Lights Saga - FINAL

You can get surface mounting frames which you attach to the ceiling and slide the panel in there is space for the driver and any connector. With the exception of the 300mm wide versions I cannot see how panels could be installed in or behind the PB as floor and ceiling joists would not be far enough apart.

As for the light saga it always seemed to me the most likely issue was a loose connection somewhere . Modern PVC cables seem quite resilient with only rodents or trapped cables subject to frictional forces being an issue.

Richard

Reply to
Tricky Dicky
Loading thread data ...

You can get surface mounting frames which you attach to the ceiling and slide the panel in there is space for the driver and any connector. With the exception of the 300mm wide versions I cannot see how panels could be installed in or behind the PB as floor and ceiling joists would not be far enough apart.

As for the light saga it always seemed to me the most likely issue was a loose connection somewhere . Modern PVC cables seem quite resilient with only rodents or trapped cables subject to frictional forces being an issue.

Richard

Reply to
Tricky Dicky

I got it from SF not TLC:

formatting link

The lumen output of the 36W fluro tube is higher (when new) - but it is omni directional. The LED of some tubes is somewhat directional (although the manual of the one I got claims not - I am not sure I believe it). I can't say there was a noticeable difference in practice.

The LED did cost more[1]... so at the price I am paying for juice at the moment it would need to save ~20kWh to pay for itself.

I calculated that the light does quite long hours (it is in a utility room) perhaps 8 hours a day. So at a 20W difference, that is 160Wh/day or approx 1kWh/week. So break even it at about 20 weeks.

[1] The tube was nearing end of life anyway.

It will depend a bit on how good the reflector in the fitting is - but the directionality will certainly increase the Lux measured at any given point that is illuminated.

Reply to
John Rumm

Here's the spec of the 40W unit:

formatting link
they claim 4000 Lumens

Reply to
nothanks

The only glue on lights I have seen are the so called LED Tape lights. I have used some, and so far have never had one detach. (they are very light weight, and the adhesive tape is usually something fairly decent). It might depends on what you stick them to though, and how well it was cleaned before sticking.

Reply to
John Rumm

I think it *was* a fixed font, but the eyes are not what they used to be. I thought it was a speck of dust on the screen inside the O...

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

In the past, I have pasted two strings into Excel to compare them. And occasionally converted them to Ascii, using od, or in Excel, before I could see the difference.

Reply to
Pancho

I've got a couple of screwfix 6 foot battens, 32W 3200lm

My point wasn't about total light, just that having the light source spacially distributed improves its ability to light nooks and crannies and avoid shadows.

For my double garage, I should have bought 3, I only bought 2.

To be honest, I think both panel and batten leds are pretty good. A good improvement on what came before.

Reply to
Pancho

And the gods of Qwerty put them next door to each other on the keyboard...

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

I should have gone to Specsavers!!! ;-)

Yours might be non-directional. This one claims to be 330°:

formatting link

In contrast, this one (intended more for kitchen undercabinet lighting) claims to have a beam angle of 145 °:

formatting link

Makes sense for that sort of usage. I reckon that, on average, my garage lights get barely an hour of use a week. There are three 5ft lamps; I've been here almost 11 years and they are still the originals. I really should change the kitchen 2ft under cabinet fluos to LEDs, as I've had to buy at least four replacements - perhaps five.

An aside... Following the problem with the garage lighting wiring, I cut away the old wiring hidden above the plasterboard and in the rockwool insulation, and replaced it with surface mounted wiring in 16mm^2 trunking. For the last bit to be done I had two fluorescent lights in line about 80cm apart, and I wanted to run 2 metres of the trunking from one to the other, right up against both lights, so about 60 cm of each light had trunking along it. I wired it all up ready to put the cable in the trunking and clip the cover on, only to realise the idiot who'd originally put up the lights had put the second up the opposite way round to the first. That meant the trunking would have covered one or other of the starters (depending on which side I put it), making the covered one impossible to remove! I had to remove the wiring and take down the light, and reverse it so it matched the other one. Sigh.

Reply to
Jeff Layman

In what sense? An improvement on the leds of a few years ago? A 6ft 70W fluorescent light gives 5600 lumens (TLC), so a couple of those would provide 11200 lumens for 140W consumption (at least when new). The 40W led panels you refer to would provide 12000 lumens for 120W, so 20W saved for a similar light output. If on for 8 hours/day, you'd save

160Wh a day, or about 6p/day at 35p/kWh. Three new panels would come to about £80; three new 70W fluos are about £16. So it would take about 3 years to make up the £64 cost difference.
Reply to
Jeff Layman

Since they will last a good deal longer than 3yr, probably worth it in the long run.

Reply to
John Rumm

There was a time where the gods of qwerty did not even bother to furnish a 0, since they figured you could make do with O

(going back to typewriter days)

Reply to
John Rumm

I actually meant an improvement on fluorescent.

Erm. I don't have lights on in my garage 8 minutes a day, let alone 8 hours a day. In my home, the only lights I have on for long periods are

5 watt, uplighters. Unless I'm doing something that needs light, I like it dim.

The LED battens were easy to fit, light up quickly, don't cast shadows and were cheap, cost me £45 for 2. The lumens per watt economy was good, but not a particular concern, in this case.

For power economy, I've been meaning to buy a new TV, and probably a fridge, I've already done the PC monitor, and the freezer. I also use low power ARM CPU servers (Raspberry Pi types) instead of the old Intel PC I used to leave on 24/7. My electric usage is half what it was four years ago.

Reply to
Pancho

mprovement on what came before.

According to the OP's reply, his lights don't run for even 8 minutes a day. On that basis, if the fluos were already fitted, it'd take 200 years for payback! :-)))

Reply to
Jeff Layman

Fluorescents emit 360° around the axis of the tube, while LED tubes are far more directional. You can likely use a lower lumen LED tube to replace a fluorescent tube, making the saving greater. Certainly when I replaced a pair of 36W fluorescents with a pair of 37W LED battens, the shed (railway room) was hugely brighter - exactly what I wanted to achieve.

Reply to
SteveW

Rats chew through fibre broadband cables in MK

formatting link
As one wag pointed out in the DT comments, they were probably adding fibre to their diet.

Reply to
Andrew

Apparently like all rodents rats must chew to stop their teeth getting too large - they grow constantly like fingernails.

(I heard this on the beeb as a young child and added it to my essay for 'nature studies' The teacher drew a red line through it and said 'don't tell lies and make stuff up'. I learnt something about 'elders and betters' that day).

Hard to medium plastics are simply perfect for them. That's why they love to chew PVC coatings.

When I was working on the software for an undersea fibre project, they said that sharks liked to chew the covering of those, as well.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

How illuminating... the mice clearly made light work of their lunch!

Reply to
SH

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.