We're still mulling over ideas for the lighting in the refurbished
bathroom at our flat.

The basic plan is now fairly well defined, six downlighters in a false
ceiling which we will put up. The existing ceiling is quite high and
is concrete or similar so making holes in that for downlighters is out.

How much light should one need in a 2.5 metre by 1.5 metre bathroom
with virtually no outside light (it just has a narrow window onto a
stairwell)? I guess the choices are 6 x 20 watt, 6 x 35 watt or 6 x
50 watt.

We're thinking of using MDF for the ceiling rather than plasterboard
on the basis that it will be easier to work with and it might be more
practical to make one or two panels removable for access. Does this
sound like a good idea or not?

What's the minimum depth that downlighters need? I'm a bit worried
about the heat in the (small) void between the downlighters and the
real ceiling. I've no worries about the real ceiling being flammable
as it's cement or something similar but what about the MDF and the
battens used to hold it etc.?

Any comments on whether mains or low voltage downlighters would be
better? A couple of them need to be IPx4 and I can't find many
downlighters that quote the IP rating. In addition we'd like two
matching (or at least similar) eyeball (i.e. swivelling) downlighters
for above the washbasin.

--
Chris Green )

wrote:

We're still mulling over ideas for the lighting in the refurbished
bathroom at our flat.

The basic plan is now fairly well defined, six downlighters in a false
ceiling which we will put up. The existing ceiling is quite high and
is concrete or similar so making holes in that for downlighters is out.

How much light should one need in a 2.5 metre by 1.5 metre bathroom
with virtually no outside light (it just has a narrow window onto a
stairwell)? I guess the choices are 6 x 20 watt, 6 x 35 watt or 6 x
50 watt.

We're thinking of using MDF for the ceiling rather than plasterboard
on the basis that it will be easier to work with and it might be more
practical to make one or two panels removable for access. Does this
sound like a good idea or not?

What's the minimum depth that downlighters need? I'm a bit worried
about the heat in the (small) void between the downlighters and the
real ceiling. I've no worries about the real ceiling being flammable
as it's cement or something similar but what about the MDF and the
battens used to hold it etc.?

Any comments on whether mains or low voltage downlighters would be
better? A couple of them need to be IPx4 and I can't find many
downlighters that quote the IP rating. In addition we'd like two
matching (or at least similar) eyeball (i.e. swivelling) downlighters
for above the washbasin.



I'd go for 6x50W as the bulbs are a bit more robust.

300W spread over the area of the ceiling - 3.75 sq meters - is less than
100W/sq meter. That is about what my underfloor heating kicks out at
full crack. If you are worried, use plasterboard rather than MDF. That
will take a deal of heat. Or even Masterboard (multiboard) which is
'asbestos replacement' board

If you are worried about heat also, youi could run fat '50A' cable from
a remote toroidal to the lights rather than tuck transformers up in the
void. I'd avoid electronic transformers vbeacuse of the possibility of
damp,. and the blasted buzzing they produce.

Use the special bathroom fitments where spalshing is likely.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I'd go for 6x50W as the bulbs are a bit more robust.

But do we actually need that much light in a 2.5 x 1.5 metre bathroom?
Also I would have thought that low voltage 35 or 20 watt lamps would
be pretty robust.


300W spread over the area of the ceiling - 3.75 sq meters - is less than
100W/sq meter. That is about what my underfloor heating kicks out at
full crack. If you are worried, use plasterboard rather than MDF. That
will take a deal of heat. Or even Masterboard (multiboard) which is
'asbestos replacement' board

How easy is Masterboard (or Supalux) to work with? Is it similar to
ordinary plasterboard, better, worse or what?


If you are worried about heat also, youi could run fat '50A' cable from
a remote toroidal to the lights rather than tuck transformers up in the
void. I'd avoid electronic transformers vbeacuse of the possibility of
damp,. and the blasted buzzing they produce.

That's not really an option as there really is nowhere to put it.


Use the special bathroom fitments where spalshing is likely.

Er yes, but what I'm after is matching plain downlighters and
swivelling ones. I was hoping someone might be able to point me in
the direction of a manufacturer/supplier who has matching ones with
the required IP rating.

--
Chris Green )

In article ,
writes

How much light should one need in a 2.5 metre by 1.5 metre bathroom
with virtually no outside light (it just has a narrow window onto a
stairwell)? I guess the choices are 6 x 20 watt, 6 x 35 watt or 6 x
50 watt.

6?! Better budget on a pair of sunglasses then. We put 3 x 20w in our
2m x 2m bathroom and that is perfectly adequate.

By the way, as the lights are low voltage, fed using a proper (not
electronic) transformer, and the bulbs are sealed, I didn't worry about
IP4x ratings and stuck in "normal" eyeball fittings, including the one
above the shower. We originally wanted (mains) wall lights but I
couldn't find any IP rated ones in a design that I actually liked.

--
A. Top posters.
Q. What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Mike Tomlinson wrote:
In article ,
writes

How much light should one need in a 2.5 metre by 1.5 metre bathroom
with virtually no outside light (it just has a narrow window onto a
stairwell)? I guess the choices are 6 x 20 watt, 6 x 35 watt or 6 x
50 watt.

6?! Better budget on a pair of sunglasses then. We put 3 x 20w in our
2m x 2m bathroom and that is perfectly adequate.

OK, thanks, maybe 6 x 20 watts is the way to go then. Certainly my
mother-in-law's bathroom which is a similar size is very adequate with
six downlighters.


By the way, as the lights are low voltage, fed using a proper (not
electronic) transformer, and the bulbs are sealed, I didn't worry about
IP4x ratings and stuck in "normal" eyeball fittings, including the one
above the shower. We originally wanted (mains) wall lights but I
couldn't find any IP rated ones in a design that I actually liked.

I have wondered about this and whether IPx4 rating is required when
they are low voltage. I couldn't find any explicit information and,
as the flat *might* be let again one day I need to keep to the letter
of the (non-)law.

The other thing I'm finding difficult is that most downlighters seem
to need a minimum of at least 4" void above them with many needing 6".
Are there any that need less space behind them?

--
Chris Green )

wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I'd go for 6x50W as the bulbs are a bit more robust.


But do we actually need that much light in a 2.5 x 1.5 metre bathroom?
Also I would have thought that low voltage 35 or 20 watt lamps would
be pretty robust.



*shrug* I like teh 50W units. Nice and bright and tough. YMMV

I reckon that a square meter per 50W is about right.


About the right amount to heat a well insulated room as well :-)




300W spread over the area of the ceiling - 3.75 sq meters - is less than
100W/sq meter. That is about what my underfloor heating kicks out at
full crack. If you are worried, use plasterboard rather than MDF. That
will take a deal of heat. Or even Masterboard (multiboard) which is
'asbestos replacement' board


How easy is Masterboard (or Supalux) to work with? Is it similar to
ordinary plasterboard, better, worse or what?



Oh, its almost better - its a lot stronger than plasterboard - its
gyspum filled with I think chopped glass strand. Think 'asbestos roof'
and hats the sort of brittleness, tho its easier to cut with a padsaw etc.

Have to be a little carefil banging nails throough it - i'd drill and
screw as per MDF, then fill the heads and paint.



If you are worried about heat also, youi could run fat '50A' cable from
a remote toroidal to the lights rather than tuck transformers up in the
void. I'd avoid electronic transformers vbeacuse of the possibility of
damp,. and the blasted buzzing they produce.


That's not really an option as there really is nowhere to put it.



Use the special bathroom fitments where spalshing is likely.


Er yes, but what I'm after is matching plain downlighters and
swivelling ones. I was hoping someone might be able to point me in
the direction of a manufacturer/supplier who has matching ones with
the required IP rating.



They all look pretty much teh same - white,chrome or brass rim with or
without eyeball. Screwfix must do em. I got cheapos from newey and eyre
and they have been fine. I also used their individual toroids. Pretty
good BUT they need air round em or the overheat and cut out. However
they are hard to fit after the ceiling cos they are almost to wiode to
pop through the holes. If I has to do what you are doing I might well
add an access hole and use ne socking big transformer, and wire from
that. 300W toroids are not that huge. AND it sounds like you have space
above the new ceiling.

The Natural Philosopher wrote in message ...
wrote:

We're still mulling over ideas for the lighting in the refurbished
bathroom at our flat.

We're thinking of using MDF for the ceiling rather than plasterboard
on the basis that it will be easier to work with and it might be more
practical to make one or two panels removable for access. Does this
sound like a good idea or not?

fire


I'd go for 6x50W as the bulbs are a bit more robust.

300W spread over the area of the ceiling - 3.75 sq meters

lord no. Halogen bulbs are around 2x as efficient as 240v filament
bulbs: can you imagine 600w of filament bulbs in 4m2 of room? Using
downlighting does kill the efficiecy tho, if you have anything but
white/cream carpet, so 300w is probably a closer comparison. Still
well OTT, unless youre filming in there.


I wouldnt recommend these downlighters myself. They're in vogue at the
mo, but sooner or later will be uninstalled in large numbers due to
their downsides. Its only a matter of time.

In most cases I'd put spots on the wall and point them up at the
ceiling. Pick spots that you can put ordinary CFLs in. Better
lighting, much more energy efficient, no glare.


Regards, NT

N. Thornton wrote:

I wouldnt recommend these downlighters myself. They're in vogue at the
mo, but sooner or later will be uninstalled in large numbers due to
their downsides. Its only a matter of time.

Well the sample I've seen I quite like, though I don't in general like
downlighters I think they do work quite well in bathrooms.


In most cases I'd put spots on the wall and point them up at the
ceiling. Pick spots that you can put ordinary CFLs in. Better
lighting, much more energy efficient, no glare.

.... and very unsuitable for a bathroom surely.


--
Chris Green )

wrote:

N. Thornton wrote:

I wouldnt recommend these downlighters myself. They're in vogue at the
mo, but sooner or later will be uninstalled in large numbers due to
their downsides. Its only a matter of time.


Well the sample I've seen I quite like, though I don't in general like
downlighters I think they do work quite well in bathrooms.



In most cases I'd put spots on the wall and point them up at the
ceiling. Pick spots that you can put ordinary CFLs in. Better
lighting, much more energy efficient, no glare.


... and very unsuitable for a bathroom surely.




Nigel does seem to be quite *intense* in his opinions.
Unlike his lighting solutions.

Go with what you like. I found most of this stuff doesn't illuminate
wide areas well, hence use lots.

Fire risk taken care of by using plasterboard.