We have a set of lights that basically heat the place up like a toaster oven. So I was thinking abotu putting a bunch of CFLs in there. Can I do that with a fixture like this? Or can't one have too many CFLs on the same circuit?
Those bulbs are primarily decorative. CFLs would look a little strange. I'd make a trip to a "big box" store and:
There is no problem, to my understanding, of having a bunch of CFLs on the same circuit/lamp bank.
The problem I've had with those light bars is simply glare. In one case -- new house, standard "builder's" light setup, I replaced the light bar with a nice three light array with shades. Threw enough light to shave by, but cut down the glare a LOT. In an other case, I did as I suggested above... lower wattage, and frosted bulbs.
You take out the bulbs, pull the sleeves from around the sockets, and the decorative plate comes off. The backing plate is simply screwed to the wall. The usual precautions about working with electrical circuits...
The replacement took place in a bathroom that I was repainting and papering.
You can use the CF bulbs, no reason not to at all, they will present less load and heat than the incandescent bulbs. They even make a round globe shaped one ( kind of expensive, but if you care about the esthetics..) that will look just like those..I've seen then at HD and Wal-Mart, among other places.
You can do it, although you may not like the light . The bulbs you presently have are clear G-25s. I don't believe they make a "G" CFL, so anything you get that's made to resemble an incandescent lamp will stick out considerably farther
I have seen "G" CFLs. They are not really common, but try Home Depot, Lowes and Ikea. Maybe online outfits such as bulbs.com.
Then again, those G incandescents are clear. Glare would not be increased by replacing these with any shape CFL. Nowadays, spiral CFLs are available at both Lowes and Home Depot in the somewhat halogenlike
3500K color (a whiter shade of warm white, still more "incandescent" than "pure white"). They now call those "bright white" and they are available in a few different wattages.- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
I have much the same setup. I use frosted lamps. I have replaced every other original lamp with CF lamps similar to these
these
Many cfls have poor color rendition, old types make you look green. Popular Mechanics magazine recently did a test of maybe 10 brands and the most pleasing they rated. even better than incandesant was Home depot brand. Incandesants are basicly heaters, 90% of their energy is heat, 10% is light. The review should be avalaible at the magazine
I generally find skin tone rendition from CFLs (other than dollar store clunkers and the "FUL" not-quite-"true-compact") to be a little pinkish compared to incandescent, rather than greenish.
Many non-compact fluorescents, especially ones without a "triphosphor" formulation, appear to me to make skin tones more greenish/yellowish/pale. The offenders mostly have color rendering index outside the range of 82-86 or "daylight"/"full spectrum" icy cold to bluish color or both in my experience. What I consider the worst is "old tech warm white" whose CRI is 53, even worse than the widely-berated "old tech cool white" (CRI of
62).
I have yet to see a Home Depot brand CFL.
However, I have seen them sell mainly Philips ones and promote those until a few years ago when they made Commercial Electric their CFL brand that appeared to me their favored one. And about a year ago, I saw them largely ditching Commercial Electric in favor of N:Vision.
Meanwhile, what I have found among 2700K ("regular incandescent approximation CFL color") CFLs are a couple of trends:
I find both the Sylvanias at Lowes and the N:Vision ones at Home Depot to err slightly from 3500K color by being a bit less yellow and a bit more purple than "true 3500 K blackbody color", but I still find it pleasant.
Keep in mind that whiter light color can appear "dreary" when light level is lower. The challenge here gets more extreme when the light is of sunlight-like or worse-still of daylight-like color. Thankfully, 3500K is "warm enough" (low enough color temperature) to look good at typical bathroom illumination levels and even most other brighter home illumination levels. 4100K ("cool white") has a good chance of appearing "dreary" unless illumination level gets to around 1000-plus lux (around
90-plus footcandles) common in office areas, classrooms, and retail display areas.- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
I have six bulb bath bar lights in each of two separate bathrooms.
Each uses all CFLs, with a whitish frosted globe cover.
Number of CFLs has never been a problem.
...
If I am not mistaken, it worse: 97% heat, 3% light.
It varies, but for most household incandescents it's 4-8% light.
25 watt incandescent of color temperature 2550 K and achieving 7 lumens per watt is lowish side and about 3% efficient at converting electrical power to visible light. Some 25 watt 120V incandescents, even some of same color temperature, get closer to 3.75% efficiency. 60 watt incandescent producing 870 lumens and having color temperature in the upper 2700's is about 5.6-5.75% efficient. 100 watt incandescent with color temperature 2860-2870 K and producing 1710-1750 lumens is about 6.7% efficient.Halogens and higher wattage incandescents with color temperature about
3000 K and achieving 20 lumens per watt have efficiency of converting electrical energy to visible light (400-700 nm) about 8%. 3400K photoflood lamps with life expectancy in hours hardly/barely double digits and wattage at least 250 watts can achieve about 13% efficiency.Compact fluorescents achieve about 20%, but have their spectrum concentrated towards more-efficacious wavelengths so as to have lumen/watt "overall luminous efficacy" figures almost 4 times that of an incandescent whose efficiency at producing visible light is lower by a factor of only 3.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Another option is to simply replace the fixture with a two tube 4 ft. T8 fluorescent strip (approximate cost, $25.00) and build a valance that is open at the top and bottom so that more light can be distributed throughout the room.
A fluorescent strip would consume just 60-watts and two good quality T8 fluorescent tubes would provide upwards of 6,300 lumens of light -- roughly the same amount of light as fifteen or more 40-watt G25 incandescents. For residential bathrooms, I might recommend a T8 lamp with a 3,000K colour temperature and a CRI (colour rendering index) of
85 or higher (e.g., a GE SPX30). The Philips 32T8/ADV830 is another excellent choice.Not only are linear fluorescents less costly to replace, they produce
1.5 to 2.0 times more light, watt for watt, last two to three times longer than a standard CFL and the quality of the light they provide is generally superior. They also produce more light at startup and reach full brightness more quickly.Best regards, Paul
T 12 flourescent and electronic ballast would be the most efficient.
We have globe-style "GE BIAX" CFLs in our vanity. Only problem is they take for-EVER to come up to full brightness. If you can live with that, they're fine and should run a lot cooler. Maybe other brands aren't as bad.
Do you have any figures to support that?
According to my Philips lamp catalog, F40/30U (Ultralume 3000K F40T12) has initial lumens of 3300, which is 82.5 lumens/watt.
The 34 watt version has rated initial lumens of 2950, which works out to
86.8 lumens/watt.The F40T12 "Advantage" 3000K (a premium one) has rated initial lumens of
3600, which works out to 90 lumens per watt.I cannot find any more efficacious T12 4-footers.
The same catalog says initial lumens of 2950 for most F32T8 models, 3100 for the "Advantage" premium one. Those work out to 92.2 and 96.9 lumens/watt respectively.
The industry standard is for T12 and for 17, 25, and 32 watt T8 fluorescents to have their performance specified with a magnetic ballast (and newer T5 ones specified with an electronic ballast). T12 and T8 should both improve in efficacy by roughly equal margins over the efficacies that the catalog lumen and watt specifications indicate when electronic ballasts are used.
I am aware that T12 is supposed to be more efficient than T8 according to books by Elenbaas or Waymouth. However, it appears to me that T8 permits higher quality phosphor at a given cost because less phosphor is needed. Also, for equal length, T8 has a lower percentage of input power going into electrode losses due to higher lamp voltage.
Furthermore, I expect better prices and quality for T8 electronic ballasts than for T12 ones because T8 electronic ballasts are extremely common and T12 ones are far from that.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
If warmup is an issue, then I would go for linear fluorescents as proposed by Paul Eldridge. If the lamps must be screw-in CFLs, I would see if bare spirals would be acceptable.
In my experience, compact fluorescents with outer bulbs mostly tend to be even worse at warmup requirements than ones without, such as bare spirals.
What I consider the likely explanation: In a CFL with an outer bulb, the fluorescent tubing reaches a higher temperature. So it has to be designed for its performance to be optimum at that higher temperature.
As a result, it starts dimmer than a bare spiral CFL does, and takes more time to heat itself to the higher temperature, along with heating up the outer bulb in order to reach full operating temperature.
CFLs with more severe warmup requirements tend to have a wider range of ambient temperature over which they work well. As a result, ones for outdoor use tend to have outer bulbs, start dim, and take a minute (or more) to get close to full light output.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Hi Don,
That's certainly my overall impression as well. As you noted, the
32-watt Philips Advantage has an initial lumen rating of 3,100, which pegs lamp efficacy at 96.9 lumens/watt (not including ballast losses).Source:
Source:
It's pretty much the same story over at GE. The F32T8XLSPX30HLEC is rated at 3,100 lumens and their equivalent T12 numbers comes in at
3,400 and 2,900 lumens respectively.Assuming T8 and T12 electronic ballasts are equally efficient in operation (and I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise), lumen for lumen, a T12 lamp would consume 5 to 10 per cent more energy than its T8 counterpart.
T12 is obsolete, dead-end technology and I would expect the major lamp manufacturers to focus the bulk of their attention on their T5 and T8 lines going forward.
Best regards, Paul
That would be my ideal solution. But, I'm not Bob Villa, and we're not down there all the time. How hard would it be just to replace that monstrosity with a T8 fluorescent strip? I can replace electrical outlets, change tires... but generally speaking I fix computers. So when your hard drive goes bad let me know.
Hi Edward,
If you're not comfortable tackling this type of work, it's probably best to let someone else take it on. That said, if you can work on computers, this should be pretty straightforward.
Obvious safety precautions apply; i.e., as a first step, turn off the circuit breaker that powers this fixture. Removal of the old fixture probably requires popping off the front faceplate, disconnecting the feed wires and removal of the mounting hardware. A set of installation instructions should accompany the new fixture. When reconnecting the feed wires, make sure the ground (green wire) is properly attached to the metal frame -- there is a metal screw that holds this wire firmly in place.
A second set of hands will make the job a lot easier, so a couple of (root)beers and perhaps a few burgers on the 'Q might help move things along nicely. And if you don't want to build a valance to shield the fixture, you might opt for one with an internal diffuser/lense cover.
Best regards, Paul
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.