info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
CFL on steroids any risk?
125 views
Skip to first unread message
Tim R
May 23, 2019, 10:26:21 AM5/23/19
to
I got a grab bag of CFLs cheap at a thrift store, and one of them is a Maxlite 32W that looks like this:
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=maxlite+growight&ref=nb_sb_noss
although it doesn't say growlight, but I don't know why else you would have one. I've never seen a super CFL that size.
Is there any risk to running one of these in a basement ceiling fixture?
During the winter I do my morning wakeup under bright light, this kind of lamp might be easier than my current setup. But not if it's going to explode or break during use.
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=maxlite+growight&ref=nb_sb_noss
although it doesn't say growlight, but I don't know why else you would have one. I've never seen a super CFL that size.
Is there any risk to running one of these in a basement ceiling fixture?
During the winter I do my morning wakeup under bright light, this kind of lamp might be easier than my current setup. But not if it's going to explode or break during use.
tabb...@gmail.com
May 23, 2019, 11:28:40 AM5/23/19
to
On Thursday, 23 May 2019 15:26:21 UTC+1, Tim R wrote:
> I got a grab bag of CFLs cheap at a thrift store, and one of them is a Maxlite 32W that looks like this:
> https://www.amazon.com/s?k=maxlite+growight&ref=nb_sb_noss
0 results
> I got a grab bag of CFLs cheap at a thrift store, and one of them is a Maxlite 32W that looks like this:
> https://www.amazon.com/s?k=maxlite+growight&ref=nb_sb_noss
> although it doesn't say growlight, but I don't know why else you would have one. I've never seen a super CFL that size.
> Is there any risk to running one of these in a basement ceiling fixture?
> During the winter I do my morning wakeup under bright light, this kind of lamp might be easier than my current setup. But not if it's going to explode or break during use.
Break...all lamps do if whacked.
NT
John Robertson
May 23, 2019, 12:44:00 PM5/23/19
to
is OK if made with the usual UL/CSA requirements...
Mind you this is from Amazon and there is no regulation there at all,
total Chinese crap (and dangerously so) is my experience in several cases.
John :-#)#
Tim R
May 23, 2019, 1:43:15 PM5/23/19
to
No, it's just that I've heard of CFLs failing catastrophically, but I've never even seen one this big. The basement ceiling fixture is the simple one socket ceramic plate, no globe or shield, so it will mount base up.
tabb...@gmail.com
May 23, 2019, 7:25:11 PM5/23/19
to
On Thursday, 23 May 2019 18:43:15 UTC+1, Tim R wrote:
> No, it's just that I've heard of CFLs failing catastrophically, but I've never even seen one this big. The basement ceiling fixture is the simple one socket ceramic plate, no globe or shield, so it will mount base up.
that won't help it last.
NT
> On Thursday, May 23, 2019 at 11:28:40 AM UTC-4, tabby wrote:
> > On Thursday, 23 May 2019 15:26:21 UTC+1, Tim R wrote:
> > > I got a grab bag of CFLs cheap at a thrift store, and one of them is a Maxlite 32W that looks like this:
> > > https://www.amazon.com/s?k=maxlite+growight&ref=nb_sb_noss
> >
> > 0 results
> >
> > > although it doesn't say growlight, but I don't know why else you would have one. I've never seen a super CFL that size.
> >
> > So you have a non-growing use for it, but no-one else has?
> >
> > > Is there any risk to running one of these in a basement ceiling fixture?
> >
> > nothing beyond the usual minor risks of lamps.
> >
> > > During the winter I do my morning wakeup under bright light, this kind of lamp might be easier than my current setup. But not if it's going to explode or break during use.
> >
> > why do you think it would it explode? Seems an odd idea.
> > Break...all lamps do if whacked.
> >
> >
> > NT
>
> I can think of lots of nongrowlight uses for a light that bright, like in a work area, athletics, etc.; just it doesn't seem very "residential" and the other contents of the bag gave clues to the origin.
Well I use lots of lighting watts now & then in a residential setting, and there's no lack of other people that do too.
> > On Thursday, 23 May 2019 15:26:21 UTC+1, Tim R wrote:
> > > I got a grab bag of CFLs cheap at a thrift store, and one of them is a Maxlite 32W that looks like this:
> > > https://www.amazon.com/s?k=maxlite+growight&ref=nb_sb_noss
> >
> > 0 results
> >
> > > although it doesn't say growlight, but I don't know why else you would have one. I've never seen a super CFL that size.
> >
> > So you have a non-growing use for it, but no-one else has?
> >
> > > Is there any risk to running one of these in a basement ceiling fixture?
> >
> > nothing beyond the usual minor risks of lamps.
> >
> > > During the winter I do my morning wakeup under bright light, this kind of lamp might be easier than my current setup. But not if it's going to explode or break during use.
> >
> > why do you think it would it explode? Seems an odd idea.
> > Break...all lamps do if whacked.
> >
> >
> > NT
>
> I can think of lots of nongrowlight uses for a light that bright, like in a work area, athletics, etc.; just it doesn't seem very "residential" and the other contents of the bag gave clues to the origin.
> No, it's just that I've heard of CFLs failing catastrophically, but I've never even seen one this big. The basement ceiling fixture is the simple one socket ceramic plate, no globe or shield, so it will mount base up.
NT
Tim R
May 23, 2019, 8:14:38 PM5/23/19
to
On Thursday, May 23, 2019 at 7:25:11 PM UTC-4, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
The basement ceiling fixture is the simple one socket ceramic plate, no globe or shield, so it will mount base up.
>
> that won't help it last.
>
>
> NT
So it should really be used base down?
The basement ceiling fixture is the simple one socket ceramic plate, no globe or shield, so it will mount base up.
>
> that won't help it last.
>
>
> NT
It occurs to me that the majority of the light may be emitted sideways, but if I mount it sideways then half the light goes up. (I teach handbell ringing, and the sound comes off the sides of the bell, with very little coming from the end, so I coach my ringers in holding the bell so the sound reaches the audience.)
tabb...@gmail.com
May 24, 2019, 3:07:05 PM5/24/19
to
On Friday, 24 May 2019 01:14:38 UTC+1, Tim R wrote:
> It occurs to me that the majority of the light may be emitted sideways, but if I mount it sideways then half the light goes up. (I teach handbell ringing, and the sound comes off the sides of the bell, with very little coming from the end, so I coach my ringers in holding the bell so the sound reaches the audience.)
Yes, more sideways than end on. In practice it doesn't seem to create problems though. LEDs are more directional.
NT
> On Thursday, May 23, 2019 at 7:25:11 PM UTC-4, tabby wrote:
> The basement ceiling fixture is the simple one socket ceramic plate, no globe or shield, so it will mount base up.
> >
> > that won't help it last.
>
> The basement ceiling fixture is the simple one socket ceramic plate, no globe or shield, so it will mount base up.
> >
> > that won't help it last.
>
> So it should really be used base down?
yup. Not sure about sideways.
> It occurs to me that the majority of the light may be emitted sideways, but if I mount it sideways then half the light goes up. (I teach handbell ringing, and the sound comes off the sides of the bell, with very little coming from the end, so I coach my ringers in holding the bell so the sound reaches the audience.)
NT
Jeff Urban
May 25, 2019, 4:03:05 PM5/25/19
to
I don't care what you grow, bottom line is that if you give it the voltage it wants it should be safe. If it is a bad design then I can't say.
Actually, anyone out there interested in growing smoke - it is almost not worth it now. It is legal to grow in many places now and that means those people will not be buying. Plus now they got vapes and those are efficient and not that easy to make, and they will win a good piece of the market.
I tried it back when it was worth it and all I got out of it was junk and almost ten grand in utility bills. We didn't really have LEDS or CCFLs then, I had sodium and nickel hydrydes, 1,200 watts of them and then about 20,000 BTU to cool the whole mess down.
I could heaver done much better things with that money.
One of the things with LED and CCFL is that I am concerned about their spectral output. You need UV and all that, and that also may include people. Some people just don't like florescent tubes, old tubes were phosphors, so are CCFLs and the newer LEDs. (that's why the can use them to backlight an LCD screen now)
Some people just really like incandescents.
Actually, anyone out there interested in growing smoke - it is almost not worth it now. It is legal to grow in many places now and that means those people will not be buying. Plus now they got vapes and those are efficient and not that easy to make, and they will win a good piece of the market.
I tried it back when it was worth it and all I got out of it was junk and almost ten grand in utility bills. We didn't really have LEDS or CCFLs then, I had sodium and nickel hydrydes, 1,200 watts of them and then about 20,000 BTU to cool the whole mess down.
I could heaver done much better things with that money.
One of the things with LED and CCFL is that I am concerned about their spectral output. You need UV and all that, and that also may include people. Some people just don't like florescent tubes, old tubes were phosphors, so are CCFLs and the newer LEDs. (that's why the can use them to backlight an LCD screen now)
Some people just really like incandescents.
Jeff Liebermann
May 25, 2019, 4:42:30 PM5/25/19
to
On Thu, 23 May 2019 07:26:18 -0700 (PDT), Tim R <timot...@aol.com>
wrote:
>I got a grab bag of CFLs cheap at a thrift store, and one
>of them is a Maxlite 32W that looks like this:
>https://www.amazon.com/s?k=maxlite+growight&ref=nb_sb_noss
>although it doesn't say growlight, but I don't know why else
>you would have one. I've never seen a super CFL that size.
I have a 100 watt equivalent CFL light in a hallway. It's mounted
upside-down which is a good way shorten its life. When it blows, I'll
replace it with a warm LED light.
>Is there any risk to running one of these in a basement ceiling fixture?
You haven't described the fixture. If it's enclosed, particularly in
the ceiling, you run the risk of either starting a fire, blowing up
the CFL light from overheating, or both. It's strictly a matter of
ventilation and heat build up. Buy an IR thermometer and do whatever
it takes to keep it cool, including adding a small (quiet) fan.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=ir+thermometer+gun&tbm=isch>
>During the winter I do my morning wakeup under bright light, this
>kind of lamp might be easier than my current setup. But not if
>it's going to explode or break during use.
It probably won't explode, but might get hot enough to set fire to
anything nearby that's flammable. I had one CFL lamp on my desk belch
fire for about 2 seconds from a small hole in the "ceramic" base. If
there had been anything nearby that could burn, it would have started
a fire.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=exploding+compact+fluorescent+bulbs>
If you're into indoor agriculture, I suggest you look into LED grow
lights and read something on how they work.
[Quiz] Why are plants green, but LED grow lights produce very little
green light?
<https://www.google.com/search?q=LED+grow+lights&tbm=isch>
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
wrote:
>I got a grab bag of CFLs cheap at a thrift store, and one
>of them is a Maxlite 32W that looks like this:
>https://www.amazon.com/s?k=maxlite+growight&ref=nb_sb_noss
>although it doesn't say growlight, but I don't know why else
>you would have one. I've never seen a super CFL that size.
upside-down which is a good way shorten its life. When it blows, I'll
replace it with a warm LED light.
>Is there any risk to running one of these in a basement ceiling fixture?
the ceiling, you run the risk of either starting a fire, blowing up
the CFL light from overheating, or both. It's strictly a matter of
ventilation and heat build up. Buy an IR thermometer and do whatever
it takes to keep it cool, including adding a small (quiet) fan.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=ir+thermometer+gun&tbm=isch>
>During the winter I do my morning wakeup under bright light, this
>kind of lamp might be easier than my current setup. But not if
>it's going to explode or break during use.
anything nearby that's flammable. I had one CFL lamp on my desk belch
fire for about 2 seconds from a small hole in the "ceramic" base. If
there had been anything nearby that could burn, it would have started
a fire.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=exploding+compact+fluorescent+bulbs>
If you're into indoor agriculture, I suggest you look into LED grow
lights and read something on how they work.
[Quiz] Why are plants green, but LED grow lights produce very little
green light?
<https://www.google.com/search?q=LED+grow+lights&tbm=isch>
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
tabb...@gmail.com
May 26, 2019, 1:01:46 PM5/26/19
to
Green plants absorb & use red & blue light. Green light, when growing, is wasted.
NT
Tim R
May 27, 2019, 6:54:26 PM5/27/19
to
On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 4:42:30 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> If you're into indoor agriculture, I suggest you look into LED grow
> lights and read something on how they work.
> [Quiz] Why are plants green, but LED grow lights produce very little
> green light?
I'm not into indoor gardening and doubt I ever will be - not that many years left to experiment.
> If you're into indoor agriculture, I suggest you look into LED grow
> lights and read something on how they work.
> [Quiz] Why are plants green, but LED grow lights produce very little
> green light?
In the 70s I did an indoor garden for a season. It did very well with four foot fluourescents, the standard T12 that was in use back then. I think I used six tubes, four cool white and two warm white, for the balance.
I've read about LED grow lights and it all looked like advertising hype with no science behind it. Perhaps there have been some advances. I've been told the illegal growers mostly used metal halide fixtures, not something I'd want in my house.
Terry Schwartz
May 27, 2019, 7:34:06 PM5/27/19
to
Jeff Liebermann
May 27, 2019, 8:14:10 PM5/27/19
to
On Mon, 27 May 2019 15:54:21 -0700 (PDT), Tim R <timot...@aol.com>
wrote:
>On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 4:42:30 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> If you're into indoor agriculture, I suggest you look into LED grow
>> lights and read something on how they work.
>> [Quiz] Why are plants green, but LED grow lights produce very little
>> green light?
>I'm not into indoor gardening and doubt I ever will be - not that
>many years left to experiment.
Not a problem if you don't inhale.
>In the 70s I did an indoor garden for a season. It did very well
>with four foot fluourescents, the standard T12 that was in use back
>then. I think I used six tubes, four cool white and two warm white,
>for the balance.
At the time, the authorities were monitoring household electric bills.
Any sudden and stable rise in consumption implied that the household
was using artificial lighting to grow something.
>I've read about LED grow lights and it all looked like advertising
>hype with no science behind it. Perhaps there have been some advances.
Is NASA a sufficiently credible source?
"Sole-Source Lighting for Controlled-Environment Agriculture"
<https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20150009399>
There's been quite a bit of research on agriculture in space and in
non-solar environments.
Try searching Google Scholar for research reports:
<https://scholar.google.com>
For example:
<https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_vis=1&q=LED+grow+light+agriculture&btnG=>
>I've been told the illegal growers mostly used metal halide fixtures,
>not something I'd want in my house.
It's now legal to grow marijuana in California. Much of the indoor
and underground farms have moved outdoors.
wrote:
>On Saturday, May 25, 2019 at 4:42:30 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> If you're into indoor agriculture, I suggest you look into LED grow
>> lights and read something on how they work.
>> [Quiz] Why are plants green, but LED grow lights produce very little
>> green light?
>I'm not into indoor gardening and doubt I ever will be - not that
>many years left to experiment.
>In the 70s I did an indoor garden for a season. It did very well
>with four foot fluourescents, the standard T12 that was in use back
>then. I think I used six tubes, four cool white and two warm white,
>for the balance.
Any sudden and stable rise in consumption implied that the household
was using artificial lighting to grow something.
>I've read about LED grow lights and it all looked like advertising
>hype with no science behind it. Perhaps there have been some advances.
"Sole-Source Lighting for Controlled-Environment Agriculture"
<https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20150009399>
There's been quite a bit of research on agriculture in space and in
non-solar environments.
Try searching Google Scholar for research reports:
<https://scholar.google.com>
For example:
<https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_vis=1&q=LED+grow+light+agriculture&btnG=>
>I've been told the illegal growers mostly used metal halide fixtures,
>not something I'd want in my house.
and underground farms have moved outdoors.
Jeff Liebermann
May 27, 2019, 8:23:19 PM5/27/19
to
On Sun, 26 May 2019 10:01:41 -0700 (PDT), tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
>On Saturday, 25 May 2019 21:42:30 UTC+1, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> [Quiz] Why are plants green, but LED grow lights produce very little
>> green light?
>> <https://www.google.com/search?q=LED+grow+lights&tbm=isch>
>On Saturday, 25 May 2019 21:42:30 UTC+1, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> [Quiz] Why are plants green, but LED grow lights produce very little
>> green light?
>> <https://www.google.com/search?q=LED+grow+lights&tbm=isch>
>Green plants absorb & use red & blue light. Green light, when growing, is wasted.
Close enough but not quite complete. We see objects by the
wavelengths (colors) the object does NOT absorb, but does reflect.
Plants are generally green and therefore do NOT absorb green
wavelengths. Therefore, wasting power generating light in the green
part of the spectrum is largely wasted on plants.
Or so I thought.
"Sole-Source Lighting for Controlled-Environment Agriculture"
<https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150009399.pdf>
From a summary of the above article, it seems that plants do find a
little green light useful:
<https://advancedledlights.com/blog/technology/nasa-research-optimum-light-wavelengths-plant-growth/>
Green Light (500 - 600 nm) was once thought not to be necessary
for plants, but recent studies have discovered this wavelength
penetrates through thick top canopies to support the leaves in
the lower canopy.
Tim R
May 27, 2019, 8:53:25 PM5/27/19
to
Thanks for the links, and the google scholar reference.
Interesting stuff.
I guess I probably can't buy high powered blue and red LED lamps at Home Depot. I guess I could test a high watt LED bulb over a plant some time, something legal of course.
I'm no longer worried about my super CFL exploding. I got my thermometer out to test it, and................it didn't work. The bulb I mean. The other lamps in the bag work okay, so I didn't get totally taken, but I was looking forward to seeing a miniature sun in my basement.
Interesting stuff.
I guess I probably can't buy high powered blue and red LED lamps at Home Depot. I guess I could test a high watt LED bulb over a plant some time, something legal of course.
I'm no longer worried about my super CFL exploding. I got my thermometer out to test it, and................it didn't work. The bulb I mean. The other lamps in the bag work okay, so I didn't get totally taken, but I was looking forward to seeing a miniature sun in my basement.
tabb...@gmail.com
May 28, 2019, 2:10:21 AM5/28/19
to
On Tuesday, 28 May 2019 01:14:10 UTC+1, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Mon, 27 May 2019 15:54:21 -0700 (PDT), Tim R <timot...@aol.com>
> wrote:
> At the time, the authorities were monitoring household electric bills.
> Any sudden and stable rise in consumption implied that the household
> was using artificial lighting to grow something.
Now the technique is to fly over with IR imagine camera, and see hot lofts.
> On Mon, 27 May 2019 15:54:21 -0700 (PDT), Tim R <timot...@aol.com>
> wrote:
> At the time, the authorities were monitoring household electric bills.
> Any sudden and stable rise in consumption implied that the household
> was using artificial lighting to grow something.
> >I've read about LED grow lights and it all looked like advertising
> >hype with no science behind it. Perhaps there have been some advances.
>
> Is NASA a sufficiently credible source?
> "Sole-Source Lighting for Controlled-Environment Agriculture"
> <https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20150009399>
> There's been quite a bit of research on agriculture in space and in
> non-solar environments.
>
> Try searching Google Scholar for research reports:
> <https://scholar.google.com>
> For example:
> <https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_vis=1&q=LED+grow+light+agriculture&btnG=>
>
> >I've been told the illegal growers mostly used metal halide fixtures,
> >not something I'd want in my house.
NT
tabb...@gmail.com
May 28, 2019, 2:13:06 AM5/28/19
to
On Tuesday, 28 May 2019 01:23:19 UTC+1, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
NT
> On Sun, 26 May 2019 10:01:41 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote:
> >On Saturday, 25 May 2019 21:42:30 UTC+1, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> >> [Quiz] Why are plants green, but LED grow lights produce very little
> >> green light?
> >> <https://www.google.com/search?q=LED+grow+lights&tbm=isch>
>
> >Green plants absorb & use red & blue light. Green light, when growing, is wasted.
>
> Close enough but not quite complete. We see objects by the
> wavelengths (colors) the object does NOT absorb, but does reflect.
> Plants are generally green and therefore do NOT absorb green
> wavelengths. Therefore, wasting power generating light in the green
> part of the spectrum is largely wasted on plants.
>
> Or so I thought.
> "Sole-Source Lighting for Controlled-Environment Agriculture"
> <https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150009399.pdf>
> From a summary of the above article, it seems that plants do find a
> little green light useful:
> <https://advancedledlights.com/blog/technology/nasa-research-optimum-light-wavelengths-plant-growth/>
> Green Light (500 - 600 nm) was once thought not to be necessary
> for plants, but recent studies have discovered this wavelength
> penetrates through thick top canopies to support the leaves in
> the lower canopy.
If you're growing at home, the green is nearly all wasted as little gets absorbed. It therefore doesn't make sense to produce it - subject to an assortment of conditions, eg if you want white light for other reasons.
> >On Saturday, 25 May 2019 21:42:30 UTC+1, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> >> [Quiz] Why are plants green, but LED grow lights produce very little
> >> green light?
> >> <https://www.google.com/search?q=LED+grow+lights&tbm=isch>
>
> >Green plants absorb & use red & blue light. Green light, when growing, is wasted.
>
> Close enough but not quite complete. We see objects by the
> wavelengths (colors) the object does NOT absorb, but does reflect.
> Plants are generally green and therefore do NOT absorb green
> wavelengths. Therefore, wasting power generating light in the green
> part of the spectrum is largely wasted on plants.
>
> Or so I thought.
> "Sole-Source Lighting for Controlled-Environment Agriculture"
> <https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150009399.pdf>
> From a summary of the above article, it seems that plants do find a
> little green light useful:
> <https://advancedledlights.com/blog/technology/nasa-research-optimum-light-wavelengths-plant-growth/>
> Green Light (500 - 600 nm) was once thought not to be necessary
> for plants, but recent studies have discovered this wavelength
> penetrates through thick top canopies to support the leaves in
> the lower canopy.
NT
peterw...@gmail.com
May 28, 2019, 3:23:16 PM5/28/19
to
Some basics:
a) ALL LED lamps should be used base-down unless otherwise marked. Yes, there are LED lamps designed for horizontal, vertical, base-up and base-down applications. But if UNMARKED, base-down only.
b) The driver (what is in the base) emits heat. Approximately 80% of all the heat generated by the lamp. The other 20% is spread throughout the emitters and in terms of 'feel' will be negligible.
c) Keep in mind that an LED lamp, on average, makes about 150 - 200 lumens per watt. Let's use 200 for this discussion.
d) This lamp will make very roughly 6,400 lumens, and about 26 watts in heat at the base. Note that the 10,000 lumens advertised is what is known in the industry as "Flash" lumens - the first 3 seconds that power is applied to the LEDs for the first time - and then only.
e) A typical incandescent lamp produces about 17 lumens per watt these days. But heat is emitted across the entire envelope, not concentrated in the base as with CFL or LED lamps.
f) Hence, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, and children of all ages - BASE DOWN unless marked otherwise. AND!!! the lamp base rating should be observed as compared to actual light delivered.
g) Meaning - if a base is rated for "60 watts", an ~1.100-lumen lamp should be pretty much the limit of what is installed in it, whether incandescent, CFL or LED.
Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA
a) ALL LED lamps should be used base-down unless otherwise marked. Yes, there are LED lamps designed for horizontal, vertical, base-up and base-down applications. But if UNMARKED, base-down only.
b) The driver (what is in the base) emits heat. Approximately 80% of all the heat generated by the lamp. The other 20% is spread throughout the emitters and in terms of 'feel' will be negligible.
c) Keep in mind that an LED lamp, on average, makes about 150 - 200 lumens per watt. Let's use 200 for this discussion.
d) This lamp will make very roughly 6,400 lumens, and about 26 watts in heat at the base. Note that the 10,000 lumens advertised is what is known in the industry as "Flash" lumens - the first 3 seconds that power is applied to the LEDs for the first time - and then only.
e) A typical incandescent lamp produces about 17 lumens per watt these days. But heat is emitted across the entire envelope, not concentrated in the base as with CFL or LED lamps.
f) Hence, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, and children of all ages - BASE DOWN unless marked otherwise. AND!!! the lamp base rating should be observed as compared to actual light delivered.
g) Meaning - if a base is rated for "60 watts", an ~1.100-lumen lamp should be pretty much the limit of what is installed in it, whether incandescent, CFL or LED.
Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA
peterw...@gmail.com
May 28, 2019, 3:35:43 PM5/28/19
to
On Tuesday, May 28, 2019 at 2:13:06 AM UTC-4, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
> If you're growing at home, the green is nearly all wasted as little gets absorbed. It therefore doesn't make sense to produce it - subject to an assortment of conditions, eg if you want white light for other reasons.
LED lamps these days may be controlled for spectrum to a remarkably fine degree. I work in, but not for, a hospital, and we, as the landlord are relamping approximately 1,000,000 s.f. of space including everything from ORs through research labs to animal, bacterial and plant facilities. You may bet, very safely, that in many of the labs and procedure rooms, CRI, Kelvin and Color are critical at many levels.
> If you're growing at home, the green is nearly all wasted as little gets absorbed. It therefore doesn't make sense to produce it - subject to an assortment of conditions, eg if you want white light for other reasons.
Yet, we are using perhaps two different basic lamps throughout with CRI, Kelvin & Color being controlled primarily via the drivers, not the emitters. Not the Kelvin and Color are very nearly, but not quite the same thing - and the critical parameter is CRI (Color Rendering Index).
John-Del
May 28, 2019, 3:49:40 PM5/28/19
to
On Monday, May 27, 2019 at 8:14:10 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
> At the time, the authorities were monitoring household electric bills.
> Any sudden and stable rise in consumption implied that the household
> was using artificial lighting to grow something.
>
And sometimes you can discover the same with just some basic observational skills:
>
> At the time, the authorities were monitoring household electric bills.
> Any sudden and stable rise in consumption implied that the household
> was using artificial lighting to grow something.
>
https://secure.i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03194/haarlem2_3194129b.jpg
tabb...@gmail.com
May 28, 2019, 5:02:52 PM5/28/19
to
On Tuesday, 28 May 2019 20:23:16 UTC+1, pf...@aol.com wrote:
> Some basics:
>
> a) ALL LED lamps should be used base-down unless otherwise marked. Yes, there are LED lamps designed for horizontal, vertical, base-up and base-down applications. But if UNMARKED, base-down only.
that [partially] applies to the higher power lamps only. 3w reflector lamps are good in any position, and are of course mostly used facing downward. Partially means lamp life is affected, but it still works.
> Some basics:
>
> a) ALL LED lamps should be used base-down unless otherwise marked. Yes, there are LED lamps designed for horizontal, vertical, base-up and base-down applications. But if UNMARKED, base-down only.
> b) The driver (what is in the base) emits heat. Approximately 80% of all the heat generated by the lamp. The other 20% is spread throughout the emitters and in terms of 'feel' will be negligible.
> c) Keep in mind that an LED lamp, on average, makes about 150 - 200 lumens per watt. Let's use 200 for this discussion.
> d) This lamp will make very roughly 6,400 lumens, and about 26 watts in heat at the base. Note that the 10,000 lumens advertised is what is known in the industry as "Flash" lumens - the first 3 seconds that power is applied to the LEDs for the first time - and then only.
> e) A typical incandescent lamp produces about 17 lumens per watt these days. But heat is emitted across the entire envelope, not concentrated in the base as with CFL or LED lamps.
> f) Hence, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, and children of all ages - BASE DOWN unless marked otherwise. AND!!! the lamp base rating should be observed as compared to actual light delivered.
> g) Meaning - if a base is rated for "60 watts", an ~1.100-lumen lamp should be pretty much the limit of what is installed in it, whether incandescent, CFL or LED.
>
> Peter Wieck
> Melrose Park, PA
NT
tabb...@gmail.com
May 28, 2019, 5:06:25 PM5/28/19
to
On Tuesday, 28 May 2019 20:35:43 UTC+1, pf...@aol.com wrote:
> LED lamps these days may be controlled for spectrum to a remarkably fine degree. I work in, but not for, a hospital, and we, as the landlord are relamping approximately 1,000,000 s.f. of space including everything from ORs through research labs to animal, bacterial and plant facilities. You may bet, very safely, that in many of the labs and procedure rooms, CRI, Kelvin and Color are critical at many levels.
>
> Yet, we are using perhaps two different basic lamps throughout with CRI, Kelvin & Color being controlled primarily via the drivers, not the emitters.
that is confused. CCT is determined by the emitters, of which those lamps have at least 2 of different CCT, or 3 R G & B. Adjusting the PSU determines which gets how much current, thus determining final CCT. It does not of course determine the CCT of each separate LED emitter, those are fixed by the LEDs themselves.
> LED lamps these days may be controlled for spectrum to a remarkably fine degree. I work in, but not for, a hospital, and we, as the landlord are relamping approximately 1,000,000 s.f. of space including everything from ORs through research labs to animal, bacterial and plant facilities. You may bet, very safely, that in many of the labs and procedure rooms, CRI, Kelvin and Color are critical at many levels.
>
> Yet, we are using perhaps two different basic lamps throughout with CRI, Kelvin & Color being controlled primarily via the drivers, not the emitters.
NT
peterw...@gmail.com
May 29, 2019, 7:00:28 AM5/29/19
to
Tabby:
You are about 3 years behind the times with LEDs. Suffice it that that is an eternity in the lighting business. And about covers your very nearly complete ignorance of what is in the market today.
You are about 3 years behind the times with LEDs. Suffice it that that is an eternity in the lighting business. And about covers your very nearly complete ignorance of what is in the market today.
Tim R
May 29, 2019, 8:17:28 AM5/29/19
to
My yard light and my porch light are base down.
Every other lamp in my house is base up. I would think that is true for many people, probably most.
I have only a couple of incandescents left, most were converted to CFL and then as CFL got harder to find and LED cheaper, to LED.
If it's true these should not be mounted base up, then manufacturers have been way overselling the benefits. In particular the supposed longer life of the more expensive bulb does not really exist, if it's only true base down.
Every other lamp in my house is base up. I would think that is true for many people, probably most.
I have only a couple of incandescents left, most were converted to CFL and then as CFL got harder to find and LED cheaper, to LED.
If it's true these should not be mounted base up, then manufacturers have been way overselling the benefits. In particular the supposed longer life of the more expensive bulb does not really exist, if it's only true base down.
peterw...@gmail.com
May 29, 2019, 8:46:35 AM5/29/19
to
Otherwise, look carefully on the packaging for standard Edison-Base lamps. Most will either have an icon indicating base position(s) or some verbiage to that end. Those that do not are designed for base-down installation. Please also note that this goes all the way back to incandescent lamps, with early 3-way lamps marked for base position.
https://eyehortilux.com/grower-education/hid-lights/lamp-operating-positions/
Is one example specifically applicable to HID lamps.
Putting a lamp out of position is not immediately fatal, but it will shorten the life of the lamp.
Tim R
May 29, 2019, 8:57:36 AM5/29/19
to
On Wednesday, May 29, 2019 at 8:46:35 AM UTC-4, pf...@aol.com wrote:
> Putting a lamp out of position is not immediately fatal, but it will shorten the life of the lamp.
>
> Peter Wieck
> Melrose Park, PA
Given that most applications are base up, would there be an advantage to choosing CFL vs LED?
> Putting a lamp out of position is not immediately fatal, but it will shorten the life of the lamp.
>
> Peter Wieck
> Melrose Park, PA
My LED bulbs seem to have a heat sink. CFLs don't, I've taken a couple of failed ones apart to see what's inside. Is there gas inside the envelope of an LED, so it transfers some heat to the bulb shape?
Any heat source generates convection air flow, as long as the fixture isn't enclosed.
Tim R
May 29, 2019, 9:13:12 AM5/29/19
to
tabb...@gmail.com
May 29, 2019, 11:11:55 AM5/29/19
to
NT
peterw...@gmail.com
May 29, 2019, 11:46:30 AM5/29/19
to
On Wednesday, May 29, 2019 at 11:11:55 AM UTC-4, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
> Er no, that is what's standard fare for domestic lighting.
Is GB really that far behind the rest of the world? Or is it just you?
> Er no, that is what's standard fare for domestic lighting.
tabb...@gmail.com
May 29, 2019, 6:04:25 PM5/29/19
to
On Wednesday, 29 May 2019 16:46:30 UTC+1, pf...@aol.com wrote:
NT
> On Wednesday, May 29, 2019 at 11:11:55 AM UTC-4, tabby wrote:
> > Er no, that is what's standard fare for domestic lighting.
>
> Is GB really that far behind the rest of the world? Or is it just you?
>
> Peter Wieck
> Melrose Park, PA
I'm just letting you know what's in the shops. Really I don't know what your problem is. And am not interested.
> > Er no, that is what's standard fare for domestic lighting.
>
> Is GB really that far behind the rest of the world? Or is it just you?
>
> Peter Wieck
> Melrose Park, PA
NT
Jeff Liebermann
May 29, 2019, 11:36:07 PM5/29/19
to
On Wed, 29 May 2019 05:57:33 -0700 (PDT), Tim R <timot...@aol.com>
wrote:
>Any heat source generates convection air flow, as long as the fixture isn't enclosed.
Yeah, that's a problem with all lighting. Most fixtures (luminaires)
are enclosed.
Here's an example of a melted MR16 5watt 12v LED lamp:
<http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/LED/MR16-LED-melted-01.jpg>
The lamp is the upper right is the way the lamp looked when new. The
wrinkled looking lamps are what happened when they were run in a badly
ventilated light fixture. Notice how much the plastic has shrunk when
over-heated. The PCB in the lower left is the back of a 60 LED array
and consists of 10ea 82ohm(?) resistors and a diode bridge. I haven't
bothered to decode how the LEDs are wired.
<http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/LED/MR16-LED-melted-02.jpg>
The LED front view is in the upper right. The lamp in the upper left
in an MR16 incandescent light. It's made of an aluminized glass
reflector, aluminum frame, and ceramic base. I think it's rated at 20
watts. All were mounted with the base facing upwards.
I couldn't find the original listing, but I think it's the 60 LED (5
watts) version of this light:
<https://www.ebay.com/itm/GU10-MR16-E26-E27-LED-Spotlight-Bulb-2835-SMD-4W-5W-6W-Lamp-Bright-110V-220V-12V/123255156639>
What happened was that I replaced about 20 incandescent MR16 lights on
some overhead track lighting. The light fixtures were miserably
ventilated and were killing 20w incandescent lamps at an alarming
rate. Replacing them with LED's was suppose to reduce the heat load.
Instead, it melted the plastic case instead of blowing the filament.
Burning down the house was averted because the house was full of hot
plastic smell and the smoke alarm was screaming. Oops.
Moral: The plastic materials used in most LED's are not as heat
resistant as the glass and ceramic materials used in incandescent and
CFL lighting.
wrote:
>Any heat source generates convection air flow, as long as the fixture isn't enclosed.
are enclosed.
Here's an example of a melted MR16 5watt 12v LED lamp:
<http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/LED/MR16-LED-melted-01.jpg>
The lamp is the upper right is the way the lamp looked when new. The
wrinkled looking lamps are what happened when they were run in a badly
ventilated light fixture. Notice how much the plastic has shrunk when
over-heated. The PCB in the lower left is the back of a 60 LED array
and consists of 10ea 82ohm(?) resistors and a diode bridge. I haven't
bothered to decode how the LEDs are wired.
<http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/LED/MR16-LED-melted-02.jpg>
The LED front view is in the upper right. The lamp in the upper left
in an MR16 incandescent light. It's made of an aluminized glass
reflector, aluminum frame, and ceramic base. I think it's rated at 20
watts. All were mounted with the base facing upwards.
I couldn't find the original listing, but I think it's the 60 LED (5
watts) version of this light:
<https://www.ebay.com/itm/GU10-MR16-E26-E27-LED-Spotlight-Bulb-2835-SMD-4W-5W-6W-Lamp-Bright-110V-220V-12V/123255156639>
What happened was that I replaced about 20 incandescent MR16 lights on
some overhead track lighting. The light fixtures were miserably
ventilated and were killing 20w incandescent lamps at an alarming
rate. Replacing them with LED's was suppose to reduce the heat load.
Instead, it melted the plastic case instead of blowing the filament.
Burning down the house was averted because the house was full of hot
plastic smell and the smoke alarm was screaming. Oops.
Moral: The plastic materials used in most LED's are not as heat
resistant as the glass and ceramic materials used in incandescent and
CFL lighting.
Tim R
May 30, 2019, 8:59:12 AM5/30/19
to
On Wednesday, May 29, 2019 at 11:36:07 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> Moral: The plastic materials used in most LED's are not as heat
> resistant as the glass and ceramic materials used in incandescent and
> CFL lighting.
>
Thanks. There's some good info there. Now having looked at the guts of a number of LED lamps I can see where heat dissipation is more of a problem than I realized.
> Moral: The plastic materials used in most LED's are not as heat
> resistant as the glass and ceramic materials used in incandescent and
> CFL lighting.
>
It's probably worse than with CFLs because of the concentrated area where the heat is produced, right?
What isn't obvious to me, having looked at the internals, is why the orientation would have more than a trivial effect. That heat looks pretty trapped no matter where the base faces.
Jeff Liebermann
May 30, 2019, 1:36:48 PM5/30/19
to
On Thu, 30 May 2019 05:59:08 -0700 (PDT), Tim R <timot...@aol.com>
wrote:
>It's probably worse than with CFLs because of the concentrated area
>where the heat is produced, right?
Maybe. LED's are certainly more efficient.
Lumens/watt
LED 100
CFL 60
Incandescent 16
For equal amounts of light output (lumens), a CFL lamp takes 1.7 times
as much power to produce that light as does an LED. That's a big
difference, but not as spectacular as the 6.3 times jump from
incandescent to LED.
You're concerned about "heat" with measured in Joules where
1 joule = 1 watt/second
What I think you want is the final operating temperature of the device
to make sure that it doesn't melt plastic, degrade the LED's, destroy
electronic components, or set fire to the vicinity. The final
temperature has many parameters, most of which are NOT the same for
LED and CFL. For radiation loss, the surface area of a CFL lamp is
larger than the equivalent LED, and is therefore a more efficient heat
radiator. While the LED might waste fewer watts than the CFL light
heating up the room, the CFL will remove the heat from the lamp more
efficiently because it has a larger surface area. The LED compensates
for its smaller size by using aluminum heat sinks, while the CFL has a
larger thermal mass by using ceramics. Lots of other differences
making a general conclusion rather difficult.
>What isn't obvious to me, having looked at the internals, is why the
>orientation would have more than a trivial effect. That heat looks
>pretty trapped no matter where the base faces.
Also maybe. The various lamps will move heat using conduction,
radiation, and convection. All three mechanisms are involved in
determining the final temperature of a lamp. In a light fixture, the
ability of move air through the fixture to remove the heat via
convective air currents is restricted. Without air flow the
temperature of the lamp will rise. If the air flow is uneven, there
will be hot spots on the lamp surface. Some lamps are more tolerant
to heating than others. My plastic case MR16 LED lamp was probably
the least tolerant. High temperature halogen incandescent lamps are
quite happy at much higher temperatures. LEDs lose half their light
output going from room temp (25C) to operating temperature (100C)
<https://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/nlpip/lightinganswers/led/heat.asp>
which is why LED heat sinks are much better and larger than CFL which
can tolerate higher temperatures.
wrote:
>It's probably worse than with CFLs because of the concentrated area
>where the heat is produced, right?
Lumens/watt
LED 100
CFL 60
Incandescent 16
For equal amounts of light output (lumens), a CFL lamp takes 1.7 times
as much power to produce that light as does an LED. That's a big
difference, but not as spectacular as the 6.3 times jump from
incandescent to LED.
You're concerned about "heat" with measured in Joules where
1 joule = 1 watt/second
What I think you want is the final operating temperature of the device
to make sure that it doesn't melt plastic, degrade the LED's, destroy
electronic components, or set fire to the vicinity. The final
temperature has many parameters, most of which are NOT the same for
LED and CFL. For radiation loss, the surface area of a CFL lamp is
larger than the equivalent LED, and is therefore a more efficient heat
radiator. While the LED might waste fewer watts than the CFL light
heating up the room, the CFL will remove the heat from the lamp more
efficiently because it has a larger surface area. The LED compensates
for its smaller size by using aluminum heat sinks, while the CFL has a
larger thermal mass by using ceramics. Lots of other differences
making a general conclusion rather difficult.
>What isn't obvious to me, having looked at the internals, is why the
>orientation would have more than a trivial effect. That heat looks
>pretty trapped no matter where the base faces.
radiation, and convection. All three mechanisms are involved in
determining the final temperature of a lamp. In a light fixture, the
ability of move air through the fixture to remove the heat via
convective air currents is restricted. Without air flow the
temperature of the lamp will rise. If the air flow is uneven, there
will be hot spots on the lamp surface. Some lamps are more tolerant
to heating than others. My plastic case MR16 LED lamp was probably
the least tolerant. High temperature halogen incandescent lamps are
quite happy at much higher temperatures. LEDs lose half their light
output going from room temp (25C) to operating temperature (100C)
<https://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/nlpip/lightinganswers/led/heat.asp>
which is why LED heat sinks are much better and larger than CFL which
can tolerate higher temperatures.
Tim R
May 30, 2019, 3:51:24 PM5/30/19
to
On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 1:36:48 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
> Maybe. LED's are certainly more efficient.
> Lumens/watt
> LED 100
> CFL 60
> Incandescent 16
> For equal amounts of light output (lumens), a CFL lamp takes 1.7 times
> as much power to produce that light as does an LED. That's a big
I doubt that's true. Flash power, the first 3 seconds of operation for an LED, might be 100 lumens per watt, but I think 60 is more realistic.
>
> Maybe. LED's are certainly more efficient.
> Lumens/watt
> LED 100
> CFL 60
> Incandescent 16
> For equal amounts of light output (lumens), a CFL lamp takes 1.7 times
> as much power to produce that light as does an LED. That's a big
>
> LED and CFL. For radiation loss, the surface area of a CFL lamp is
> larger than the equivalent LED, and is therefore a more efficient heat
> radiator. While the LED might waste fewer watts than the CFL light
> heating up the room, the CFL will remove the heat from the lamp more
> efficiently because it has a larger surface area. The LED compensates
I don't think the majority of the heat dissipation from a CFL is from the curlicues. But if even a portion is, then the orientation will make no difference. Air will flow through them base up or down about the same.
tabb...@gmail.com
May 31, 2019, 6:41:07 AM5/31/19
to
All heat produced by both does get dissipated, it can't be trapped else the thing would get endlessly hotter & self destruct.
Why does orientation matter? With a 20w CFL, the ballast silicon is vulnerable to high temps. Ballast down it gets cool air flowing slowly upward past it. Ballast up it gets hot air past it, reducing life expectancy. The tube OTOH doesn't care either way.
NT
peterw...@gmail.com
May 31, 2019, 8:12:03 AM5/31/19
to
The Dubai Lamp range is comprised of four LED bulbs, each of which is available in “cool daylight” and “warm white” colors. There’s a 1-W, 200-lm E14 candle bulb, 400-lm E27 classic bulb and a 600-lm E27 classic bulb. Philips says it designed the filament LED bulbs to replace 25-W, 40-W, and 60-W incandescent bulbs, respectively. The bulbs run off Dubai’s 220-240-V mains voltage.
The above article is from very nearly two years ago. 150 - 175 l/W lamps are common in the commercial market, and readily available in to consumers with a just a bit of effort. A bit more costly, perhaps - but if one is in a region where the Utility is subsidizing prices, you may not notice.
That Home Depot or whatever passes for a Big-Box store at whatever location will not be selling either the latest, nor certainly not cutting-edge technology. They WILL be selling whatever may be mass-produced at the lowest cost with the highest margins.
Most of the discussions here are based on assumptions that are - at least - three years out of date.
Suffice it to understand:
LED Lamp drivers get HOT. These are drivers, not ballasts.
The amount of heat generated is in direct proportion to the amount of light generated as function of emitting surface. Linear emitters
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41yQl0egsTL.jpg
spread the emitter heat out, and allow (relatively) tiny drivers making not-much heat. Most of these lamps are also "universal" inasmuch as they may be run in any position. And, their lumens-per-watt is not massive, either.
Point-source emitters such as the CREE XHP35 will make up to 706 lumens at 350 ma. - which translates to 183 lumens per watt. Really. And that was introduced in 2018, and is commonly found in your MagLite, if you want a "real world" application. It runs at 150C at the junction - which is tiny, so that heat is easily managed. And as it is a direct DC device, there is no separate driver in a flashlight application. In a lamp application, that driver gets quite complex as that same emitter may run anywhere from 5500K with a CRI of 50 to 2700K with a CRI of 90.
The technology is still evolving. And it is NOT where it was even a year ago.
Tabby, for the record, you give us all a deeper understanding of the term "invincible ignorance". Thank you for that!
The above article is from very nearly two years ago. 150 - 175 l/W lamps are common in the commercial market, and readily available in to consumers with a just a bit of effort. A bit more costly, perhaps - but if one is in a region where the Utility is subsidizing prices, you may not notice.
That Home Depot or whatever passes for a Big-Box store at whatever location will not be selling either the latest, nor certainly not cutting-edge technology. They WILL be selling whatever may be mass-produced at the lowest cost with the highest margins.
Most of the discussions here are based on assumptions that are - at least - three years out of date.
Suffice it to understand:
LED Lamp drivers get HOT. These are drivers, not ballasts.
The amount of heat generated is in direct proportion to the amount of light generated as function of emitting surface. Linear emitters
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41yQl0egsTL.jpg
spread the emitter heat out, and allow (relatively) tiny drivers making not-much heat. Most of these lamps are also "universal" inasmuch as they may be run in any position. And, their lumens-per-watt is not massive, either.
Point-source emitters such as the CREE XHP35 will make up to 706 lumens at 350 ma. - which translates to 183 lumens per watt. Really. And that was introduced in 2018, and is commonly found in your MagLite, if you want a "real world" application. It runs at 150C at the junction - which is tiny, so that heat is easily managed. And as it is a direct DC device, there is no separate driver in a flashlight application. In a lamp application, that driver gets quite complex as that same emitter may run anywhere from 5500K with a CRI of 50 to 2700K with a CRI of 90.
The technology is still evolving. And it is NOT where it was even a year ago.
Tabby, for the record, you give us all a deeper understanding of the term "invincible ignorance". Thank you for that!
tabb...@gmail.com
May 31, 2019, 5:32:55 PM5/31/19
to
NT
Lucifer
Jun 1, 2019, 4:00:23 AM6/1/19
to
On Wed, 29 May 2019 20:36:05 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:
>On Wed, 29 May 2019 05:57:33 -0700 (PDT), Tim R <timot...@aol.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Any heat source generates convection air flow, as long as the fixture isn't enclosed.
>
>Yeah, that's a problem with all lighting. Most fixtures (luminaires)
>are enclosed.
>
>Here's an example of a melted MR16 5watt 12v LED lamp:
><http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/LED/MR16-LED-melted-01.jpg>
>The lamp is the upper right is the way the lamp looked when new. The
>wrinkled looking lamps are what happened when they were run in a badly
>ventilated light fixture. Notice how much the plastic has shrunk when
>over-heated. The PCB in the lower left is the back of a 60 LED array
>and consists of 10ea 82ohm(?) resistors and a diode bridge. I haven't
>bothered to decode how the LEDs are wired.
>
><http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/LED/MR16-LED-melted-02.jpg>
>The LED front view is in the upper right. The lamp in the upper left
>in an MR16 incandescent light. It's made of an aluminized glass
>reflector, aluminum frame, and ceramic base. I think it's rated at 20
>watts. All were mounted with the base facing upwards.
Download all 1518 jpegs using
wget.exe -nd -r -A jpg http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/
wrote:
>On Wed, 29 May 2019 05:57:33 -0700 (PDT), Tim R <timot...@aol.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Any heat source generates convection air flow, as long as the fixture isn't enclosed.
>
>Yeah, that's a problem with all lighting. Most fixtures (luminaires)
>are enclosed.
>
>Here's an example of a melted MR16 5watt 12v LED lamp:
><http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/LED/MR16-LED-melted-01.jpg>
>The lamp is the upper right is the way the lamp looked when new. The
>wrinkled looking lamps are what happened when they were run in a badly
>ventilated light fixture. Notice how much the plastic has shrunk when
>over-heated. The PCB in the lower left is the back of a 60 LED array
>and consists of 10ea 82ohm(?) resistors and a diode bridge. I haven't
>bothered to decode how the LEDs are wired.
>
><http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/pics/LED/MR16-LED-melted-02.jpg>
>The LED front view is in the upper right. The lamp in the upper left
>in an MR16 incandescent light. It's made of an aluminized glass
>reflector, aluminum frame, and ceramic base. I think it's rated at 20
>watts. All were mounted with the base facing upwards.
wget.exe -nd -r -A jpg http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/
Jeff Liebermann
Jun 1, 2019, 6:25:32 PM6/1/19
to
On Thu, 30 May 2019 12:51:20 -0700 (PDT), Tim R <timot...@aol.com>
wrote:
>On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 1:36:48 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>
>> Maybe. LED's are certainly more efficient.
>> Lumens/watt
>> LED 100
>> CFL 60
>> Incandescent 16
>> For equal amounts of light output (lumens), a CFL lamp takes 1.7 times
>> as much power to produce that light as does an LED. That's a big
>
>I doubt that's true. Flash power, the first 3 seconds of operation
>for an LED, might be 100 lumens per watt, but I think 60 is more realistic.
That's correct, if you include:
1. Losses through any lenses or reflectors.
2. Losses in the switching power supply.
3. Losses in any power factor correction circuitry.
4. AC power is power factor corrected.
Easy enough to measure. I have enough junk from my flashlight
tinkering to measure lumens, but not with any great accuracy. Here's
how I do it with flashlights, bicycle headlights, spot lights, and any
light that generates a round spot on a wall.
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/rec.bicycles.tech/UJdJQFTDgl8/NgOZUloVCwAJ>
I found new LED "flood" light in my collection.
<https://www.feit.com/products/bulbs/flood-and-spot/led_lampsreflectorr_ledsrr_and_brbr30-927-led-can/>
750 lumens 12.5w
Notice that there's plastic diffuser in front of the LEDs.
Plugging it into my Kill-A-Watt watt-guesser, I measure:
12watts 15VA 0.78PF (power factor)
which seems about right.
Luminous Efficacy = 750lumens / 12watts = 63 lumens/watt
So, you're correct if I include all the losses.
However, the numbers I provided were for the raw LED at room
temperature and does NOT include all the losses.
Might as well grind the numbers for CFL.
I found one of these in my collection:
<http://www.greenliteusa.com/en/lights/1684-26w-t2-ultra-mini-spiral.html>
1700 lumens 26 watts
Measuring with the Kill-a-Watt meter:
26watts 37VA 0.70PF
Luminous Efficacy = 1700lumens / 26watts = 65 lum/w
Hmmm... looks like the LED (with the diffuser) is almost as bad as
CFL. I suspect the diffuser loss is what's causing the lower efficacy
for the LED, but I don't have LED bulb handy to prove it. I'll see if
I can find or borrow one, at least with a glass lens, not plastic.
According to this chart:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_efficacy#Lighting_efficiency>
the LED floodlight should have been about 100 lum/W.
>Surface area makes a difference for both radiation and convection, but
>the temperature difference is what really drives the heat transfer.
>The plastic globe area of an LED equivalent lamp runs much hotter than
>the curlicues of a CFL. (I haven't measured, but that's what my
>fingers tell me when changing both while hot.) (and that's probably
>because an LED doesn't have vacuum inside the globe, it has air
>that's in contact with the emitters)
Temperature (C or F) is not the same as heat (calories) which is not
the same power (watts) which is not the same as energy (joules or
watts/second). Also, there are several different types of
efficiencies and efficacy:
"Energy Efficiency of White LEDs" (2009)
<https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/led-efficiency.pdf>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_efficacy#Lighting_efficiency>
Overall luminous Overall luminous
efficacy lum/W efficiency
LED screw base lamp (120 V) Up to 102 Up to 14.9%
9- 32 W compact fluorescent 46 - 75 8 - 11.45%
(with ballast)
Kinda looks like the LED produces about twice the light output of the
CFL, for the same amount of input power. However, my measurements say
they're about the same.
>I don't think the majority of the heat dissipation from a CFL is from the curlicues. But if even a portion is, then the orientation will make no difference. Air will flow through them base up or down about the same.
wrote:
>On Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 1:36:48 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>
>> Maybe. LED's are certainly more efficient.
>> Lumens/watt
>> LED 100
>> CFL 60
>> Incandescent 16
>> For equal amounts of light output (lumens), a CFL lamp takes 1.7 times
>> as much power to produce that light as does an LED. That's a big
>
>I doubt that's true. Flash power, the first 3 seconds of operation
>for an LED, might be 100 lumens per watt, but I think 60 is more realistic.
1. Losses through any lenses or reflectors.
2. Losses in the switching power supply.
3. Losses in any power factor correction circuitry.
4. AC power is power factor corrected.
Easy enough to measure. I have enough junk from my flashlight
tinkering to measure lumens, but not with any great accuracy. Here's
how I do it with flashlights, bicycle headlights, spot lights, and any
light that generates a round spot on a wall.
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/rec.bicycles.tech/UJdJQFTDgl8/NgOZUloVCwAJ>
I found new LED "flood" light in my collection.
<https://www.feit.com/products/bulbs/flood-and-spot/led_lampsreflectorr_ledsrr_and_brbr30-927-led-can/>
750 lumens 12.5w
Notice that there's plastic diffuser in front of the LEDs.
Plugging it into my Kill-A-Watt watt-guesser, I measure:
12watts 15VA 0.78PF (power factor)
which seems about right.
Luminous Efficacy = 750lumens / 12watts = 63 lumens/watt
So, you're correct if I include all the losses.
However, the numbers I provided were for the raw LED at room
temperature and does NOT include all the losses.
Might as well grind the numbers for CFL.
I found one of these in my collection:
<http://www.greenliteusa.com/en/lights/1684-26w-t2-ultra-mini-spiral.html>
1700 lumens 26 watts
Measuring with the Kill-a-Watt meter:
26watts 37VA 0.70PF
Luminous Efficacy = 1700lumens / 26watts = 65 lum/w
Hmmm... looks like the LED (with the diffuser) is almost as bad as
CFL. I suspect the diffuser loss is what's causing the lower efficacy
for the LED, but I don't have LED bulb handy to prove it. I'll see if
I can find or borrow one, at least with a glass lens, not plastic.
According to this chart:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_efficacy#Lighting_efficiency>
the LED floodlight should have been about 100 lum/W.
>Surface area makes a difference for both radiation and convection, but
>the temperature difference is what really drives the heat transfer.
>The plastic globe area of an LED equivalent lamp runs much hotter than
>the curlicues of a CFL. (I haven't measured, but that's what my
>fingers tell me when changing both while hot.) (and that's probably
>because an LED doesn't have vacuum inside the globe, it has air
>that's in contact with the emitters)
the same power (watts) which is not the same as energy (joules or
watts/second). Also, there are several different types of
efficiencies and efficacy:
"Energy Efficiency of White LEDs" (2009)
<https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/led-efficiency.pdf>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_efficacy#Lighting_efficiency>
Overall luminous Overall luminous
efficacy lum/W efficiency
LED screw base lamp (120 V) Up to 102 Up to 14.9%
9- 32 W compact fluorescent 46 - 75 8 - 11.45%
(with ballast)
Kinda looks like the LED produces about twice the light output of the
CFL, for the same amount of input power. However, my measurements say
they're about the same.
>I don't think the majority of the heat dissipation from a CFL is from the curlicues. But if even a portion is, then the orientation will make no difference. Air will flow through them base up or down about the same.
peterw...@gmail.com
Jun 2, 2019, 6:28:40 PM6/2/19
to
They are found in both our houses. That you wish to make a virtue of ignorance is what is funny in a sad sort of way.
Lucifer
Jun 3, 2019, 1:17:03 AM6/3/19
to
On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 14:26:16 -0700 (PDT), "pf...@aol.com"
<peterw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>They are found in both our houses. That you wish to make a virtue of
>ignorance is what is funny in a sad sort of way.
To whom are you replying and about what?
<peterw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>They are found in both our houses. That you wish to make a virtue of
>ignorance is what is funny in a sad sort of way.
tabb...@gmail.com
Jun 3, 2019, 5:17:37 AM6/3/19
to
NT
0 new messages