I guess it makes economic sense to do so now that the tube has blown.

I have partially dismantled the existing fitting.

Do these things have standard mounting holes so that a new batten
fitting would slot into place?

The old one probably dates back a few decades.

Also, why on earth are there no less than four twin-core and
earth cables coming out of the ceiling?

(All the cores are wired together in terminal blocks wrapped
in tape. Looks like a bit of a bodge job).

On 01/12/2017 10:20, Fevric J. Glandules wrote:

I guess it makes economic sense to do so now that the tube has blown.

I have partially dismantled the existing fitting.

Do these things have standard mounting holes so that a new batten
fitting would slot into place?

Usually. Some are designed as straight drop in replacements. Others will
require some wiring changes to the fitting to take the old magnetic
ballast out of circuit. Follow the instructions with your lamp carefully.

The old one probably dates back a few decades.

Also, why on earth are there no less than four twin-core and
earth cables coming out of the ceiling?

You would normally expect at least 3, however it may be you have a
branch in the circuit at that point, with a feed to an additional lamp
being taken from the position.

See here for an illustration:

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php/...Loop-in_Wiring

(you may have more than one "Supply cable to next light fitting")

(All the cores are wired together in terminal blocks wrapped
in tape. Looks like a bit of a bodge job).




--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

John Rumm wrote:

On 01/12/2017 10:20, Fevric J. Glandules wrote:

I guess it makes economic sense to do so now that the tube has blown.

I have partially dismantled the existing fitting.

Do these things have standard mounting holes so that a new batten
fitting would slot into place?

Usually. Some are designed as straight drop in replacements. Others will
require some wiring changes to the fitting to take the old magnetic
ballast out of circuit. Follow the instructions with your lamp carefully.

I'm planning to replace the *fitting*...

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php/...Loop-in_Wiring

(you may have more than one "Supply cable to next light fitting")

Thanks. There's no other light fittings on the same switch *now* but
there may have been in the dim & distant.

On 01/12/2017 13:01, Fevric J. Glandules wrote:
John Rumm wrote:

On 01/12/2017 10:20, Fevric J. Glandules wrote:

I guess it makes economic sense to do so now that the tube has blown.

I have partially dismantled the existing fitting.

Do these things have standard mounting holes so that a new batten
fitting would slot into place?

Usually. Some are designed as straight drop in replacements. Others will
require some wiring changes to the fitting to take the old magnetic
ballast out of circuit. Follow the instructions with your lamp carefully.

I'm planning to replace the *fitting*...

ah, ok misread that. That should be easy enough, but the screw holes etc
are less likely to match!

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php/...Loop-in_Wiring

(you may have more than one "Supply cable to next light fitting")

Thanks. There's no other light fittings on the same switch *now* but
there may have been in the dim & distant.

The cable out is not necessarily to an additional lamp on the same
switch (although that is a possibility), but is usually the power feed
to the next lamp - which will probably be in a different room. (i.e. the
circuit starts at the consumer unit and runs to the first lamp, then
daisy chains to the next one in the next room. The last lamp fitting on
the circuit will not have a feed out - so there would usually just be
two cables on that - power in and a drop to the switch).

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

John Rumm wrote:

The cable out is not necessarily to an additional lamp on the same
switch (although that is a possibility), but is usually the power feed
to the next lamp - which will probably be in a different room. (i.e. the

Ah, gotcha, although in this case I'd expect it to go on to the other
light fitting in the kitchen - no sign of a branch, but there may
have been one originally. But four is only one more than "normal"
so I can rest easy.

On Fri, 1 Dec 2017 10:20:03 -0000 (UTC), "Fevric J. Glandules"
wrote:

I guess it makes economic sense to do so now that the tube has blown.

I have partially dismantled the existing fitting.

Do these things have standard mounting holes so that a new batten
fitting would slot into place?


There's no guarantee that a new fitting will use the same mounting
holes as the existing. I think that's what you mean.
If you just replace the tube you will have to remove the starter
(Little thing that sticks out at the side. Just twist it to remove.)
from the fitting. Some LED tubes require a dummy starter but that
should be supplied if required.

In article ,
Fevric J. Glandules wrote:
I guess it makes economic sense to do so now that the tube has blown.

But does it? Fluorescents are vastly more efficient than tungsten. And
have a longer life too. So any savings in running costs not the same sort
of percentage. You'd need to do careful sums, given LEDs cost more.

--
*Never slap a man who's chewing tobacco *

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

What was there before? Maybe it was some form of multiple light fitting.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Fevric J. Glandules" wrote in message
news
I guess it makes economic sense to do so now that the tube has blown.

I have partially dismantled the existing fitting.

Do these things have standard mounting holes so that a new batten
fitting would slot into place?

The old one probably dates back a few decades.

Also, why on earth are there no less than four twin-core and
earth cables coming out of the ceiling?

(All the cores are wired together in terminal blocks wrapped
in tape. Looks like a bit of a bodge job).

I have two Thorne fittings here one double one single unit and was
wondering the same. Both have now started to buzz, one assumes from the
ballast choke. Not having had experience of replacing with led, does one
just take the capacitor, choke and starter out and wire up one pin or
both to the mains input or what? I'd be loathe to remove the fittings as the
next thing will be the ceiling will need to be redone with paint!

Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Fevric J. Glandules wrote:
I guess it makes economic sense to do so now that the tube has blown.

But does it? Fluorescents are vastly more efficient than tungsten. And
have a longer life too. So any savings in running costs not the same sort
of percentage. You'd need to do careful sums, given LEDs cost more.

--
*Never slap a man who's chewing tobacco *

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

On Friday, 1 December 2017 17:15:00 UTC, Brian Gaff wrote:
I have two Thorne fittings here one double one single unit and was
wondering the same. Both have now started to buzz, one assumes from the
ballast choke. Not having had experience of replacing with led, does one
just take the capacitor, choke and starter out and wire up one pin or
both to the mains input or what? I'd be loathe to remove the fittings as the
next thing will be the ceiling will need to be redone with paint!

Brian

Sometimes buzz is caused by a bad tube partly rectifying the power. If the cause is the ballast, take hammer & nail to the edges of the ballast laminations, or varnish it. In the unlikely event those fail, mount the ballast on rubber washers.


NT

Fevric J. Glandules wrote

I guess it makes economic sense to do so now that the tube has blown.

I have partially dismantled the existing fitting.

You can get led tubes that replace just the old fluoro tube.

Do these things have standard mounting holes so
that a new batten fitting would slot into place?

Nope, that would be too sensible.

The old one probably dates back a few decades.

Also, why on earth are there no less than four twin-core
and earth cables coming out of the ceiling?

Someone wants easy access to the terminal blocks in future.

(All the cores are wired together in terminal blocks
wrapped in tape. Looks like a bit of a bodge job).

Its actually the reverse, regardless of how it looks.

Fevric J. Glandules wrote:
John Rumm wrote:
The cable out is not necessarily to an additional lamp on the same
switch (although that is a possibility), but is usually the power feed
to the next lamp - which will probably be in a different room. (i.e. the

Ah, gotcha, although in this case I'd expect it to go on to the other
light fitting in the kitchen - no sign of a branch, but there may
have been one originally. But four is only one more than "normal"
so I can rest easy.

It doesn't *have* to daisy-chain, lighting circuits are radial circuits
so branching is perfectly valid. In that case, one cable will be the
switch drop, one will carry unswitched power from the previous light or
the consumer unit, and the other two will carry unswitched power to two
other light fittings - either or both of which may have more fittings
beyond them.

Mike

On Fri, 01 Dec 2017 15:08:42 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

I guess it makes economic sense to do so now that the tube has
blown.

But does it? Fluorescents are vastly more efficient than tungsten. And
have a longer life too. So any savings in running costs not the same
sort of percentage. You'd need to do careful sums, given LEDs cost more.

That depends, Aldi were flogging off 5' 20 W 2000 lm LED "tubes" for
£4.99... Roughly half the lumens of a 5' 58 W florry but as our eyes
are log not lin the reduced level isn't really noticeable. Put it
this way there has been no adverse comment from SWMBO'd, mind you I'm
not sure she has noticed the instant start rather than the several
second preheat of the traditional florry.

These LED tubes are direct replacement for a florry tube and are
supplied with a dummy starter. I suspect that leaving a standard
starter in would kill the tube when it tries to strike it...

Not actually sure why they need a dummy starter. Is it just to get
power to one end of the tube for the LED driver?

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 03/12/2017 00:53, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Fri, 01 Dec 2017 15:08:42 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

I guess it makes economic sense to do so now that the tube has
blown.

But does it? Fluorescents are vastly more efficient than tungsten. And
have a longer life too. So any savings in running costs not the same
sort of percentage. You'd need to do careful sums, given LEDs cost more.

That depends, Aldi were flogging off 5' 20 W 2000 lm LED "tubes" for
£4.99... Roughly half the lumens of a 5' 58 W florry but as our eyes
are log not lin the reduced level isn't really noticeable. Put it
this way there has been no adverse comment from SWMBO'd, mind you I'm
not sure she has noticed the instant start rather than the several
second preheat of the traditional florry.

These LED tubes are direct replacement for a florry tube and are
supplied with a dummy starter. I suspect that leaving a standard
starter in would kill the tube when it tries to strike it...

Not actually sure why they need a dummy starter. Is it just to get
power to one end of the tube for the LED driver?


Well half the lumens are not going upwards and getting wasted!

The dummy starter is to get L&N at one end, well actually either end, so
that the LED tube can be fitted either way around and still work (one
end of the LED tube is a short).

Leaving in the original starter will not kill the LED.

--
Adam

ill work
(one end of the LED tube is a short).

Leaving in the original starter will not kill the LED.


Surely a good DIY person would want to remove redundent chokes. ballasts
and capacitors and make the wiring suitable for purpose. All this Dummy
Starter seems a bodge to me.

In article
l.net,
says...


Put it
this way there has been no adverse comment from SWMBO'd, mind you I'm
not sure she has noticed the instant start rather than the several
second preheat of the traditional florry.


In our old house I fitted electronic starters 20 odd years
ago. Virtually instant start with no noticeable delay and no
failures!

Damn! Should have rescued them before we moved! On the other
hand, if I replace them with LEDs when the current tubes
die, I won't need them, will I?


--

Terry

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

"DerbyBorn" wrote in message
2.222...
ill work
(one end of the LED tube is a short).

Leaving in the original starter will not kill the LED.


Surely a good DIY person would want to remove redundent chokes.
ballasts and capacitors and make the wiring suitable for purpose.

All this Dummy Starter seems a bodge to me.

But is a lot easier for those that buy them in the
shop and just plug them in to the existing batten.

And a lot safer when someone else replaces the led
tube with a traditional fluoro tube when the led tube
fails and they know so little about what they are
doing that they don’t even realise it’s a led tube.

In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
Put it
this way there has been no adverse comment from SWMBO'd, mind you I'm
not sure she has noticed the instant start rather than the several
second preheat of the traditional florry.

A decent electronic ballast starts a florry pretty well as quickly as a
main LED.

--
*Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm *

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

On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 18:50:51 -0000, Terry Casey wrote:

Put it this way there has been no adverse comment from SWMBO'd,
mind
you I'm not sure she has noticed the instant start rather than the

several second preheat of the traditional florry.

In our old house I fitted electronic starters 20 odd years
ago. Virtually instant start with no noticeable delay and no
failures!

Electronic starter or electronic ballast? Our florries have lumps of
iron ballasts but electronic starters, they have a good second or two
preheat before striking, first time, everytime. Electronic ballast
for the fish tank lights also delays before striking. I was under the
impression that striking a florry before the filaments were hot
wasn't a Good Idea, mind you they probably get hot enough within 1/2
a second.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 03/12/2017 11:11, DerbyBorn wrote:
ill work
(one end of the LED tube is a short).

Leaving in the original starter will not kill the LED.


Surely a good DIY person would want to remove redundent chokes. ballasts
and capacitors and make the wiring suitable for purpose. All this Dummy
Starter seems a bodge to me.

Indeed.

As the most common LED tube sold in the UK is shorted at one end and has
the driver at the other end then it makes sense to wire the fitting to
suit that and make sure that the lamp will work either way around
without causing the MCB to go bang.

--
Adam

On 04/12/2017 00:36, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
Put it
this way there has been no adverse comment from SWMBO'd, mind you I'm
not sure she has noticed the instant start rather than the several
second preheat of the traditional florry.

A decent electronic ballast starts a florry pretty well as quickly as a
main LED.

And still wastes half the tubes output onto the light fitting.

--
Adam

In article ,
ARW wrote:
On 04/12/2017 00:36, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
Put it
this way there has been no adverse comment from SWMBO'd, mind you I'm
not sure she has noticed the instant start rather than the several
second preheat of the traditional florry.

A decent electronic ballast starts a florry pretty well as quickly as a
main LED.

And still wastes half the tubes output onto the light fitting.

only if the back is painted matt black. In the case of the one I have in my
kitchen the back is white and reflects the light into the room.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

In article ,
ARW wrote:
On 04/12/2017 00:36, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
Put it
this way there has been no adverse comment from SWMBO'd, mind you I'm
not sure she has noticed the instant start rather than the several
second preheat of the traditional florry.

A decent electronic ballast starts a florry pretty well as quickly as a
main LED.

And still wastes half the tubes output onto the light fitting.

No reflectors in your neck of the woods? Ceilings all painted matt black?

--
*All generalizations are false.

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

On 05/12/2017 00:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ARW wrote:
On 04/12/2017 00:36, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
Put it
this way there has been no adverse comment from SWMBO'd, mind you I'm
not sure she has noticed the instant start rather than the several
second preheat of the traditional florry.

A decent electronic ballast starts a florry pretty well as quickly as a
main LED.

And still wastes half the tubes output onto the light fitting.

No reflectors in your neck of the woods? Ceilings all painted matt black?

To reflect the light back into the tube?

Ceilings painted black - I once did make a post several years ago about
that!

Longer life and little reduction in lumens output after a couple of
years? LED wins every time.

--
Adam

DerbyBorn Wrote in message:
ill work
(one end of the LED tube is a short).

Leaving in the original starter will not kill the LED.


Surely a good DIY person would want to remove redundent chokes. ballasts
and capacitors and make the wiring suitable for purpose. All this Dummy
Starter seems a bodge to me.


I just bought an entire new LED fitting at Toolstation :-)
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 18:19:25 +0000, ARW
wrote:

snip

Longer life and little reduction in lumens output after a couple of
years? LED wins every time.


I have 4 x 6' flouro singles in my workshop and apart from being a
little slow to warm up in this cold weather, do seem to give off a lot
of light (in all directions. I have stuff in the roof above them so
some up lighting isn't such a bad thing). ;-)

So, can you actually get 'replacement' LED 6' tubes that 'are' as
bright as the traditional flouro? (Phillips daylight 70W from memory).

I ask because a mate replaced 4 in his shop (with LED) and the
definitely aren't as bright as the flouros (quite noticeably).

However, he doesn't get migraines any more so is worth it for him. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

jim k wrote in o.uk:

DerbyBorn Wrote in message:
ill work
(one end of the LED tube is a short).

Leaving in the original starter will not kill the LED.


Surely a good DIY person would want to remove redundent chokes.
ballasts and capacitors and make the wiring suitable for purpose. All
this Dummy Starter seems a bodge to me.


I just bought an entire new LED fitting at Toolstation :-)

Good way to go - who needs to have old chokes and stuff in the ceiling!

In article ,
ARW wrote:
Longer life and little reduction in lumens output after a couple of
years? LED wins every time.

LED tubes ain't been around long enough to know how long they'll last.
Hours running continuously in a lab isn't the same as domestic use.

--
*Just give me chocolate and nobody gets hurt

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

On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 18:19:25 +0000
ARW wrote:

On 05/12/2017 00:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

No reflectors in your neck of the woods? Ceilings all painted matt
black?
To reflect the light back into the tube?

Only the very top of the tube is emitting light that will be obstructed
by the tube on reflection. Obviously reflection is not 100%, and is
diffuse, but you're not losing half the light.

In article 20171206055323.7dbaf3ab@Mars,
Rob Morley wrote:
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 18:19:25 +0000
ARW wrote:

On 05/12/2017 00:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

No reflectors in your neck of the woods? Ceilings all painted matt
black?
To reflect the light back into the tube?

Only the very top of the tube is emitting light that will be obstructed
by the tube on reflection. Obviously reflection is not 100%, and is
diffuse, but you're not losing half the light.

Of course not. Ever seen an LED car headlamp without a reflector?

--
*Never kick a cow pat on a hot day *

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

On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 09:33:50 +0000, Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 18:50:51 -0000, Terry Casey wrote:

Put it this way there has been no adverse comment from SWMBO'd,
mind
you I'm not sure she has noticed the instant start rather than the

several second preheat of the traditional florry.

In our old house I fitted electronic starters 20 odd years ago.
Virtually instant start with no noticeable delay and no failures!

Electronic starter or electronic ballast? Our florries have lumps of
iron ballasts but electronic starters, they have a good second or two
preheat before striking, first time, everytime. Electronic ballast for
the fish tank lights also delays before striking. I was under the
impression that striking a florry before the filaments were hot wasn't a
Good Idea, mind you they probably get hot enough within 1/2 a second.

The half century old "Quickstart"(tm) transformers certainly managed to
start up in something like 250 to 330ms (about as quick as the four
12v35W halogen downlighters in the shower room, each fed from their own
individual "electronic" transformer) and the tubes would last many years
in the kitchen fitting.

Unfortunately, the days are numbered for the one remaining 40W 4 foot
"Quickstart"(tm) fitting in the basement (and the other 7or 8 spares in
the attic) since *suitable* T12 tubes have become as rare as rocking
horse ****. In any case, whilst producing plenty of light, their 51 watts
of total energy consumption versus the 36 watts of a modern
electronically ballasted T8 tube is incentive enough to "upgrade" from a
"Quickstart"(tm) ballasted fitting.

The "cheap" B&Q electronically ballasted 4 ft slimline fitting we bought
two or three years ago to replace the "Quickstart"tm) kitchen fitting
instantly started the T8 tubes but the Chinese ballast housed inside of a
rectangular plastic tubing proved a bit rough on tube life (the first,
supplied, tube expiring in less than a year with a quality tube lasting
little more than 12 months). The last tube, after turning it end over end
in the fitting to get a few more hours of life, eventually caused the
ballast to literally go "Phut", necessitating a replacement ballast *and*
tube to effect a repair.

I managed to locate a Helvar ballast on Amazon for less than a fiver
delivered. This was about the same physical size but in heat dissipative
metal and didn't route the pvc insulated tube connection wiring
internally against the heatsink tabs of the power transistors like the
Chinese ballast had done (the most likely cause of the failure as the
insulation had melted, shorting the conductor to the power transistor
heatsink tab).

Also, the Helvar unit had published specifications on max ambient
temperature and hour lifetime ratings and (missing from the Chinese unit)
microprocessor control which stopped it trying to run both failed tubes
(hence the purchase of a replacement tube I had hoped might not have been
necessary).

The Helvar unit doesn't attempt instant start, taking a good 900 to
1000ms of pre-heating to strike the tube from switch on (the Chinese
ballast took about 300ms of flickery (25 to 50Hz) ignition attempts
before lighting up to full luminance unlike the "Quickstart"(tm)
transformer which applied some 250 to 300ms of preheat before springing
into full luminance sans flicker).

I do miss the startup characteristics of a "Quickstart"(tm) ballasted
fitting which doesn't compromise tube life. The full one second's worth
of pre-heat used by the "modern" electronic ballast strikes me as being
needlessly protective of tube life imo (and, therefore, an irritating
reminder of just what has been lost to the Gods of efficiency and
microprocessor technology "advances").

I did briefly consider the expensive "LED Tube" fitting option until I
saw just how low their lumens output was and how directed it would have
been onto the kitchen floor and away from the ceiling and worktops.
Unless a LED based lighting manufacturer considers the need to use the
full 360 of the tube's circumference as a light emission surface for
domestic kitchen lighting duty at better than 100 LPW, I'll be using a
fluorescent tube based kitchen lighting solution for the foreseeable
future.

--
Johnny B Good

On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 11:15:36 +0000 (GMT)
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article 20171206055323.7dbaf3ab@Mars,
Rob Morley wrote:

Obviously reflection is not
100%, and is diffuse, but you're not losing half the light.

Of course not. Ever seen an LED car headlamp without a reflector?

Eh?

On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 19:52:23 GMT, Johnny B Good wrote:

I did briefly consider the expensive "LED Tube" fitting option until I
saw just how low their lumens output was and how directed it would have
been onto the kitchen floor and away from the ceiling and worktops.

Well both the Aldi and branded Philips replacement tubes I have are
only marginally less omnidirectional than a standard tube.

at better than 100 LPW,

I don't buy LED unless it is = 100 l/W. OK the Aldi tubes are (on
paper) 91 l/W close enough and better than most LEDs out there.

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 19:52:23 GMT, Johnny B Good wrote:

I did briefly consider the expensive "LED Tube" fitting option until I
saw just how low their lumens output was and how directed it would have
been onto the kitchen floor and away from the ceiling and worktops.

Well both the Aldi and branded Philips replacement tubes I have are
only marginally less omnidirectional than a standard tube.

at better than 100 LPW,

I don't buy LED unless it is = 100 l/W. OK the Aldi tubes are (on
paper) 91 l/W close enough and better than most LEDs out there.

I have colour matching north light tubes in the workshop. Is there a LED
equivalent?

--
*If all the world is a stage, where is the audience sitting?

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

"Huge" wrote in message
...
Have you gone mostly LED at home? (Honest question, not looking for
an argument.)

FWIW, I have. And I've mostly been replacing CFLs with LED. IIRC, we have
virtually no CFLs, about 90% LED and a few GLS.

We've got daylight CFLs (mostly 25W or 30W, equivalent to about 150W or 175W
tungsten) in wax-paper lampshades on pendant fittings in several of the
bedrooms to provide general room lighting; likewise for the hall and landing
lights. I find for single-fitting ceiling lights, CFL provide a much
brighter light. For rooms where multi-bulb fittings are available, a group
of LEDs provides enough light.

My bedside light and my wife's (*) bedside and pendant ceiling lights are
coloured Philips Hue, as are some of the GU10 mini-spotlights in the kitchen
and bathroom, with white versions (2800-6500 K) in the remaining GU10
fittings in those rooms. We also have an LED strip light (a flexible clear
strip with LEDs embedded all along its length) under the wall cupboards to
illuminate the worktops.

These are supplemented by a dimmable tungsten photoflood uplighter in the
dining table part of the living room, and by a conventional 3x
tungsten-candle-bulb ceiling fitting in the centre of the living room; the
latter has a mixture of 60W conventional tungsten and 40W halogen tungsten
bulbs (the 60W are replaced by 40W halogen as they fail).

We've got the Philips Hue bulbs controlled by a Hue hub from an Android app
and an Amazon Alexa voice control; this also controls a switchable 3-pin
plug for the photoflood uplighter so we can ask Alexa to turn on
"downstairs" (living room uplighter, kitchen 5x GU10 fitting and kitchen
worktop LED strip) or "living room" (just the switchable plug for the
uplighter).

My wife has a dimmable LED-array desk light in her study and I have an
ancient U-shaped fluorescent tube (warm white) desk lamp in my study - the
sort of tube that has a flash-flash-on bimetallic starter in the fluorescent
tube base.

The LEDs on "concentrate" setting and the CFLs appear to the human eye to be
fairly close to cloudy daylight, though to a digital camera on fixed white
balance setting rather than auto-white-balance, the LEDs appear fairly warm
compared with the CFLs which the camera sees as white when on its
cloudy-daylight setting; the LEDs appear white on the camera's
warm-white-fluorescent setting if they are on "concentrate" or else as white
on the camera's tungsten bulb setting if they are on the "reading" setting
which looks slightly warmer (though still less orange than a tungsten bulb)
to the human eye. In other words, a camera sees the LEDs as warmer than the
human eye when compared to daylight or to tungsten bulbs. The auto-white
setting on the camera seems to sort it all out very well: the days of any
fluorescent light reproducing as sickly green went out with the demise of
slide film.

I did some comparison photos of a makeshift colour chart, with the camera
white-balanced under various lights, and the results are fairly consistent
apart from a slight dulling of reds under LED and, to a lesser extent, CFL:

https://s33.postimg.org/6f2cuf5fz/daylight.jpg - illuminated by daylight in
the shade (ie not direct sunlight)
https://s33.postimg.org/7hcjcyvz3/daylight_CFL.jpg - illuminated by
"daylight" CFL
https://s33.postimg.org/500s5own3/Led.jpg - illuminated by "cool white" GU10
LED
https://s33.postimg.org/hreyc7tkf/white_fluor.jpg - illuminated by "white"
4-foot fluorescent tubes

(in all of the above, I white-balanced the camera from a sheet of A4 printer
paper illuminated by the relevant light source)

https://s33.postimg.org/4n9dzi6nj/wh...aylight_WB.jpg - same
fluorescent tubes, with camera on "cloudy" daylight setting, showing that it
is fairly warm compared with daylight

The red plastic box of screws (left of the face in the photos) was a fairly
vibrant red which is a bit dull in the artificial light. The blue box of
drills was dark royal blue. As expected, both of these have reproduced most
faithfully in shady daylight


(*) I snore, so we tend to sleep in separate rooms - mostly :-)

On 07/12/2017 10:59, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article l.net,
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 19:52:23 GMT, Johnny B Good wrote:

I did briefly consider the expensive "LED Tube" fitting option until I
saw just how low their lumens output was and how directed it would have
been onto the kitchen floor and away from the ceiling and worktops.

Well both the Aldi and branded Philips replacement tubes I have are
only marginally less omnidirectional than a standard tube.

at better than 100 LPW,

I don't buy LED unless it is = 100 l/W. OK the Aldi tubes are (on
paper) 91 l/W close enough and better than most LEDs out there.

I have colour matching north light tubes in the workshop. Is there a LED
equivalent?

Do you know the actual colour temperature of the tubes?


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 15:36:22 +0000, John Rumm wrote:

Well both the Aldi and branded Philips replacement tubes I have
are
only marginally less omnidirectional than a standard tube.

at better than 100 LPW,

I don't buy LED unless it is = 100 l/W. OK the Aldi tubes are
(on
paper) 91 l/W close enough and better than most LEDs out there.

I have colour matching north light tubes in the workshop. Is there
a
LED equivalent?

Do you know the actual colour temperature of the tubes?

Dave might be using the term "north light" as derived from TV
lighting as he combines it with "colour matching". So it's not just
colour temperature that is importnat, the spectrum is as well. Now
where is the toy spectroscope? I've not looked at what these LED
tubes are like.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 07/12/2017 16:35, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 15:36:22 +0000, John Rumm wrote:

Well both the Aldi and branded Philips replacement tubes I have
are
only marginally less omnidirectional than a standard tube.

at better than 100 LPW,

I don't buy LED unless it is = 100 l/W. OK the Aldi tubes are
(on
paper) 91 l/W close enough and better than most LEDs out there.

I have colour matching north light tubes in the workshop. Is there
a
LED equivalent?

Do you know the actual colour temperature of the tubes?

Dave might be using the term "north light" as derived from TV
lighting as he combines it with "colour matching". So it's not just
colour temperature that is importnat, the spectrum is as well. Now
where is the toy spectroscope? I've not looked at what these LED
tubes are like.

There are some tubes advertised as North Light, e.g.:

https://www.bltdirect.com/fluorescen...tt-2ft-600mm-1

That claims to be "daylight" colour and 6500K (so presumably a CRI of 80%)

The Daylight version of:

https://trade.ledhut.co.uk/commercia...nonbundle.html

is also 6500K

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 06/12/2017 21:39, Adam Funk wrote:

Have you gone mostly LED at home? (Honest question, not looking for
an argument.)

Everywhere apart from the front outside light that I cannot see been
bettered by an LED, the rear outside light that will be LED as soon as I
drop on a spare at work:-), and the loft light (that can keep it's
crappy CFL and I have a few spares).

--
Adam

Dave Plowman wrote:

I have colour matching north light tubes in the workshop.

You've mentioned them before, but it wasn't clear to me what defines a
"north light", seems it's the combination of colour temperature and CRI,
according to this

http://www.lamptech.co.uk/Documents/FL%20Colours.htm

Some of the tubes sold as north light seem to say 860 or 865, others say
965 which includes UV, are you sure your workshop isn't a tanning studio :-)

Just checked one of the tri-phosphor tubes which I find nice and 'crisp'
in the garage they are 840 (I thought they were called daylight white,
but I guess they are cool white really.


Is there a LED equivalent?

depends if you mean 860 or 965 I guess, if the former yes, the latter
seems to be fluoro only.