. I take it you flunked physics at MIT.

Me? I was on Dean's List.

No lampshade. Enclosed fixture, metal upper, lower a for-real glass
globe.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On 30 Jul 2012 07:25:52 GMT, Jasen Betts wrote:

On 2012-07-30, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 21:02:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Sno-o-o-ort!

Ok, you're forgiven (this time only).

Old office fan with light fixture, one single 150W
Halogen, 18 years old, fails. New weenie fixture made impotent by
leftist rules takes 3 x 40W incandescent... strange, eh?

Assuming you mean a ceiling fan with co-axial lumiere,
try fittin the old lumiere to new fan, AIUI it's a standard thread.

My very first thought. Doesn't fit :-(


The eco-leftist commie liberal green rules are for your own good. It
saves energy by requiring you to buy 3 times as many fixtures, 3 times
as many lamps, and pay 3 times as much for them. You're going to save
energy even if it costs you extra cash. Think of it as part of job
creation.

More likely some designer decided that the three smaller globes would
allow a more streamlined package, possibly this was a compromise after
a T9 was ruled out on cost.

how about 60W T9? (ring shaped rluorescent tube) might fit in the
existing package.

Under consideration. "Globe" is literally hemisphere, 8" diameter x
4" deep.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On 30/07/2012 03:25, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:15:48 +1000, "David Eather"
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:53:26 +1000, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

Technically the incandescent. The both consume 40 watts but the halogen is
more efficient at converting power to light (and hence not to heat). I
said 'technically' because you are unlikely to notice the difference in
heat.

My thoughts, too. I have a fixture rated for three 40W miniature base
incandescents, presently loaded with three 40W Halogens. My
temptation is to go up to three 60W Halogens.

...Jim Thompson

I replaced eight 40W standard spots with 43W Halogen spots, which are
supposed to give the same light output as 60W standard spots.
Subjectively, that seems to be true.

I wanted more light but didn't want to overheat the fittings. The bulbs
actually comprise Quartz Halogen capsules within a normal glass envelope
making them a straight replacement.

Cheers
--
Syd

On 07/30/2012 07:45 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:


Me? I was on Dean's List.


...Jim Thompson


Oh, I know it's none of my business..but this so begs the question:
"Which one?" :-)

-bill

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:25:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:15:48 +1000, "David Eather"
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:53:26 +1000, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

Technically the incandescent. The both consume 40 watts but the halogen is
more efficient at converting power to light (and hence not to heat). I
said 'technically' because you are unlikely to notice the difference in
heat.

My thoughts, too. I have a fixture rated for three 40W miniature base
incandescents, presently loaded with three 40W Halogens. My
temptation is to go up to three 60W Halogens.

...Jim Thompson
Jim,
Probably not a good idea. Halogens are actually designed to run
hotter, as this activates the halogen cycle that gives them longer
life at those temperatures. If the fixture is only rated at a total
of 120 watts, then that is what it should have. 180 watts of halogens
would run considerably hotter.

Charlie

Jim Thompson writes:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

Which answer do you want? Decide that, and we adjust the question.

--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 12:25:05 +1000, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:15:48 +1000, "David Eather"
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:53:26 +1000, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

Technically the incandescent. The both consume 40 watts but the halogen
is
more efficient at converting power to light (and hence not to heat). I
said 'technically' because you are unlikely to notice the difference in
heat.

My thoughts, too. I have a fixture rated for three 40W miniature base
incandescents, presently loaded with three 40W Halogens. My
temptation is to go up to three 60W Halogens.

...Jim Thompson

I'm not sure exactly what you're after but maybe one of these would be
about right

http://dx.com/p/3w-300-lumen-6500k-w...-86-265v-56233
http://dx.com/p/e14-3500k-3w-260-lum...-85-245v-81197
http://dx.com/p/e14-3w-3-led-240-lum...-35579?item=15
http://dx.com/p/e14-3w-260-lumen-700...-47970?item=17

There is a ship load of them and running them save you money.



--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 16:53:26 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

Since they are both black body radiators the final amount of heat should
be equal [for equal input power] (assuming that no visible light escapes
through a window). The halogen lamp is supposed to have more light in the
visible band due to a higher operating temperature.

?-)

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 18:58:56 -0500, "Tim Williams"
wrote:

Yeah... where, exactly?

Examples:
- Neither changes the thermodynamic state of the Universe (sum potential and
kinetic energy).
- If you instead meant local to the house it's in, neither, 40W is 40W.
- If you meant from power station to end user, the halogen will incur
slightly higher losses due to the low power factor in transmission (the
difference will be on the order of 5%).
I don't see how that can be, 40 W is 40 W.
- If you meant the energy which is not serving a useful purpose (i.e.,
visible light used for illumination before it, too, is absorbed and
downgraded to a lower heat grate), then the incandescent will win by 15-20%.
How can that be, 40 W is 40 W.

But a Good Engineer would know this already.
Ahem, 40 W is 40 W.

Tim

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:25:05 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:15:48 +1000, "David Eather"
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:53:26 +1000, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

Technically the incandescent. The both consume 40 watts but the halogen is
more efficient at converting power to light (and hence not to heat). I
said 'technically' because you are unlikely to notice the difference in
heat.

My thoughts, too. I have a fixture rated for three 40W miniature base
incandescents, presently loaded with three 40W Halogens. My
temptation is to go up to three 60W Halogens.

...Jim Thompson

How about dimmable LED lamps, three 20 W lamps will last much longer and
provide much more visible light.

?-)

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:25:15 +0100, Martin Brown
wrote:

On 30/07/2012 03:25, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:15:48 +1000, "David Eather"
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:53:26 +1000, Jim Thompson
wrote:

Loony Question for Today...

Which produces more HEAT, a 40W Incandescent, or a 40W Halogen bulb?

...Jim Thompson

Technically the incandescent. The both consume 40 watts but the halogen is
more efficient at converting power to light (and hence not to heat). I
said 'technically' because you are unlikely to notice the difference in
heat.

There are two forms of heat involved here. Thermal radiation and warm
air the relative proportions vary with the type of lamp.

You haven't defined what you mean by "heat" but taking it to be
thermally damaging radiation capable of scorching lampshades.

The *peak* emission even of the quartz halogen lamp is still in the near
infrared even for a halogen bulb run at 3300K so the flux of thermal IR
from a quartz halogen is more likely to start fires. The small red hot
envelope and tendency to explode adds to the excitement.

More short wave visible photons are emitted by the quartz halogen
filament at a higher temperature but well over half of them are high
temperature thermal IR (anything characteristic of 600K and above).

http://zeiss-campus.magnet.fsu.edu/a...nhalogen..html

Has graphs of the BB radiation curves for 2500K through 3300K.
This applet will let you plot some suitable curves as a function of
temperature set Tmax=3300 (tungsten isn't quite a black body)

http://www.phy.ntnu.edu.tw/ntnujava/...p?topic=1037.0

Mains quartz halogens come with a warning that they are unsuitable for
desk lamps in part for this reason (they are double glass envelope).

Once it has thermalised in the room 40W total dissipation is 40W of heat
ignoring any light that escapes out of the windows. You can feel the
beam of heat radiation from a directional quartz halogen fitting.

More light and heat radiation is emitted from a quartz halogen lamp as a
proportion of the electricity consumed and a higher percentage is at
visible wavelengths but the peak emission is still around 900nm.

An ordinary filament lamp loses a larger proportion of its heat by
convection of warm air from the physically larger but cooler glass envelope.

My thoughts, too. I have a fixture rated for three 40W miniature base
incandescents, presently loaded with three 40W Halogens. My
temptation is to go up to three 60W Halogens.

...Jim Thompson

Well if you want to set fire to the lampshades and burn your house down
go right ahead. I take it you flunked physics at MIT.

Geez. Did you do anything to validate the junk on those two sites?
Tungsten photofloods at 3200 k and 3400 k have been available for over 50
years. I can buy halogen lamps with operating temperatures as high as
5700 k, for my car even. Take a look at Plank's law for energy
distribution and Wein's law for spectral peak.

http://egglescliffe.org.uk/physics/a...ody/bbody.html

?-)

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 21:02:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 20:41:37 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:26:44 -0700, Jim Thompson
wrote:

That's a weenie answer.

Simplistic questions deserve simplistic answers. You forgot to supply
any context, such was what you were trying to accomplish. Are you
concerned about temperature rise in some sort of package? Do you have
any efficiency or total power consumption compliance specifications?
Are you experiencing problems with one or the other technology?
Inquiring minds want to know.

I suppose you'd say I should use CFL's ?:-)
...Jim Thompson

Nope. LED lighting would be too easy. For your unspecified
application, methinks burning torch, propane, kerosene wick, or
Coleman white gas illumination might be equally appropriate. Why
loose efficiency converting fossil fuels to electricity and then to
mostly heat in your lamps, when you can produce the light directly?
Think of all the possible applications for MEMS miniature propane
illuminators.

Sno-o-o-ort! Old office fan with light fixture, one single 150W
Halogen, 18 years old, fails. New weenie fixture made impotent by
leftist rules takes 3 x 40W incandescent... strange, eh? I'm trying
to get light output up. I may end up rolling my own LED... multiples
on a round PCB to fit the "globe".

...Jim Thompson

You will still have a heat dissipation problem, LEDs can barely take 400 k
though the lumens per watt is good.

?-)

Jim Thompson wrote:
40W Incandescent
Well, the 40W Incandescent obviously, because it is less efficient.

On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:33:55 +1000, "David Eather"
wrote:

My thoughts, too. I have a fixture rated for three 40W miniature base
incandescents, presently loaded with three 40W Halogens. My
temptation is to go up to three 60W Halogens.

...Jim Thompson

So you want to upgrade three 450 lm sources with three 750 lm sources.

I'm not sure exactly what you're after but maybe one of these would be
about right

http://dx.com/p/3w-300-lumen-6500k-w...-86-265v-56233
http://dx.com/p/e14-3500k-3w-260-lum...-85-245v-81197
http://dx.com/p/e14-3w-3-led-240-lum...-35579?item=15
http://dx.com/p/e14-3w-260-lumen-700...-47970?item=17

There is a ship load of them and running them save you money.

So you are suggesting using three 240 lm sources instead, which does
not make much sense. Thus, the number of lamps would have to be
doubled or tripled, i.e. a new light fixture would be required.

It should be noted that "white" 6500-7000 K LEDs have a strong narrow
blue spectral line and some broadband yellow and red emission, not
very compatible with existing incandescent light bulbs in the room.