Re: Glowing walls could kill off the light bulb
Andrew Usher
> "Ken Lacey, the chief executive of Lomox, said that the first products
> would go on sale in 2012. “The light is a very natural, sunlight-type
> of lighting with the full colour range. It gives you all kinds of
> potential for how you do lighting,” he said.
Despite this claim, I won't believe it until I see a spectrum. They
always promise 'natural' lighting; in fact, true full-spertrum light
is rare, and, other than incandescent, is not sold for general
lighting.
Andrew Usher
Mike Jr
It is possible that it is BS. I haven't seen the science.
The pessimist is right nine out of ten times. It is that one out of
ten that really pi$%es off all those pessimists!
http://www.lomox.co.uk/articles/technology
"Technology Solution
There are critical problems that exist with OLED technology in its
present state. The technology is not scalable to large-sized displays
(approximately >6” diagonal) at reasonable manufacturing costs. In
addition, more than half the light generated is lost inside present-
day OLED devices, causing the operating lifetime of screens to be
unacceptably short. The OLED challenges for Low Energy Lighting are as
follows:
* Operational lifetime
* Device Efficiency
* Shelf Life
* Production Costs
LOMOX® addresses these major problems through:
* Fabrication of device structures with our patented materials by
a very high-yield photolithographic process similar to those in the
state-of-the-art semiconductor industry.
* Use of holographically-generated nanostructures to eliminate the
50% loss of light emission in all OLED displays to date. Previous work
has shown that reactive mesogen (i.e., polymerisable liquid crystal)
OLED emitter materials can be photo-patterned into multicoloured
display pixels with no loss in light output due to the photo-
patterning process.
* Delivering emitter materials with substantially improved
chemical stability and better processes for incorporating them into
OLEDs.
These new materials will yield long-lived easy and inexpensive-to-
fabricate OLED displays."
I am as curious as the next guy to see what they have. I bet that the
stock is cheap ....
--Mike Jr.
Thomas Paterson
> "Ken Lacey, the chief executive of Lomox, said that the first products
> would go on sale in 2012. “The light is a very natural, sunlight-type
> of lighting with the full colour range. It gives you all kinds of
> potential for how you do lighting,” he said.
>
> several years, Mr Lacey said that concerns over cost and durability
> had prevented further development. He said that Lomox had developed a
> much cheaper process and discovered a combination of chemicals that
> were not vulnerable to the oxidation that shortened the operating life
> span of other types of organic LEDs."
>
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article6970927.ece
>
> --Mike Jr.
2012 is very early for a technology company that started in 2007. We
worked with some of the first "high output" LEDs in 1998 and we're
really only just seeing the technology maturing into mainstream area
lighting now, generously call it just a decade.
I share the concerns of many others about quality of light, durability
and indeed, the desirability of large area sources. The comment about
indirect lighting has some validity, but indirect lighting has a flow,
uneven, often very graceful graduations across surfaces and can
express architectural volume, depth, curvature, etcetera. This,
presumably, will not.
As well as the question of color rendition (the quality of any given
color temperature), there is the simple question of color temperature
itself. It's taken a decade for decent warm whites and incandescent
whites to be achieved with LEDs and they're still not great. I'm not
sure that large area sources have the same need for warm light -
applications may be more in the office/industrial arena than
residential, but we'll see.
Just my thoughts.
Thomas Paterson
http://www.luxpopuli.com
Richard Tobin
>> Despite this claim, I won't believe it until I see a spectrum. They
>> always promise 'natural' lighting; in fact, true full-spertrum light
>> is rare, and, other than incandescent, is not sold for general
>> lighting.
>The pessimist is right nine out of ten times.
But Andrew Usher is wrong ten times out of ten. Perhaps we should
buy shares.
-- Richard
--
Please remember to mention me / in tapes you leave behind.
TKM
"Mike Jr" <n00...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:96895273-5394-4409...@h2g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...
http://www.lomox.co.uk/articles/technology
"Technology Solution
LOMOX. addresses these major problems through:
* Fabrication of device structures with our patented materials by
a very high-yield photolithographic process similar to those in the
state-of-the-art semiconductor industry.
* Use of holographically-generated nanostructures to eliminate the
50% loss of light emission in all OLED displays to date. Previous work
has shown that reactive mesogen (i.e., polymerisable liquid crystal)
OLED emitter materials can be photo-patterned into multicoloured
display pixels with no loss in light output due to the photo-
patterning process.
* Delivering emitter materials with substantially improved
chemical stability and better processes for incorporating them into
OLEDs.
These new materials will yield long-lived easy and inexpensive-to-
fabricate OLED displays."
I am as curious as the next guy to see what they have. I bet that the
stock is cheap ....
--Mike Jr.
________________________
It is good to be cautious. Lighting quality factors like color rendering do
matter more than ever and make the success hurdle for new light souces
higher than in the past. LED flat planels are already on the market; but,
so far, performance is marginal -- more suited to office or industrial uses
perhaps than retail or residential.
See: http://lightingfortomorrow.com/2009/winners/ssl_maxlite_flat.shtml
And, then, there's always that pesky cost issue.
As much as researchers, start-up companies and the press love to put out
press releases touting "revolutionary" lighting systems, how many do you
recall as actually being revolutionary -- i.e. changing lighting practice
very substantially over a 1-year, or even a 5-year, period?
But, in spite of being skeptical, I'm impressed with the work that's being
done to mix and improve the light from LEDs into good color and efficient
general lighting packages. Examples are the downlights from Cree
http://lightingfortomorrow.com/2009/winners/ssl_cree_high_output.shtml and
others.
Terry McGowan
Mike Jr
> On Jan 2, 10:32 am, Mike Jr <n00s...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > "Ken Lacey, the chief executive of Lomox, said that the first products
> > would go on sale in 2012. “The light is a very natural, sunlight-type
> > of lighting with the full colour range. It gives you all kinds of
> > potential for how you do lighting,” he said.
>
> > Although organic light-emitting diodes (LEDs) have been available for
> > several years, Mr Lacey said that concerns over cost and durability
> > had prevented further development. He said that Lomox had developed a
> > much cheaper process and discovered a combination of chemicals that
> > were not vulnerable to the oxidation that shortened the operating life
> > span of other types of organic LEDs."
>
> >http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article6970927.ece
>
> > --Mike Jr.
>
> 2012 is very early for a technology company that started in 2007. We
> worked with some of the first "high output" LEDs in 1998 and we're
> really only just seeing the technology maturing into mainstream area
> lighting now, generously call it just a decade.
>
> I share the concerns of many others about quality of light, durability
> and indeed, the desirability of large area sources. The comment about
> indirect lighting has some validity, but indirect lighting has a flow,
> uneven, often very graceful graduations across surfaces and can
> express architectural volume, depth, curvature, etcetera. This,
> presumably, will not.
One could conceivably achieve similar effects using a wall paper
that varied flow and graduation over its extent. That is, a flat
ceiling could be made to look like a vaulted ceiling illuminated
with indirect lighting.
I am also thinking of a widow that is actually a "TV" showing you,
say a real or simulated image of a favorite place giving the illusion
that you were there.
An inexpensive and quality luminescent wallpaper could offer novel
opportunities for designers.
Joe
[snip]
>But, in spite of being skeptical, I'm impressed with the work that's being
>done to mix and improve the light from LEDs into good color and efficient
>general lighting packages. Examples are the downlights from Cree
>http://lightingfortomorrow.com/2009/winners/ssl_cree_high_output.shtml and
>others.
>
>Terry McGowan
Is there any software that can be used to read .ies files, without
having to buy lighting design packages? I would simply like to be able
to view the photometric data.
Thanks,
Joe
R Fritz
publication yet.
What platform are you using?
R Fritz
boxman
You can try this software from Acuity. It is free.
http://www.acuitybrands.com/CustomerResources/Sustainability/Calculation_Tools.aspx
TKM
"boxman" <box...@voyager.net> wrote in message
news:hhtf8h$fak$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
Cooper Lighting has a similar tool called "Photometric Toolbox". It's
downloadable free at:
http://www.cooperlighting.com/content/design/etools.cfm
There's another "Photometric Toolbox" (not free) which is designed for
professional use and supports the AGI32 design software. Go to Lighting
Analysts for info at: http://www.agi32.com/
Terry McGowan
Lloydj
>
> I am also thinking of a widow that is actually a "TV" showing you,
> say a real or simulated image of a favorite place giving the illusion
> that you were there.
>
> An inexpensive and quality luminescent wallpaper could offer novel
> opportunities for designers.
>
>
> > Thomas Patersonhttp://www.luxpopuli.com
It sounds so much like Bradbury's "The Veldt" circa 1960, except that
room came alive. We already have huge screen TVs (104" plus), LCD
windows that darken on command, etc. Why is the further realization
so far in the future? We have most of it now.
LJ
Thomas Paterson
> "boxman" <box...@voyager.net> wrote in message
>
> news:hhtf8h$fak$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
>
>
>
> > Joe wrote:
> >> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 17:00:44 -0500, "TKM" <nom...@no.net> wrote:
>
> >> [snip]
> >>> But, in spite of being skeptical, I'm impressed with the work that's
> >>> being
> >>> done to mix and improve the light from LEDs into good color and
> >>> efficient
> >>> general lighting packages. Examples are the downlights from Cree
> >>>http://lightingfortomorrow.com/2009/winners/ssl_cree_high_output.shtml
> >>> and
> >>> others.
>
> >>> Terry McGowan
>
> >> Is there any software that can be used to read .ies files, without
> >> having to buy lighting design packages? I would simply like to be able
> >> to view the photometric data.
>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Joe
>
> > You can try this software from Acuity. It is free.
>
>
> Cooper Lighting has a similar tool called "Photometric Toolbox". It's
> downloadable free at:http://www.cooperlighting.com/content/design/etools.cfm
>
> There's another "Photometric Toolbox" (not free) which is designed for
> professional use and supports the AGI32 design software. Go to Lighting
> Analysts for info at: http://www.agi32.com/
>
> Terry McGowan
Also Dialux is free, www.dial.de, and is almost as powerful as AGI32
on calcs, better on detail calcs, and excellent for presentation grade
renderings.
Thomas.
TKM
"Thomas Paterson" <t_p_pa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0e74c524-1b4a-4a68...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
Thomas.
What's the learning curve on Dialux like, Thomas? Will it do outdoor
lighting, including roadway, too?
Terry
Thomas Paterson
> Thomas.
>
> What's the learning curve on Dialux like, Thomas? Will it do outdoor
> lighting, including roadway, too?
>
> Terry
Interesting question. Yes, it does outdoor pretty well, it has most
European code preconfigured, and I think some US and IES code
included, although we do very complex spaces and so tend to do the
calcs and check results against code ourselves, rather than rely on it
precisely interpreting it. For example, you can get some little
glitches on area calcs if you include furniture as that can create a
dark spot that doesn't exist for code purposes. There is a "do not
use for calculation purposes" on every object you insert, but missing
a few of these can throw out your calcs.
In terms of learning curve, I learned AGI16 and that's the last time I
used it fully, so I can't make a fair comparison. As such, these are
general observations rather than comparative.
I find it very easy to do outdoor spaces, and it easily renders static
images and flythroughs at near photographic resolution. This is great
for taking technical information and making it presentable. For
buildings, etc, you can use simple blocks, complex pre-configured
structures, or more recently, 3DS files (export from 3D Studio Max,
Sketchup, etc). This is great as it lets you create your models in
more user friendly space. It won't do curves, but they can be
faceted. I'll reply directly with a video link that took four hours
to model, light and start running (it took a day or two to process the
full video). I'm off to commission the project in Qatar tonight, so
I'll let you know how accurate it is!
For interior spaces for quick lumen crunches, it's awesome - it'd take
you doing a couple of exercised for an hour or two to get on top of
it, although it would take a couple of days to explore all the menus
and higher level features. For complex interior spaces, it can do
amazing things. It includes transparent and translucent materials
fairly well, color temperature, filters, reflected light coloration,
etc.
I think for anyone used to using coordinate systems, it is very easy
and it is rapidly getting more user friendly for the less technical.
And it'd be cheap at twice the price.
Regards,
Thomas Paterson
http://www.luxpopuli.com
RickR
I use Dialux also and can second most of what Thomas says. I find it
very easy, but a few things don't make sense.
+ There's no way to control your camera positon with coordinates.
Getting a truely horizontal view can be difficult.
+ I don't like the database solution for IES files. Since I use
exclusively USA sold products the built in catalogs are of limit
value.
+ Every now and then I get fed up an go to Relux for a while. Very
similar but with a different set of issues, not as intuitive but
easier to do hard things.
Cheers,
RickR
On Jan 6, 12:44 pm, "TKM" <no.m...@no.net> wrote:
>
> What's the learning curve on Dialux like, Thomas? Will it do outdoor
> lighting, including roadway, too?
>
> Terry-
Thomas Paterson
> Terry,
>
> I use Dialux also and can second most of what Thomas says. I find it
> very easy, but a few things don't make sense.
>
> + There's no way to control your camera positon with coordinates.
create views of tight spaces, capture architecture properly.
Totally agreed with this point.
As to the IES files, we keep a separate library and import as we need
them, so we don't have this problem - probably the better solution
given the limits of Dialux..
T.
TKM
T.
Very helpful comments -- I've just been grinding through the features of the
various programs. The old DOS clunker that I've used for years just isn't
enough anymore.
Terry McGowan
Thomas Paterson
> "Thomas Paterson" <t_p_pater...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Terry, it might be time to go visual! But then, it's only a lighting
application. ;)
Dialux and Dialux LT (bundled) would be a good place to start for the
simple reason that it's free. Once you're familiar, it'll be easier
to split the difference.
That said, I still use Excel for simple lumen crunches. I wonder when
Revit will include all of this and energy code in a user friendly
way. I hope that DIAL/AGI/RELUX all start thinking about converting
to plugins for BIM packages.
Thomas.
Joe
wrote:
>I've got something in the works. It'll be free, but it's not ready for
>publication yet.
>
>What platform are you using?
>
>R Fritz
>
Generally W7, sometimes iterations of Ubuntu.
Sorry about the delay in replying - after I posted, I visited the doc
& found I have pneumonia. Sorta wears you down. Don't worry, though -
I've run this post through an antibiotic program.
Thanks, and please keep me posted.
Joe
Joe
Joe