I see that cree have announced a power LED that produces 200 lumens/watt:
"Two years after breaking the 200 lumens-per-watt (LPW) R&D efficacy barrier, Cree, Inc. (Nasdaq: CREE) delivers another industry first with the introduction of the Cree XLamp® MK-R LEDs. The new MK-R LEDs leverage the SC³ Technology? next-generation LED platform to deliver up to 200 lumens-per-watt (at 1 W, 25°C) LEDs."
formatting link
looks like LEDs have now surpassed CFLs and linear fluorescent tubes, and are up there with LPS.
I wonder how long before this technology is commercially available.
hopefully spelling the end of the ballast-weight million candle power torches, with lead acid batteries that last a year at most and cost more than the whole torch to replace. A 120 lumen Cree torch is just as bright and last ages on three alkaline D cells.
No one has managed to design a lamp which can run LED junctions at less than 100-125C. That's the problem - LED efficiency drops significantly as the junction temperature rises, and the manufacturers always quote efficiency at the unachieveable 25C temperature.
formatting link
LPS get more efficient as they get hotter. Their problem is that as they get hotter, they produce less waste heat to make them hotter! That's why they operature in a thermos flask with an infra-red reflective coating on the inside. In the lab, they have got up to
300lm/watt with more efficient heat retention, but there's no appetite to take into production, because the lighting industry doesn't make enough profit from LPS, and is trying to phase it out completely.
So far, most power LED technology has only become viable in the retail sector as patents have expired and there is competition, because it's very price sensitive. They become viable in the in commercial sectors much faster, which is not so price conscious, or at least will weigh acquisition cost against total cost of ownership.
Indeed, many councils leapt at things like LED streetlighting far too soon and without quality assessments, and have found the supposedly long life maintenance-free LED lanterns they bought lasted less time than the lamps did in their previous lights. Some have now backed away and there seems to be quite a move now to CFL.
Do they think all that corporate-speak is going to impress or piss off readers of their press offerings? It makes me wanns puke. Why reinvent English in such a way that nobody really knows what you mean. after a quick trip to Wikipedia, I think it ought to say, Hey guysm, we been very quiet about this here new more efficient led, so we have decided to hype up a few advanced prototypes to show you what will be coming out. However don't look at the price and reliability just yet, we need to get those sorted out before we sell them.
You're right. The press-release quotes "up to 200 lumens-per-watt (at
1 W, 25°C)" so the 200 lm/W figure is for a low-power device running cool.
Later on, they say "The MK-R LED features a 7 mm x 7 mm footprint with a 6 mm optical source and delivers up to 1600 lumens at 15 W, 85°C". So that's a real-world figure I guess. That's just over 100 lm/W, which is still pretty good but nowhere near 200 lm/W.
Not quite 15W of heat, because the efficiency will be high enough that a decent proportion of that 15W will be in the form of light. But I guess most of it will still be heat.
Will the increasing efficiency of LEDs help solve the heat problem? As efficiency rises less energy is needed for the same amount of light, and a lower proportion of that energy ends up as heat.
They can dissipate far more than that on CPUs, even with passive cooling. It just means bolting the LED to a thickish ali housing with fins on it. You could even fit a fan but I doubt its needed.
My server CPU is passively cooled it's a lowly 800MHz Pentium III, the lump of finned ali to do this is about 6 x 2 x 1.5" inside the forced ventilation (power supply fan) case of course...
The fan would take a significant amount of power, screws up the efficiency something rotten... Not to mention the noise and of course yo= u have to squeeze all this into the space and shape a standard GU10 or maybe an R80 spot light takes. And its still a fairly unidirectional source of light, not the near omnidirectional light you get from a CFL o= r GLS bulb.
I have a Maglite clone from 20 years ago - I think it's a Streamlite, but not sure. The head looks to be same size as a genuine one (52mm), so how do these drop-in upgrades work? Do you have to entirely gut the old head and re-use the glass? Is it reversible?
You take out the reflector and bulb and screw this module onto the bulb retaining ring thread. Chainge the o ring between the glass and the end housing ring (for slightly increased spacing and screw together. Takes 2 mins. If you keep the reflector bulb and old o ring, it is reversible.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.