On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 10:31:55 -0800, the infamous
email@example.com scrawled the following:
Ditto your experience there, but most beat incandescent lamp lives.
Ayup, and the fried electronics stink. I won't buy Feit again as one
actually blew the bulb when it fried.
I have one in my front porch fixture and it gets going well in about 2
minutes after providing minor light after about 4 seconds. No big
deal, as use it about 3 times a year, usually for late UPS deliveries.
Until LEDs come down to Earth in price, I'll continue to love CFLs.
Let us know how those LED floods work out for you, please, Joe.
Well, for a start there's the one in the bog/toilet/loo/little boys room
or whatever term you use for the room where you take a piss :-)
Recent reports published in europe show that CFLs loose as much as 40% of
their output during their claimed life
No a 100W bulb is *not* a 100W bulb. Look at the rated output of the
bulbs at the given voltage. You generally buy a light bulb for light
(lumens) not heat (watts). If you have excess light use a smaller
You assume that a 100W 130V bulb puts out *exactly* the light needed
and that no less will do. Bad assumption.
I don't "assume" anything about "exactly" anything re: the light output.
It puts out what it puts out and that's adequate w/ a 130V bulb just
as it is w/ a 120V of the same wattage even though it would be somewhat
more w/ the latter. _IF_ it weren't, I'd have to either bump in size or
go back to 120V or add another light. I'm simply saying given the
lights we have and our habits _we've_ not seen any necessity to do any
of the above.
OTOH, you're the one that apparently is obsessed w/ somebody not doing
as you would do and measuring lumens to the nth degree.
Under the above scenario, it's cheaper as the power dissipated will be
less for the 130V bulb at something under 130V average than it will for
the same rated 120V bulb at the same average >120V. Add onto that the
much longer lifetime and it's "win-win".
Again, if you want to do something different; fine. Just don't claim
I'm spending more in absolute $$ running 130V bulbs of the same size and
you certainly aren't in position to state I don't have adequate lighting
near my easy chair or not to meet my needs.
Finis, you can tilt at light bulbs all you want, I'm done here.
Eleventh power. not 16th. <grin>
a 5% decrease in voltage equates to an over 70% increase in bulb life.
Depends on what you're measuring. <grin>
"Per lumen of light output", the de-rated bulb is more expensive to operate.
If the de-rated output is 'adequate', and you're just looking at the cost of
operating "a bulb", the 130V bulb does save a little (circa 10%) operating
money. Plus a little more for the reduced replacement frequency. The only
_real_ advantage comes if the bulb is located somewhere where it is _hard_
to change -- i.e., with a significant 'labor' cost involved in performing
I have. <grin> The '11th power' figure comes from a college dorm-mate.
He'd interned with GE in their lighting manufacturing operation. And his
masters thesis was on the subject.
yup. But many people (erroneously!) consider _only_ the cost 'per hour of
operation', in which case the de-rated bulb is _always_ less expensive _per_
_hour_ than the one operated as rated.
With standard light-bulbs, that may _not_ be an option. Try and find an
off-the-shelf (i.e., that you can by in a grocery, hardware, or home-
improvement store) 'lower wattage bulb' with, say 10% less lumens than a
standard 100 watt 120V one. Quite simply, they don't exist.
Me? no. (I was studying entirely different things -- and succeeding at
that (got one assignment back from the Prof. with "and now for something
completely different:" scrawled across the top f it.)
Him? I dunno.
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:26:31 -0600, firstname.lastname@example.org
(Robert Bonomi) wrote:
AFOAF? ;-) Doesn't much matter which, the point stands.
You assume *exact* illumination is required. Like most physiological
things, vision is logarithmic. There really isn't that much
difference between a 75W bulb and a 100W bulb that a 100W 130V bulb
would squeeze between.
only take a 10' ladder to get to, but the can lights are going to be a
real PITA. I don't use them because I really don't want to get up
there until I have to paint the ceiling. ;-)
The light sucks, they are slow to start, not good in can lights, and
their life is grossly overrated (particularly when abused by being
held hostage in confined spaces like can lights). I don't own a CFL
anymore and have no intention of ever buying another.
In short, no thanks.
I use flood lights in CFL but not those that I need on NOW.
The general wait until someone comes type are cfl - I can plan
the warm up time. Once lit, they are bright. Off color but bright.
I tried some of the beginner mass market LED lamps - I'm sure they are imports -
and they are DIM. The package had 40W on it - covered up with a sticker.
They are like 15's. Light but not enough. Now I have 8 and need to find a
home. Maybe Array lights to add up the light.
For years it has been believed that electric bulbs emitted light.
However, recent information from Bell Labs has proven otherwise. lectric
bulbs don't emit light, they suck dark. Thus they now call these bulbs
dark suckers. The dark sucker theory, according to a Bell Labs
spokesperson, proves the existence of dark, that dark has mass heavier
than that of light, and that dark is faster than light.
The basis of the dark sucker theory is that electric bulbs suck dark.
Take for example, the dark suckers in the room where you are. There is
less dark right next to them than there is elsewhere. The larger the
dark sucker, the greater its capacity to suck dark. Dark suckers in a
parking lot have a much greater capacity than the ones in this room. As
with all things, dark suckers don't last forever. Once they are full of
dark, they can no longer suck. This is proven by the black spot on a
full dark sucker.
A candle is a primitive dark sucker. lA new candle has a white wick. You
will notice that after the first use, the wick turns black, representing
all the dark which has been sucked into it. If you hold a pencil next to
the wick of an operating candle, the tip will turn black because it got
in the path of the dark flowing into the candle.
Unfortunately, these primitive dark suckers have a very limited range.
There are also portable dark suckers. The bulbs in these can't handle
all of the dark by themselves, and must be aided by a dark storage unit.
When the dark storage unit is full, it must be either emptied or
replaced before the portable dark sucker can operate again.
Dark has mass. When dark goes into a dark sucker, friction from this
mass generates heat. Thus it is not wise to touch an operating dark
sucker. Candles present a special problem, as the dark must travel in
the solid wick instead of through glass. This generates a great amount
of heat. Thus it can be very dangerous to touch an operating candle.
Dark is also heavier than light. If you swim deeper and deeper, you
notice it gets slowly darker and darker. When you reach a depth of
approximately fifty feet, you are in total darkness. This is because the
heavier dark sinks to the bottom of the lake and the lighter light
floats to the top.
The immense power of dark can be utilized to man's advantage. We can
collect the dark that has settled to the bottom of lakes and push it
through turbines, which generate electricity and help push it to the
ocean where it may be safely stored. Prior to turbines, it was much
more difficult to get dark from the rivers and lakes to the ocean. The
Indians recognized this problem, and tried to solve it. When on a river
in a canoe travelling in the same direction as the flow of the dark,
they paddled slowly, so as not to stop the flow of dark, but when they
traveled against the flow of dark, they paddled quickly so as to help
push the dark along its way.
Finally, we must prove that dark is faster than light. If you were to
stand in an illuminated room in front of a closed, dark closet, then
slowly open the closet door, you would see the light slowly enter the
closet, but since the dark is so fast, you would not be able to see the
dark leave the closet.
In conclusion, Bell Labs stated that dark suckers make all our lives
much easier. So the next time you look at an electric bulb remember that
it is indeed a dark sucker.
Try reading again. :) I knew the guy, personally. His masters thesis was
on the subject of optimizing lightbulb construction. I actually read the
whole thing -- before submission, in fact, as he wanted my editorial help,
and knew I could also follow the math.
The gathered experimental data fit a simple 11th order curve (with an error
under 5 parts in 10,000), over a range of more than three orders of magnitude,
in bulb life. i.e., of the form ax^11+k, no other elements.
Actually, it does, when you're justifying running some lighting circuits
off a (slight :) step-down auto-transformer. Accurate predictions of
results _do_ lead to repeat business. :)
No I don't. For many kinds of environments there is a _minimum_ recommended
level of illumination for the task(s) done there. (more below)
For standard incandescent bulbs, going up 'one standard wattage' results
in about 50% more light output. Note; at the _same_ service life, light
output _does_ correlate linearly with power consumption. One gets 50% more
light from a 75 watt bulb, vs a 60 watt one, because of design differences
that result in a 25% _lower_ life expectancy for the 75 watt bulb.
_That_ depends on the environment, and the situation. In business settings
you have to have certain minimums to keep OSHA inspectors, insurers, etc.
happy. With built-in fixtures, you can't change the source to work-
surface distance, so all you _can_ play with is the light output of the
bulb. 'Subjective' perception, or not, that circa 50% range between
adjacent standard bulb ratings _is_ enough that the 'legal' requirement
can preclude using the next lower standard rating, but still allow the
use of a, say, de-rated 130V bulb.
If they're regular bulbs, in flush-mount ceiling fixtures, there is a
'grabber' pole that makes that height pretty much a non-issue. <grin>
Now a _cord-supported_ can hanging 30+ ft above the nearest floor surface
(and 6-8 ft below the ceiling) is an entirely different story. Can't use
the grabber pole -- the fixture isn't 'stable' enough to grab the bulb,
Have to bring in the portable man lift, move furniture out of the way for
_that_, etc. it can easily take an hour or more, all told, to change a
=single= light bulb. (One can probably, however, change at least 5-6 bulbs
in the same room in 90 minutes total. :)
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It 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.