Well, these aren't my experiance at all. Some domestic fittings don't even allow you to change the starter without finding a screwdriver to open up the case, as in domestic situations where dead tubes aren't left trying to start repeatedly for weeks on end, a glow starter will usually outlast the replacement of the light fitting when a room has a major refurb.
What symptoms of starter failure were you observing?
The tubes wouldn't start. Fitted a new starter and they would.
:o)
I wonder if this is another voltage or start temperature related issue? I think I have only ever had top replace a starter once, but tubes several times.
yeah. That is fairly much the way it usually goes.. ;-)
A lot depends on how often they are switched.
Obviously if you leave them permanently on, the starter never goes..
But we used to switch our office lights off at least once a day when leaving.
These are in my (integral) garage where the freezers are, and get switched on and off anything up to 15 or 20 times a day.
I also have integral garage with freezer! I fitted instant-start electronic ballasts in the fluorescent lamps, mainly because I'm often in there for only a few seconds, and I didn't want most of that to be in the dark whilst the fluorescents are preheating. They're switched automatically by an occupancy sensor with a 20 minute timer (actually part of my home automation rather than a dedicated unit).
I'm still extremely leery of CFLs, even though I use them extensively. Colour rendition, even under triphosphors, is pretty poor. A CRI of
80-85 doesn't really work for me, especially as the spikiness of the spectrum makes some colours render appallingly, even when using 'good' CFLs.One of the bigger issues for me is the poor dimming performance of CFLs. Dimmable ones are on the market now, but the dimming range is less than tungsten lamps (they don't do low light levels well), and the colour temperature remains the same as they get dimmer, which give a very odd effect when you are expecting the much 'warmer' spectrum of a dimmed tungsten. Of course, some people don't like the colour of tungsten lighting, which shows that tastes do indeed differ.
I'm currently using GE CFLs bought from Tesco's, which were on offer at 68p each, and I think they are a vast improvement on earlier CFL implementations. Pretty much instant-on, and the colour temperature pretty much exactly matches tungsten lamps (which is what I want) - I'm actually running them in a fitting where one lamp is tungsten incandescent and one CFL. CRI is 82. Not dimmable though. The actual lamp is GE 200-240V 2700K Warm White ES E27 11 W, labelled in very small letters 'ecoimagination' and claiming a 10 year lifetime. GE product description is FLE11TBX/T3/827/E27 220-240V 1/8T 10Y, product code 72689 on page 93 of the November 08 GE catalogue.
The packaging is another example of marketing 'though. It claims the
11W is equivalent to 60W, and even gives a comparison of a 60W incandescent providing 620 Lm, and itself offering 640 Lm. The only problem with that is that a standard 240 V GLS 60W (Frosted) gives 700 lumen, and it is the so-called 'softlight elegance' that offers only 620 lumen.Oh, and I'm no fan of ES lamp connectors either. I far prefer BC. I didn't choose the lumieres.
Regards,
Sid
After the initial discussion here about the brightness of these bulbs I did some real-life tests. The setup was a sheet of A0 white paper (from a flip-chart) laid flat on a table underneath a ceiling hung light fitting with a lampshade. I pointed my DSLR at the paper and noted the exposure timing. All other parameters remaining constant.
With a "normal" 60W pearl bulb the exposure meter reported 1/90 sec. With an 11W CFL, the meter said 1/60 sec. With an 8W CFL the meter also read 1/60 sec.
While I'm only looking at _relative_ measurements, and I was concerned only with light for reading by (hence seeing what was reflected off the paper), it supported my view that CFLs were dimmer than tungsten bulbs. The interesting result was that 8W bulbs threw just as much light in a downwards direction as the 11W bulbs. I reckon this is because the light is projected downwards off the end of the bulbs, not off the body. Since 11W bulbs have longer bodies, but the same x-section, the usable light output is the same. The sideways emitted light is largely absorbed by the lamp shade (hence it's name!), even though it had a matte white interior.
Now I'm quite happy to accept the manufacturers' claims that the absolute light output, measured in laboratory conditions, is similar to tungstens. However, I have convinced myself that in a normal domestic ceiling-hung fitting, the shape of the bulb reduces the amount of usable light by far too much.
(Sorry about the full quote, but I think it is all needed for the context)
That is why lamp light output is measured by using an integrating sphere:
I'm not trying to defend CFLs here, but in order to criticise, the measurements need to be correct, and I'm afraid you have not controlled for all the significant variables.
I think it is Cadmium Selenide photodetectors that have a wavelength response that is substantially similar to (but not identical to) the human eye. A fair amount of work has been done to determine and codify the differences so comparisons between different sources of light can be made in a valid way. I suspect your quick check with the camera is insufficiently rigorous. Sorry. You do bring up an intereasting point about light distribution though. Now that you have mentioned it, I do notice the same.
Regards,
Sid
Thats is fairly consistent with my findings as well. an 11W spiral is similar to a 40W bulb. The longer things are a bit better, especially sideways. I have some in some outside lamps where light comes out more sideways, and there they are close to a 60W.
With the popular stick shape there's less light directed downward, giving more even lighting. Suits me.
NT
I put a double socket up with two 20W CFLs to give a supposed equivalent to 2 100W bulbs. No idea if they are but they are certainly bright enough for me and only 40W compared to the original 150W.
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Alang saying something like:
I've been trying to find those two-way lamp adapters for just this reason. Was yours old stock kicking around a kitchen drawer, or did you find one in a shop?
Somewhere I have a box of 50+ of them, all NOS (Surprise unrelated addition in a bulk auction lot purchase)
-
BC adaptors were banned from sale in about 1970, but not from use. They're still around but not exactly common.
NT
Well, you can always make your own...
Had it for about 40 years. I've got a switched one too. an sometimes get them in car boot sales
I was tempted to make one and pot it up with epoxy and slate powder. Idea is to get both lamps offset and horizontal so the whole lot fits in a 12 inch dia shade without touching the side
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember snipped-for-privacy@cucumber.demon.co.uk (Andrew Gabriel) saying something like:
like. It would be easy enough to make a simple two or three way using pendant fittings.
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.