Hi
I have a mains wall light which has ten 10 watt halogen bulbs on it, and it says on the back its 0-105W.
Is it possible to connect a dimmer switch to this light without having to include a transformer.
If i can what sort of dimmer switch would you recommend?

Many thanks
Bren

In article ,
brendonavoo69 wrote:
I have a mains wall light which has ten 10 watt halogen bulbs on it,
and it says on the back its 0-105W.

That doesn't look right.

Is it possible to connect a dimmer switch to this light without having
to include a transformer.

Are the bulbs mains or LV?

If i can what sort of dimmer switch would you recommend?

You need a suitable dimmer. If LV, you'll need one suitable for this.
If mains, make sure it is rated at least 25% above the wattage of the
fitting.

--
*Black holes are where God divided by zero *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

brendonavoo69 wrote:
Hi
I have a mains wall light which has ten 10 watt halogen bulbs on it,
and it says on the back its 0-105W.
Is it possible to connect a dimmer switch to this light without having
to include a transformer.
If i can what sort of dimmer switch would you recommend?

Many thanks
Bren

if 12v halogens, no. If mains, yes, but it wouldnt be a very smart
idea. Switchbank is a much better option, unless you actually enjoy
heating your house up during the hot summers.

NT

In article .com,
wrote:
Switchbank is a much better option, unless you actually enjoy
heating your house up during the hot summers.

Eh? While a dimmed dimmer produces *some* heat, the dimmed bulbs produce
much less than when on full. Total end result *less* heat. Would also be
the case if using a simple resistive dimmer if such a thing existed.

--
*The statement above is false

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
brendonavoo69 writes:

Hi
I have a mains wall light which has ten 10 watt halogen bulbs on it,
and it says on the back its 0-105W.

That's a standard rating for electronic transformers.
Is it an electronic transformer?

Is it possible to connect a dimmer switch to this light without having
to include a transformer.

If the transformer says "dimmable" on it, then yes.
Most nowadays are dimmable, but many older ones weren't.

If i can what sort of dimmer switch would you recommend?

A dimmer which is marked as suitable for electronic transformer
loads. MK do a good one. You may have trouble with cheap dimmers.

--
Andrew Gabriel

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:
Switchbank is a much better option, unless you actually enjoy
heating your house up during the hot summers.

Eh? While a dimmed dimmer produces *some* heat, the dimmed bulbs produce
much less than when on full. Total end result *less* heat.

Andrew Gabriel tested a 500w halogen lamp dimmed to the output of a 40w
bulb, it was eating 300w. Dimming produces heavy loss of efficacy.

10x halogen bulbs is normally 200, 350 or 500w, most often 500. Diming
to give half brightness output will produce very little power
reduction. OTOH a switchbank would mean half the power for half the
output. Thats a difference of 250w for a 500w system. And thats a fair
bit of heat, especially when the day is already very hot.

And guess what, you get to pay for that discomfort on every leccy bill.
Halogen downlighters on dimmers are one of the most energy inefficient
lighting methods you can find. Non-downlighting on dimmers isnt good
either.

The cost of lighting like this is surprisingly high. Google if wished.
In short, dimmers are not an intelligent fashion.


Would also be
the case if using a simple resistive dimmer if such a thing existed.

That would be even worse, as not only are the bulbs running at low
efficacy, but the dimmer is already pouring out heat.


NT

In article . com,
wrote:
Switchbank is a much better option, unless you actually enjoy
heating your house up during the hot summers.

Eh? While a dimmed dimmer produces *some* heat, the dimmed bulbs
produce much less than when on full. Total end result *less* heat.

Andrew Gabriel tested a 500w halogen lamp dimmed to the output of a 40w
bulb, it was eating 300w. Dimming produces heavy loss of efficacy.

Not arguing that - simply that a dimmed bulb produces less heat than a
full on one.

--
*Virtual reality is its own reward*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article . com,
wrote:
Would also be
the case if using a simple resistive dimmer if such a thing existed.

That would be even worse, as not only are the bulbs running at low
efficacy, but the dimmer is already pouring out heat.

But less *in total* than a full on lamp.

--
*The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article . com,
wrote:

Switchbank is a much better option, unless you actually enjoy
heating your house up during the hot summers.

Eh? While a dimmed dimmer produces *some* heat, the dimmed bulbs
produce much less than when on full. Total end result *less* heat.

Andrew Gabriel tested a 500w halogen lamp dimmed to the output of a 40w
bulb, it was eating 300w. Dimming produces heavy loss of efficacy.

Not arguing that - simply that a dimmed bulb produces less heat than a
full on one.

Well, 300w versus 40w means not really. If you have a 500w lamp and
want a 40, people with a dimmer will dim it and use 300w, people with
no dimmer wil either put a 40w in or get another lamp with 40w so they
can use either. So IRL dimmers waste a stack of power.


Would also be
the case if using a simple resistive dimmer if such a thing existed.
That would be even worse, as not only are the bulbs running at low
efficacy, but the dimmer is already pouring out heat.

But less *in total* than a full on lamp

Same principle as above, 300w in the dimmed bulb plus another 100w in
the dimmer versus a 40w bulb.

The answer depends on exactly what youre comparing, but in the real
world the alternatives are a dimmed 500w or a 40w.


NT

In article .com,
wrote:
Andrew Gabriel tested a 500w halogen lamp dimmed to the output of a
40w bulb, it was eating 300w. Dimming produces heavy loss of
efficacy.

Not arguing that - simply that a dimmed bulb produces less heat than a
full on one.

Well, 300w versus 40w means not really. If you have a 500w lamp and
want a 40, people with a dimmer will dim it and use 300w, people with
no dimmer wil either put a 40w in or get another lamp with 40w so they
can use either. So IRL dimmers waste a stack of power.

I'd say the 500 watt halogen is a special case designed to make a point.
But even if the difference in heat is tiny, it still can't be more than at
full belt, as implied.

Would also be
the case if using a simple resistive dimmer if such a thing existed.

That would be even worse, as not only are the bulbs running at low
efficacy, but the dimmer is already pouring out heat.

But less *in total* than a full on lamp

Same principle as above, 300w in the dimmed bulb plus another 100w in
the dimmer versus a 40w bulb.

The answer depends on exactly what youre comparing, but in the real
world the alternatives are a dimmed 500w or a 40w.

They're not for most people. A dimmed 500w multi-lamp fitting will look
more attractive than a 40 watt bulb in most rooms. This sort of lighting
is for effect or mood - not efficiency.

If you want to save money use CFLs - if you can stand the look of them.

--
*I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tue, 16 May 2006 14:00:22 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article .com,
wrote:

Well, 300w versus 40w means not really. If you have a 500w lamp and
want a 40, people with a dimmer will dim it and use 300w, people with
no dimmer wil either put a 40w in or get another lamp with 40w so they
can use either. So IRL dimmers waste a stack of power.

I'd say the 500 watt halogen is a special case designed to make a point.
But even if the difference in heat is tiny, it still can't be more than at
full belt, as implied.

Had a look at this the other day with 20W capsule halogen bulbs,
dimming them to half brightness (subjectively) they still used 80% of
the power used at full brightness. Dimming them more would give even
lower efficiency.

The answer depends on exactly what youre comparing, but in the real
world the alternatives are a dimmed 500w or a 40w.

They're not for most people. A dimmed 500w multi-lamp fitting will look
more attractive than a 40 watt bulb in most rooms. This sort of lighting
is for effect or mood - not efficiency.

Nah, that's just poor lighting design, of which there are many
examples, especially in new builds and refurbs. Do you have halogens
on dimmers?

If you want to save money use CFLs - if you can stand the look of them.

Some are very acceptable, especially when combined with a small amount
of halogen where appropriate for task lighting. Which types and brand
CFLs have you tried?

cheers,
Pete.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:
Andrew Gabriel tested a 500w halogen lamp dimmed to the output of a
40w bulb, it was eating 300w. Dimming produces heavy loss of
efficacy.

Not arguing that - simply that a dimmed bulb produces less heat than a
full on one.

Well, 300w versus 40w means not really. If you have a 500w lamp and
want a 40, people with a dimmer will dim it and use 300w, people with
no dimmer wil either put a 40w in or get another lamp with 40w so they
can use either. So IRL dimmers waste a stack of power.

I'd say the 500 watt halogen is a special case designed to make a point.

All filament lamps behave the same way in this respect. The equations
are

efficacy/EFFICACY = (volts/VOLTS)^1.9
efficacy/EFFICACY = (filament temperature/ filament TEMPERATURE)^4.52


But even if the difference in heat is tiny, it still can't be more than at
full belt, as implied.

inferred rather than implied


Would also be
the case if using a simple resistive dimmer if such a thing existed.

That would be even worse, as not only are the bulbs running at low
efficacy, but the dimmer is already pouring out heat.

But less *in total* than a full on lamp

Same principle as above, 300w in the dimmed bulb plus another 100w in
the dimmer versus a 40w bulb.

The answer depends on exactly what youre comparing, but in the real
world the alternatives are a dimmed 500w or a 40w.

They're not for most people. A dimmed 500w multi-lamp fitting will look
more attractive than a 40 watt bulb in most rooms. This sort of lighting
is for effect or mood - not efficiency.

Youre mixing up 2 different issues there. If you want a multibulb light
you have 2 choices: fit 10x 10w bulbs or 10x 50w and a dimmer. Good
practice does not mean compromise on looks.


If you want to save money use CFLs - if you can stand the look of them.

best kept for another thread.


NT

They're not for most people. A dimmed 500w multi-lamp fitting will look
more attractive than a 40 watt bulb in most rooms. This sort of lighting
is for effect or mood - not efficiency.

I would find such a fitting nothing less than immoral.

Christian.

In article ,
Christian McArdle wrote:
They're not for most people. A dimmed 500w multi-lamp fitting will
look more attractive than a 40 watt bulb in most rooms. This sort of
lighting is for effect or mood - not efficiency.

I would find such a fitting nothing less than immoral.

Perhaps most house lighting is - and always has been. A naked fluorescent
strip light in every room (which would be painted white) would be the way
to go if you really care about efficiency.

--
*Gravity is a myth, the earth sucks *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Christian McArdle wrote:
They're not for most people. A dimmed 500w multi-lamp fitting will
look more attractive than a 40 watt bulb in most rooms. This sort of
lighting is for effect or mood - not efficiency.

I would find such a fitting nothing less than immoral.

Perhaps most house lighting is - and always has been. A naked fluorescent
strip light in every room (which would be painted white) would be the way
to go if you really care about efficiency.

Or a big dish to concentrate and beam in moonlight. Really though I
agree with Christian on this, fwiw. Dimming instead of using lower
wattage bulbs is not a particularly smart option.

NT

In article .com,
wrote:
Or a big dish to concentrate and beam in moonlight. Really though I
agree with Christian on this, fwiw. Dimming instead of using lower
wattage bulbs is not a particularly smart option.

So you're going to install several different wattage lamps along side each
other to give near the flexibility of a dimmer? Come off it.
I've got 8 lighting circuits in the living area all on dimmers. To do
anything near the same using switched lower wattage bulbs would
a) cost a fortune in hardware
b) look unattractive with all the extra switches and lights
c) not possible anyway

The amount of energy my lighting consumes is peanuts compared to all the
rest I use, and I'd rather make savings elsewhere than compromise the
looks.

--
*Preserve wildlife - Go pickle a squirrel*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:
Or a big dish to concentrate and beam in moonlight. Really though I
agree with Christian on this, fwiw. Dimming instead of using lower
wattage bulbs is not a particularly smart option.

So you're going to install several different wattage lamps along side each
other to give near the flexibility of a dimmer? Come off it.

No need. In practice people only want 2 or 3 brightness levels, and
this is easily achieved by switching on different lights. These days we
usually have at least a few lights in each room rather than one, so its
usually simple to achieve. Bear in mind it only takes 2 bulbs to get 3
brightness levels.


I've got 8 lighting circuits in the living area all on dimmers. To do
anything near the same using switched lower wattage bulbs would
a) cost a fortune in hardware
b) look unattractive with all the extra switches and lights
c) not possible anyway

If you have 8 circuits all you need is a switch on each, and you have
an assortment of illumination levels.

The amount of energy my lighting consumes is peanuts compared to all the
rest I use, and I'd rather make savings elsewhere than compromise the
looks.

I have used dimmers in the past, and could never find any real
usefulness in them. Any nice lighting scheme has enough lighting
overlap that one can select various light levels without getting patchy
lighting. But I know they remain popular.


NT

In article . com,
wrote:
So you're going to install several different wattage lamps along side
each other to give near the flexibility of a dimmer? Come off it.

No need. In practice people only want 2 or 3 brightness levels, and
this is easily achieved by switching on different lights. These days we
usually have at least a few lights in each room rather than one, so its
usually simple to achieve. Bear in mind it only takes 2 bulbs to get 3
brightness levels.

Lighting to me is more than just about achieving 'levels' in a room.

--
*Never miss a good chance to shut up *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

The amount of energy my lighting consumes is peanuts compared to all the
rest I use,

If you have 8 dimmed lighting circuits just in your living area, I think you
might find that your lighting energy is far from peanuts. It could be well
over 50% of your electricity consumption. Unless you have electric heating,
most household electrics either use very little, or use large amounts for
very short periods.

Christian.

In article ,
Christian McArdle wrote:
The amount of energy my lighting consumes is peanuts compared to all
the rest I use,

If you have 8 dimmed lighting circuits just in your living area, I think
you might find that your lighting energy is far from peanuts.

It might be if they were on full all the time. But they tend to be
alternative lighting for different uses of the room.

It could be well over 50% of your electricity consumption. Unless you
have electric heating, most household electrics either use very little,
or use large amounts for very short periods.

No electric heating of any sort. Apart from a few lights...

--
*A plateau is a high form of flattery*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.