Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
CFL vs shop FL tube light
66 views
Skip to first unread message
ps56k
Nov 19, 2012, 12:57:16 PM11/19/12
to
I had to replace the burned out FL long straight tube in my shop light,
and noticed the marking indicated "40 watt".
I was thinking - our twist CFLs that replaced the our 60 watt bulbs
are only running about 14 real watts.
SO - are the traditional long straight tube FL shop lights actually using 40
watts,
or is that just and equiv and the real watt usage is much less, just like
the CFL ?
If not - then that means the long tube FL are as in-efficient as a normal
bulb.
--
/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
No Good Deed -
Goes Unpunished
and noticed the marking indicated "40 watt".
I was thinking - our twist CFLs that replaced the our 60 watt bulbs
are only running about 14 real watts.
SO - are the traditional long straight tube FL shop lights actually using 40
watts,
or is that just and equiv and the real watt usage is much less, just like
the CFL ?
If not - then that means the long tube FL are as in-efficient as a normal
bulb.
--
/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
No Good Deed -
Goes Unpunished
Pete C.
Nov 19, 2012, 1:23:22 PM11/19/12
to
incandescent lamps. Unfortunately, few people these days seem able to
understand what efficiency really means, or calculate the MPG their car
gets :(
Message has been deleted
Pete C.
Nov 19, 2012, 2:21:48 PM11/19/12
to
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
> I put a clamp on the hot side of the line cord of a regular 2 tube
> shop light and the whole thing, ballast and all is about 0.48-49 amps
> and a line voltage of 123 VAC so the whole thing is about 60 watts.
> I am not sure where the "40w" comes from.
> Maybe that was based on the old style magnetic ballast.
True RMS meter? The missing 20W could be hiding in a distorted
electronic ballast waveform.
Message has been deleted
ps56k
Nov 19, 2012, 3:17:30 PM11/19/12
to
<gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:fv0la8ph6kf7cibm1...@4ax.com...
> Just a little gee whiz info
> I put a clamp on the hot side of the line cord of a regular 2 tube
> shop light and the whole thing, ballast and all is about 0.48-49 amps
> and a line voltage of 123 VAC so the whole thing is about 60 watts.
> I am not sure where the "40w" comes from.
> Maybe that was based on the old style magnetic ballast.
>
ok - was curious enogh to break out my Kill-A-Watt meter...
> I put a clamp on the hot side of the line cord of a regular 2 tube
> shop light and the whole thing, ballast and all is about 0.48-49 amps
> and a line voltage of 123 VAC so the whole thing is about 60 watts.
> I am not sure where the "40w" comes from.
> Maybe that was based on the old style magnetic ballast.
>
as the twin tube shop light is plugged into a switched outlet.
SO - the lamps are - F40RES SP41 40w
The meter shows the fixture with both tubes running -
124v .86amp 67watt 105va ..... that's 67watts total for BOTH running
Pete C.
Nov 19, 2012, 5:02:29 PM11/19/12
to
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>
> On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 13:21:48 -0600, "Pete C." <aux3....@snet.net>
>
> "AC readings displayed on this meter are average responding, True-RMS
> indicating. They are based on a true sinusoidal waveform."
The T8 tubes are 32W also, while the T12 are 40W. Not sure which you
have in the fixture you measured.
Pete C.
Nov 19, 2012, 5:29:03 PM11/19/12
to
on four identical cheap shoplight fixtures all populated from the same
case of Sylvania Octron/Eco F032/T41/Eco 32W lamps. After a warmup
period I measured: 56W, 57W, 57W, 60W. So there is some variation and
all seem to be a bit below the 32W spec on the tube.
ps56k
Nov 19, 2012, 5:43:20 PM11/19/12
to
"Pete C." <aux3....@snet.net> wrote in message
news:50aab2b7$0$5383$a826...@newsreader.readnews.com...
>> SO - the lamps are - F40RES SP41 40w
>>
>> The meter shows the fixture with both tubes running -
>> 124v .86amp 67watt 105va ..... that's 67watts total for BOTH running
>
> Interesting. So I went out to my shop where I could conveniently measure
> on four identical cheap shoplight fixtures all populated from the same
> case of Sylvania Octron/Eco F032/T41/Eco 32W lamps. After a warmup
> period I measured: 56W, 57W, 57W, 60W. So there is some variation and
> all seem to be a bit below the 32W spec on the tube.
I'm guessing that is for the fixture - with two bulbs lit up -
>>
>> The meter shows the fixture with both tubes running -
>> 124v .86amp 67watt 105va ..... that's 67watts total for BOTH running
>
> Interesting. So I went out to my shop where I could conveniently measure
> on four identical cheap shoplight fixtures all populated from the same
> case of Sylvania Octron/Eco F032/T41/Eco 32W lamps. After a warmup
> period I measured: 56W, 57W, 57W, 60W. So there is some variation and
> all seem to be a bit below the 32W spec on the tube.
BTW - looked up that various flavors of my F40's - looking for "lumens"
and they appear to supply.... 2600 - 3150 lumens -
so a lot of light for wattage used -
hmmm -
single F40 straight bulb
2600 lumens / 34 watts = 76 lumens per watt
a stanard 60watt CFL
900 lumens / 14 watts = 64 lumens per watt
Robert Neville
Nov 19, 2012, 5:50:32 PM11/19/12
to
"ps56k" <pschuman_...@interserv.com> wrote:
>I had to replace the burned out FL long straight tube in my shop light,
>and noticed the marking indicated "40 watt".
>
>I was thinking - our twist CFLs that replaced the our 60 watt bulbs
>are only running about 14 real watts.
>
>SO - are the traditional long straight tube FL shop lights actually using 40
>watts, or is that just and equiv and the real watt usage is much less, just like
>the CFL ?
>
>If not - then that means the long tube FL are as in-efficient as a normal
>bulb.
Watts are a measure of power consumption, not light produced. What you need to
>I had to replace the burned out FL long straight tube in my shop light,
>and noticed the marking indicated "40 watt".
>
>I was thinking - our twist CFLs that replaced the our 60 watt bulbs
>are only running about 14 real watts.
>
>SO - are the traditional long straight tube FL shop lights actually using 40
>watts, or is that just and equiv and the real watt usage is much less, just like
>the CFL ?
>
>If not - then that means the long tube FL are as in-efficient as a normal
>bulb.
be looking at are lumens. Those old 40w 48" tubes lumen output varied, but 3200
lumens is a reasonable average. A 14w CFL produces about 800 lumens, which means
you'd need 4 of them to produce the same light as an old tube.
BTW - the current 48" tubes are 32 watts for a similar lumen output.
gregz
Nov 19, 2012, 9:01:49 PM11/19/12
to
"ps56k" <pschuman_...@interserv.com> wrote:
> I had to replace the burned out FL long straight tube in my shop light,
> and noticed the marking indicated "40 watt".
>
> I was thinking - our twist CFLs that replaced the our 60 watt bulbs
> are only running about 14 real watts.
>
> SO - are the traditional long straight tube FL shop lights actually using 40
> watts,
> or is that just and equiv and the real watt usage is much less, just like
> the CFL ?
>
> If not - then that means the long tube FL are as in-efficient as a normal
> bulb.
40 watts per tube. I got 32 or 40 watt tubes rated over 3000 lumens each.
> I had to replace the burned out FL long straight tube in my shop light,
> and noticed the marking indicated "40 watt".
>
> I was thinking - our twist CFLs that replaced the our 60 watt bulbs
> are only running about 14 real watts.
>
> SO - are the traditional long straight tube FL shop lights actually using 40
> watts,
> or is that just and equiv and the real watt usage is much less, just like
> the CFL ?
>
> If not - then that means the long tube FL are as in-efficient as a normal
> bulb.
The 12 watt cfl are under 1000 lumens each. You would have to match specs
and do some math.
Greg
gregz
Nov 19, 2012, 9:04:05 PM11/19/12
to
Greg
gregz
Nov 19, 2012, 9:07:07 PM11/19/12
to
change ballasts, and they were 32 watts.
Greg
Message has been deleted
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 19, 2012, 10:14:59 PM11/19/12
to
On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:57:16 -0600, "ps56k"
<pschuman_...@interserv.com> wrote:
>I had to replace the burned out FL long straight tube in my shop light,
>and noticed the marking indicated "40 watt".
>
>I was thinking - our twist CFLs that replaced the our 60 watt bulbs
>are only running about 14 real watts.
>
>SO - are the traditional long straight tube FL shop lights actually using 40
>watts,
> or is that just and equiv and the real watt usage is much less, just like
>the CFL ?
>
>If not - then that means the long tube FL are as in-efficient as a normal
>bulb.
As you can see from other replies, they may not be a true 40W, but
<pschuman_...@interserv.com> wrote:
>I had to replace the burned out FL long straight tube in my shop light,
>and noticed the marking indicated "40 watt".
>
>I was thinking - our twist CFLs that replaced the our 60 watt bulbs
>are only running about 14 real watts.
>
>SO - are the traditional long straight tube FL shop lights actually using 40
>watts,
> or is that just and equiv and the real watt usage is much less, just like
>the CFL ?
>
>If not - then that means the long tube FL are as in-efficient as a normal
>bulb.
they will use more power than the CFL. What you want to com pare
though, is the light output to see if it is the same.
At work we replaced some 1000W light with brighter 128W fluorescent.
0 new messages