|
CFL's
"Don Klipstein" wrote in message ... The standard ones are superior. CFLs are mainly for retrofitting incandescent fixtures or for use in small fixtures of size like that of incandescent fixtures. Small size standard tubes have been available for decades. The cost of replacing fittings is worth it IME. MrT. |
CFL's
"Steve Urbach" wrote in message ... Most of the CFL's I have installed make it to 9000 hours. I mark the "in service" date on the base body. I have a few lamps that run 24/7 that repeatedly make it to rated time. With people running lamps 24/7, no wonder we have an energy problem. Domestic houses don't require permanant emegency lighting in Australia. And if that's how you get a CFL to last, then there are no power savings to be had. I have also had a number of DOA's (dead from the start) and a number that failed in the first 30 days. My experience too. Note: in all cases, CFL's were installed in open fixtures and NOT on dimmers (or electronic timers). Some long service time failures were spectacular (lots of smoke). And fires have been caused by them as well. A real worry for those 24/7 lamps. Non-CFL (AKA regular fluorescent) have starter failures that are more frequent than CFL failures. Certainly not IME. I've had some non electronic starters last over 20 years! MrT. |
CFL's
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 07:47:55 GMT "James Sweet"
wrote in Message id: L_Ihi.3453$bh5.1611@trndny01: Getting rid of that crossposting crap, makes me wonder if any newsreaders can warn when crossposting so I don't have to remember to check. Mine does. www.forteinc.com |
CFL's
"Steve Urbach" wrote ...
Most of the CFL's I have installed make it to 9000 hours. I mark the "in service" date on the base body. I have a few lamps that run 24/7 that repeatedly make it to rated time. That seems consistent with the theory that you get a (much) longer life expectancy out of them when run continuously vs. on-off. |
Strange problem with low energy light bulb
"Mr.T" wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message ... Military TV station in Alaska in the early '70s: Halogen studio lights at the ceiling, and less than half in use at any one time. In the winter I would open the back door to the studio to allow the sub zero air into the studio to keep it below 80 degrees. In the summer, the talking heads did the news in a dress uniform shirt and jacket, and their underwear, because there was no air conditioning. Its stupid NOT to have a reflector on any ceiling mounted lamp. When it comes to studio lighting, there are different types of fixtues to choose from. The choice depends on the lighting pattern that is required. Also, small studio spotlights are used with brass Gobos to project patterens on the studio walls. The last custom one I made was a Shamrock, for an Irish preacher, who was visiting WACX TV. http://www.sfxdesigninc.com/v2/ for examples of stock Gobos. And the relevence to the current discussion is ..... ???????? MrT. The group that its posted to: sci.engr.television.advanced "I pity the fool who can't follow a thread!" -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
CFL's
In article , Mr.T wrote:
"Don Klipstein" wrote in message ... I see 1710, 1730 and 1750 on packages having "standard" incandescents, as low as 1670 for 750 hour soft white. The lowest wattage CFLs I have seen produce 1700-plus lumens are the Philips 25 watt SLS (1750 lumens) and 26 watt spirals. But even then not for their full life expectency unfortunately. 30 watt spirals - 100 watts after aging or when temperature is non-optimum And they seem to be both hard to obtain, and expensive. And since the wattage is approx 1/3rd, the savings are less than claimed. Easily available at Lowes and Home Depot. And I don't see 30 watts vs. 26 being some huge major deal. Me too, and those equally silly 8,000 hour claims. That is for 3 hours per start in a 25 degree C ambient. This is the actual industry standard for fluorescents. I think that a more appropriate one for incandescent-replacement CFLs should be 1 hour per start in a 40 degree C ambient. 40degC ambient??? Is that how you get the claimed life expectency, no wonder I never do. Meanwhile, I do have CFLs normally last a few thousand hours. And I still dream of even getting that much. I guess it will happen one day. - Don Klipstein ) |
CFL's
In article , Mr.T wrote:
"Steve Urbach" wrote in message .. . Most of the CFL's I have installed make it to 9000 hours. I mark the "in service" date on the base body. I have a few lamps that run 24/7 that repeatedly make it to rated time. With people running lamps 24/7, no wonder we have an energy problem. Domestic houses don't require permanant emegency lighting in Australia. And if that's how you get a CFL to last, then there are no power savings to be had. I never run mine 24/7, and they last. I have also had a number of DOA's (dead from the start) and a number that failed in the first 30 days. My experience too. I had a dollar store junker DOA, and another die spectacularly in 3 minutes (lots of smoke and orange burning glow in the ballast housing that did not stop until I shut off the power). I have had a couple Lights of America ones get flaky, another die in just several hours, and an LOA 25 watt spiral from about 2001 die in only a few hundred operating hours. I also had a couple GE 25 watt spirals from about 2001 die in a few hundred operating hours. Next up in life were Osram 13 watt quadtubes with glow switch starters used in a bathroom, where they get turned on and off a lot. Those mostly got about twice the life of incandescents. One spiral that I had in a bathroom had life expectancy along those lines. I have had over a dozen CFLs get a few thousand hours in household use, some not yet dead but left behind during a move. Note: in all cases, CFL's were installed in open fixtures and NOT on dimmers (or electronic timers). Some long service time failures were spectacular (lots of smoke). And fires have been caused by them as well. A real worry for those 24/7 lamps. The only fluorescent lamp caused fire I ever saw (or saw the aftermath of) was caused by an overheating ballast for a 20 watt linear one when the lamp failed, then caused the starter to get stuck shorted. That happened in an elevator in an apartment building. However, I think the fire risk of dollar store CFLs is worse than the fire risk of other fluorescents, CFL or standard. One Teng Fei model was recalled for having the ballast housing being made of non-flame-retardant plastic. Then again, in my experience the dollar store junkers have worse color and fall well short of claimed light output. Non-CFL (AKA regular fluorescent) have starter failures that are more frequent than CFL failures. Certainly not IME. I've had some non electronic starters last over 20 years! Standard linear fluorescents do generally last longer than CFLs. Keep in mind that a bad lamp causes extra wear on a starter, and a bad starter causes extra wear on a lamp. Then again, most fluorescents now don't use starters. - Don Klipstein ) |
CFL's
Don Klipstein wrote: I had a dollar store junker DOA, and another die spectacularly in 3 minutes (lots of smoke and orange burning glow in the ballast housing that did not stop until I shut off the power). That'll doubtless be a certification failure. Graham |
Strange problem with low energy light bulb
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message ... "Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message ... Military TV station in Alaska in the early '70s: Halogen studio lights at the ceiling, and less than half in use at any one time. In the winter I would open the back door to the studio to allow the sub zero air into the studio to keep it below 80 degrees. In the summer, the talking heads did the news in a dress uniform shirt and jacket, and their underwear, because there was no air conditioning. Its stupid NOT to have a reflector on any ceiling mounted lamp. When it comes to studio lighting, there are different types of fixtues to choose from. The choice depends on the lighting pattern that is required. Also, small studio spotlights are used with brass Gobos to project patterens on the studio walls. The last custom one I made was a Shamrock, for an Irish preacher, who was visiting WACX TV. http://www.sfxdesigninc.com/v2/ for examples of stock Gobos. And the relevence to the current discussion is ..... ???????? "I pity the fool who can't follow a thread!" Me too, especially those who can't even read the header of the thread they are posting to. MrT. |
CFL's
wrote in message oups.com... I am personally not terribly happy about 'excessive' government regulation, excepting that it has given us (here in the US) clean water, much cleaner air, much safer cars, better drugs (in general), and a few other benefits such that we all pretty much live better for it. The brute fact of the matter is that many must be dragged kicking and screaming to learning and knowledge... and live in a near-constant state of denial as long as their personal space is not affected. Since it is manifest that the average human being would like-as-not even wipe his/her own butt were it not for social consequences, the sad result is regulation of what should be within the general condition of that rarest of all commodities: Common Sense. Which proves the fallacy of your argument. Firstly butt wiping is not legally mandated, (yet most seem to manage it) secondly Politicians with common sense is an oxymoron, so why do you think their decisions are any better? MrT. |
CFL's
In article , Eeyore wrote:
Don Klipstein wrote: I had a dollar store junker DOA, and another die spectacularly in 3 minutes (lots of smoke and orange burning glow in the ballast housing that did not stop until I shut off the power). That'll doubtless be a certification failure. In my experience, most dollar store CFLs do not have any sign of certification by UL or CSA, nor FCC. Some show the CE symbol. I am a bit leery of dollar store electrical items anyway. I once got an extension cord at a dollar store that claimed UL listing, even mentioning the file number. I believe that cord was not the one that is legitimately listed with that file number, because it was rated 13 amps and got awfully warm at 2.5 amps. The wire appeared to me to be about 24 AWG, maybe 26, and had much higher resistance than normal copper wire of that size. I got the cord to see how bad it was. I knew better to actually normally use a dollar store extension cord that claimed a 13 amp rating and was thinner than 18 AWG lamp cord. I did report it to UL. I now cannot find that same cord at any dollar store. I do see at one dollar store another similarly thin extension cord not claiming certification and rated for 3 amps, and its resistance is in line with normal copper wire of 24 AWG. If my ohmmeter was reading high due to contact resistance, the wire could be anywhere from 24 to 20 AWG. I consider that one unsafe because it could burn up if a load fails short or worse still fails with decreased impedance drawing increased current but not tripping your breaker. Somehow I suspect 18 AWG lamp cord is the thinnest that reasonably reliably carries the current through a dead short until a usual household breaker trips or fuse blows. I don't see 18 AWG extension cords but I see a lot of 16 AWG ones, so I suspect 16 is the thinnest that is "reasonably safe" against overloads due to load malfunction. For that matter, based on the usual ratings of 14 and 12 AWG extension cords (15 and 20 amps respectively), I feel that the 13 amp rating usual of 16 AWG ones to be a couple amps on the aggressive side. But enough digressing from CFLs... - Don Klipstein , ) |
CFL's
"Don Klipstein" wrote in message ... In article , Eeyore wrote: Don Klipstein wrote: I had a dollar store junker DOA, and another die spectacularly in 3 minutes (lots of smoke and orange burning glow in the ballast housing that did not stop until I shut off the power). That'll doubtless be a certification failure. In my experience, most dollar store CFLs do not have any sign of certification by UL or CSA, nor FCC. Some show the CE symbol. I am a bit leery of dollar store electrical items anyway. I once got an extension cord at a dollar store that claimed UL listing, even mentioning the file number. I believe that cord was not the one that is legitimately listed with that file number, because it was rated 13 amps and got awfully warm at 2.5 amps. The wire appeared to me to be about 24 AWG, maybe 26, and had much higher resistance than normal copper wire of that size. I got the cord to see how bad it was. I knew better to actually normally use a dollar store extension cord that claimed a 13 amp rating and was thinner than 18 AWG lamp cord. I did report it to UL. I now cannot find that same cord at any dollar store. I do see at one dollar store another similarly thin extension cord not claiming certification and rated for 3 amps, and its resistance is in line with normal copper wire of 24 AWG. If my ohmmeter was reading high due to contact resistance, the wire could be anywhere from 24 to 20 AWG. I consider that one unsafe because it could burn up if a load fails short or worse still fails with decreased impedance drawing increased current but not tripping your breaker. Somehow I suspect 18 AWG lamp cord is the thinnest that reasonably reliably carries the current through a dead short until a usual household breaker trips or fuse blows. I don't see 18 AWG extension cords but I see a lot of 16 AWG ones, so I suspect 16 is the thinnest that is "reasonably safe" against overloads due to load malfunction. For that matter, based on the usual ratings of 14 and 12 AWG extension cords (15 and 20 amps respectively), I feel that the 13 amp rating usual of 16 AWG ones to be a couple amps on the aggressive side. But enough digressing from CFLs... - Don Klipstein , ) |
CFL's
I am a bit leery of dollar store electrical items anyway. I once got an
extension cord at a dollar store that claimed UL listing, even mentioning the file number. I believe that cord was not the one that is legitimately listed with that file number, because it was rated 13 amps and got awfully warm at 2.5 amps. The wire appeared to me to be about 24 AWG, maybe 26, and had much higher resistance than normal copper wire of that size. I got the cord to see how bad it was. I knew better to actually normally use a dollar store extension cord that claimed a 13 amp rating and was thinner than 18 AWG lamp cord. I did report it to UL. I now cannot find that same cord at any dollar store. I do see at one dollar store another similarly thin extension cord not claiming certification and rated for 3 amps, and its resistance is in line with normal copper wire of 24 AWG. That's the kind of thing your state government would like to know about, if you're in the USA. Or your local newspaper or TV news reporters. |
CFL's
On Jul 2, 11:31 pm, "Mr.T" MrT@home wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... I am personally not terribly happy about 'excessive' government regulation, excepting that it has given us (here in the US) clean water, much cleaner air, much safer cars, better drugs (in general), and a few other benefits such that we all pretty much live better for it. The brute fact of the matter is that many must be dragged kicking and screaming to learning and knowledge... and live in a near-constant state of denial as long as their personal space is not affected. Since it is manifest that the average human being would like-as-not even wipe his/her own butt were it not for social consequences, the sad result is regulation of what should be within the general condition of that rarest of all commodities: Common Sense. Which proves the fallacy of your argument. Firstly butt wiping is not legally mandated, (yet most seem to manage it) secondly Politicians with common sense is an oxymoron, so why do you think their decisions are any better? MrT. You are a piece of work ;-). Fallacy of my "argument"? If the refutation and/or fallacy is based on your last statement, that would be (and being very specific) the fallacy of "false premises" on your part as to the quality of politicians, and "leaping to conclusions" on the 'firstly' part. There are only seven fallacies, you are off to a very good start. As to how things work here in the US... as it happens, politicians make very damned few 'decisions', that would be very dangerous behavior. What they do is make laws. The regulations that enforce those laws, together with the interpretations, decisions and so forth are made by bureaucrats sitting in some cubicle somewhere. Mostly those individuals live and work much as the rest of us and have the same general interests as much of the rest of us, and want the same things as much of the rest of us. So, by guess and by God and by great good luck, we do get largely what we deserve both in our politicians and in the results of their efforts. If you detect an undercurrent of cynicism... well, you are not far off. But there are results. But the brute fact is that I have seen three major rivers local to me turn from open cesspools to clean, living rivers, air that I once could cut with a knife and had to leave the windows closed against soot become clean... And I live in a state that remains a net-exporter of energy to this day and the one where the very first oil well was drilled in 1859, and had the distinction of being perhaps the most polluted state in the United States in the 1950s, running in a close contest with Ohio. In Cleveland, Ohio, the Cuyahoga River actually caught fire once upon a time. So, don't hold it against me that I have the wit to actually pay attention to the lamps (and appliances, utilities, vehicles and so forth) that I purchase and do so in an informed and thoughtful way... in other words, I wipe my butt. That would be the point and in refutation of your statement that 'most people seem to manage'... actually, they do not. Example... one who purchases a Hummer for the macho image while driving around on city streets. A definite lack of butt-wiping skills there. And you may derive from there with many more examples.... one who drives 22 miles round-trip to save $0.05 per pound on chicken, and buys five pounds. Oh, and when they go they take the Hummer, not the Prius... and so forth. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA |
CFL's
On Jul 1, 3:17 pm, (Don Klipstein) wrote:
That is for 3 hours per start in a 25 degree C ambient. This is the actual industry standard for fluorescents. I think that a more appropriate one for incandescent-replacement CFLs should be 1 hour per start in a 40 degree C ambient. 104F ambient? I spend 2.5 years in Saudi Arabia (eastern province) and we seldom saw those temperatures steady-state outside of July and August. BTW, ALL of our common-area and exterior lamps there were PL-types, mostly GE, and in 2.5 years across 295 residences (villas and apartments), 100,000 square feet of office, two schools, four gyms and two supermarkets, we purchased less than 144 lamps. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA |
Strange problem with low energy light bulb
In article , Sam Goldwasser
writes I'm somewhat skeptical of the explanation with respect to inductive or capacitive coupling (though possible under just the right - or wrong - conditions) In the UK, it's common to drill holes in floor joists and run several circuits through them, including lighting (6A) and ring (32A) circuits. Thus a long length of ring main cable running alongside the lighting circuit in question would easily be sufficient to induce some current flow in the lighting circuit. This is where the energy comes from to cause the CFL to charge up and flash. To the OP: it's entirely normal and not indicative of a fault at all. You only need to do something if the flashing bothers you. -- (\__/) Bunny says NO to Windows Vista! (='.'=) http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...ista_cost.html (")_(") |
Strange problem with low energy light bulb
In article . com, Seán
O'Leathlóbhair writes I am not sure if this is an appropriate group for this question. If not, please suggest a better one. uk.d-i-y is a more appropriate group, where this phenomenon has been discussed several times. A fix has also been posted several times. -- (\__/) Bunny says NO to Windows Vista! (='.'=) http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...ista_cost.html (")_(") |
Strange problem with low energy light bulb
Mike Tomlinson wrote: Sam Goldwasser writes I'm somewhat skeptical of the explanation with respect to inductive or capacitive coupling (though possible under just the right - or wrong - conditions) In the UK, it's common to drill holes in floor joists and run several circuits through them, including lighting (6A) and ring (32A) circuits. Thus a long length of ring main cable running alongside the lighting circuit in question would easily be sufficient to induce some current flow in the lighting circuit. Not mA worth though. Graham |
Strange problem with low energy light bulb
Mike Tomlinson wrote: Seán O'Leathlóbhair writes I am not sure if this is an appropriate group for this question. If not, please suggest a better one. uk.d-i-y is a more appropriate group, where this phenomenon has been discussed several times. A fix has also been posted several times. Would you care to share with us ? Graham |
Strange problem with low energy light bulb
"Eeyore" wrote in message ... Mike Tomlinson wrote: Seán O'Leathlóbhair writes I am not sure if this is an appropriate group for this question. If not, please suggest a better one. uk.d-i-y is a more appropriate group, where this phenomenon has been discussed several times. A fix has also been posted several times. Would you care to share with us ? Graham Got home tonight, and the one CFL that I am running in the outside light, has gone off. I would guess that it has done about 1000 hours. It is a Philips one. I might try to get the time to whip it out tomorrow, and see what has happened to it Arfa |
Strange problem with low energy light bulb
"Mr.T" wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message ... "Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message ... Military TV station in Alaska in the early '70s: Halogen studio lights at the ceiling, and less than half in use at any one time. In the winter I would open the back door to the studio to allow the sub zero air into the studio to keep it below 80 degrees. In the summer, the talking heads did the news in a dress uniform shirt and jacket, and their underwear, because there was no air conditioning. Its stupid NOT to have a reflector on any ceiling mounted lamp. When it comes to studio lighting, there are different types of fixtues to choose from. The choice depends on the lighting pattern that is required. Also, small studio spotlights are used with brass Gobos to project patterens on the studio walls. The last custom one I made was a Shamrock, for an Irish preacher, who was visiting WACX TV. http://www.sfxdesigninc.com/v2/ for examples of stock Gobos. And the relevence to the current discussion is ..... ???????? "I pity the fool who can't follow a thread!" Me too, especially those who can't even read the header of the thread they are posting to. MrT. Sigh. Snipping things that you don't agree with? You're no "Mister "T". PLONK. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
Strange problem with low energy light bulb
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message ... And the relevence to the current discussion is ..... ???????? "I pity the fool who can't follow a thread!" Me too, especially those who can't even read the header of the thread they are posting to. Sigh. Snipping things that you don't agree with? So you can't remember what you wrote, and it's total irrelevance to the current discussion? Try Google then. PLONK. Good riddance. MrT. |
CFL's
|
CFL's
"Don Klipstein" wrote in message ... That is for 3 hours per start in a 25 degree C ambient. This is the actual industry standard for fluorescents. I think that a more appropriate one for incandescent-replacement CFLs should be 1 hour per start in a 40 degree C ambient. 104F ambient? I spend 2.5 years in Saudi Arabia (eastern province) and we seldom saw those temperatures steady-state outside of July and August. Check out the temperature of the air or the inner surface of the "cup" in the "base end of the cup" of the "cups" (I don't know what to call them) of ceiling fan fixtures when a CFL has been running there at least 15 minutes. That would not normally be descibed as "ambient temperature" then. Same story for small enclosed fixtures. For that matter, not-so-small enclosed fixtures are good for a good 10 degrees C difference between "ambient temperature for the CFL" and "ambient temperature outside the fixture". Or far more accurately, (and far less confusing) the enclosure temperature and the room temperature. MrT. |
CFL's
"Mr.T" wrote ...
"Don Klipstein" wrote ... That is for 3 hours per start in a 25 degree C ambient. This is the actual industry standard for fluorescents. I think that a more appropriate one for incandescent-replacement CFLs should be 1 hour per start in a 40 degree C ambient. 104F ambient? I spend 2.5 years in Saudi Arabia (eastern province) and we seldom saw those temperatures steady-state outside of July and August. Check out the temperature of the air or the inner surface of the "cup" in the "base end of the cup" of the "cups" (I don't know what to call them) of ceiling fan fixtures when a CFL has been running there at least 15 minutes. That would not normally be descibed as "ambient temperature" then. It *IS* the "ambient temperature" for the CFL (which is all that matters in this discussion.) Same story for small enclosed fixtures. For that matter, not-so-small enclosed fixtures are good for a good 10 degrees C difference between "ambient temperature for the CFL" and "ambient temperature outside the fixture". Or far more accurately, (and far less confusing) the enclosure temperature and the room temperature. The "enclosure temperature" *IS* the "ambient temperature" for the lamp. Whether the rest of the locale is -40F or +135F makes no difference to the discussion. |
CFL's
On Jul 5, 2:00 pm, "Richard Crowley" wrote:
"Mr.T" wrote ... "Don Klipstein" wrote ... That is for 3 hours per start in a 25 degree C ambient. This is the actual industry standard for fluorescents. I think that a more appropriate one for incandescent-replacement CFLs should be 1 hour per start in a 40 degree C ambient. 104F ambient? I spend 2.5 years in Saudi Arabia (eastern province) and we seldom saw those temperatures steady-state outside of July and August. Check out the temperature of the air or the inner surface of the "cup" in the "base end of the cup" of the "cups" (I don't know what to call them) of ceiling fan fixtures when a CFL has been running there at least 15 minutes. That would not normally be descibed as "ambient temperature" then. It *IS* the "ambient temperature" for the CFL (which is all that matters in this discussion.) Same story for small enclosed fixtures. For that matter, not-so-small enclosed fixtures are good for a good 10 degrees C difference between "ambient temperature for the CFL" and "ambient temperature outside the fixture". Or far more accurately, (and far less confusing) the enclosure temperature and the room temperature. The "enclosure temperature" *IS* the "ambient temperature" for the lamp. Whether the rest of the locale is -40F or +135F makes no difference to the discussion.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - There are two ambient temperatures to consider. First, that at start- up... that would seldom be anything near 40C. Then, there is ambient during operation. And that would depend on the nature of the enclosure (if any). My direct experience is that all of our CFL-type lamps may be handled without discomfort at any time during operation, base and tube. That would be meaningfully cooler than any similar brightness (irrespective of wattage) incandescent. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA |
CFL's
"Richard Crowley" wrote in message ... That is for 3 hours per start in a 25 degree C ambient. This is the actual industry standard for fluorescents. I think that a more appropriate one for incandescent-replacement CFLs should be 1 hour per start in a 40 degree C ambient. 104F ambient? I spend 2.5 years in Saudi Arabia (eastern province) and we seldom saw those temperatures steady-state outside of July and August. Check out the temperature of the air or the inner surface of the "cup" in the "base end of the cup" of the "cups" (I don't know what to call them) of ceiling fan fixtures when a CFL has been running there at least 15 minutes. That would not normally be descibed as "ambient temperature" then. It *IS* the "ambient temperature" for the CFL (which is all that matters in this discussion.) Same story for small enclosed fixtures. For that matter, not-so-small enclosed fixtures are good for a good 10 degrees C difference between "ambient temperature for the CFL" and "ambient temperature outside the fixture". Or far more accurately, (and far less confusing) the enclosure temperature and the room temperature. The "enclosure temperature" *IS* the "ambient temperature" for the lamp. Whether the rest of the locale is -40F or +135F makes no difference to the discussion. Sure, if your object is to confuse people, then not spelling out exactly what you mean is a great way to do it. MrT. |
CFL's
" wrote: "Richard Crowley" wrote: "Mr.T" wrote ... "Don Klipstein" wrote ... That is for 3 hours per start in a 25 degree C ambient. This is the actual industry standard for fluorescents. I think that a more appropriate one for incandescent-replacement CFLs should be 1 hour per start in a 40 degree C ambient. 104F ambient? I spend 2.5 years in Saudi Arabia (eastern province) and we seldom saw those temperatures steady-state outside of July and August. Check out the temperature of the air or the inner surface of the "cup" in the "base end of the cup" of the "cups" (I don't know what to call them) of ceiling fan fixtures when a CFL has been running there at least 15 minutes. That would not normally be descibed as "ambient temperature" then. It *IS* the "ambient temperature" for the CFL (which is all that matters in this discussion.) Same story for small enclosed fixtures. For that matter, not-so-small enclosed fixtures are good for a good 10 degrees C difference between "ambient temperature for the CFL" and "ambient temperature outside the fixture". Or far more accurately, (and far less confusing) the enclosure temperature and the room temperature. The "enclosure temperature" *IS* the "ambient temperature" for the lamp. Whether the rest of the locale is -40F or +135F makes no difference to the discussion.- Hide quoted text - There are two ambient temperatures to consider. First, that at start- up... that would seldom be anything near 40C. Then, there is ambient during operation. And that would depend on the nature of the enclosure (if any). My direct experience is that all of our CFL-type lamps may be handled without discomfort at any time during operation, base and tube. That would be meaningfully cooler than any similar brightness (irrespective of wattage) incandescent. There are plenty of countries where you'll find an ambient temp close to 40C. Imagine they want CFLs too. Graham |
CFL's
"Mr.T" wrote: "Richard Crowley" wrote in message The "enclosure temperature" *IS* the "ambient temperature" for the lamp. Whether the rest of the locale is -40F or +135F makes no difference to the discussion. Sure, if your object is to confuse people, then not spelling out exactly what you mean is a great way to do it. It is a good point though. Graham |
CFL's
"Eeyore" wrote in message ... There are plenty of countries where you'll find an ambient temp close to 40C. Imagine they want CFLs too. I imagine they want house cooling too. MrT. |
CFL's
"Mr.T" wrote: "Eeyore" wrote There are plenty of countries where you'll find an ambient temp close to 40C. Imagine they want CFLs too. I imagine they want house cooling too. LOL ! You need to get out a bit. Graham |
LEDs as lamp replacements
wrote:
Issues with LEDs today: Color rendering Diffusion Once those are solved effectively, they will be excellent alternatives. My guess is 5 years to color rendering, and 5 more to diffusion. Most LEDs today filter a single color to a specific monochromatic output. Even the LED-type flashlights are very heavily skewed to the blue end of the spectrum in order to get sufficient brightness, and require multiple LEDs to get even a minor beam with very poor diffusion. But you can use a combination of red, green, and blue high intensity LEDs, to create any variant of "white" that you prefer. From what Ive read so far, the efficiency of the new high intensity LEDs is almost identical now to that of CFLs, which means about the same lumens for 1/4 or 1/5th the power of an equally bright incandescent bulb. I think we shouldn't get stuck on any supposed problem with CFLs, as if they are the only alternative here. The weird thing about LEDs is that they would last such a long time that they wouldn't need replacement. In principle, you can build them right into the lamp itself. Or in walls, or whatever. Bert |
LEDs as lamp replacements
"Albert Manfredi" wrote in message ... wrote: Issues with LEDs today: Color rendering Diffusion Once those are solved effectively, they will be excellent alternatives. My guess is 5 years to color rendering, and 5 more to diffusion. Most LEDs today filter a single color to a specific monochromatic output. Even the LED-type flashlights are very heavily skewed to the blue end of the spectrum in order to get sufficient brightness, and require multiple LEDs to get even a minor beam with very poor diffusion. But you can use a combination of red, green, and blue high intensity LEDs, to create any variant of "white" that you prefer. From what Ive read so far, the efficiency of the new high intensity LEDs is almost identical now to that of CFLs, which means about the same lumens for 1/4 or 1/5th the power of an equally bright incandescent bulb. I think we shouldn't get stuck on any supposed problem with CFLs, as if they are the only alternative here. The weird thing about LEDs is that they would last such a long time that they wouldn't need replacement. In principle, you can build them right into the lamp itself. Or in walls, or whatever. Bert The length of service issue with LEDs is very dependant on the way they are driven, if you are to get the maximum of 100,000 hours plus out of them. However, that said, even if not driven properly - ie not pulsed - from what I have read, they are still good for 40k hours, before the light output has dropped by 50%. As far as colour rendering goes, I agree that this can be achieved with combinations of RGB LEDs, and I'm sure can be made as good or better now, as CFLs are ( not that I'm saying theat CFLs are good of course .... !) Just a few days ago, I saw somewhere that one of the manufacturers has come up with LED chips bonded to a sort of 'ball on a stick' shape, so many small chips face in virtually every direction around a sphere, to get over the point-source poor beamwidth issue. BTW, Philips CFLs = China ? Not any more, it would seem. I picked one up in the supermarket tonight to have a look. It said " Made in Poland " ... Arfa |
LEDs as lamp replacements
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 22:03:44 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
wrote: "Albert Manfredi" wrote in message ... wrote: Issues with LEDs today: Color rendering Diffusion Once those are solved effectively, they will be excellent alternatives. My guess is 5 years to color rendering, and 5 more to diffusion. Most LEDs today filter a single color to a specific monochromatic output. Even the LED-type flashlights are very heavily skewed to the blue end of the spectrum in order to get sufficient brightness, and require multiple LEDs to get even a minor beam with very poor diffusion. But you can use a combination of red, green, and blue high intensity LEDs, to create any variant of "white" that you prefer. From what Ive read so far, the efficiency of the new high intensity LEDs is almost identical now to that of CFLs, which means about the same lumens for 1/4 or 1/5th the power of an equally bright incandescent bulb. I think we shouldn't get stuck on any supposed problem with CFLs, as if they are the only alternative here. The weird thing about LEDs is that they would last such a long time that they wouldn't need replacement. In principle, you can build them right into the lamp itself. Or in walls, or whatever. Bert The length of service issue with LEDs is very dependant on the way they are driven, if you are to get the maximum of 100,000 hours plus out of them. However, that said, even if not driven properly - ie not pulsed - from what I have read, they are still good for 40k hours, before the light output has dropped by 50%. As far as colour rendering goes, I agree that this can be achieved with combinations of RGB LEDs, and I'm sure can be made as good or better now, as CFLs are ( not that I'm saying theat CFLs are good of course ... !) Just a few days ago, I saw somewhere that one of the manufacturers has come up with LED chips bonded to a sort of 'ball on a stick' shape, so many small chips face in virtually every direction around a sphere, to get over the point-source poor beamwidth issue. BTW, Philips CFLs = China ? Not any more, it would seem. I picked one up in the supermarket tonight to have a look. It said " Made in Poland " ... Arfa Currently, white LEDs are in fact blue LEDs coated with a fluorescent substance, so probably the overall light quality will be quite similar to CFL. d -- Pearce Consulting http://www.pearce.uk.com |
LEDs as lamp replacements
"Don Pearce" wrote in message ... On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 22:03:44 GMT, "Arfa Daily" wrote: "Albert Manfredi" wrote in message ... wrote: Issues with LEDs today: Color rendering Diffusion Once those are solved effectively, they will be excellent alternatives. My guess is 5 years to color rendering, and 5 more to diffusion. Most LEDs today filter a single color to a specific monochromatic output. Even the LED-type flashlights are very heavily skewed to the blue end of the spectrum in order to get sufficient brightness, and require multiple LEDs to get even a minor beam with very poor diffusion. But you can use a combination of red, green, and blue high intensity LEDs, to create any variant of "white" that you prefer. From what Ive read so far, the efficiency of the new high intensity LEDs is almost identical now to that of CFLs, which means about the same lumens for 1/4 or 1/5th the power of an equally bright incandescent bulb. I think we shouldn't get stuck on any supposed problem with CFLs, as if they are the only alternative here. The weird thing about LEDs is that they would last such a long time that they wouldn't need replacement. In principle, you can build them right into the lamp itself. Or in walls, or whatever. Bert The length of service issue with LEDs is very dependant on the way they are driven, if you are to get the maximum of 100,000 hours plus out of them. However, that said, even if not driven properly - ie not pulsed - from what I have read, they are still good for 40k hours, before the light output has dropped by 50%. As far as colour rendering goes, I agree that this can be achieved with combinations of RGB LEDs, and I'm sure can be made as good or better now, as CFLs are ( not that I'm saying theat CFLs are good of course ... !) Just a few days ago, I saw somewhere that one of the manufacturers has come up with LED chips bonded to a sort of 'ball on a stick' shape, so many small chips face in virtually every direction around a sphere, to get over the point-source poor beamwidth issue. BTW, Philips CFLs = China ? Not any more, it would seem. I picked one up in the supermarket tonight to have a look. It said " Made in Poland " ... Arfa Currently, white LEDs are in fact blue LEDs coated with a fluorescent substance, so probably the overall light quality will be quite similar to CFL. d Hi Don I just went looking at some of the latest LED technology, and they are now producing LED chips that have an array of alternate red and blue die 'stripes', each made up of a string of individual dies, with the whole overlaid with a yellow phosphor. By altering the colour of the phosphor, they can set the colour temperature to any value they like and, it is claimed, with a colour rendition index of 90 or better, so it seems that the colour rendition issue with LED 'light bulbs' is a lot closer to being fully resolved, than the 5 years that was postulated in one of the above posts. If this is the case, and the field of LED lighting contnues to advance at the pace that it has over the last say 3 years, then I would suggest that the CFL has a very limited future ... Arfa Arfa -- Pearce Consulting http://www.pearce.uk.com |
LEDs as lamp replacements
Currently, white LEDs are in fact blue LEDs coated with a fluorescent substance, so probably the overall light quality will be quite similar to CFL. It's not, the phosphor is not the same as used in a CFL, and the light output is dominated by the blue from the LED chip. Another problem with them is that they shift blue as the phosphor ages. They're improving, but still far from perfect. There's a lot of Chinese crap LEDs on the market now too that are noticeably inferior to good name brand ones. I had some bargain white LEDs that got dim and blue after only about 2 months of continuous use and that was driven below spec. |
LEDs as lamp replacements
"Albert Manfredi" wrote:
wrote: Issues with LEDs today: Color rendering Diffusion Once those are solved effectively, they will be excellent alternatives. My guess is 5 years to color rendering, and 5 more to diffusion. Most LEDs today filter a single color to a specific monochromatic output. Even the LED-type flashlights are very heavily skewed to the blue end of the spectrum in order to get sufficient brightness, and require multiple LEDs to get even a minor beam with very poor diffusion. But you can use a combination of red, green, and blue high intensity LEDs, to create any variant of "white" that you prefer. From what Ive read so far, the efficiency of the new high intensity LEDs is almost identical now to that of CFLs, which means about the same lumens for 1/4 or 1/5th the power of an equally bright incandescent bulb. Don't believe everything you read. Experience is the best teacher. In other words, LEDs suck for bright light sources. However, the hype is good for selling them to fools over the TV/Internet. Like that one guy selling LED light bulbs on TV (USA). He doesn't explicitly say that they're bright as a lightbulb, but they are in a lightbulb package and used in the commercial as if they were a lightbulb. Some people probably fall for that. The weird thing about LEDs is that they would last such a long time that they wouldn't need replacement. In principle, you can build them right into the lamp itself. Or in walls, or whatever. Right, but pointless except for low light applications. Bert |
CFL's
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. I've done a fair number of fairly large (i.e., 8 or more bulbs per room) incadescent (mostly halogen) to CFL upgrades, with extremely positive results. In every case the fixtures were previously loaded up with incadescent bulbs rated at the fixture's maximum power. They were providing poor to marginal lighting. No argument from me that most halogens are even bigger crap than most CFL's. However I had never assumed people do not bother to differentiate standard filament light bulbs from small halogens. I'm puzzled why they even bother to differentiate CFL's in that case. Simply call them lamps :-) MrT. |
CFL's
"Eeyore" wrote in message ... There are plenty of countries where you'll find an ambient temp close to 40C. Imagine they want CFLs too. I imagine they want house cooling too. LOL ! You need to get out a bit. Maybe you can tell us exactly which houses have electric lighting and 40degC temperatures at night. (or why they choose to run lights during the day in such conditions) I obviously haven't been "getting out" to those! MrT. |
LEDs as lamp replacements
"John Doe" wrote in message . net... "Albert Manfredi" wrote: wrote: Issues with LEDs today: Color rendering Diffusion Once those are solved effectively, they will be excellent alternatives. My guess is 5 years to color rendering, and 5 more to diffusion. Most LEDs today filter a single color to a specific monochromatic output. Even the LED-type flashlights are very heavily skewed to the blue end of the spectrum in order to get sufficient brightness, and require multiple LEDs to get even a minor beam with very poor diffusion. But you can use a combination of red, green, and blue high intensity LEDs, to create any variant of "white" that you prefer. From what Ive read so far, the efficiency of the new high intensity LEDs is almost identical now to that of CFLs, which means about the same lumens for 1/4 or 1/5th the power of an equally bright incandescent bulb. Don't believe everything you read. Experience is the best teacher. In other words, LEDs suck for bright light sources. However, the hype is good for selling them to fools over the TV/Internet. Like that one guy selling LED light bulbs on TV (USA). He doesn't explicitly say that they're bright as a lightbulb, but they are in a lightbulb package and used in the commercial as if they were a lightbulb. Some people probably fall for that. The weird thing about LEDs is that they would last such a long time that they wouldn't need replacement. In principle, you can build them right into the lamp itself. Or in walls, or whatever. Right, but pointless except for low light applications. I have a friend who has LED downlighters as the only source of light in his shop. They are perfectly bright and adequate for the job, if a little 'cold' in colour temperature. Also, a local photography shop uses similar ones for its window display, and again, the only comment you would make is that they are a little cold. The specifications for up to date ones would certainly suggest that they are on a par in terms of light output and beamwidth, with comparable fitting halogens. With a bit of work, I'm sure that they will also get to the point where they can replace a standard filament bulb, in the same sized package, unlike a CFL which has to accommodate the ballast. I think it might be a case of 'ya gets wot ya pay fer' Arfa |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:27 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter