Ban on Incandescent Bulbs

[amdx]

Below are a couple of references on the proposed ban on incandescent
bulbs.
But first find an artcle on the good the bad and the dangers of CFLs. I am
a happy user of CFLs, but I will
make a few changes with info from this article.
( I have improper fixtures and dimmers)

http://sound.westhost.com/articles/incandescent.htm


Ban incandescents articles.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,249141,00.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6316635.stm
Mike

 

[Don Klipstein]

Below are a couple of references on the proposed ban on incandescent
bulbs.
But first find an artcle on the good the bad and the dangers of CFLs. I am
a happy user of CFLs, but I will
make a few changes with info from this article.
( I have improper fixtures and dimmers)

http://sound.westhost.com/articles/incandescent.htm

Early in the article I see the big "alarm bells" being enclosed fixtures
and dimmers.

My experience in the USA, which has a ban mainly on "regular shape and
size" ("A19") 75 and 10 watt incandescents scheduled to take effect in
2012, and to extend to affect 60 and 40 watt ones in 2014.

I am seeing dimmable CFLs beginning to make an uptick in presence and
availability. GE makes them, and I see them at Target. Sadly, they cost
more than non-dimmable ones - but still less than nondimmable ones cost
about 10 years ago (inflation-adjusted) or 15 years ago (not
inflation-adjusted).

There are ones that can take the heat of enclosed fixtures and even the
heat-hellhole recessed ceiling fixtures. I have in mind ones that have
been around since late 1999 - Philips SLS non-dimmable models of 15, 20
and 23 watts. I suspect that others are already available, and that the
upcoming incandescent ban will create a market for more of them still.

Ban incandescents articles.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,249141,00.html

Incandescents having no major modifications in the past 125 years? How
about filaments being carbon 125 years ago and tungsten now? How about
inert gas fill to slow filament evaporation to allow higher filament
temperature?
(Only increases efficiency for a given wattage/voltage/life-expectancy
when *roughly* wattage is around or over 1 watt per millimeter of overall
filament length (before uncoiling), meaning current around .2 amp,
somewhat less with premium fill gases [krypton or xenon]).
How about halogen lamps? The small bulb/"capsule" size and tougher
bulb/capsule material permit higher fill gas pressure to slow filament
evaporation more, and reduce the cost of premium fill gases. Would you
believe this makes more difference than the halogen does - the halogen is
not that good at returning evaporated tungsten to whetre the filament
suffered evaporation the most - what it does more is keep the inner
surface of the bulb clean!

How about "HIR" - halogen lamps with a coating to reflect infrared back
to the filament! That in practice increases efficiency about 35-40%
compared to halogens without this technology. I see use of this
infrared-retroreflection technology being expanded because as far as I
heard the USA's upcoming "incandescent ban" does not ban technologies but
requires efficiency standards that HIR can meet.

This is still an incandescent technology! Then again, the cited article
talks about California, with some really loony leftwingers from LA county
and some really loony rightwingers from Orange County, and brain-scrambled
voters in these counties willing to elect nutcases to office. The
"statehouse" in Sacramento should be "known to the State of California" to
cause cancer, brain damage, birth defects and reproductive harm, and power
shortages and excessive taxes and individual freedom being lower than in
the other 49 US states!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6316635.stm

"Meanwhile, they remain incredibly inefficient, converting only about 5%
of the energy they receive into light."

Probably close to true on average - if by "light" one means
electromagnetic radiation of wavelengths 400-700 nm, the most common
definition of "visible light".

The "USA-usual" 100 watt 120V "A19" with doubly coiled filament and
design life expectancy of 750 hours achieves about 6.7% efficiency in this
area. Most other incandescents achieve a little to somewhat less.

Sadly, the competition that produces better numbers still generates ones
small enough to disappoint many:

Fluorescents: CFLs are in this area about 16-20% efficient. 4-foot T8
lamps powered by high frequency electronic ballasts are about or hardly
over 30% efficient.
Gain in overall luminous efficacy is greater than the gain in conversion
efficiency because the spectrum of these fluorescents is concentrated to
wavelengths more favorable for higher luminous efficacy. For example,
most fluorescents (and many other artificial white light sources) have a
"shortage" of deep red wavelengths, which the human eye has lower
sensitivity to.

LEDs: None on the market now significantly outperform 4-foot T8
fluorescents powered by high frequency electronic ballasts, either in
efficiency or overall luminous efficacy. (Exception - slight
outperformance when significantly underpowered.) The most efficient
latest laboratory prototype white ones that I heard of achieve 150
lumens/watt. Extrapolation from the most recent datapoint that I have on
both overall luminous efficacy and conversion efficiency of one of these
(27.7% efficiency, 91.7 lumens per watt) leads me to think the best
efficiency so far in announced laboratory prototype white LEDs is
somewhare around 45%.

I am sure they are working on advancing this!

Low pressure sodium: Best I heard so far for a commercial product is
180 lumens/watt, and for 589 nm that is about 34% efficient. 1 watt of
this wavelength is about 525 lumens. I suspect that high frequency
electronic ballasts can improve LPS efficiency somewhat - maybe to about
38-40%, or about 200-210 lumens/watt.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

 

[Jim Thompson]

[snip]

Incandescents having no major modifications in the past 125 years? How
about filaments being carbon 125 years ago and tungsten now? How about
inert gas fill to slow filament evaporation to allow higher filament
temperature?

[snip]

I'm stockpiling 130V versions ;-)

...Jim Thompson

 

[Phil Allison]

"Don Klipstein"

Early in the article I see the big "alarm bells" being enclosed fixtures
and dimmers.

** Yes - in both cases they are serious traps for users.

Both situations lead to fire hazards - as well as very short life spans.

I am seeing dimmable CFLs beginning to make an uptick in presence and
availability.

** Shame how that look exactly like the non dimmer safe kind.

Shame how the non dimmable kind APPEAR to work OK in a (triac) dimmed
socket set near to maximum on the dial - but in fact are operating under
enormous stress with 5 times the rated rms current draw.

More disasters just waiting to happen.

There are ones that can take the heat of enclosed fixtures and even the
heat-hellhole recessed ceiling fixtures.

** That sounds like utter BOLLOCKS to me.

Testing revealed that the internal temp ( where the electronics are located)
of a 23 watt CFL reached 100C very easily in a sealed fitting - while the
room ambient was only 22 C.

CFLs are a long way from being a direct replacements for the common light
bulb - those who say otherwise are criminal liars or dangerous fools.

The lighting industry is pulling it biggest ever scam on the public, while
the greenie lunatics all help.



....... Phil

 

[Terry Given]

"Don Klipstein"





** Yes - in both cases they are serious traps for users.

Both situations lead to fire hazards - as well as very short life spans.






** Shame how that look exactly like the non dimmer safe kind.

Shame how the non dimmable kind APPEAR to work OK in a (triac) dimmed
socket set near to maximum on the dial - but in fact are operating under
enormous stress with 5 times the rated rms current draw.

More disasters just waiting to happen.







** That sounds like utter BOLLOCKS to me.

Testing revealed that the internal temp ( where the electronics are located)
of a 23 watt CFL reached 100C very easily in a sealed fitting - while the
room ambient was only 22 C.

CFLs are a long way from being a direct replacements for the common light
bulb - those who say otherwise are criminal liars or dangerous fools.

The lighting industry is pulling it biggest ever scam on the public, while
the greenie lunatics all help.



...... Phil

indeed. the greenies mean well, but it'd help if they understood things
like, say, PF & mercury content.

OTOH, check out www.llfinc.com - these things are NICE. dimmable,
50,000hr operating life, 55 lumens/W. Definitely the coolest looking
lamp I have yet seen. And PF > 0.98. the thermal design is little short
of magnificent.

Cheers
Terry

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

[snip]

Incandescents having no major modifications in the past 125 years? How
about filaments being carbon 125 years ago and tungsten now? How about
inert gas fill to slow filament evaporation to allow higher filament
temperature?

[snip]

I'm stockpiling 130V versions ;-)

No one wants the old 90 volt Edison bulbs.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[krw]

[snip]

Incandescents having no major modifications in the past 125 years? How
about filaments being carbon 125 years ago and tungsten now? How about
inert gas fill to slow filament evaporation to allow higher filament
temperature?

[snip]

I'm stockpiling 130V versions ;-)

No one wants the old 90 volt Edison bulbs.

Might be useful in CA during the summer. ;-)

 

[Don Klipstein]

"Don Klipstein"

** That sounds like utter BOLLOCKS to me.

Testing revealed that the internal temp ( where the electronics are located)
of a 23 watt CFL reached 100C very easily in a sealed fitting - while the
room ambient was only 22 C.

Please state what brand/mfr and what model/part-number. I know of a 23
watt CFL that claims to be good in recessed ceiling fixtures, another 23
watt model by the same manufacturer that disclaims this, and plenty of 23
watt ones that avoid saying anything in this area.

Keep in mind that we now have plenty of components that can be used in a
125 C ambient, and there are electrolytic capacitors (a major CFL weak
link) rated for 105 degrees C.

CFLs are a long way from being a direct replacements for the common light
bulb - those who say otherwise are criminal liars or dangerous fools.

The lighting industry is pulling it biggest ever scam on the public, while
the greenie lunatics all help.
...... Phil

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

 

[Phil Allison]

"Don Klipstein"

Please state what brand/mfr and what model/part-number.

** Philips "Genie" with quad looped tube.

But totally irrelevant as the heat dissipation is similar across a whole
variety of such lamps.

I know of a 23
watt CFL that claims to be good in recessed ceiling fixtures,

** Recessed ceiling fixtures normally have through ventilation - the one
for halogen downlights all do.

Nothing to do with the MILLIONS of fully sealed fittings - eg "oyster" and
spherical ball types.

CFL makers specifically WARN AGAINST using their lamps in such fittings.

Keep in mind that we now have plenty of components that can be used in a
125 C ambient, and there are electrolytic capacitors (a major CFL weak
link) rated for 105 degrees C.

** Err - with what expected life spans ??

Certainly the 10 to 15 thousand hours being claimed.

Plus you failed to see the significance of the low ambient temp during the
test.



....... Phil

 

[Don Klipstein]

indeed. the greenies mean well, but it'd help if they understood things
like, say, PF & mercury content.

PF means little for home use, and I see all too many "greenies" opposing
CFLs because they have mercury. I did calculations for
on-USA-national-average-basis net change in mercury pollution from
replacing incandescents with CFLs, and I found a decrease by reduction of
coal burning.

OTOH, check out www.llfinc.com - these things are NICE. dimmable,
50,000hr operating life, 55 lumens/W. Definitely the coolest looking
lamp I have yet seen. And PF > 0.98. the thermal design is little short
of magnificent.

Keep in mind that "The Usual Standard" for PF is .8 for commercial/
industrial electricity customers (for total load as opposed to individual
load items or individual "branch circuits"), and there is none yet for
most homes.

The main good impressions that I have of the LLF products are lumens/w,
warm color temperature, and CRI around 90. I have yet to actually see
these products.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

 

[Don Klipstein]

"Don Klipstein"

** Philips "Genie" with quad looped tube.

But totally irrelevant as the heat dissipation is similar across a whole
variety of such lamps.


** Recessed ceiling fixtures normally have through ventilation - the one
for halogen downlights all do.

Nothing to do with the MILLIONS of fully sealed fittings - eg "oyster" and
spherical ball types.

CFL makers specifically WARN AGAINST using their lamps in such fittings.

My experience is more of warnings against recessed ceiling fixtures and
operation in a base-up position in general. And that many CFLs,
especially of lower wattages, lack these warnings.

** Err - with what expected life spans ??

Certainly the 10 to 15 thousand hours being claimed.

I can find a 100 uF 200V one that at 105 degrees C and maximum ripple
current of .5 amp RMs 120 Hz rated to reliably not even go out of spec
at 3,000 hours. Took me only a couple minutes.

Panasonic ECC62DA101BL

I have high expectations of lasting a lot longer before completely
failing, and that CFL manufacturers get electrolytic capacitors better
than ones that I can find in a couple of minutes.

Plus you failed to see the significance of the low ambient temp during the
test.

I am aware that CFLs have to work at ambients a lot warmer than your
test conditions. I am also aware that it is not too hard to find plenty
of components that have a failure rate a lot less than 50% at 10,000 hours
at 125 degrees C. Plenty of silicon semiconductors have a reasonably low
failure rate at 150 C junction temperature and 10,000 hours.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

 

[Phil Allison]

"Don Klipstein"

My experience is....

** Stupid, wrong & very biased.

I can find a 100 uF 200V one that at 105 degrees C and maximum ripple
current of .5 amp RMs 120 Hz rated to reliably not even go out of spec
at 3,000 hours. Took me only a couple minutes.

** CFLs do not use 100 uF electro caps - dickhead.

Plus, 3000 hours is NOT 10,000 or 15,000 - now is it ??

The break even on cost point occurs for CFLs at around 3000 hours.

I am aware that CFLs have to work at ambients a lot warmer than your
test conditions.

** Then take heed of that fact - you ignorant, PITA old fool.

The room ambient can be at 40C, making the internal then 120C+.

The Genie lamps use 105C electros.

IMBECILE !!

I am also aware that it is not too hard to find plenty
of components that have a failure rate a lot less than 50% at 10,000 hours
at 125 degrees C.

** So fucking whaaaaaattt ?

The CFLs on wide public sale DO NOT USE THEM !!!

IDIOT.



........ Phil

 

[Terry Given]

PF means little for home use, and I see all too many "greenies" opposing
CFLs because they have mercury. I did calculations for
on-USA-national-average-basis net change in mercury pollution from
replacing incandescents with CFLs, and I found a decrease by reduction of
coal burning.

nice!

Although PF means little for home use, it means a lot when powering,
say, a nation that just replaced all household incandescents with evil
PF CFLs. There's gold in them thar VARs.....

Keep in mind that "The Usual Standard" for PF is .8 for commercial/
industrial electricity customers (for total load as opposed to individual
load items or individual "branch circuits"), and there is none yet for
most homes.

I supect once incandescents are gone, PFC will soon be made compulsory
for CFLs as the distribution authorities will not like bouncing that
many VARs about.

The main good impressions that I have of the LLF products are lumens/w,
warm color temperature, and CRI around 90. I have yet to actually see
these products.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

not only is the colour temperature nice, its constant over the life of
the product - a very good trick. Mechanically they are very, very nice.
All the luminaires I have seen in NZ are complete shit - cheap or
expensive, they are all crappy; the LLF unit is downright sexy, with its
3-piece cast aluminium housing. I have several of them, and when I
demonstrate them, people are suitably impressed.

Cheers
Terry

 

[Terry Given]

My experience is more of warnings against recessed ceiling fixtures and
operation in a base-up position in general. And that many CFLs,
especially of lower wattages, lack these warnings.




I can find a 100 uF 200V one that at 105 degrees C and maximum ripple
current of .5 amp RMs 120 Hz rated to reliably not even go out of spec
at 3,000 hours. Took me only a couple minutes.

Panasonic ECC62DA101BL

several manufacturers also make 125V rated electrolytics, although the
ripple current is lower than 105V parts - I recently did the calcs for
an 85C SMPS, and the 125C parts ended up with almost the same lifetime
as the 105C parts - perhaps 5% lower. If my ripple current were a bit
smaller, the 125V parts would have won.

Of course if my internal ambient had been 115C, the 125C caps would have
won by a country mile

I have also seen lifetimes as hig as 15,000 hours. I use a lot of (low
voltage) ZLH caps, which are 10,000hrs @ 105C.


or these:
- Rubycon 47uF 450V 1.2A @ 100kHz, 0.48A @ 120Hz, 10,000hrs 105C
- Rubycon 47uF 450V 0.72A @ 100kHz, 0.36A @ 120Hz, 12,000hrs 105C

it would be trivial to go on and on.....

I have high expectations of lasting a lot longer before completely
failing, and that CFL manufacturers get electrolytic capacitors better
than ones that I can find in a couple of minutes.

the first comment: oh yes. When I used to work for a company that spent
$1,500,000 p.a. with Hitachi AIC, they gave us ALL of their technical
data. the mean lifetime is actually 2x the spec'd lifetime, which is -3
sigma


the second comment? Yeah Right! many products are made in China, for the
lowest possible cost. expect the cheapest, shittiest caps money can buy.
I've gutted a few dead CFLs (typically died at first turn-on), and found
some appalling workmanship, and shitty brand caps.

A few years back I did some consulting for a Chinese company that makes
LED lamps (50W halogen downlight replacements) for Philips, who were
very strict on the optical performance, but didnt seem to pay much
attention to construction or lifetime. One design I debugged had a 100%
failure rate - but hey, they only built 40,000 of them

I am aware that CFLs have to work at ambients a lot warmer than your
test conditions. I am also aware that it is not too hard to find plenty
of components that have a failure rate a lot less than 50% at 10,000 hours
at 125 degrees C. Plenty of silicon semiconductors have a reasonably low
failure rate at 150 C junction temperature and 10,000 hours.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

Cheers
Terry

 

[Don Klipstein]

"Don Klipstein"

** Stupid, wrong & very biased.


** CFLs do not use 100 uF electro caps - dickhead.

The few CFLs that I dissected had 47 uF ones. If it took me only 2
minutes to find the mentioned 100 uF one, I doubt CFL manufacturers would
have trouble getting better ones of whatever value in this ballpark they
need.

Plus, 3000 hours is NOT 10,000 or 15,000 - now is it ??

I don't see CFLs claiming 15,000 hours, and 3,000 hours is only for a
rate a lot less than 50% (as in pretty much none) of merely falling out of
spec as opposed to actually completely failing.

The break even on cost point occurs for CFLs at around 3000 hours.


** Then take heed of that fact - you ignorant, PITA old fool.

The room ambient can be at 40C, making the internal then 120C+.

The Genie lamps use 105C electros.

I found that the CFL manufacturers managed over the past many years to
source ones that are fairly good at going a lot longer than 3,000 hours
before completely failing in a very high percentage of their use in 40
degree C ambient.

IMBECILE !!


** So fucking whaaaaaattt ?

The CFLs on wide public sale DO NOT USE THEM !!!

You think an International Rectifier or Zetex or competitive MOSFET is
going to have much trouble lasting 10,000 hours at 125 degrees C? I have
even found IR ones in CFLs!

IDIOT.

....... Phil

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

 

[D from BC]

I wonder if xenon arc lamps can be good for home interior lighting...
It's like the sun!


D from BC
British Columbia
Canada.

 

[Don Klipstein]

nice!

Although PF means little for home use, it means a lot when powering,
say, a nation that just replaced all household incandescents with evil
PF CFLs. There's gold in them thar VARs.....

What if the total VA is reduced despite reduction of PF?

(For that matter, most "non-real" portion of VA by
integral-electronic-ballast CFLs are not reactive, but harmonic.)

<SNIP from here>

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

 

[Paul Hovnanian P.E.]

[snip]

This is still an incandescent technology! Then again, the cited article
talks about California, with some really loony leftwingers from LA county
and some really loony rightwingers from Orange County, and brain-scrambled
voters in these counties willing to elect nutcases to office. The
"statehouse" in Sacramento should be "known to the State of California" to
cause cancer, brain damage, birth defects and reproductive harm, and power
shortages and excessive taxes and individual freedom being lower than in
the other 49 US states!

Just tell all those image conscious morons that they'll look hideous
under fluorescent light and the whole deal will be off.

;-)

 

[Phil Allison]

"Don Klipstein"


** Add to that BLIND as a BAT WILFUL IGNORANCE.

The few CFLs that I dissected had 47 uF ones.

** You likely misread - they were 4.7 uF.

That is the most common value used.

I don't see CFLs claiming 15,000 hours,

** Then look harder - you PITA old fool.

8000 hours is the most common figure claimed.

10,000 to 15000 hours is also commonly quoted.



** No reply noted.

This PITA old fool responds selectively and IRRELEVANTLY.

I found that the CFL manufacturers managed over the past many years to
source ones that are fairly good at going a lot longer than 3,000 hours
before completely failing in a very high percentage of their use in 40
degree C ambient.

** Try reading what I actually wrote - you illiterate MORON.

It was 40 C plus a temp rise of 80 C+ = 120 C+ inside the lamp base.

105C rated electros would fail completely in a few minutes !!!!!!!!!

You think an International Rectifier or Zetex or competitive MOSFET is
going to have much trouble lasting 10,000 hours at 125 degrees C?

** What a BLATANT straw man fallacy.

Shame how ALL the other parts n the PCB have to survive as well.

Like the cheapest poly caps run way outside their safe voltage and current
ratings.

The pig ignorant Chinese cunts who make the horrible piles of shit

DO JUST WHATEVER THEY FUCKING LIKE !!!

The lifespan figures quoted are largely fictional ( ie wild estimates not
designed & tested ) and can only ever be possibly met if the lamp is used in
open air at 25C.




....... Phil

 

[Don Klipstein]

I wonder if xenon arc lamps can be good for home interior lighting...
It's like the sun!

Short arc xenon lamps have cost generally around $100 and up, lifetimes
generally around 1,000 hours (similar to incandescent), and overall
luminous efficacy generally 30-50 lumens/watt. Lower wattages even
have overall luminous efficacy in the 20's! They also have hazards
worse than those of halogen and HID, and require expensive ballasts that
deliver starting pulses of something like 30 KV. They have more severe
current waveform requirements than fluorescent and HID lamps in order to
achieve the life expectancy figures that I mentioned.

Short arc xenon is used mainly when the main requirement is an
especially small and intense light source size. For example, a short arc
lamp of a kilowatt or two has an arc about the size of a pea.

There are "long arc" xenon lamps, with longer lifetimes and milder
requirements and milder hazards, though still requiring bigtime high
voltage starting pulses. They also have efficiency lower in the xenon
arc range and appear to me to be available only in wattages over 100 watts
with cost of hundreds of $$$.

Keep in mind that xenon arc lamps tend to have color temperature
generally around 4800-5500 K or so, as in bluish side to roughly extreme
blue end of the range of direct sunlight at low altitude on Earth. A
more-typical figure for color temperature of "direct sunlight" in the
more-populated areas of North America and Europe is 4100 K, which is a
common rated color temperature for fluorescent and metal halide lamps.

Color temperatures around or over 4,000 K tend to have a "dreary gray
effect" when illumination level is around or less than roughly 500 lux (45
footcandles). Most illumination that succeeds with such color temperature
is around or over 1000 lux (90 footcandles). Most home lighting is at a
lower illumination level than this.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])