The Lemon Fool

quelquod wrote:Incandescent lamps got the chop ages ago but they’re still readily and cheaply available. I think fluorescents will outlast me.

The EU legislation banned production but not sale. It looks like Carrie wants to ban the sale of halogens in the UK this month, and fluorescents soon to follow, on climate change grounds :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57407233

servodude wrote:Sorry if this is hijacking the thread
- but does anyone know if replacing the tube and starter with the available LED drop-ins will work if the magnetic ballast has all but given up the ghost
- the fitting is such that there's no replacement ballast I can find and the grumpy old sod who's complaining that it takes an age to come on doesn't want to change the whole fitting (new tubes and starters have not helped )

I suppose that depends upon the nature of the way the inductive ballast is giving up. I imagine that so long at there is a low enough resistance between the ballast's connections then it would probably work fine. If however the thing was going open circuit then it wouldn't. I think the former is more likely.

One could bypass the ballast but the danger would be that if anyone stuck a normal fluorescent tube back in it may self-destruct. Probably not a good idea.

Chris

servodude wrote:
Sorry if this is hijacking the thread
- but does anyone know if replacing the tube and starter with the available LED drop-ins will work if the magnetic ballast has all but given up the ghost
- the fitting is such that there's no replacement ballast I can find and the grumpy old sod who's complaining that it takes an age to come on doesn't want to change the whole fitting (new tubes and starters have not helped )

-sd

I gather that LED tubes are available for 'standard' fluorescent fittings. On some you need to bypass the starter and ballast gear, but I cather some others also do a straight swap.

As I'm looking for new ones rather than replacements, I haven't looked into ths, but the ones in the other garage do take a while to come on, and new tubes and starters hasn't helped, so I might have to go down that route eventually. At the moment I solved it with a ten quid sensor secutiry light plugged into a spare socket that comes on as soon as I walk into the garage from the house, which is fine for popping in for stuff at night.

Paul

jaizan wrote:As far as I can tell, there is no inherent reliability problem with LED lights.

I've had very poor reliability from the B&Q Dial GU10s and also "Interlux" brand.
Meanwhile, I've never had a failure of "Mini Sun" brand LED GU10s despite having about a dozen of them in the house for up to 8 years. I keep a record of what fails and "name and shame". These are very bright and near daylight tone.

So if I were looking for replacement garage lighting, I'd probably look for LEDs. If no suitable strip lights were available, I'd just put in more individual standard light bulbs.

I replaced all my GU10 halogens with LEDs one by one as they failed (didn't have to wait long)
The first batch of relatively expensive glass encapsulated Philips LEDs were terrible - they had all failed within 18 months
Must have been a bad batch - the later pack of three Philips spares are still going, and the remainder are a mix of Wilko and Sainsbury's which are fine

AleisterCrowley wrote:

jaizan wrote:As far as I can tell, there is no inherent reliability problem with LED lights.

I've had very poor reliability from the B&Q Dial GU10s and also "Interlux" brand.
Meanwhile, I've never had a failure of "Mini Sun" brand LED GU10s despite having about a dozen of them in the house for up to 8 years. I keep a record of what fails and "name and shame". These are very bright and near daylight tone.

So if I were looking for replacement garage lighting, I'd probably look for LEDs. If no suitable strip lights were available, I'd just put in more individual standard light bulbs.

I replaced all my GU10 halogens with LEDs one by one as they failed (didn't have to wait long)
The first batch of relatively expensive glass encapsulated Philips LEDs were terrible - they had all failed within 18 months
Must have been a bad batch - the later pack of three Philips spares are still going, and the remainder are a mix of Wilko and Sainsbury's which are fine

As your experience also indicates, the things have become much better over the last decade (unlike my car's LED side-light that has gone into limp-mode barely alight after just a few months - not the brightest tool in the box).


Chris

csearle wrote:As your experience also indicates, the things have become much better over the last decade
Chris

I've noticed they've got cheaper, and offer choices that would've been unthinkable a generation ago. But much better?

The first LEDs I bought were back in 2013, when I went in to B&Q and paid a tenner for a single GU10 bulb. That bulb (and the second one I bought as soon as it had given me confidence) still serves over my bed and does a great job. This is not at all like CFLs, where the first generation were truly terrible and gave "low-energy" bulbs a bad name.

To answer my own question, I decided to do a test wth the existing ones in the garage.

There are 3 old tubes, which take a while to come on, despite replacing 2 of them and the starters for all 3 last year. So tardy are they that I installed a cheap LED security light in the garage so when I popped in for something at least i could see instantly.

Anyway, I read the reviews, checked the ballast in the old fitting was magnetic and not HF, and went out and paid nine quid for a 5 foot "equivalent" LED replacement. All you have to do is swap the little plastic 'starter' for the LED compatible one supplied.

The first disappointment was that despite being the correct T8 width, it didn't actually fit my old fitting.

The second disappointment was that the correct 6 foot long one was more than double the price.

So, 3 mins of faffing on the ladder and the new Energrizer (tm) LED is in. It says on the packing "30W > 72W replacement. 3000 lumen", and has a stripe up one side that should face the fitting.

Switching it on revealed instant light, however whilst it states 3000 lm, it was easily as bright as the new fluorescent I put in a year ago, and much brighter than the 15 or so year old one still in one of the fittings.

So, whether it is some cleer alignment of the LEDs to direct the light, or some wierd way of measuring/calculating lumens from a conventional omnidirectional tube, however it appears LED lumens are much brighter than fluorescent ones.

Paul

DrFfybes wrote:So, 3 mins of faffing on the ladder and the new Energrizer (tm) LED is in.

Tin snips?


Julian F. G. W.

Are you sure the poor light output of the old tube(s) isn't just accumulated dust over the years ? Have you tried wiping the dust off ?

richlist wrote:Are you sure the poor light output of the old tube(s) isn't just accumulated dust over the years ? Have you tried wiping the dust off ?

My take on the technically impressive DrFfybes is that he would have considered this. C.

csearle wrote:

richlist wrote:Are you sure the poor light output of the old tube(s) isn't just accumulated dust over the years ? Have you tried wiping the dust off ?

My take on the technically impressive DrFfybes is that he would have considered this. C.

The esteemed DrFfybes did say that he had changed two of the tubes last year.

Fluorescent lamps' ship has sailed.

It's LEDs all the way going forward.

Watis

Re : 3 mins to change a tube - for some reason the end fittings slipped back to the "working position when I removed the old one, so I had to shuffle stuff to get to both ends to open them again with an electricians screwdriver.

On the old tubes, I replaced 2 but one was over a car with a flat battery, so I just cleaned the end. The new ones were definately better. The old one really dim.

To get a completely unbiased opinion I left them on last night and asked MrsF to go into the garage to see if she could tell the difference between the newer tube and the LED. Sadly she'd noticed the lights were on a few mins earlier, and turned them off. So she then turned them back on and said "that's the LED, it comes on quicker", so that was that experiment gone

FWIW we both agreed the LED was slightly brighter than the newer tube initially, but going back a couple of min later there was no discernable difference, tested by reading the small print on a bank statement under each one.

So at 3 x 30W instead of 72W that means a saving of about 1kWh per night if MrsF forgets to check I turned them off

Paul

DrFfybes wrote:So at 3 x 30W instead of 72W that means a saving of about 1kWh per night if MrsF forgets to check I turned them off

You're running a drug lab aren't you !?(I've watched Narcos!)

Anyways following your post from yesterday I've ordered a couple of tubes to try with the old sod down the road; I'm hopeful that he'll be happy.

-sd

I have seven LED battens in the garage/workshop, randomly bought from Denmans.
All are OK after 5 years.
I also have several individual LED bulbs in coolie hats pendants, some wired separately, some come on with the battens.
Again, no failures.

And one fluorescent strip which I keep for old times' sake. Its dim light takes me back to the early days of pump-up paraffin lamps.
In the attic there is a new fluorescent fitting with diffuser and 'bulb', bought some years ago, 4ft or 5ft, I forget, the whole thing still in its wrapping.
I tried to give it away via the local paper a while ago, no takers.

V8

DrFfybes wrote:
So, 3 mins of faffing on the ladder and the new Energrizer (tm) LED is in. It says on the packing "30W > 72W replacement. 3000 lumen", and has a stripe up one side that should face the fitting.

Switching it on revealed instant light, however whilst it states 3000 lm, it was easily as bright as the new fluorescent I put in a year ago, and much brighter than the 15 or so year old one still in one of the fittings.

So, whether it is some clear alignment of the LEDs to direct the light, or some weird way of measuring/calculating lumens from a conventional omnidirectional tube, however it appears LED lumens are much brighter than fluorescent ones.

I replaced all the 100W incandescent bulbs in my house with the Screwfix LAP 9.5W, 806-lumen bulbs linked below, which currently cost around £9 for a pack of 5 -

https://www.screwfix.com/p/lap-bc-gls-led-light-bulb-806lm-9w-5-pack/5894t

They're supposed to be a direct replacement for 60W incandescents, and that's what's pointed out on the link above, but I'd read lots of user-reviews on the above Screwfix page from people who were over the moon to find the real-world LED brightness was actually equivalent to the 100W bulbs they'd too replaced, and so I was happy to give them a go, and they were right - they really are as good as the 100W bulbs they replaced even though they're sold as 60W equivalents...

Like you, I suspect light-directing improvements to be one of the main reasons behind this, although there may be other aspects in play somewhere, but I just wanted to say that your experience comparing previously-installed lumens with the newer LED-delivered lumens was also something I've seen too, when replacing my 100W bulbs...

As an aside, I've also been very pleased with the longevity of the above LED bulbs as well, which of course isn't something we discover until much later after purchase, and with them being dimmable as well, I think they're great value for money for anyone looking to replace any old 100W bulbs if they've not already done so...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Itsallaguess wrote:They're supposed to be a direct replacement for 60W incandescents, and that's what's pointed out on the link above, but I'd read lots of user-reviews on the above Screwfix page from people who were over the moon to find the real-world LED brightness was actually equivalent to the 100W bulbs they'd too replaced, and so I was happy to give them a go, and they were right - they really are as good as the 100W bulbs they replaced even though they're sold as 60W equivalents...

That's been my experience switching this house from halogen to LEDs.

Example: after finding a 3.6W LED in the hallway far too bright[1], I ended up using these 2.6W/210lm bulbs from screwfix. They claim to replace 20W, but in fact they offer similar brightness to the 50W halogens they replaced!

[1] Those got used for the loft room (WFH office) instead.

The performance of incandescent bulbs depends strongly on the applied voltage. The filament resistance has a positive temperature coefficient, the temperature varies with power and voltage, the brightness varies with temperature. Brightness varies as the third or fourth power of voltage. Power varies as about the 1.5 power. Life is inversely proportional to the tenth (or higher) power.

So an incandescent bulb that at 240V is 100W 1500lm for 1000hours
is also at 220V 92W 1100lm 2500hours.

So how is the voltage on an incandescent regulated? Badly. Somewhere in the distribution system 240V is regulated within -6% to +10%. The voltage at the point of use then depends on Ohms law etc. and will vary a bit more.

Chances are your nominal 100W incandescent is quite a bit dimmer than it says on the box. And also lasts quite a bit longer than it says on the box. (Which was usually a bad thing. For incandescence long life trades with reduced efficiency. The life cycle cost of a light bulb is dominated by the cost of electricity, unless it's dominated by the cost of access to change the bulb.)

A good LED driver will provide constant current to the LED as long as the supplied voltage is in the operating range. Same power, brightness and probably lifespan from 190-300V, or something like that. So you get what it says on the box.


Fortunately this is mostly of historical interest if you are not using incandescent bulbs.

9873210 wrote:So how is the voltage on an incandescent regulated? Badly. Somewhere in the distribution system 240V is regulated within -6% to +10%.

A point of order M'lud,

It is 230V -6% to +10%.

The actual voltage in the UK didn't suddenly drop when we adopted 230V, the tolerance of up to +10% was chosen so that it didn't have to. It can be as high as 253V and still be within tolerance. Make sure any incandescent lamps (including halogen ones) you buy are marked 240V, not 230V or they won't last as long.


Julian F. G. W.

jfgw wrote:

9873210 wrote:So how is the voltage on an incandescent regulated? Badly. Somewhere in the distribution system 240V is regulated within -6% to +10%.

A point of order M'lud,

It is 230V -6% to +10%.

The actual voltage in the UK didn't suddenly drop when we adopted 230V, the tolerance of up to +10% was chosen so that it didn't have to. It can be as high as 253V and still be within tolerance. Make sure any incandescent lamps (including halogen ones) you buy are marked 240V, not 230V or they won't last as long.


Julian F. G. W.

Point accepted. I got the tolerance backward, 240V -10% +6% (Which is about the same thing as 230 -6% +10%)

Using 230V or 240V marked lamps is a tradeoff. Other things equal, a 230V lamp won't last as long but it will be brighter and more efficient.

If you want incandescence to last wire two in series, so each gets 120V. The light will be of a dim and feeble sort, but they will last for decades or until somebody gets sick of the dim and feeble light or the electric bill. This will not work for halogens since they won't get hot enough for the halogen cycle to work so they will fail relatively quickly on too low a voltage.

If you use 24V GLS lamps, You can wire, say, 9, 10, 11 or whatever in series depending upon your desired balance of efficiency and lifespan.

Julian F. G. W.