On Friday, November 18, 2016 at 11:09:53 AM UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Almost as if the LED had a 'strike' current.

`Strike` voltage, bit over 3V usually for white blue and true green LEDs, less than 2 for older colours.


--
*I wish the buck stopped here. I could use a few.

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

On Friday, November 18, 2016 at 2:00:13 PM UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Lee wrote:
On 17/11/2016 15:24, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Asking here in the hope someone has come across this and may have an
answer.

Car interior lights have an auto 'dimmer'. They do a graceful fade in
and fade out when switched on and off. On a Merc. Owner wanted some
slightly brighter lights so changed from tungsten to LED. The auto
system still does a graceful fade out - but sort of leaps to on,
rather than fading up. Later Mercs have got LED lighting which does
fade in and out OK - but it's not just a case of changing the module
which on the later cars is part of other things too.

On this model the module is stand alone, so would be possible to
modify it.


I wonder if the tungsten module is doing it by varying the voltage
whereas the LED one is PWM/current control?

That's a good guess, I'd say.

Should be easy to check and then maybe knock up a voltage controlled
PWM? I note there are a few old school 555 designs for that

Not seen any that do the fade in fade out when powered up and down, though.

As was said, it might be easier to use a microprocessor for this. Above my
pay grade, sadly.

PWM won`t quite make it to zero theres a slight step down to zero , but usually close enough, current control is usually smoother.

Arduino and output transistor, cheaper than building it in discretes

http://arduino.stackexchange.com/que...h-arduino-nano

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/like/262459320226



--
*I wished the buck stopped here, as I could use a few*

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

In article ,
Adam Aglionby wrote:
On Friday, November 18, 2016 at 11:09:53 AM UTC, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article ,
Almost as if the LED had a 'strike' current.

`Strike` voltage, bit over 3V usually for white blue and true green
LEDs, less than 2 for older colours.


Right - which would explain the 'jumping' on, but smooth fade out?

--
*I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing *

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

In article ,
Adam Aglionby wrote:
Should be easy to check and then maybe knock up a voltage controlled
PWM? I note there are a few old school 555 designs for that

Not seen any that do the fade in fade out when powered up and down,
though.

As was said, it might be easier to use a microprocessor for this.
Above my pay grade, sadly.

PWM won`t quite make it to zero theres a slight step down to zero , but
usually close enough, current control is usually smoother.

Arduino and output transistor, cheaper than building it in discretes

http://arduino.stackexchange.com/que...h-arduino-nano

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/like/262459320226

Thanks, Adam, I'll pass this on.

--
*Can atheists get insurance for acts of God? *

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

On Friday, 18 November 2016 00:31:41 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
Why don't you replace the traic ;-)

'cos car electrics are dc

Doubt our Dave knows the difference between a triac and SCR. ;-)

Then why did yuo tell me to replace the triac in my dimmer ?

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 18 November 2016 00:31:41 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
Why don't you replace the traic ;-)

'cos car electrics are dc

Doubt our Dave knows the difference between a triac and SCR. ;-)

Then why did yuo tell me to replace the triac in my dimmer ?

Thanks for confirming my worse fears.

--
*If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?

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

On Monday, 21 November 2016 15:03:17 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 18 November 2016 00:31:41 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
Why don't you replace the traic ;-)

'cos car electrics are dc

Doubt our Dave knows the difference between a triac and SCR. ;-)

Then why did yuo tell me to replace the triac in my dimmer ?

Thanks for confirming my worse fears.

That you haven't got a clue what you are talking about in that it's not the traic or the SCR where the problem lies it's how and when the triac or SCR is triggered changing either will NOT change the triggering of it.

And that is why you need to change to a trailing edge dimmer replacing a traic or SCR will have NO effect on triggering.
It's like replacing teh fuse to get rid of the problem of a short.
Do you put nails in fuseboxes to stop them blowing too ?

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 21 November 2016 15:03:17 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 18 November 2016 00:31:41 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
Why don't you replace the traic ;-)

'cos car electrics are dc

Doubt our Dave knows the difference between a triac and SCR. ;-)

Then why did yuo tell me to replace the triac in my dimmer ?

Thanks for confirming my worse fears.

That you haven't got a clue what you are talking about in that it's not
the traic or the SCR where the problem lies it's how and when the triac or
SCR is triggered changing either will NOT change the triggering of it.

And that is why you need to change to a trailing edge dimmer replacing a
traic or SCR will have NO effect on triggering.
It's like replacing teh fuse to get rid of the problem of a short.
Do you put nails in fuseboxes to stop them blowing too ?

I'm glad you've cleared that up for us.
Who'da thunk it.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 21 November 2016 15:03:17 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 18 November 2016 00:31:41 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
Why don't you replace the traic ;-)

'cos car electrics are dc

Doubt our Dave knows the difference between a triac and SCR. ;-)

Then why did yuo tell me to replace the triac in my dimmer ?

Thanks for confirming my worse fears.

That you haven't got a clue what you are talking about in that it's not
the traic or the SCR where the problem lies it's how and when the triac
or SCR is triggered changing either will NOT change the triggering of it.

So you've not Googled to find out what an SCR is?

And that is why you need to change to a trailing edge dimmer replacing a
traic or SCR will have NO effect on triggering. It's like replacing teh
fuse to get rid of the problem of a short. Do you put nails in fuseboxes
to stop them blowing too ?

I dunno, Dave. It's many many years since I had a fusebox. Or indeed some
el cheapo dimmer that wouldn't work with dimming LEDs. My 25 year old Home
Automation ones do.

--
*This message has been ROT-13 encrypted twice for extra security *

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

On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 12:22:32 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 21 November 2016 15:03:17 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 18 November 2016 00:31:41 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
Why don't you replace the traic ;-)

'cos car electrics are dc

Doubt our Dave knows the difference between a triac and SCR. ;-)

Then why did yuo tell me to replace the triac in my dimmer ?

Thanks for confirming my worse fears.

That you haven't got a clue what you are talking about in that it's not
the traic or the SCR where the problem lies it's how and when the triac
or SCR is triggered changing either will NOT change the triggering of it.

So you've not Googled to find out what an SCR is?

And that is why you need to change to a trailing edge dimmer replacing a
traic or SCR will have NO effect on triggering. It's like replacing teh
fuse to get rid of the problem of a short. Do you put nails in fuseboxes
to stop them blowing too ?

I dunno, Dave. It's many many years since I had a fusebox. Or indeed some
el cheapo dimmer that wouldn't work with dimming LEDs.

The vast majoroty don't work with dimmable LEDs.

My 25 year old Home
Automation ones do.

strange condiering you have claimed to replace the traics why replace them ?

On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 14:18:12 UTC, whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 12:22:32 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 21 November 2016 15:03:17 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 18 November 2016 00:31:41 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
Why don't you replace the traic ;-)

'cos car electrics are dc

Doubt our Dave knows the difference between a triac and SCR. ;-)

Then why did yuo tell me to replace the triac in my dimmer ?

Thanks for confirming my worse fears.

That you haven't got a clue what you are talking about in that it's not
the traic or the SCR where the problem lies it's how and when the triac
or SCR is triggered changing either will NOT change the triggering of it.

So you've not Googled to find out what an SCR is?

And that is why you need to change to a trailing edge dimmer replacing a
traic or SCR will have NO effect on triggering. It's like replacing teh
fuse to get rid of the problem of a short. Do you put nails in fuseboxes
to stop them blowing too ?

I dunno, Dave. It's many many years since I had a fusebox. Or indeed some
el cheapo dimmer that wouldn't work with dimming LEDs.

The vast majoroty don't work with dimmable LEDs.

My 25 year old Home
Automation ones do.

strange condiering you have claimed to replace the traics why replace them ?

Not many people keep taking the **** out of their own stupdity.

On 22/11/16 14:42, wrote:
their own stupdity

Their own WHAT? Oh, I see, it's an example of your own stupidity...

--
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
fully understood.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
I dunno, Dave. It's many many years since I had a fusebox. Or indeed some
el cheapo dimmer that wouldn't work with dimming LEDs.

The vast majoroty don't work with dimmable LEDs.

I haven't got 'the vast majority'. Have you?

My 25 year old Home
Automation ones do.

strange condiering you have claimed to replace the traics why replace
them ?

You've not learned a single thing from these posts, have you?

--
*Why isn't 11 pronounced onety one? *

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

On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 15:28:12 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
I dunno, Dave. It's many many years since I had a fusebox. Or indeed some
el cheapo dimmer that wouldn't work with dimming LEDs.

The vast majoroty don't work with dimmable LEDs.

I haven't got 'the vast majority'. Have you?

Yes I have .
I'm not using kit which is 1/4 of a century old.




My 25 year old Home
Automation ones do.

strange condiering you have claimed to replace the traics why replace
them ?

You've not learned a single thing from these posts, have you?

Not from you there is nothing but studidity from you.
Now explain again why you replaced your triacs ?

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 15:28:12 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
I dunno, Dave. It's many many years since I had a fusebox. Or
indeed some el cheapo dimmer that wouldn't work with dimming LEDs.

The vast majoroty don't work with dimmable LEDs.

I haven't got 'the vast majority'. Have you?

Yes I have .
I'm not using kit which is 1/4 of a century old.

Of course not. You keep on breaking things through your own stupidity.

My 25 year old Home
Automation ones do.

strange condiering you have claimed to replace the traics why replace
them ?

You've not learned a single thing from these posts, have you?

Not from you there is nothing but studidity from you.
Now explain again why you replaced your triacs ?

Explain again? Since you didn't understand the first time - with others
trying to explain it to you too - why would you understand now?

For someone who works in the education field not being able to learn at
all seems very odd.

--
He who laughs last, thinks slowest*

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

On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 16:28:34 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 15:28:12 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
I dunno, Dave. It's many many years since I had a fusebox. Or
indeed some el cheapo dimmer that wouldn't work with dimming LEDs.

The vast majoroty don't work with dimmable LEDs.

I haven't got 'the vast majority'. Have you?

Yes I have .
I'm not using kit which is 1/4 of a century old.

Of course not. You keep on breaking things through your own stupidity.

Where do you get that idea out of the usual place your arse.
I dimmer that I throw out in nearly 30 years.
How many triacs have yuo chanaged in that timne ?
What a waste of time.




My 25 year old Home
Automation ones do.

strange condiering you have claimed to replace the traics why replace
them ?

You've not learned a single thing from these posts, have you?

Not from you there is nothing but studidity from you.
Now explain again why you replaced your triacs ?

Explain again? Since you didn't understand the first time - with others
trying to explain it to you too - why would you understand now?

yuo claim that replacing triacs turns makes a dimmer go from a leading edge to a trailing edge dimmer.


For someone who works in the education field not being able to learn at
all seems very odd.

Some like you are just too thick to learn.
every site I've seen says pretty much teh same thing about dimmable LEDs'
why are yuo saying they are all wrong.

http://luxreview.com/article/2015/07...or-led-dimming

Which could be why I haven't had any lamp or bulb fail in the last 15 months or so.







--
He who laughs last, thinks slowest*

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

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Explain again? Since you didn't understand the first time - with others
trying to explain it to you too - why would you understand now?

yuo claim that replacing triacs turns makes a dimmer go from a leading
edge to a trailing edge dimmer.

Only in your rather warped mind.

For someone who works in the education field not being able to learn at
all seems very odd.

--
*I don't feel old. I don't feel anything until noon. Then it's time for my nap.

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Explain again? Since you didn't understand the first time - with others
trying to explain it to you too - why would you understand now?

yuo claim that replacing triacs turns makes a dimmer go from a leading
edge to a trailing edge dimmer.

Only in your rather warped mind.

For someone who works in the education field not being able to learn at
all seems very odd.

He's just taking the ****, Dave. He HAS to be, no way could he be THAT
thick.
Could he?

On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 17:57:54 UTC, bm wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:

Explain again? Since you didn't understand the first time - with others
trying to explain it to you too - why would you understand now?

yuo claim that replacing triacs turns makes a dimmer go from a leading
edge to a trailing edge dimmer.

Only in your rather warped mind.

For someone who works in the education field not being able to learn at
all seems very odd.

He's just taking the ****, Dave. He HAS to be, no way could he be THAT
thick.
Could he?

I hope not. But he is in education. And he keeps taking the **** out of his own stupidity re triacs.


NT

wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 17:57:54 UTC, bm wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:

Explain again? Since you didn't understand the first time - with
others
trying to explain it to you too - why would you understand now?

yuo claim that replacing triacs turns makes a dimmer go from a leading
edge to a trailing edge dimmer.

Only in your rather warped mind.

For someone who works in the education field not being able to learn
at
all seems very odd.

He's just taking the ****, Dave. He HAS to be, no way could he be THAT
thick.
Could he?

I hope not. But he is in education.

Not even that, can't bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag.

Most obviously currently with pet insensitive PIRs.

And he keeps taking the **** out of his own stupidity re triacs.

The overs with the plow**** are just the usual pub bull****.

On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 19:59:50 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 17:57:54 UTC, bm wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:

Explain again? Since you didn't understand the first time - with
others
trying to explain it to you too - why would you understand now?

yuo claim that replacing triacs turns makes a dimmer go from a leading
edge to a trailing edge dimmer.

Only in your rather warped mind.

For someone who works in the education field not being able to learn
at
all seems very odd.

He's just taking the ****, Dave. He HAS to be, no way could he be THAT
thick.
Could he?

I hope not. But he is in education.

Not even that, can't bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag.

Most obviously currently with pet insensitive PIRs.

what are pet insensative PIRs do ou really think a pets infra red foot print is that difernt from a humans well it not.
All these so called PIRs do is lower the sensativity, if you set it to ignore 40KG animals it wontl detect 40KG of a child either.
You're just fooled by adversising.

http://www.safewise.com/home-securit...tion-detectors
Features vary by manufacturer and model, but can include selectable sensitivity for pets up to 40 pounds or those weighing up to 80 pounds and can be set to disregard one large pet, like a full-grown dog or several small pets, like cats.

It's just a sensativity setting or you angle them above floor level.

You really need more than just a PIR.
http://www.dsc.com/index.php?n=products&o=view&id=1347

On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 4:57:54 PM UTC, whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 16:28:34 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 15:28:12 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
I dunno, Dave. It's many many years since I had a fusebox. Or
indeed some el cheapo dimmer that wouldn't work with dimming LEDs.

The vast majoroty don't work with dimmable LEDs.

I haven't got 'the vast majority'. Have you?

Yes I have .
I'm not using kit which is 1/4 of a century old.

Of course not. You keep on breaking things through your own stupidity.

Where do you get that idea out of the usual place your arse.
I dimmer that I throw out in nearly 30 years.
How many triacs have yuo chanaged in that timne ?
What a waste of time.




My 25 year old Home
Automation ones do.

strange condiering you have claimed to replace the traics why replace
them ?

You've not learned a single thing from these posts, have you?

Not from you there is nothing but studidity from you.
Now explain again why you replaced your triacs ?

Explain again? Since you didn't understand the first time - with others
trying to explain it to you too - why would you understand now?

yuo claim that replacing triacs turns makes a dimmer go from a leading edge to a trailing edge dimmer.


For someone who works in the education field not being able to learn at
all seems very odd.

Some like you are just too thick to learn.
every site I've seen says pretty much teh same thing about dimmable LEDs'
why are yuo saying they are all wrong.

http://luxreview.com/article/2015/07...or-led-dimming

Trailing Edge, AKA Reverse Phase Control, RFC is a technical backwater , a patch for retro fit to cover early driver limitations.

LEDs are best dimmed and driven at the driver.

From article quoted "...adjustable minimum brightness..." isn`t something that`s needed when LEDs can be dimmed to near zero directly at driver.

Dimming the power, whatever way, to the driver will always have aminimum setting below which cannae go.

If you want to retrofit rather than rewire , major brand dimmable LEDs will now make a reasonable job of dimming to a low level on any phase chopping dimmer.



Which could be why I haven't had any lamp or bulb fail in the last 15 months or so.






--
He who laughs last, thinks slowest*

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

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Most obviously currently with pet insensitive PIRs.

what are pet insensative PIRs do ou really think a pets infra red foot
print is that difernt from a humans well it not. All these so called
PIRs do is lower the sensativity, if you set it to ignore 40KG animals
it wontl detect 40KG of a child either. You're just fooled by
adversising.

It's not unusual to leave a pet at home alone. A small child, not. Or
rather not in the sort of families I'm used to. You may have a different
experience.

--
*Why is the time of day with the slowest traffic called rush hour?

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

In article ,
wrote:
If you want to retrofit rather than rewire , major brand dimmable LEDs
will now make a reasonable job of dimming to a low level on any phase
chopping dimmer.

Interesting. I'm a very late adopter of LEDs indoors since I want a decent
light quality and the ability to dim them. And was surprised when a recent
dimmable LED bought for not a lot at ASDA dimmed perfectly on a 25 year
old dimmer.

--
*When everything's coming your way, you're in the wrong lane *

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

On Wednesday, 23 November 2016 13:42:32 UTC, wrote:
On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 4:57:54 PM UTC, whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 16:28:34 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 15:28:12 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
I dunno, Dave. It's many many years since I had a fusebox. Or
indeed some el cheapo dimmer that wouldn't work with dimming LEDs.

The vast majoroty don't work with dimmable LEDs.

I haven't got 'the vast majority'. Have you?

Yes I have .
I'm not using kit which is 1/4 of a century old.

Of course not. You keep on breaking things through your own stupidity.

Where do you get that idea out of the usual place your arse.
I dimmer that I throw out in nearly 30 years.
How many triacs have yuo chanaged in that timne ?
What a waste of time.




My 25 year old Home
Automation ones do.

strange condiering you have claimed to replace the traics why replace
them ?

You've not learned a single thing from these posts, have you?

Not from you there is nothing but studidity from you.
Now explain again why you replaced your triacs ?

Explain again? Since you didn't understand the first time - with others
trying to explain it to you too - why would you understand now?

yuo claim that replacing triacs turns makes a dimmer go from a leading edge to a trailing edge dimmer.


For someone who works in the education field not being able to learn at
all seems very odd.

Some like you are just too thick to learn.
every site I've seen says pretty much teh same thing about dimmable LEDs'
why are yuo saying they are all wrong.

http://luxreview.com/article/2015/07...or-led-dimming

Trailing Edge, AKA Reverse Phase Control, RFC is a technical backwater , a patch for retro fit to cover early driver limitations.

LEDs are best dimmed and driven at the driver.

what do you mean by that ?



From article quoted "...adjustable minimum brightness..." isn`t something that`s needed when LEDs can be dimmed to near zero directly at driver.

Dimming the power,

very technical dimming the power how do you do that ?

On Wednesday, 23 November 2016 15:07:10 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Most obviously currently with pet insensitive PIRs.

what are pet insensative PIRs do ou really think a pets infra red foot
print is that difernt from a humans well it not. All these so called
PIRs do is lower the sensativity, if you set it to ignore 40KG animals
it wontl detect 40KG of a child either. You're just fooled by
adversising.

It's not unusual to leave a pet at home alone. A small child, not. Or
rather not in the sort of families I'm used to. You may have a different
experience.

Those that have animals of suchas a cat or dog make sure teh PIRs don;t cover the areas where the cat or dog will cross, or you can turn down the sensitivity
whiuch is where teh 40 or 80kg comes from the PIR still can;t tell if it's a cat dog or sprog, it'll just ignore something small.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_infrared_sensor

The term passive in this instance refers to the fact that PIR devices do not generate or radiate any energy for detection purposes. They work entirely by detecting the energy given off by other objects.[1] PIR sensors don't detect or measure "heat"; instead they detect the infrared radiation emitted or reflected from an object.



Product design

The PIR sensor is typically mounted on a printed circuit board containing the necessary electronics required to interpret the signals from the sensor itself. The complete assembly is usually contained within a housing, mounted in a location where the sensor can cover area to be monitored.
PIR motion sensor design

The housing will usually have a plastic "window" through which the infrared energy can enter. Despite often being only translucent to visible light, infrared energy is able to reach the sensor through the window because the plastic used is transparent to infrared radiation. The plastic window reduces the chance of foreign objects (dust, insects, etc.) from obscuring the sensor's field of view, damaging the mechanism, and/or causing false alarms. The window may be used as a filter, to limit the wavelengths to 8-14 micrometres, which is closest to the infrared radiation emitted by humans. It may also serve as a focusing mechanism.

SEE NOT the PIR which is a fixed sensor you use other me methods the PIR can't tell ahuman from a dog.

On Wednesday, 23 November 2016 15:07:11 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
If you want to retrofit rather than rewire , major brand dimmable LEDs
will now make a reasonable job of dimming to a low level on any phase
chopping dimmer.

Interesting. I'm a very late adopter of LEDs indoors since I want a decent
light quality and the ability to dim them.

I have had that ability for a number of years it;s only in teh last 15 months or so that the price has come down enough to make it tempting.
I've been dimming LEDs for years using PWM.



And was surprised when a recent
dimmable LED bought for not a lot at ASDA dimmed perfectly on a 25 year
old dimmer.

Really you said you didn't buy your electrical stuff from ASDA.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Trailing Edge, AKA Reverse Phase Control, RFC is a technical backwater , a patch for retro fit to cover early driver limitations.

LEDs are best dimmed and driven at the driver.

what do you mean by that ?

A dedicated LED driver, rather than having it incorporated in the bulb.

The same sort of idea as using an external power supply to run low voltage
halogen.

--
*Out of my mind. Back in five minutes.

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

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
And was surprised when a recent
dimmable LED bought for not a lot at ASDA dimmed perfectly on a 25 year
old dimmer.

Really you said you didn't buy your electrical stuff from ASDA.

No I didn't. You've invented it - again. Given the time you spend posting,
I'd expect you to check up on earlier posts.

I'll buy 'electrical stuff' from where I get the best value for what I
want - or in the case of a couple of low powered LEDs, where it happens to
be convenient.

--
*Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt.

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

On Wednesday, 23 November 2016 16:51:01 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Trailing Edge, AKA Reverse Phase Control, RFC is a technical backwater , a patch for retro fit to cover early driver limitations.

LEDs are best dimmed and driven at the driver.

what do you mean by that ?

A dedicated LED driver, rather than having it incorporated in the bulb.

Then where would it be incorporated if it;s not in the bulb or lamp itself.


The same sort of idea as using an external power supply to run low voltage
halogen.

Like that was a big succsess ratherthan a con for most.

On Thursday, 24 November 2016 00:44:46 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
And was surprised when a recent
dimmable LED bought for not a lot at ASDA dimmed perfectly on a 25 year
old dimmer.

Really you said you didn't buy your electrical stuff from ASDA.

No I didn't. You've invented it - again. Given the time you spend posting,
I'd expect you to check up on earlier posts.

I'll buy 'electrical stuff' from where I get the best value for what I
want - or in the case of a couple of low powered LEDs, where it happens to
be convenient.

ASDA then ?
Maybe this is why your bulbs were destroying your dimmers

On Wednesday, 23 November 2016 13:42:32 UTC, wrote:

Trailing Edge, AKA Reverse Phase Control, RFC is a technical backwater , a patch for retro fit to cover early driver limitations.

cheaper rather than early

LEDs are best dimmed and driven at the driver.

Usually they're best dimmed wherever it's cheapest

From article quoted "...adjustable minimum brightness..." isn`t something that`s needed when LEDs can be dimmed to near zero directly at driver.

Dimming the power, whatever way, to the driver will always have aminimum setting below which cannae go.

There are a few ways you can dim RC ballasted LEDs all the way to zero.

If you want to retrofit rather than rewire , major brand dimmable LEDs will now make a reasonable job of dimming to a low level on any phase chopping dimmer.


NT

On 24/11/16 13:01, wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 November 2016 13:42:32 UTC, wrote:

Trailing Edge, AKA Reverse Phase Control, RFC is a technical backwater , a patch for retro fit to cover early driver limitations.

cheaper rather than early

LEDs are best dimmed and driven at the driver.

Usually they're best dimmed wherever it's cheapest

From article quoted "...adjustable minimum brightness..." isn`t something that`s needed when LEDs can be dimmed to near zero directly at driver.

Dimming the power, whatever way, to the driver will always have aminimum setting below which cannae go.

There are a few ways you can dim RC ballasted LEDs all the way to zero.

Conceptually its simple: the current is the intensity of the light.

Its the non linear relationship between current and voltage that makes
dimmers that expect a resistive load, not perform linearly, if indeed
they perform at all.



--
"I guess a rattlesnake ain't risponsible fer bein' a rattlesnake, but ah
puts mah heel on um jess the same if'n I catches him around mah chillun".

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 November 2016 16:51:01 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Trailing Edge, AKA Reverse Phase Control, RFC is a technical
backwater , a patch for retro fit to cover early driver
limitations.

LEDs are best dimmed and driven at the driver.

what do you mean by that ?

A dedicated LED driver, rather than having it incorporated in the bulb.

Then where would it be incorporated if it;s not in the bulb or lamp
itself.


The same sort of idea as using an external power supply to run low
voltage halogen.

Like that was a big succsess ratherthan a con for most.

Low voltage halogen like MR16 not only are more efficient than the 240v
equivalant (GU10) but last longer too. As you'd have known if you'd ever
had them.

--
*Save the whale - I'll have it for my supper*

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

On Thursday, 24 November 2016 14:05:52 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 November 2016 16:51:01 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Trailing Edge, AKA Reverse Phase Control, RFC is a technical
backwater , a patch for retro fit to cover early driver
limitations.

LEDs are best dimmed and driven at the driver.

what do you mean by that ?

A dedicated LED driver, rather than having it incorporated in the bulb.

Then where would it be incorporated if it;s not in the bulb or lamp
itself.


The same sort of idea as using an external power supply to run low
voltage halogen.

Like that was a big succsess ratherthan a con for most.

Low voltage halogen like MR16 not only are more efficient than the 240v
equivalant (GU10) but last longer too. As you'd have known if you'd ever
had them.

I was never stupid enough to have them, which is why you rarely see them as most get them removed. On paper they are more efficinet but most mount them in ceiling as downlighters where they can;t be cooled properly so there lifetime seriously reduces. Which is anothe rreason you don;t see them much now.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Low voltage halogen like MR16 not only are more efficient than the
240v equivalant (GU10) but last longer too. As you'd have known if
you'd ever had them.

I was never stupid enough to have them, which is why you rarely see them
as most get them removed. On paper they are more efficinet but most
mount them in ceiling as downlighters where they can;t be cooled
properly so there lifetime seriously reduces. Which is anothe rreason
you don;t see them much now.

Explain how that is relevant between low voltage and mains halogen?

But thanks for confirming you've never look at them.

--
*I just got lost in thought. It was unfamiliar territory*

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

On Thursday, 24 November 2016 16:43:33 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Low voltage halogen like MR16 not only are more efficient than the
240v equivalant (GU10) but last longer too. As you'd have known if
you'd ever had them.

I was never stupid enough to have them, which is why you rarely see them
as most get them removed. On paper they are more efficinet but most
mount them in ceiling as downlighters where they can;t be cooled
properly so there lifetime seriously reduces. Which is anothe rreason
you don;t see them much now.

Explain how that is relevant between low voltage and mains halogen?

because LV halogen is being replaced because it;s not as good as people thought it was having to use transformers whch usually go placed where you couldn't get to them.



But thanks for confirming you've never look at them.

I;'m not still using a 25 year-old ASDA products

--
*I just got lost in thought. It was unfamiliar territory*

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

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Explain how that is relevant between low voltage and mains halogen?

because LV halogen is being replaced because it;s not as good as people
thought it was having to use transformers whch usually go placed where
you couldn't get to them.

As I said thanks for confirming you know nothing about them. Low volt
power supplies can fit through the hole for the light fitting - so easily
accessible if ever needed.

--
*Santa's helpers are subordinate clauses*

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

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 19:59:50 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 17:57:54 UTC, bm wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:

Explain again? Since you didn't understand the first time - with
others
trying to explain it to you too - why would you understand now?

yuo claim that replacing triacs turns makes a dimmer go from a
leading
edge to a trailing edge dimmer.

Only in your rather warped mind.

For someone who works in the education field not being able to
learn
at
all seems very odd.

He's just taking the ****, Dave. He HAS to be, no way could he be THAT
thick.
Could he?

I hope not. But he is in education.

Not even that, can't bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag.

Most obviously currently with pet insensitive PIRs.

what are pet insensative PIRs

Even you can't actually be that stupid.

do ou really think a pets infra red foot print
is that difernt from a humans well it not.

Must be when pet insensitive PIR work fine.

All these so called PIRs do is lower the sensativity,

Wrong, as always, most obviously with those
what dont look at stuff that is low on the floor.

if you set it to ignore 40KG animals
it wontl detect 40KG of a child either.

**** all have 40KG cats, ****wit.

You're just fooled by adversising.

Nope, got one that works fine thanks.

http://www.safewise.com/home-securit...tion-detectors
Features vary by manufacturer and model, but can include selectable
sensitivity
for pets up to 40 pounds or those weighing up to 80 pounds and can be set
to
disregard one large pet, like a full-grown dog or several small pets, like
cats.

It's just a sensativity setting or you angle them above floor level.

Wrong, as always, particularly with the hybrid PIR/dopplers.

And its completely trivial to go much further and use cameras
instead and when you have a fully integrated alarm and light
control system, you can even have it work out that its just the
cat that has come in thru the cat flap and that there is no need
to turn the room lights on for that etc.

Even a terminal ****wit such as yourself should be able work
out that a system that uses cameras can trivially work out what
is a human and what is a pet, if someone was actually stupid
enough to lend you a seeing eye dog and a white cane when
you weren't actually completely ****ing blotto, as always.

And even go much further and have it notify you that mice
etc have been observed while you were sleeping etc and
suggest you bait them etc.

You're just a pathetic excuse for a troll that has never
had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

On Friday, 25 November 2016 00:33:49 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 19:59:50 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 22 November 2016 17:57:54 UTC, bm wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:

Explain again? Since you didn't understand the first time - with
others
trying to explain it to you too - why would you understand now?

yuo claim that replacing triacs turns makes a dimmer go from a
leading
edge to a trailing edge dimmer.

Only in your rather warped mind.

For someone who works in the education field not being able to
learn
at
all seems very odd.

He's just taking the ****, Dave. He HAS to be, no way could he be THAT
thick.
Could he?

I hope not. But he is in education.

Not even that, can't bull**** its way out of a wet paper bag.

Most obviously currently with pet insensitive PIRs.

what are pet insensative PIRs

Even you can't actually be that stupid.

There aren't .

The IR emitted or reflected fromn a pet is pretty much the same type of IR emitted or reflected by a human.
IR is radation not a smell or vioce recgonition.


do ou really think a pets infra red foot print
is that difernt from a humans well it not.

Must be when pet insensitive PIR work fine.

They do work fine when used as insrtructed.
They have a lower sensitivity or are directed away from the ground where a pet is more likely to be.



All these so called PIRs do is lower the sensativity,

Wrong, as always, most obviously with those
what dont look at stuff that is low on the floor.

Why don't they look at stuff on the floor ?



if you set it to ignore 40KG animals
it wontl detect 40KG of a child either.

**** all have 40KG cats, ****wit.

So why have that setting at all then. ?

Why not have don;lt detect dogs don;t detect cats and or only detect humans settings.

You're just fooled by adversising.

Nope, got one that works fine thanks.

I prefer motion detection.


http://www.safewise.com/home-securit...tion-detectors
Features vary by manufacturer and model, but can include selectable
sensitivity
for pets up to 40 pounds or those weighing up to 80 pounds and can be set
to
disregard one large pet, like a full-grown dog or several small pets, like
cats.

It's just a sensativity setting or you angle them above floor level.

Wrong, as always, particularly with the hybrid PIR/dopplers.

then it's NOT the PIR then is it.
Why bother adding the expense of dopplers when PIR can do it all according to you?




And its completely trivial to go much further and use cameras
instead and when you have a fully integrated alarm and light
control system, you can even have it work out that its just the
cat that has come in thru the cat flap and that there is no need
to turn the room lights on for that etc.

Yep I know.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUBgEZ5fteU&t=12s

When another cat came to the flap it set an alarm on my computer that said intruder or red alert (from star trek) as my cat was in the frontroom it got used to teh warning and ran to the cat flap whenever it heard intruder alert.


Even a terminal ****wit such as yourself should be able work
out that a system that uses cameras can trivially work out what
is a human and what is a pet,

Yes but that does NOT use PIR, idiot.




And even go much further and have it notify you that mice
etc have been observed while you were sleeping etc and
suggest you bait them etc.

I go mine to trigger when a snail crossed a step.
I aslo go a few off flying things triggering the alarm.
I could adjust the sensitivity so it wouldn;t trigger from snails or rain.
But I wasnlt using a PIR for that stupid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O32lQ_FGwdQ

I also use pre-triggering.


You're just a pathetic excuse for a troll that has never
had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

Go find the rear of a sheep to take your frustrations out on.