Interesting ...

[Arfa Daily]

EE Times article that came to me by email today

http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/en/the-big-lie-about-led-lighting.html?cmp_id=7&news_id=222923405

Arfa

[N_Cook]

There is a shop in town that is all LED strip lighting. So far no
failures noticed, but I will estimate the total number of LEDs and
monitor over time. I would guess , sitting here, something like 20,000
5mm LEDs in total (not the higher powered types). I feel like running a
red/orange felt-tip along all
the cover-strips of the LED runs, as its that horrible stark blue-white.
Doesn't take much pen ink to give a much warmer tone (to CFL bulbs anyway)

This article has soldering as a dying art along with trug making etc

http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/dec/30/traditional-skills-endangered-heritage-craft

perhaps they meant soldering as in tin-smithing.
But on the other hand how much hands-on soldering rework of modern day
mass electronics production is there?

[Andy Burns]

N_Cook wrote:

> This article has soldering as a dying art along with trug making etc
>
> http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/dec/30/traditional-skills-endangered-heritage-craft
>
> perhaps they meant soldering as in tin-smithing.

http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NDUzWDY0MA==/z/CMgAAOxyLm9TDdVl/$_12.JPG

> But on the other hand how much hands-on soldering rework of modern day
> mass electronics production is there?

Probably just rework on any dead items at the end of the line (if has
sufficient value) or attaching the big lumpy stuff like connectors and
transformers.

[alan_m]

On 02/01/2015 14:56, Arfa Daily wrote:

The electronics don't have 100 components as stated and as LED lighting
becomes more widespread the support circuits will be integrated into
fewer components.

While the support electronics may be less reliable than the LED itself
other factors such as running the devices at elevated temperatures is
more likely to shorten the life. Elevated temperatures will occur if
the bulb is in an inappropriate fitting (inappropriate for a LED bulb)

If you applied the authors logic to LED backlit TVs 1 in 4 would have
already failed.


--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

[William Sommerwerck]

His basic premise makes sense -- more components = lower reliability -- but
the fact is that one can easily find electronic devices 50 and 60 years old
that have never been serviced that continue to work. Members of this group
probably own them.

A failure rate of 1 in 10,000 (per year?) strikes me as unduly pessimistic,
even for devices used in vacuum tube equipment. Solid-state -- which almost
always operates at lower voltages and temperature -- should be even more
reliable.

I own devices that contain far more components than an LED bulb -- yet they do
not drop like flies. Flat-panel TVs are a good example. CU says the reported
breakdown rate is extremely low (3% for a few brands is on the high end), and
advises against purchasing service contracts.

Though the point he raises is valid, and not only deserves, but requires,
study, you can't assume these products fail prematurely simply because they
contain "too many parts". Why they failed is more important. I wouldn't be
surprised if it was due to SMD soldering failure.

[mike]

I've never had a CFL failure that I could trace to the CFL.
It's always the electronics driving it. A power glitch can take
out a LED just as easily as a CFL.

Lifetime guarantee. If you can find where to send it and pay
more in shipping it back than the cost of replacement.
And it's not the lifetime of the light. It's the lifetime
of the supplier.

Home lamps are designed for cheap,cheap,cheap,
not for reliability. But it will get better over time.

I always giggle at flashlights that say you never replace the LED,
over 20,000 hour life, etc.
The elephant in the room is that in most cheap designs, they
put the LED directly across three batteries and hope the battery
resistance increases faster than the time it takes to melt the light.
And the better designs have a dozen high-stress parts in
some regulator.

I sawed a free harbor freight flashlight in half and soldered it
back together to make an extension. Put an 18650 in an extended light.
Really bright. Replacing three 1.5V with one 4.2V oughta work, right?
Not for long...but far longer than I expected. Put one ohm in series
and it looks like life might be ok. ;-) Still pretty bright.
There's a reason they ship with heavy duty batteries.

Home Depot has some really great deals if you watch closely.
I bought 44 40W LED's when they were 4 for $5.05 and replaced
most of my CFL. Turns out that two 40's in a Y-adapter was
way cheaper than a 60W and had better light dispersion.
Then they had 60W at 3 for $6.97 to replace 12 of the 40's.
Then they had 75W at ONE CENT. I bought all 8 of them to replace
some of the 60's.

There's no possible financial reason for doing that.
I tell myself that the LED's should last longer in applications
where you switch them on and off a lot. But I put LED's in fixtures
I haven't turned on in years. Don't judge me...I'm saving the planet...

In the attic, I have about a hundred used incandescents, right
next to the hundred CFL's, right next to all the spare LED's
I bought but never used.
Right next to the box of flashlights I couldn't help buying.
And I still mine Home Depot for LED deals. I need to go
to rehab for LED abuse.

Often we do stuff because we can, not because we should.

If I remember correctly, if you combine the MTBF of all the components,
the probability of system failure within the system MTBF is 37%.

Are we having fun yet?

[Rod Speed]

"Arfa Daily" <arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:Qkypw.703472$CW3.1...@fx07.am4...

> EE Times article that came to me by email today
>
> http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/en/the-big-lie-about-led-lighting.html?cmp_id=7&news_id=222923405

Mindlessly superficial.

If that mindlessly superficial approach was correct,
we'd all be using a pencil instead of computers.

[Cydrome Leader]

In sci.electronics.repair mike <ham...@netzero.net> wrote:
> On 1/2/2015 6:56 AM, Arfa Daily wrote:
>> EE Times article that came to me by email today
>>
>> http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/en/the-big-lie-about-led-lighting.html?cmp_id=7&news_id=222923405
>>
>>
>> Arfa
> I've never had a CFL failure that I could trace to the CFL.
> It's always the electronics driving it. A power glitch can take
> out a LED just as easily as a CFL.

I've had a couple CFLs burn out at the bulb from old age. Most had
electronic failures, or jsut broke.

The longest lasting CFL may be one in my bathroom with 10 years of
on-off use. I'd have to remove it to checked the purchase date I write on
them though.

[Rod Speed]

"N_Cook" <div...@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
news:m86csv$8eo$1...@dont-email.me...

> On 02/01/2015 14:56, Arfa Daily wrote:
>> EE Times article that came to me by email today
>>
>> http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/en/the-big-lie-about-led-lighting.html?cmp_id=7&news_id=222923405
>>
>>
>> Arfa
>
> There is a shop in town that is all LED strip lighting. So far no failures
> noticed, but I will estimate the total number of LEDs and monitor over
> time. I would guess , sitting here, something like 20,000 5mm LEDs in
> total (not the higher powered types). I feel like running a red/orange
> felt-tip along all
> the cover-strips of the LED runs, as its that horrible stark blue-white.
> Doesn't take much pen ink to give a much warmer tone (to CFL bulbs anyway)

> This article has soldering as a dying art along with trug making etc
> http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/dec/30/traditional-skills-endangered-heritage-craft

Just more mindlessly silly journalism.

There might be only one person still making denim
on that soggy little island, but plenty in china.

> perhaps they meant soldering as in tin-smithing.

Corse they did and they're wrong about that too.

> But on the other hand how much hands-on soldering rework of modern day
> mass electronics production is there?

Quite a bit actually. Forget what they were making but
someone posted a link to a youtube of a factory in china
making something like a video camera or something.

Lots of hand soldering going on.

[Vir Campestris]

On 02/01/2015 15:19, N_Cook wrote:
>
> There is a shop in town that is all LED strip lighting. So far no
> failures noticed, but I will estimate the total number of LEDs and
> monitor over time.

Our office has been up-and-running for less than 6 months. I don't know
when it was fitted out, but the LED lights in the conference rooms are
on clever circuits so they come on only when they are used - and our
floor was empty.

One of them has died. Not the LEDs, but the driver - it's a square
luminaire with LEDs on each side, and one side flashed.

Andy

[Jerry Peters]

I've had a few CFL's fail due to electronics failure, but the newer
bulbs last longer. Unfortunately as they age they get dimmer. Looking
at an aged bulb I noticed that the phosphor layer has turned a brownish
color.

I did have one failure that when I took it apart, 1 of the wires to to
the flourescent was disconnected & the others were questionable.
Soldered them all & re-assembled the bulb and it's still in use in the
basement bathroom.

[Cydrome Leader]

In sci.electronics.repair Jerry Peters <je...@example.invalid> wrote:
> In sci.electronics.repair Cydrome Leader <pres...@mungepanix.com> wrote:
>> In sci.electronics.repair mike <ham...@netzero.net> wrote:
>>> On 1/2/2015 6:56 AM, Arfa Daily wrote:
>>>> EE Times article that came to me by email today
>>>>
>>>> http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/en/the-big-lie-about-led-lighting.html?cmp_id=7&news_id=222923405
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Arfa
>>> I've never had a CFL failure that I could trace to the CFL.
>>> It's always the electronics driving it. A power glitch can take
>>> out a LED just as easily as a CFL.
>>
>> I've had a couple CFLs burn out at the bulb from old age. Most had
>> electronic failures, or jsut broke.
>>
>> The longest lasting CFL may be one in my bathroom with 10 years of
>> on-off use. I'd have to remove it to checked the purchase date I write on
>> them though.
>
> I've had a few CFL's fail due to electronics failure, but the newer
> bulbs last longer. Unfortunately as they age they get dimmer. Looking
> at an aged bulb I noticed that the phosphor layer has turned a brownish
> color.

I'd have to agree that the newer ones seem a bit better. They've figured
out how make them as simple as possible now is my guess.

> I did have one failure that when I took it apart, 1 of the wires to to
> the flourescent was disconnected & the others were questionable.
> Soldered them all & re-assembled the bulb and it's still in use in the
> basement bathroom.

they're still useless for outdoor cold use. The ones outside by the stairs
are like nightlights when the temps drop to freezing. It's amazing they
even start.

I'm not a fan of the warm up period they take, even indoors.

[Rod Speed]

"Cydrome Leader" <pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote in message
news:m8720h$4l6$1...@reader1.panix.com...

I like it with the bedhead light. You don’t get the same
blinding effect when you turn it on in the dark.

[Capitol]

Cydrome Leader wrote:
> In sci.electronics.repair Jerry Peters<je...@example.invalid> wrote:
>> In sci.electronics.repair Cydrome Leader<pres...@mungepanix.com> wrote:
>>> In sci.electronics.repair mike<ham...@netzero.net> wrote:
>>>> On 1/2/2015 6:56 AM, Arfa Daily wrote:
>>>>> EE Times article that came to me by email today
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/en/the-big-lie-about-led-lighting.html?cmp_id=7&news_id=222923405
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Arfa
>>>> I've never had a CFL failure that I could trace to the CFL.
>>>> It's always the electronics driving it. A power glitch can take
>>>> out a LED just as easily as a CFL.
>>>
>>> I've had a couple CFLs burn out at the bulb from old age. Most had
>>> electronic failures, or jsut broke.
>>>
>>> The longest lasting CFL may be one in my bathroom with 10 years of
>>> on-off use. I'd have to remove it to checked the purchase date I write on
>>> them though.
>>
>> I've had a few CFL's fail due to electronics failure, but the newer
>> bulbs last longer. Unfortunately as they age they get dimmer. Looking
>> at an aged bulb I noticed that the phosphor layer has turned a brownish
>> color.
>
> I'd have to agree that the newer ones seem a bit better. They've figured
> out how make them as simple as possible now is my guess.
>
>> I did have one failure that when I took it apart, 1 of the wires to to

>> the flourescent was disconnected& the others were questionable.
>> Soldered them all& re-assembled the bulb and it's still in use in the

>> basement bathroom.
>
> they're still useless for outdoor cold use. The ones outside by the stairs
> are like nightlights when the temps drop to freezing. It's amazing they
> even start.
>
> I'm not a fan of the warm up period they take, even indoors.

Interesting, my outside CFLs are over 35yrs old and start down to -8C
without fail. My newer CFLs, die like flies in comparison, particularly
in glass globe fittings. I reckon some CFLs have as short a life as
filament bulbs, even when running cool..

[Phil Allison]

Capitol wrote:

>
> Iteresting, my outside CFLs are over 35yrs old and start down to -8C
> without fail.


** The CFLs on sale in the 1980s used iron ballasts and most had replaceable bulbs. When used as outdoor night lights on a premises, bulb lifespan is 1 to 2 years or about 8000 hours.

> My newer CFLs, die like flies in comparison, particularly
> in glass globe fittings.

** The last CFL I used as a night light lasted 4 years.

Naturally, it was cycled only once per day and that is the secret.


.... Phil

[William Sommerwerck]

"Cydrome Leader" wrote in message news:m8720h$4l6$1...@reader1.panix.com...

> I'm not a fan of the warm up period they take, even indoors.

Recent models come to full brightness quickly.

[alan_m]

On 02/01/2015 21:09, Jerry Peters wrote:

>
> I've had a few CFL's fail due to electronics failure,

+1
http://www.admac.myzen.co.uk/bulb/

[Jon Elson]

Yup, a lot of the consumer-grade LED lighting, at least, is
crap! Some of it is even a FIRE hazard!

I made my own LED retrofits. Not cheap, but they are working well.
I measured the power draw of the ANCIENT magnetic ballasts for
a two-lamp 48" fluorescent at 101 W. The replacement with
20 Cree "1 W" LEDs draws a measured 21 W. I used a commercial
LED lighting power supply from Digi-key. I have 3 units installed
with these Cree LEDs so far (first one was only 10 LEDs and a
home-made power supply) and I am really happy with them.

Jon

[Michael A. Terrell]

I see a lot of LED traffic lights with groups of dead LEDs. The one
closest to me is on the fourth red LED lamp in the last couple years and
already has some groups that are quite dim.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

[Arfa Daily]

"Vir Campestris" <vir.cam...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:vsidnZFrvdYflTrJ...@brightview.co.uk...

A while back, they changed the car park lights to LED at my local Co-op
store. One of them started flashing in fairly short order, and has continued
to do so ever since, despite my repeatedly bringing it to their attention. I
suppose in the days of the metal halide lights that they had previously, the
maintenance guy would just have shinned up a ladder and replaced the lamp in
the fitting. To sort out this LED one would require the entire unit to be
unbolted from the wall, and replaced. As to the failure on the one in your
place being the driver rather than the LEDs themselves, I think that goes
along with what the guy is suggesting in the EE Times article.

Arfa

[Arfa Daily]

"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cgoeh0...@mid.individual.net...

>
>
> "Arfa Daily" <arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:Qkypw.703472$CW3.1...@fx07.am4...
>> EE Times article that came to me by email today
>>
>> http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/en/the-big-lie-about-led-lighting.html?cmp_id=7&news_id=222923405
>
> Mindlessly superficial.

Much like you then ...

Arfa

[Jeff Liebermann]

What the article says is that if you calculate the MTBF of an LED
light, it will be lousy. That's true, except that it's no longer
important because such lights are designed to fail. Conspiracy theory
follows.

The problem with LED lights is that they can theoretically last
forever. All that's required is some really good heat sinking, decent
components, and AC line glitch protection. You might see those on
tower lights, runway lights, and other high reliability applications,
but not on the consumer stuff, unless the GUM (great unwashed masses)
suddenly decide that paying for quality is a good thing.

The reason for the designed in failures is the need for manufactories
to continue selling replacements. If they actually made a device that
lasts forever, they will sell a few years worth, and then go out of
business because there will be no replacement sales. Reliability is
bad for (consumer) business.

There's another problem. Anything that lasts longer than the intended
product life is considered a waste of money. For commodity items like
lighting, every penny is important because when selling millions of
lamps, the pennies add up quickly. The result is that failures are
evaluated on basis of MINIMIZING their lifetime. If something lasts
twice as long as originally intended, it is considered a candidate for
"cost reduction" which by implication means "lifetime reduction".
Ideally, the result is a product where everything fails simultaneously
one day after the warranty period. We're fairly close to the idea in
the consumer electronics and computah industry. I've seen such
simultaneous failures on the bench, especially old Sony CRT displays,
which showed evidence of intentional electrolytic capacitor lifetime
manipulation (weird voltage rating on the caps). With today's heavily
computerized design and modeling tools, it is possible to design for a
specific lifetime.

All this begs the question "Why did the author write the article"?
Scott Elder is no slouch and works for a reputable manufacturer of the
chips used to run LED lighting. Presumably, he knows how it all works
and has real data to substantiate his allegations. It seems counter
productive that an industry insider would write an article denouncing
the industry perception of LED lifetimes and reliability. My best
guess(tm) is that he's frustrated by the aforementioned penny counting
cost and lifetime reductions and wanted an indirect way to point out
the problem without appears to be a conspiratorial wacko like me.

That also begs the question "Why did Arfa Daily post the article"? My
best guess(tm) here is that he's still having problems adjusting to
LED lighting and needs a new reason to not use LED lighting. Am I at
least close?

This also begs the question "Why did I write this long rant when I
should be doing something productive"? That's easy. I like to write
conspiracy theories. It's also Friday evening, which I reserve for
working on my own projects. Finally, I've had some medical problems
lately and feel lousy enough to want to dump my problems on the world.
This is a good start.


--
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

[Jeff Liebermann]

Nothing profound has ever been said on one line.

[Phil Allison]

mike wrote:

> I've never had a CFL failure that I could trace to the CFL.

** Really? That puts you in a minority of one.

The most common CFL failure is the tube heaters going open - most are rated for only 1 to 2 thousand switch on cycles. Ones that light up quickly and tolerate low temps better seem to be the poorest at this.

All other failures I have seen are the result of the electronics section running too hot causing capacitor failure, particularly electro and EMI suppression caps.

A great many ceiling fixtures are not well suited to CFL or LED lamps cos they trap heat.

> It's always the electronics driving it.

** Not true in general.

> A power glitch can take
> out a LED just as easily as a CFL.

** Power glitch = what ??

A line voltage spike lasting less than a mS or a hit by lighting ?

The typically 4 to 22uF electro in the DC supply absorbs brief spikes nicely and most indirect effects of lightning too.

.... Phil

[Rod Speed]

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:TtidndKcQb6NoDrJ...@earthlink.com...

Can't say I have ever seen even one.

> The one closest to me is on the fourth red LED lamp in the last
> couple years and already has some groups that are quite dim.

Presumably just a very bad design.

[Rod Speed]

"Arfa Daily" <arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote in message

news:mwHpw.359076$Ea7.1...@fx16.am4...

You never could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag.

[Rod Speed]

"Jeff Liebermann" <je...@cruzio.com> wrote in message
news:htfeaa9rp9rc028ei...@4ax.com...

Bullshit.

> All this begs the question "Why did the author write the article"?
> Scott Elder is no slouch and works for a reputable manufacturer of the
> chips used to run LED lighting. Presumably, he knows how it all works
> and has real data to substantiate his allegations. It seems counter
> productive that an industry insider would write an article denouncing
> the industry perception of LED lifetimes and reliability. My best
> guess(tm) is that he's frustrated by the aforementioned penny counting
> cost and lifetime reductions and wanted an indirect way to point out
> the problem without appears to be a conspiratorial wacko like me.

Much more likely he doesn't actually have a fucking clue about the basics.

> That also begs the question "Why did Arfa Daily post the article"?
> My best guess(tm) here is that he's still having problems adjusting
> to LED lighting and needs a new reason to not use LED lighting.
> Am I at least close?

Nope.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 3 Jan 2015 13:41:50 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Much more likely he doesn't actually have a fucking clue about the basics.

<https://www.linkedin.com/pub/j-scott-elder/48/217/717>
28 years experience in analog IC design. 16 patents.

Some of his blog articles:
<http://www.planetanalog.com/archives.asp?section_id=526>

Are you really qualified to judge whether he has a clue? I think not.

[Cydrome Leader]

35 years old? That thing must have been belt driven.

The oldest ones I saw were 1990-ish and from panasonic, with a huge
magnetic ballast. It was large, stupid and didn't fit in most fixtures. I
can't recall what the life was, but it was put together well with lots of
glass and silicone goop. There's no way in hell it was cheaper than a box
of incandescent bulbs, especially when you factor in the part where
electricity itself isn't really that expensive in the US.

[Rod Speed]

Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote

> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote

>> Much more likely he doesn't actually have a fucking clue about the
>> basics.

> <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/j-scott-elder/48/217/717>
> 28 years experience in analog IC design. 16 patents.

Clearly doesn't have a fucking clue about how to calculate
how long a LED light will last compared with an incandescent.

> Some of his blog articles:
> <http://www.planetanalog.com/archives.asp?section_id=526>

> Are you really qualified to judge whether he has a clue?

Anyone is with that stupid claim about how long a
LED light will last compared with an incandescent.

> I think not.

Not a shred of evidence that you are actually capable of rational thought.

[Henry Mydlarz]

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message news:Qkypw.703472$CW3.1...@fx07.am4...

EE Times article that came to me by email today

http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/en/the-big-lie-about-led-lighting.html?cmp_id=7&news_id=222923405

Arfa

A few months ago I bought at Aldi about eight LED bulbs to use on my 240V
lighting (Australia). Three of them failed within about a month, one of them
does light up occasionally. Unfortunately I could not find the receipt for
them.

Henry

[Bob Eager]

On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 17:32:41 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:


> All this begs the question "Why did the author write the article"? Scott

> That also begs the question "Why did Arfa Daily post the article"? My

> This also begs the question "Why did I write this long rant when I

http://afterdeadline.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/begging-the-question-
again/?_r=0

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £30a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

[Tim Watts]

On 03/01/15 05:03, Cydrome Leader wrote:

> 35 years old? That thing must have been belt driven.

Philips SL probably - 35 year old this year:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_fluorescent_lamp#mediaviewer/File:Old_compact_fluorescent_lamp.JPG

[polygonum]

On 03/01/2015 05:03, Cydrome Leader wrote:
> 35 years old? That thing must have been belt driven.

Perhaps one of the 2D lamps? Like in the link below - but maybe the
specs. have been changed form the originals?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/16W-Energy-Saving-Light-bulb/dp/B001N7SKVU

Surely they were the precursors of the more compact CFLs? And I remember
seeing a large number of them at Preston Guildhall somewhen around the
mid-1980s or so.

--
Rod

[Brian Gaff]

Well back in the days when i could see, I used to build stuff and used
solder, but increasingly even then automation for mass produced products
meant that surface mount and wire wrap techniques abounded. I'd imagine with
the banning of leaded solder its more likely that machines can make better
joints than humans even if they could use soldering stations easily.
Back then the only folk still soldering in industry were the development
types. If a pcb failed in test, then it was taken out junked and replaced.
Gone are the days when simple hands on component substitution was cost
effective it seems.
As for led lamps, I imagine they are still in the early stages of
evaluation. Nobody has had them in service long enough to refine colour temp
and reliability methods. It will probably only get better though as the
efficiency is so much better than alternatives, they are going to make it
work.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"N_Cook" <div...@tcp.co.uk> wrote in message
news:m86csv$8eo$1...@dont-email.me...

> On 02/01/2015 14:56, Arfa Daily wrote:
>> EE Times article that came to me by email today
>>
>> http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/en/the-big-lie-about-led-lighting.html?cmp_id=7&news_id=222923405
>>
>>
>> Arfa
>

> There is a shop in town that is all LED strip lighting. So far no failures
> noticed, but I will estimate the total number of LEDs and monitor over

> time. I would guess , sitting here, something like 20,000 5mm LEDs in
> total (not the higher powered types). I feel like running a red/orange
> felt-tip along all
> the cover-strips of the LED runs, as its that horrible stark blue-white.
> Doesn't take much pen ink to give a much warmer tone (to CFL bulbs anyway)
>
> This article has soldering as a dying art along with trug making etc
>
> http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/dec/30/traditional-skills-endangered-heritage-craft
>
> perhaps they meant soldering as in tin-smithing.
> But on the other hand how much hands-on soldering rework of modern day
> mass electronics production is there?

[Tim Watts]

On the subject - what *is* the best way to drive LEDs?

Seems to me that whilst convenient and in line with my earlier comments
on standardisation, putting little 230V PSUs in every lamp that get hot
and blow up is not the best way forward.

Does a 12V supply offer any advantages in terms of minimising on board
electronics? 12V SELV is at least standard.

If an LED has a Vf (forward voltage drop) of x volts, is it considered
good form to put 12/x LEDs in series across the supply with no other
limiting circuitry?

Or is there a really simple 2 pin current regulator on a chip available?

Old style 0.2" 20mA LEDs weren't that bothered, but I'm not au fait with
high power Crees and the like.

[bm]

"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:cgpcn4...@mid.individual.net...

LOL

[Rod Speed]

Brian Gaff <brian...@gmail.com> wrote

> Well back in the days when i could see, I used to build stuff and used
> solder, but increasingly even then automation for mass produced products
> meant that surface mount and wire wrap techniques abounded. I'd imagine
> with the banning of leaded solder its more likely that machines can make
> better joints than humans even if they could use soldering stations
> easily.

They still do in china as the recently posted youtube
video of one of the production lines in china shows.

> Back then the only folk still soldering in industry were the development
> types.

Not in china.

> If a pcb failed in test, then it was taken out junked and replaced.

Not in china.

> Gone are the days when simple hands on component substitution was cost
> effective it seems.

Not in china.

> As for led lamps, I imagine they are still in the early stages of
> evaluation.

Particularly with the higher powered ones.

More production than evaluation tho.

> Nobody has had them in service long enough to refine colour temp and
> reliability methods.

I doubt that is true of Cree.

> It will probably only get better though

Absolutely certainly.

> as the efficiency is so much better than alternatives, they are going to
> make it work.

They already have with quite a bit of LED stuff.

[Tim Lamb]

In message <m87t7j$5ai$2...@reader1.panix.com>, Cydrome Leader
<pres...@MUNGEpanix.com> writes

Philips brought out a bayonet fitting CFL late '70's. Very heavy for
pendant drops!

Our outside lamps are CFLs fitted in 1995. No failures although they
don't get much use.

>
>The oldest ones I saw were 1990-ish and from panasonic, with a huge
>magnetic ballast. It was large, stupid and didn't fit in most fixtures. I
>can't recall what the life was, but it was put together well with lots of
>glass and silicone goop. There's no way in hell it was cheaper than a box
>of incandescent bulbs, especially when you factor in the part where
>electricity itself isn't really that expensive in the US.
>
>
>

--
Tim Lamb

[polygonum]

On 02/01/2015 19:22, William Sommerwerck wrote:
> His basic premise makes sense -- more components = lower reliability --
> but the fact is that one can easily find electronic devices 50 and 60
> years old that have never been serviced that continue to work. Members
> of this group probably own them.
>
> A failure rate of 1 in 10,000 (per year?) strikes me as unduly
> pessimistic, even for devices used in vacuum tube equipment. Solid-state
> -- which almost always operates at lower voltages and temperature --
> should be even more reliable.
>
> I own devices that contain far more components than an LED bulb -- yet
> they do not drop like flies. Flat-panel TVs are a good example. CU says
> the reported breakdown rate is extremely low (3% for a few brands is on
> the high end), and advises against purchasing service contracts.
>
> Though the point he raises is valid, and not only deserves, but
> requires, study, you can't assume these products fail prematurely simply
> because they contain "too many parts". Why they failed is more
> important. I wouldn't be surprised if it was due to SMD soldering failure.

The Haswell-E die is composed of 2.6 billion transistors. You have to
achieve phenomenal component reliability for any of them to work as they
leave the factory, let alone years later! Adding up everything in a
typical modern PC including the display leads to even huger numbers of
components. Yet we see many of them struggle on for many years until
they are replaced, all too often, due to inadequate computing power (or
not being able to justify the complete re-install of an updated OS on an
old box) rather than component failure.

--
Rod

[polygonum]

On 03/01/2015 11:43, Huge wrote:
> Nothing profound has ever been said by Rod Speed.


I don't know, "Profound from Latin profundus : prō-, before; see pro-1 +
fundus, bottom." :-)

--
Rod

[The Natural Philosopher]

The deeper analysis asks the question 'what fails, and why?'

In general a chip once made, wont degrade catastrophically. Its
thermally stable, and any manufacturing faults show up on test or early on.

Yes, RAM and other chops do age, but there is a wide tolerance before
they go so far out of spec they are useless.

By far the greatest killer is heat: heat accelerates ageing., death
occurs in microseconds at 180C, decades at 30C



--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. – Erwin Knoll

[William Sommerwerck]

"Huge" wrote in message news:cgq2lk...@mid.individual.net...

On 2015-01-02, William Sommerwerck <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:

>> His basic premise makes sense -- more components = lower reliability
>> -- but the fact is that one can easily find electronic devices 50 and 60
>> years old that have never been serviced that continue to work. Members
>> of this group probably own them.

> This is a category error. Yes, we all have 'n' year-old electronic devices,
> because we have thrown away the ones that have failed.

That's logically correct. But I have 40 to 50 year old Sony and KLH products
that work fine. Whereas Sony stuff from the last 15 years is gradually falling
apart.

[William Sommerwerck]

"polygonum" wrote in message news:cgq7lq...@mid.individual.net...

> The Haswell-E die is composed of 2.6 billion transistors. You have
> to achieve phenomenal component reliability for any of them to
> work as they leave the factory, let alone years later!

One might argue that all the transistors are created simultaneously in a
single processing sequence, and that the chip is, technically, a single
component.

[William Sommerwerck]

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
news:goheaa5ogri9rn4tm...@4ax.com...

> Nothing profound has ever been said on one line.

Including that statement?

[William Sommerwerck]

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message

news:htfeaa9rp9rc028ei...@4ax.com...

> The reason for the designed in failures is the need for manufactories
> to continue selling replacements. If they actually made a device that
> lasts forever, they will sell a few years worth, and then go out of
> business because there will be no replacement sales. Reliability is
> bad for (consumer) business.

What about lighting for new buildings?

From my perspective, the cost savings outweigh the "premature" failures.

> That also begs the question "Why did Arfa Daily post the article"?

> My best guess(tm) here is that he's still having problems adjusting
> to LED lighting and needs a new reason to not use LED lighting.

Like most people, Arfa doesn't like high-K lighting. I switched to 5000K CFLs,
and though it took a couple of weeks to adjust, I much prefer light that
more-closely resembles daylight, and is subjectively brighter.

[William Sommerwerck]

"Rod Speed" wrote in message news:cgp383...@mid.individual.net...

> Much more likely he doesn't actually have a fucking clue about the basics.

Are you any relation to Joshua Speed?

Arfa is an intelligent and knowledgeable person. You do not come off as very
bright (joke intended) making such a broad attack.

[The Natural Philosopher]

In general its also a tested component.

so it works to spec or it doesn't.

*Failure* of a system that worked to start with implies change over
time: The relevant point is what changes happen to circuits over time
and what law if any, they follow.

[polygonum]

One might argue that is the case for the 100-component circuit referred
to in the EE Times article. I simply do not know what goes on in the
making of "an LED plus its associated circuitry". Is it made as one,two
or 101 components?

--
Rod

[polygonum]

On 03/01/2015 15:10, William Sommerwerck wrote:
> Like most people, Arfa doesn't like high-K lighting. I switched to 5000K
> CFLs, and though it took a couple of weeks to adjust, I much prefer
> light that more-closely resembles daylight, and is subjectively brighter.

I too prefer higher K lamps - though probably 4200 to 4500 rather than
5000. I get the feeling that the 2700 ones started out as OK LEDs but
someone adjusted it until it was a yellow as a candle.

Also want the best possible CRI.

--
Rod

[William Sommerwerck]

"polygonum" wrote in message news:cgqhch...@mid.individual.net...

On 03/01/2015 15:03, William Sommerwerck wrote:

>> One might argue that all the transistors are created simultaneously in a
>> single processing sequence, and that the chip is, technically, a single
>> component.

> One might argue that is the case for the 100-component circuit referred to
> in the EE Times article.

One //might not// argue that. The LED lamp is made of discrete components that
are manufactured separately, and individually soldered in place.

[Jeff Liebermann]

Of course. Everything I write has a hidden meaning, hidden agenda,
hidden target, or hidden oxymoron.

The problem here is that while I respect the rights of every person to
have an opinion in accordance with freedom of speech, I don't really
care what that opinion might be. I'm interested in the reasoning
behind that opinion, the logic used to arrive at the opinion, and
possibly some examples of why that opinion is correct and others
wrong. I'll then weight all the sides of the discussion, relative to
my needs, and make my own decision. Circumventing this logic process
by merely offering an opinion is a waste of time and bytes.

Also, the proliferation of one-line comments on the web and Usenet
make me suspect that the literacy of those involved is deficient. I
can speculate endlessly as to the reasons for this deterioration in
literacy. One of the more interesting causes is coupled with another
problem. Posters with questions often supply as little information as
possible and require interrogation in order to extract the facts.
One-liners and lack of info are symptoms of the same problem, fear of
screwing up. The more one writes, the easier it is for someone else
to find an error, omission, or logic fault. Rather than be caught
making a mistake, it is much easier to not present a targets.

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and
remove all doubt"? (Abraham Lincoln).

It's also possible that the perpetrators of one-liners are stuck in a
write only mode, where they care little about those that might read
the comments. That would class them only slightly better than a
spammer that doesn't read the newsgroup before or after posting their
junk. If this is the problem, I suggest that people posting anything
first consider a simple litmus test. If you don't like reading what
you're about to post, then don't post it.


--
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

[Jeff Layman]

Still using a Phillips CFL bought around 1985, rated at 18w, and about a
dozen cm in diameter. Works well, with no obvious loss of light once
warmed up, although it was used only for 3 or 4 years when first bought,
and not used again until a couple of years ago. As you say, it's pretty
heavy!

--

Jeff

[Jeff Liebermann]

On 3 Jan 2015 06:50:55 GMT, Bob Eager <news...@eager.cx> wrote:

>On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 17:32:41 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
>> All this begs the question "Why did the author write the article"? Scott

>> That also begs the question "Why did Arfa Daily post the article"? My

>> This also begs the question "Why did I write this long rant when I
>
><http://afterdeadline.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/25/begging-the-question-again/?_r=0>

Please put carrets around URL's so that the Usenet server doesn't
reformat it by wrapping the lines.

If your one-line comment is about my use of "begs the question",
you're correct that mine was not the correct usage. It should have
been "raises the question" as described in:
<http://begthequestion.info>
My appologies. I'll instruct my proof reader to check for such
grammatical errors.

[Rod Speed]

Huge <Hu...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote

> William Sommerwerck <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote

>> His basic premise makes sense -- more components = lower
>> reliability -- but the fact is that one can easily find electronic
>> devices 50 and 60 years old that have never been serviced that
>> continue to work. Members of this group probably own them.

> This is a category error.

No.

> Yes, we all have 'n' year old electronic devices, because

> we have thrown away the ones that have failed.

And yet cars are in fact MUCH more reliable now even tho
they have a lot more components than they used to have.

Same with other stuff like TVs etc too.

[Adrian]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 10:19:37 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> Please put carrets around URL's so that the Usenet server doesn't
> reformat it by wrapping the lines.

Please spell carats correctly and cease the apostrophe abuse so that we
don't have to wrap your lines...

[Rod Speed]

William Sommerwerck <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> Much more likely he doesn't actually
>> have a fucking clue about the basics.

> Are you any relation to Joshua Speed?

No idea, I've never done the
genealogy that comprehensively.

I do know that I am not related to quite
a few other Speeds in my country even
tho it is a rather uncommon name.

> Arfa is an intelligent and knowledgeable person.

He clearly isn't on that particular question.

He didn't even notice that cars are MUCH
more reliable than they used to be even
tho they have vastly more components
than they used to have. In spades with
computer cpus and memory alone.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 3 Jan 2015 07:10:25 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
<grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:

>"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
>news:htfeaa9rp9rc028ei...@4ax.com...
>
>> The reason for the designed in failures is the need for manufactories
>> to continue selling replacements. If they actually made a device that
>> lasts forever, they will sell a few years worth, and then go out of
>> business because there will be no replacement sales. Reliability is
>> bad for (consumer) business.
>
>What about lighting for new buildings?

It's strictly a question of selling price.

Joe Sixpack is not going to tolerate $8 "60 watt" lamps in his house.
He wants cheap, at any cost, even if it blows up every few years. I've
noticed that most of the homes that I see that have all LED lighting,
also have a hybrid car, grid tied solar systems, and other energy
conservation devices. They tend to be affluent but not very good at
calculating the alleged savings or comparing with alternatives. When
I do this for them, some don't want to hear the bad news. They'll pay
any price, to save a few pennies. Seriously expensive LED lighting is
not a problem for this market.

However, the rest are tightwads or just plain cheap. They look at the
store shelf and see $1 CCFL lamps next to $10 LED lights. My guess is
they'll buy the $1 lamp and wait for the price of LED's to drop. I
saw this happen at the local hardware store. The flooring manager
said that when he puts the two types of lights next to each other, the
sales of CCFL lamps go up and LED's drop. When he separates them,
putting the LED's in a garish impulse buy display near the cash
register, CCFL sales drop, and LED's go up. The bottom line is that
Joe Sixpack wants cheap lights, and the only way the industry is going
to supply those is to cut corners, which show up as increased infant
mortality and lifetime failures.

However, high reliability lighting (towers, airports, buildings, etc)
are in a different class from Joe Sixpack. You don't find those
lights at the hardware store or supermarket. They're industrial
specialty items, with high quality LED's, and high prices to match.
Reputation is a big thing in such markets, so anything designed to
fail prematurely is not going to last very long.

>From my perspective, the cost savings outweigh the "premature" failures.

That totally depends on how you rate lifetime. I get about 2 years on
most of my commodity CCFL lights. I haven't blown out enough lights
to produce useful statistics, but mostly I break them from impact
damage, or something in the electronics burns out, usually with a puff
of smog and a noxious smell. A capacitor would be my guess from the
smell.

However, these are not the best CCFL lights. Why would this company
advertise that their CCFL lamps have 2.5 to 6.6 times the lifetime of
ordinary CCFL lamps?
<http://www.ccfllamps.com/_en/02_technology/01_detail.php?fid=3>
Is it because their lamps are better, or because the ordinary CCFL
lamps have been cost reduced to produce a shorter lifetime? Dunno,
but I suspect the latter.

LED's are probably similar. You can get those that last forever, and
those that are cost reduced to blow up just after the warranty
expires. If you do the math, my guess is the price/performance ratio
is about the same.

>> That also begs the question "Why did Arfa Daily post the article"?
>> My best guess(tm) here is that he's still having problems adjusting
>> to LED lighting and needs a new reason to not use LED lighting.

>Like most people, Arfa doesn't like high-K lighting. I switched to 5000K CFLs,
>and though it took a couple of weeks to adjust, I much prefer light that
>more-closely resembles daylight, and is subjectively brighter.

It's been a while, but I recall that he could not adjust to LED
lighting. He's not the only one. The neighboring architects office
has two people that claim eyestrain from the replacement LED lighting.
Their section of the office uses ordinary fluorescent tubes and
incandescent desk lamps. (I once suggested kerosene lamps with
predictable results).

I've done some testing on myself to see what works best. 6000K
daylight LED lighting seems best for doing fine detail work.
2700-3000K is much easier on my eyes for reading, but I have trouble
focusing on detail and fine print. I use both where appropriate.

[John Robertson]

On 01/03/2015 7:10 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
> "Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
> news:htfeaa9rp9rc028ei...@4ax.com...
>
>> The reason for the designed in failures is the need for manufactories
>> to continue selling replacements. If they actually made a device that
>> lasts forever, they will sell a few years worth, and then go out of
>> business because there will be no replacement sales. Reliability is
>> bad for (consumer) business.
>
> What about lighting for new buildings?

My son-in-law is working on that problem. They manufacture light pipes
that bring outside light sources - the sun, high intensity electric,
etc. - and transport that throughout buildings (up to 50 feet) using
light pipes that drop it down everywhere needed. They are having great
fun with this!

<http://www.suncentralinc.com/>

> From my perspective, the cost savings outweigh the "premature" failures.
>
>
>> That also begs the question "Why did Arfa Daily post the article"?
>> My best guess(tm) here is that he's still having problems adjusting
>> to LED lighting and needs a new reason to not use LED lighting.
>
> Like most people, Arfa doesn't like high-K lighting. I switched to 5000K
> CFLs, and though it took a couple of weeks to adjust, I much prefer
> light that more-closely resembles daylight, and is subjectively brighter.

--
(Please post followups or tech inquiries to the newsgroup)
John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9
(604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games)
www.flippers.com
"Old pinballers never die, they just flip out."

[John Robertson]

OK, guys, when we turn into language police then examples of Godwin's
Law aren't far behind...

(ducking)

John ;-#)#

[John Robertson]

And I have a lovely Phillips reel-to-reel tape player (1960s) that has
had all the internal drive belts and idler tires turn to goo...a real
pain to get running again! If I ever get around to it. The electronics
all appear just fine.

Not to mention one of my first jobs in the 60s was scrapping rotted foam
sound insulation from the inside cases of IBM punch card printers, etc.
- around 1967 as I recall.

So, what can fail often has little to do with electronics, there is all
that support stuff that goes bad after its BBD (Best Before Date).

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 19:51:18 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>I see a lot of LED traffic lights with groups of dead LEDs.

I haven't. Locally, we have some LED traffic and street lights. I
have yet to see one malfunction. However, it might be simply because
the traffic department is good about quickly replacing any failures.
Most LED lights include a remote monitoring feature.

I'm not sure what might be causing the failures that you've observed.
Any sign of overheating? Power glitches? Bullet holes?

Los Angeles Saves Millions With LED Street Light Deployment
<http://www.forbes.com/sites/justingerdes/2013/01/25/los-angeles-saves-millions-with-led-street-light-deployment/>
After 36 months of initial operation, for instance, high-intensity
discharge (HID) fixtures in Los Angeles recorded an average failure
rate of 10%; the average failure rate for LED fixtures, according
to the latest figures, is 0.2% (189 of 98,000 installed).

>The one
>closest to me is on the fourth red LED lamp in the last couple years and
>already has some groups that are quite dim.

Got an IR temperature gun? Get as close as you can and get a
temperature reading. My guess(tm) is that it's running hot, even with
some blown lights.

[Phil Hobbs]

I have a bunch of Luxo desk lamps that have a 100 W incandescent
surrounded by a 22W circular fluorescent. They're by far the easiest
thing on the eyes that I've ever used.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

[Rod Speed]

Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote

> William Sommerwerck <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote
>> Jeff Liebermann wrote

>>> Nothing profound has ever been said on one line.

>> Including that statement?

> Of course. Everything I write has a hidden meaning,
> hidden agenda, hidden target, or hidden oxymoron.

> The problem here is that while I respect the rights of every person to
> have an opinion in accordance with freedom of speech, I don't really
> care what that opinion might be. I'm interested in the reasoning
> behind that opinion, the logic used to arrive at the opinion, and
> possibly some examples of why that opinion is correct and others
> wrong. I'll then weight all the sides of the discussion, relative to
> my needs, and make my own decision. Circumventing this logic
> process by merely offering an opinion is a waste of time and bytes.

> Also, the proliferation of one-line comments on the web and Usenet
> make me suspect that the literacy of those involved is deficient.

That line can't explain why some like Churchill specialised in
stinging one liners. Hard to claim his literacy was deficient.

> I can speculate endlessly as to the reasons for this deterioration in
> literacy. One of the more interesting causes is coupled with another
> problem. Posters with questions often supply as little information
> as possible and require interrogation in order to extract the facts.

That has always been a problem. Plenty just don't understand that
'it doesn't work anymore' isnt every useful for working out why it doesn't.

> One-liners and lack of info are symptoms
> of the same problem, fear of screwing up.

I don't buy that with one liners with people like Churchill.

> The more one writes, the easier it is for someone
> else to find an error, omission, or logic fault.

Yes.

> Rather than be caught making a mistake,
> it is much easier to not present a targets.

I don't believe that is the reason for one
liners or the lack of detail with a fault either.

> "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than
> to speak out and remove all doubt"? (Abraham Lincoln).

Another one liner.

> It's also possible that the perpetrators of one-liners are stuck in
> a write only mode, where they care little about those that might
> read the comments. That would class them only slightly better
> than a spammer that doesn't read the newsgroup before or after
> posting their junk. If this is the problem, I suggest that people
> posting anything first consider a simple litmus test. If you don't
> like reading what you're about to post, then don't post it.

Some of us prefer Ab's one liner to your para just above.

[Rod Speed]

"Jeff Liebermann" <je...@cruzio.com> wrote in message
news:bncgaaducg27p8egu...@4ax.com...

Yes.

> and the only way the industry is going
> to supply those is to cut corners,

No, most obviously with the change from
incandescent torches to LED torches.

> which show up as increased infant mortality and lifetime failures.

No, most obviously with the change from
incandescent torches to LED torches.

And with cars in spades. MUCH more reliable than they used to be.

> However, high reliability lighting (towers, airports, buildings,
> etc) are in a different class from Joe Sixpack. You don't find those
> lights at the hardware store or supermarket. They're industrial
> specialty items, with high quality LED's, and high prices to match.
> Reputation is a big thing in such markets, so anything designed
> to fail prematurely is not going to last very long.

Same with systems like Amazon and ebay where
its so easy to see how long things have lasted.

And you get the short life problem even with the brand name
high end items too. Have a look at logitech mice for example.
The microswitches fail with monotonous regularity, multiple
clicking when you only intended a single click. That's been
going on for more than a decade now even with their most
expensive mice selling for $100 each with 5 or 7 year warrantys
where its in the manufacturer's interest to fix the problem
because they have to wear the replacement under warranty.

Your claim that logitech deliberately designs them
to fail like that just can't fly with warrantys like that.

>> From my perspective, the cost savings outweigh the "premature" failures.

> That totally depends on how you rate lifetime. I get
> about 2 years on most of my commodity CCFL lights.

I'm currently seeing more than 10 out of
mine and that one is used every single day.

> I haven't blown out enough lights to produce useful
> statistics, but mostly I break them from impact damage,

Those don't count.

> or something in the electronics burns out, usually
> with a puff of smog and a noxious smell. A
> capacitor would be my guess from the smell.

> However, these are not the best CCFL lights. Why would
> this company advertise that their CCFL lamps have 2.5 to
> 6.6 times the lifetime of ordinary CCFL lamps?
> <http://www.ccfllamps.com/_en/02_technology/01_detail.php?fid=3>
> Is it because their lamps are better, or because the ordinary CCFL
> lamps have been cost reduced to produce a shorter lifetime?

Or they have put more effort into a decent design.

> Dunno, but I suspect the latter.

> LED's are probably similar. You can get those that last forever,

And virtually all of the lowest power indicator leds do just that.

> and those that are cost reduced to blow
> up just after the warranty expires.

I don't believe that that last is even possible.

The reality with the cheapest shit from china is that
you're lucky if all of them work out of the box.

> If you do the math, my guess is the
> price/performance ratio is about the same.

Fraid not with my CFLs.

[Tim Watts]

On 03/01/15 10:13, Tim Watts wrote:
> On the subject - what *is* the best way to drive LEDs?
>
> Seems to me that whilst convenient and in line with my earlier comments
> on standardisation, putting little 230V PSUs in every lamp that get hot
> and blow up is not the best way forward.
>
> Does a 12V supply offer any advantages in terms of minimising on board
> electronics? 12V SELV is at least standard.
>
> If an LED has a Vf (forward voltage drop) of x volts, is it considered
> good form to put 12/x LEDs in series across the supply with no other
> limiting circuitry?
>
> Or is there a really simple 2 pin current regulator on a chip available?
>
> Old style 0.2" 20mA LEDs weren't that bothered, but I'm not au fait with
> high power Crees and the like.
>

Anyone?

[Bob Eager]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 10:19:37 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> Please put carrets around URL's so that the Usenet server doesn't
> reformat it by wrapping the lines.

I don't think you mean 'carrets' (sic) [that would be 'carets']

But I'm not sure what the right term is - I call them 'diamond brackets'.

Sorry about omitting them - as I often do, I remembered it after I
pressed the button!

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £30a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

[Bob Eager]

ITYM 'carets'!

[john james]

"Tim Watts" <tw_u...@dionic.net> wrote in message
news:gg2mnb-...@squidward.dionic.net...

www.google.com/search?q=cree+teardown

[The Natural Philosopher]

Please spell *carets* correctly ....

[polygonum]

On 03/01/2015 21:49, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 10:19:37 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
>> Please put carrets around URL's so that the Usenet server doesn't
>> reformat it by wrapping the lines.
>
> I don't think you mean 'carrets' (sic) [that would be 'carets']
>
> But I'm not sure what the right term is - I call them 'diamond brackets'.
>
> Sorry about omitting them - as I often do, I remembered it after I
> pressed the button!
>

They ain't carrats, carrets, carrots, carats nor even carets!

^
ASCII caret
(circumflex accent)

They are:

> <

Angle brackets or Less-than sign and Greater-than sign

--
Rod

[Phil Allison]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

>
> However, the rest are tightwads or just plain cheap. They look at the
> store shelf and see $1 CCFL lamps next to $10 LED lights.

** Why "CCFL" lamps.

> That totally depends on how you rate lifetime. I get about 2 years on
> most of my commodity CCFL lights.

** Why "CCFL" lamps.

> However, these are not the best CCFL lights. Why would this company
> advertise that their CCFL lamps have 2.5 to 6.6 times the lifetime of
> ordinary CCFL lamps?

** Because they ARE CCFL type lamps.

CCFL = " cold cathode fluorescent."

Same technology used for backlighting LDC screens, but made in bulb style.

Google tells me they exist, but I have never seen one.

Look like spiral CFLs but the glass tube is much finer and there are a lot more turns.


.... Phil

[Tim Watts]

On 03/01/15 22:09, john james wrote:
>
> www.google.com/search?q=cree+teardown

Thank you - that was very informative.

Wonder if those are available here

<goes off to check>

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 20:02:10 +0000, Tim Streater
<timst...@greenbee.net> wrote:

>In article <smagaapbev4em643p...@4ax.com>, Jeff

>Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>
>>problem. Posters with questions often supply as little information as
>>possible and require interrogation in order to extract the facts.
>>One-liners and lack of info are symptoms of the same problem, fear of
>>screwing up. The more one writes, the easier it is for someone else
>>to find an error, omission, or logic fault. Rather than be caught
>>making a mistake, it is much easier to not present a targets.

>Or, of course, being inconsistent within a post. It's late, one is
>tired, and so on. Much easier to make a short post than make a longer
>one be coherent.

Are you sure?
"I have made this letter longer than usual, because I lack the time to
make it short" (Blaise Pascal)

I know how to make things worse. I often post to Usenet when I'm
working in my palatial office. A single long reply might be assembled
in perhaps 5 sections, spread over several hours. I frequently have a
better idea as I go along, and forget to edit the previous great idea
into something that is consistent with the latest great idea. When I
later review the posting, my reaction is usually "Did I write that"?
Sometime long and coherent are mutually exclusive.

I tend to write that way I expect others to write. As I previously
mentioned, I really don't care for one-line opinions and
pontifications. I want to read logic, reasoning, references,
examples, links to related articles, and personal experiences. That's
rather difficult to deliver in a short posting and impossible in a
one-liner.

Also, I'm quite serious about the fear of screwing up. It really bugs
me. With all the rants and conspiracy theories that I write, mistakes
are inevitable. When possible, I admit and correct my mistakes. More
often, I just turn off the computer, and go sulk for a few days.
Sometimes, there's nothing I can write that would be worth reading, so
I just disappear. Eventually, I recover and return until repeated
after my next inevitable mistake. I could greatly improve my batting
average by simply replying with a one-liner, where my ability to screw
things up is severely restricted.

[Rod Speed]

Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote
> Tim Streater <timst...@greenbee.net> wrote
>> Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote

>>> Posters with questions often supply as little information as
>>> possible and require interrogation in order to extract the facts.
>>> One-liners and lack of info are symptoms of the same problem,
>>> fear of screwing up. The more one writes, the easier it is for
>>> someone else to find an error, omission, or logic fault.
>>> Rather than be caught making a mistake, it is much
>>> easier to not present a targets.

>> Or, of course, being inconsistent within a post.
>> It's late, one is tired, and so on. Much easier to make
>> a short post than make a longer one be coherent.

> Are you sure?

Yep.

> "I have made this letter longer than usual, because
> I lack the time to make it short" (Blaise Pascal)

Another one liner from someone who is quite literate.

> I know how to make things worse. I often post to Usenet when I'm
> working in my palatial office. A single long reply might be assembled
> in perhaps 5 sections, spread over several hours. I frequently have a
> better idea as I go along, and forget to edit the previous great idea
> into something that is consistent with the latest great idea. When
> I later review the posting, my reaction is usually "Did I write that"?
> Sometime long and coherent are mutually exclusive.

Sure, but clearly we do see the other effect he mentioned too.

> I tend to write that way I expect others to write. As I previously
> mentioned, I really don't care for one-line opinions

They can be useful at times, particularly when you are
saying you agree with someone else's longer post.

> and pontifications.

Even pontifications have their place, particularly if you are the Pope.

> I want to read logic, reasoning, references, examples,
> links to related articles, and personal experiences.

Sure, but that isnt always feasible, particularly
with links to related articles in some situations.

Sometimes its useful to just post a list of possibilitys
with a problem and suggest how to test if that one
is what is happening etc.

> That's rather difficult to deliver in a short
> posting and impossible in a one-liner.

Yes, but one liners do have their place.
Have a look at some of Churchill's sometime.

> Also, I'm quite serious about the fear
> of screwing up. It really bugs me.

Sure, but it isnt something that drives everyone in the fear sense.

> With all the rants and conspiracy theories
> that I write, mistakes are inevitable.

Yes, and you have done that with one liners.

> When possible, I admit and correct my mistakes.

You haven't done that with this one.

> More often, I just turn off the computer, and go sulk for a few days.
> Sometimes, there's nothing I can write that would be worth reading,
> so I just disappear. Eventually, I recover and return until repeated
> after my next inevitable mistake. I could greatly improve my
> batting average by simply replying with a one-liner, where
> my ability to screw things up is severely restricted.

Sure, but as you say, they aren't always
useful, particularly with problem solving.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
> On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 19:51:18 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >I see a lot of LED traffic lights with groups of dead LEDs.
>
> I haven't. Locally, we have some LED traffic and street lights. I
> have yet to see one malfunction. However, it might be simply because
> the traffic department is good about quickly replacing any failures.
> Most LED lights include a remote monitoring feature.
>
> I'm not sure what might be causing the failures that you've observed.
> Any sign of overheating? Power glitches? Bullet holes?

This is Central Florida, so it is hot, and the electricity is crap,
since it went from Florida Power, to Progress Energy, then to Duke
Energy. They are specified and maintained by FDOT, or one of their
contractors. I've seen a few spots where they went back to the
incandescent lamp and colored lens.

> Los Angeles Saves Millions With LED Street Light Deployment
> <http://www.forbes.com/sites/justingerdes/2013/01/25/los-angeles-saves-millions-with-led-street-light-deployment/>
> After 36 months of initial operation, for instance, high-intensity
> discharge (HID) fixtures in Los Angeles recorded an average failure
> rate of 10%; the average failure rate for LED fixtures, according
> to the latest figures, is 0.2% (189 of 98,000 installed).
>
> >The one
> >closest to me is on the fourth red LED lamp in the last couple years and
> >already has some groups that are quite dim.
>
> Got an IR temperature gun? Get as close as you can and get a
> temperature reading. My guess(tm) is that it's running hot, even with
> some blown lights.

No, all I have is the small fob type of contactless IR thermometer.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

[mike]

On 1/3/2015 12:04 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

>
>> However, these are not the best CCFL lights. Why would
>> this company advertise that their CCFL lamps have 2.5 to
>> 6.6 times the lifetime of ordinary CCFL lamps?
>> <http://www.ccfllamps.com/_en/02_technology/01_detail.php?fid=3>
>> Is it because their lamps are better, or because the ordinary CCFL
>> lamps have been cost reduced to produce a shorter lifetime?

It's called business.
Go to any grocery store.
Do you really believe this toothpaste gets your teeth twice as clean
as that one?
Or that your clothes will stay fresh 2X longer with this detergent?
Any claim that can't be disproved in court is a good claim.

In their zeal to get to market, it's not unusual to find that the cure
for one reliability problem introduced another. oops!

How long do you save the receipts and packaging?
Lifetime warranty is useless if you can't figger out where
to place the claim or it costs more to ship than to buy new.

With anything new, you want to reel in all the early adopters
who'll pay high prices. Product has to last until the prices
come down below shipping costs or you've changed the name on the
company nameplate.

[Phil Allison]

mike wrote:

Rod Speed wrote:
>
> >
> >> However, these are not the best CCFL lights. Why would
> >> this company advertise that their CCFL lamps have 2.5 to
> >> 6.6 times the lifetime of ordinary CCFL lamps?
> >> <http://www.ccfllamps.com/_en/02_technology/01_detail.php?fid=3>
> >> Is it because their lamps are better, or because the ordinary CCFL
> >> lamps have been cost reduced to produce a shorter lifetime?

** Rod did not write the above.

> It's called business.


*** FFS can't you see either that "CCFL" and "CFL" are NOT the same ?

> Go to any grocery store.

** Go to Google first.

Geez ....



.... Phil

[PeterC]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 10:54:18 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> However, these are not the best CCFL lights. Why would this company
> advertise that their CCFL lamps have 2.5 to 6.6 times the lifetime of
> ordinary CCFL lamps?
> <http://www.ccfllamps.com/_en/02_technology/01_detail.php?fid=3>
> Is it because their lamps are better, or because the ordinary CCFL
> lamps have been cost reduced to produce a shorter lifetime? Dunno,
> but I suspect the latter.

Interesting about the CCFLs - for a start I thought it was a typo for CFL,
but then realised that CCFLs are used in displays and last for years (mine
is nearly 8 years old but has been on for probably no more than 20,000h in
that period).
The article does seem to have a bit of trouble with its units, e.g. kW/h.

--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

[Andy Burns]

William Sommerwerck wrote:

> polygonum wrote
>
>> William Sommerwerck wrote:
>>
>>> One might argue that all the transistors are created simultaneously in a
>>> single processing sequence, and that the chip is, technically, a single
>>> component.
>
>> One might argue that is the case for the 100-component circuit referred to
>> in the EE Times article.
>
> One //might not// argue that. The LED lamp is made of discrete components that
> are manufactured separately, and individually soldered in place.

The original article makes the very crude leap from one filament with a
claimed 0.0001% probability of failure (shouldn't that approach 100%
after a thousand hours?), to 60 electronic components yet assumes they
each have the same 0.0001% probability of failure, multiplying them up
to give a 60x higher failure rate for the LED vs the incandescent.

Subject to my eyesight, in the circuit chosen there appear to be 1
integrated circuit, 8 diodes, 8 transistors, 11 capacitors, 26
resistors, 2 chokes, 1 fuse.

Each of these classes of component have different probabilities of
failure, and in "cheap" PSU circuits it tends to be the capacitors with
the highest, for a given circuit a bit of analysis will probably reveal
three or four "pinch" components that are likely to be responsible for
>90% of all the failures.

Searching for other LED lamp schematics, was that one chosen because it
was considered a well designed circuit, or because it has a conveniently
high component count?

[Andy Burns]

Andy Burns wrote:

> The original article makes the very crude leap from one filament with a
> claimed 0.0001% probability of failure

Grrrr! 0.01% in both cases

[Vir Campestris]

On 03/01/2015 21:50, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 18:23:51 +0000, Adrian wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 10:19:37 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>
>>> Please put carrets around URL's so that the Usenet server doesn't
>>> reformat it by wrapping the lines.
>>
>> Please spell carats correctly and cease the apostrophe abuse so that we
>> don't have to wrap your lines...
>
> ITYM 'carets'!
>

"Carats" ties up better with "diamond brackets" :P

Andy

[Arfa Daily]

>
> 35 years old? That thing must have been belt driven.
>
> The oldest ones I saw were 1990-ish and from panasonic, with a huge
> magnetic ballast. It was large, stupid and didn't fit in most fixtures. I
> can't recall what the life was, but it was put together well with lots of
> glass and silicone goop. There's no way in hell it was cheaper than a box
> of incandescent bulbs, especially when you factor in the part where
> electricity itself isn't really that expensive in the US.
>
>

When we owned a day nursery, it was located in a Victorian school building
that we bought. It was back in the early 80s. When we bought the place, it
had all old pendant fixtures in the rooms - probably something like 12 in
each room, so you can imagine what the electricity bill would have been
like. I replaced them all with some CFLs called "Dulux EL Globes". I would
guess that each was about 4 - 5" diameter and was completely translucent.
They took a while to warm up to full brightness, but the light output from
them was excellent, and of a very pleasant colour. They ran 5 days a week
from 7:30 in the morning until gone 6pm, and the failure rate was very very
low. They weren't cheap, mind ...

Arfa

[Arfa Daily]

"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cgp2v5...@mid.individual.net...
>
>
> "Arfa Daily" <arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:mwHpw.359076$Ea7.1...@fx16.am4...
>>
>>
>> "Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:cgoeh0...@mid.individual.net...
>>>
>>>
>>> "Arfa Daily" <arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Qkypw.703472$CW3.1...@fx07.am4...
>>>> EE Times article that came to me by email today
>>>>
>>>> http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/en/the-big-lie-about-led-lighting.html?cmp_id=7&news_id=222923405
>>>
>>> Mindlessly superficial.
>>
>> Much like you then ...
>
> You never could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag.
>

BWAHAHAHA !

All that 'good' stuff you've just written, then you spot my (one line)
comment - 2 days late I might add - and you revert exactly to type, as we
have all come to know and expect of you. Good old Rod, never one to let us
down old boy, are you ? :-) I suppose the paper bag is wet because I
live on a soggy little island, right ?

Arfa

[Arfa Daily]

>
> That also begs the question "Why did Arfa Daily post the article"? My
> best guess(tm) here is that he's still having problems adjusting to

> LED lighting and needs a new reason to not use LED lighting. Am I at
> least close?

Not really ...

I don't like CFL lighting - that's well known. I am still reserving judgment
on LED lighting. My local supermarket recently had a major refit, and all of
their ceiling fluorescent fittings were replaced with linear LED arrays, so
at first, you don't notice that anything has changed. When I did realise, I
was surprised that the quality and intensity of the light in terms of how
well it illuminated the sales floor, was every bit as good as the original
fluorescents. They also have replaced the car park floodlights with LED
arrays, and these are crap compared to the metal halide fixtures that they
replaced. My hairdresser has replaced all of the mini spots in his ceiling
fixtures with equivalent LED bulbs. They produce a good amount of light, and
the colour is not bad, but they are unpleasantly bright to look at. They are
also not a very good shape and don't fit the fixtures terribly well. I'm not
a great fan of LED street lighting either, as I think it is harsh in
comparison to say LPS, and nothing like as effective at penetrating fog, as
it is polychromatic light. It also doesn't seem as good at producing 'even'
street lighting as LPS or even HPS is, if you can get past the yellow colour
of those types.

As everyone also knows, I am not a fan of substitute lighting technologies
brought in for eco-bollox reasons. CFLs are not as good as incandescents,
and never will be in terms of light quality, low temperature performance,
and start-up time. LEDs are better in all of those areas, but still have a
long way to go before I would consider them to be a replacement technology
for domestic incandescent bulbs, rather than the substitute which they
currently are. The 'eco' credentials for this lighting, as spouted by the
politicians and commentators, is always far too simplistic, and designed to
convince the great unwashed that they must be better because they consume so
much less energy. No account is taken of the energy budgets to make these
things in the first place, or to dispose of them (properly) when they fail.
The supermarket sales floor lights are a good example of what can be
achieved with commercial LED lighting. Where you are not trying to reproduce
sunlight - such as with airport runway and taxiway lighting - then they are,
without doubt, the best and most reliable technology for the job. There are
may LED traffic signals in the area where I live, and they seem to work
extremely well, so another area where LEDs are appropriate and good at the
job.

All of the above, we have discussed on these two groups over the years, as
the technology has changed and evolved. I merely thought that this article,
by someone who seems to be in a position to make valid comments on the
subject, had an interesting alternative view of the common wisdom that is
generally pushed. Simply that, Jeff. Hence the reason that I titled the post
"Interesting..." ...

[Arfa Daily]

"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:cgqrjq...@mid.individual.net...
> William Sommerwerck <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>
>>> Much more likely he doesn't actually have a fucking clue about the
>>> basics.
>
>> Are you any relation to Joshua Speed?
>
> No idea, I've never done the genealogy that comprehensively.
> I do know that I am not related to quite a few other Speeds in my country
> even tho it is a rather uncommon name.
>> Arfa is an intelligent and knowledgeable person.
>
> He clearly isn't on that particular question.

What particular question ?

>
> He didn't even notice that cars are MUCH
> more reliable than they used to be even tho they have vastly more
> components
> than they used to have. In spades with computer cpus and memory alone.

You are unbelievable. How did you manage to extrapolate that mindless crap
from my original post ?

Sheesh ! Twat ...

Arfa

[Arfa Daily]

"Phil Hobbs" <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote in message
news:54A84133...@electrooptical.net...

> On 1/3/2015 1:54 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Sat, 3 Jan 2015 07:10:25 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
>> <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
>>> news:htfeaa9rp9rc028ei...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>> The reason for the designed in failures is the need for manufactories
>>>> to continue selling replacements. If they actually made a device that
>>>> lasts forever, they will sell a few years worth, and then go out of
>>>> business because there will be no replacement sales. Reliability is
>>>> bad for (consumer) business.
>>>
>>> What about lighting for new buildings?
>>
>> It's strictly a question of selling price.
>>
>> Joe Sixpack is not going to tolerate $8 "60 watt" lamps in his house.
>> He wants cheap, at any cost, even if it blows up every few years. I've
>> noticed that most of the homes that I see that have all LED lighting,
>> also have a hybrid car, grid tied solar systems, and other energy
>> conservation devices. They tend to be affluent but not very good at
>> calculating the alleged savings or comparing with alternatives. When
>> I do this for them, some don't want to hear the bad news. They'll pay
>> any price, to save a few pennies. Seriously expensive LED lighting is
>> not a problem for this market.
>>

>> However, the rest are tightwads or just plain cheap. They look at the

>> store shelf and see $1 CCFL lamps next to $10 LED lights. My guess is
>> they'll buy the $1 lamp and wait for the price of LED's to drop. I
>> saw this happen at the local hardware store. The flooring manager
>> said that when he puts the two types of lights next to each other, the
>> sales of CCFL lamps go up and LED's drop. When he separates them,
>> putting the LED's in a garish impulse buy display near the cash
>> register, CCFL sales drop, and LED's go up. The bottom line is that

>> Joe Sixpack wants cheap lights, and the only way the industry is going
>> to supply those is to cut corners, which show up as increased infant
>> mortality and lifetime failures.
>>

>> However, high reliability lighting (towers, airports, buildings, etc)
>> are in a different class from Joe Sixpack. You don't find those
>> lights at the hardware store or supermarket. They're industrial
>> specialty items, with high quality LED's, and high prices to match.
>> Reputation is a big thing in such markets, so anything designed to
>> fail prematurely is not going to last very long.
>>

>>>From my perspective, the cost savings outweigh the "premature" failures.
>>

>> That totally depends on how you rate lifetime. I get about 2 years on

>> most of my commodity CCFL lights. I haven't blown out enough lights

>> to produce useful statistics, but mostly I break them from impact

>> damage, or something in the electronics burns out, usually with a puff

>> of smog and a noxious smell. A capacitor would be my guess from the
>> smell.
>>

>> However, these are not the best CCFL lights. Why would this company
>> advertise that their CCFL lamps have 2.5 to 6.6 times the lifetime of
>> ordinary CCFL lamps?
>> <http://www.ccfllamps.com/_en/02_technology/01_detail.php?fid=3>
>> Is it because their lamps are better, or because the ordinary CCFL
>> lamps have been cost reduced to produce a shorter lifetime? Dunno,
>> but I suspect the latter.
>>

>> LED's are probably similar. You can get those that last forever, and

>> those that are cost reduced to blow up just after the warranty

>> expires. If you do the math, my guess is the price/performance ratio
>> is about the same.
>>

>>>> That also begs the question "Why did Arfa Daily post the article"?
>>>> My best guess(tm) here is that he's still having problems adjusting
>>>> to LED lighting and needs a new reason to not use LED lighting.
>>

>>> Like most people, Arfa doesn't like high-K lighting. I switched to 5000K
>>> CFLs,
>>> and though it took a couple of weeks to adjust, I much prefer light that
>>> more-closely resembles daylight, and is subjectively brighter.
>>
>> It's been a while, but I recall that he could not adjust to LED
>> lighting. He's not the only one. The neighboring architects office
>> has two people that claim eyestrain from the replacement LED lighting.
>> Their section of the office uses ordinary fluorescent tubes and
>> incandescent desk lamps. (I once suggested kerosene lamps with
>> predictable results).
>>
>> I've done some testing on myself to see what works best. 6000K
>> daylight LED lighting seems best for doing fine detail work.
>> 2700-3000K is much easier on my eyes for reading, but I have trouble
>> focusing on detail and fine print. I use both where appropriate.
>>
>

> I have a bunch of Luxo desk lamps that have a 100 W incandescent
> surrounded by a 22W circular fluorescent. They're by far the easiest
> thing on the eyes that I've ever used.
>
> Cheers
>
> Phil Hobbs


Go Phil, go ! :-)

Arfa


>
> --
> Dr Philip C D Hobbs
> Principal Consultant
> ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
> Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
>

[Arfa Daily]

"Henry Mydlarz" <myd...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:43Lpw.845586$No4.1...@fx19.iad...
> "Arfa Daily" wrote in message news:Qkypw.703472$CW3.1...@fx07.am4...

>
> EE Times article that came to me by email today
>
> http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/en/the-big-lie-about-led-lighting.html?cmp_id=7&news_id=222923405
>

> Arfa
>
> A few months ago I bought at Aldi about eight LED bulbs to use on my 240V
> lighting (Australia). Three of them failed within about a month, one of
> them does light up occasionally. Unfortunately I could not find the
> receipt for them.
>
> Henry
>

Hmmm. From your aspect, point made then, I would guess ??

Arfa

[Rod Speed]

Some gutless fuckwit desperately cowering behind
Arfa Daily <arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote just the
puerile shit that always pours from the back of it when its
got done like a fucking dinner, as it always is by everyone.

[Rod Speed]

Arfa Daily <arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote

>> William Sommerwerck <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote

>>>> Much more likely he doesn't actually
>>>> have a fucking clue about the basics.

>>> Arfa is an intelligent and knowledgeable person.

>> He clearly isn't on that particular question.

> What particular question ?

The stupid claim that article he posted made about the
purported problem with a lot more components in a LED light
instead of the single one with the incandescent it replaced.

>> He didn't even notice that cars are MUCH more reliable than
>> they used to be even tho they have vastly more components than
>> they used to have. In spades with computer cpus and memory alone.

> You are unbelievable.

We'll see...

> How did you manage to extrapolate that
> mindless crap from my original post ?

The article you mindlessly posted clearly claimed that
when there are lots more components in the LED light
than in the incandescent light it replaced, that that was
absolutely certain to guarantee that it would have a shorter
life than the incandescent it replaced. Pigs arse it does.

<reams of your puerile shit any 2 year old could
leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 14:21:23 -0500, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:

>I have a bunch of Luxo desk lamps that have a 100 W incandescent
>surrounded by a 22W circular fluorescent. They're by far the easiest
>thing on the eyes that I've ever used.
>Cheers
>Phil Hobbs

100 watt incandescent bulb on a desk lamp? Doesn't that get rather
warm and possibly hot enough to shorten the life of the bulb?

I also use two lights, but differently. One is an area flood light,
usually on the ceiling. The other is a desk lamp with a flood light
to light up whatever I'm working on. If the work is large, two flood
lights.

This is what I've been using for close work:
<http://www.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/drivel/slides/luxo-flood.html>
(Oops. I just noticed it's a Ledu, not a Luxo.)

The flood light is a 120 degree "Lights of America" 2003LEDP38-65K LED
flood light purchased at Costco. 5 watts consumption and 45 watt
"equivalent" output. The manufacturer has apparently never heard of
lumens:
<http://ledlightbulbsreviews.blogspot.com/2010/05/lights-of-america-2003ledp38-65k-led.html>
<http://www.amazon.com/Lights-America-2003LEDP38-65K-8-Standard-Outdoor/product-reviews/B001BPYGQ2>
Problems. It's not sealed and the lens is slowly getting clouded,
probably from volatiles inside the PCB remaining from soldering and
sloppy cleaning. I haven't had any burnout problems, but that might
be luck. Still, it puts out plenty of light, is great for close work,
and doesn't burn my hair every time I accidentally put my head under
the light.

If you plan to use a flood light, I suggest finding a different lamp.
PAR20 or PAR30 seem about right for desk lamps.

I also bought a few of these color changing LED lights:
<http://www.ebay.com/itm/350973170093>
I tried to determine which color or color combination was best for
computing, reading, tinkering, etc. No conclusion yet because the
little 3W light doesn't really put out enough lumens (140 lm) to be
considered a reading or work light. Still, it was fun to play with.