Author Topic: I thought LED lights were efficient?  (Read 7242 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ice-Tea

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3070
  • Country: be
    • Freelance Hardware Engineer
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #25 on: April 05, 2022, 01:55:52 pm »
The really good fluorescents are at least on par with poor LED replacements.
So they are still worse in general.

Sure. My point is that it is not a given and it is often presented as such. If you have a good fluorescent installation, not just any LED replacement will beat it and resources could be better spend elsewhere.


What pisses me off a bit is the whole "oh, all those fluorescents have got to go" as if it's written in the Bible.  :--
Quote
One huge factor to phase them out is the mercury content, and also it's bad habit to be inhaled when the tube is broken...

No argument there.

What pisses me off a bit is the whole "oh, all those fluorescents have got to go" as if it's written in the Bible.  :--

The really good fluorescents are at least on par with poor LED replacements.

Is anyone forcing you to change them?

Not at all. But agressive advertising makes it out as if you're an idiot if you're still runing fluorescent which is simply not always true.

Offline themadhippy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2582
  • Country: gb
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #26 on: April 05, 2022, 02:23:42 pm »
Here in the uk we've got until september 2023 before florrys get banned,existing stocks can still be sold,but once they've gone thats it.
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #27 on: April 05, 2022, 03:37:31 pm »
Here in the uk we've got until september 2023 before florrys get banned,existing stocks can still be sold,but once they've gone thats it.

I hate bans. They should tax them based on efficiency if anything, there are still applications where fluorescent lamps are superior.
 
The following users thanked this post: amyk

Offline cdev

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 7350
  • Country: 00
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #28 on: April 05, 2022, 04:22:34 pm »
I was having lots of problems especially with "feit" brand LED replacement bulbs widely sold at Costco, Home Depot, etc.   But recently have been buying Phillips Warm White, and some cheapie MR-16 bulbs on ebay and they turned out to be very efficient (dont even get warm) very bright, a good color and generally GOOD.

Since I have a bunch of the fixtures around, this is great for me.  So now my wife and I are using (I think) 100% LED lighting.

Despite the Feit fiasco which left me with a lot of defective Feit light bulbs which I would like to repair or remove the defective parts from and fix, or reuse the LEDS or something.

Sometimes they half fail and cause RFI. Anybody have any good suggestions of how to effectively use all the white LEDs? (from LED bulbs that have burned out - either one or several LEDs have died rendering the bulb useless and dark unless the bad LEDs are replaced by means of hand soldering.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2022, 04:25:37 pm by cdev »
"What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away."
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #29 on: April 05, 2022, 04:25:49 pm »
I had changed out all of my compact fluorescent bulbs with LED by 2015. Philips and Cree have always been my favorites, I've had very few of them fail. The first LED bulbs I was buying were over $40 each but they still paid for themselves.
 

Offline jmelson

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2765
  • Country: us
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #30 on: April 05, 2022, 04:34:57 pm »
Like wraper said, for illumination, the relevant figure is simply lm/W. Since both lm and W are reported for most types of lighting, it's easy to calculate.
A few years ago I made up my own LED retrofit system.  I used commercial LED power supplies with high efficiency, and got the best Cree LEDs available at the time (102 Lm/W) and mounted them on long strips of PC board material to act as a heat sink.  These have worked quite well, with no detectable dimming since 2014.  The power supplies draw ~21 W from the mains and deliver 20 W to the LEDs.
Jon
 

Offline Siwastaja

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8172
  • Country: fi
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #31 on: April 05, 2022, 05:13:33 pm »
A few years ago I made up my own LED retrofit system.  I used commercial LED power supplies with high efficiency, and got the best Cree LEDs available at the time

Yeah, if you want state-of-art, you need to do it yourself. The exact same pattern can be seen in li-ion batteries (in battery-powered tools, powerbanks etc.) and LED illumination: cheap crap uses what was state-of-art 15 years ago; expensive brand products 10 years.

Since the component (li-ion cell; or LEDs) manufacturers are producing and selling modern stuff all the time, the question is, where does it go? What explains the 10-15 year delay? Is it like production ramp-up taking 5 years (so you can't buy them in large enough volume at first), then product design cycle takes 2-3 years, and then the components sit in OEM warehouses for another 2-3 years before being assembled? I sincerely don't understand how it can be this long. It's a long enough time that hobbyists and small, agile startups have true, large advantage over the mass produced stuff anytime.
 

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 16861
  • Country: lv
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #32 on: April 05, 2022, 06:12:38 pm »
Quote
Is it like production ramp-up taking 5 years (so you can't buy them in large enough volume at first), then product design cycle takes 2-3 years, and then the components sit in OEM warehouses for another 2-3 years before being assembled? I sincerely don't understand how it can be this long. It's a long enough time that hobbyists and small, agile startups have true, large advantage over the mass produced stuff anytime.
I all goes down to economics. Why make better products and reduce your profit or encourage EU making restrictions on less efficient bulbs? https://www.mea.lighting.philips.com/consumer/dubai-lamp For example 1, 2 and 3 bulbs have 200 lm/w efficiency which you'll not find anywhere else other than in Arab Emirates.

« Last Edit: April 05, 2022, 06:14:51 pm by wraper »
 

Offline NorthyTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 217
  • Country: england
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #33 on: April 05, 2022, 07:35:03 pm »
Thanks for the comprehensive replies  8) It's been an interesting read.

I think I'll get a couple of the 40W V-TAC units and see how they go.

Cheers,

G
 
The following users thanked this post: shakalnokturn

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #34 on: April 05, 2022, 08:14:48 pm »
Since the component (li-ion cell; or LEDs) manufacturers are producing and selling modern stuff all the time, the question is, where does it go? What explains the 10-15 year delay? Is it like production ramp-up taking 5 years (so you can't buy them in large enough volume at first), then product design cycle takes 2-3 years, and then the components sit in OEM warehouses for another 2-3 years before being assembled? I sincerely don't understand how it can be this long. It's a long enough time that hobbyists and small, agile startups have true, large advantage over the mass produced stuff anytime.

My guess would be military, they get first dibs on all the latest cutting edge tech.
 

Online tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11500
  • Country: ch
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #35 on: April 06, 2022, 02:24:52 am »
Do they, though?? Military and aerospace generally tend towards being technically conservative, sticking with older, field-proven components. Sure, there are some areas where they’re cutting-edge, but I think that on the whole they lean quite “old tech”.
 
The following users thanked this post: Someone

Offline Someone

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4530
  • Country: au
    • send complaints here
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #36 on: April 06, 2022, 03:21:19 am »
Since the component (li-ion cell; or LEDs) manufacturers are producing and selling modern stuff all the time, the question is, where does it go? What explains the 10-15 year delay? Is it like production ramp-up taking 5 years (so you can't buy them in large enough volume at first), then product design cycle takes 2-3 years, and then the components sit in OEM warehouses for another 2-3 years before being assembled? I sincerely don't understand how it can be this long. It's a long enough time that hobbyists and small, agile startups have true, large advantage over the mass produced stuff anytime.
Try getting a volume order of the latest bleeding edge LED efficiency, its often easier to get small quantities of the edge bins while the process keeps improving, there is significant ramp up and even anticipated bins that never end up being produced in production volumes. But the LEDs that are available in volume? my guess would be going to the people who will pay the premium for the extra efficiency because of 24/7 or very high duty applications: retail lighting, airline interiors, TV studio lighting, etc
 
The following users thanked this post: Siwastaja

Offline GLouie

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 144
  • Country: us
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #37 on: April 06, 2022, 06:55:43 am »
I recently took apart a failing Costco Feit 60W 90CRI LED bulb, and I think I will just be tossing the failed ones instead of trying to repair or scavenge.

They are difficult to take apart. The entire base is a formed aluminum cone with a plastic overmold, then the plastic globe is silicone glued on and the threaded base dimpled on. I had to destroy the housings to get to the LED plate and circuit board, and I do not see a good way to disassemble and replace after a repair. The LEDs are reflow mounted, in this case 12 on a MCPCB disc arranged in 2 parallel banks of 6 in series. On mine, 1 LED had failed taking down a bank, so the whole lamp immediately had half output. The remaining 11 LEDS appear to at least work with a DMM diode test. I didn't research what LED these could be or the solder mount pattern, so couldn't say if these might be useful somewhere else. Soldering should be easy enough with a hot plate arrangement. Your Feits could be different.

Probably further discussion of these should be in a new thread.

I was having lots of problems especially with "feit" brand LED replacement bulbs widely sold at Costco, Home Depot, etc.   But recently have been buying Phillips Warm White, and some cheapie MR-16 bulbs on ebay and they turned out to be very efficient (dont even get warm) very bright, a good color and generally GOOD.

Since I have a bunch of the fixtures around, this is great for me.  So now my wife and I are using (I think) 100% LED lighting.

Despite the Feit fiasco which left me with a lot of defective Feit light bulbs which I would like to repair or remove the defective parts from and fix, or reuse the LEDS or something.

Sometimes they half fail and cause RFI. Anybody have any good suggestions of how to effectively use all the white LEDs? (from LED bulbs that have burned out - either one or several LEDs have died rendering the bulb useless and dark unless the bad LEDs are replaced by means of hand soldering.
 
The following users thanked this post: edavid

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 16861
  • Country: lv
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #38 on: April 06, 2022, 12:03:26 pm »
Thanks for the comprehensive replies  8) It's been an interesting read.

I think I'll get a couple of the 40W V-TAC units and see how they go.

Cheers,

G
Most of what V-TAC sells is below average. Of what you linked, V-TAC is the worst. Buying V-TAC is quite pointless unless you get them 2-3 cheaper than something decent.
 

Offline themadhippy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2582
  • Country: gb
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #39 on: April 06, 2022, 12:19:40 pm »
Quote
Most of what V-TAC sells is below average. Of what you linked, V-TAC is the worst
Have you actually installed any of there stuff? On a previous contract  we used a lot of there  stuff,the only minor issue was the ip rated down lights didnt come with instructions on the order of  2 silicon seals,however trial and error  got it sorted.Over 12 months on and no call backs or failures and were not talking 1 or 2 fittings here,im talking about large retail spaces.
 

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 16861
  • Country: lv
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #40 on: April 06, 2022, 12:46:32 pm »
Quote
Most of what V-TAC sells is below average. Of what you linked, V-TAC is the worst
Have you actually installed any of there stuff? On a previous contract  we used a lot of there  stuff,the only minor issue was the ip rated down lights didnt come with instructions on the order of  2 silicon seals,however trial and error  got it sorted.Over 12 months on and no call backs or failures and were not talking 1 or 2 fittings here,im talking about large retail spaces.
I have a few V-TAC bulbs in my house. Purchased them only because because they were at sale for EUR 1 - 1.20 a piece for a 9-11W bulb. They are the least efficient of what I have and have a linear regulator inside them so I put there whey they are used only occasionally. V-TAC with at least 100 l/m is an unobtanium rarity (check their website). Even more expensive "Samsung LED" models have the same crap efficiency. They have a linear regulator and a very small number of LEDs inside for given power. Most of the half decent bulbs of such power have a switch-mode ballast inside them but not V-TAC.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2022, 12:50:42 pm by wraper »
 

Offline NorthyTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 217
  • Country: england
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #41 on: April 06, 2022, 12:50:41 pm »
These were the V-TAC battens that I was thinking of getting:

https://cpc.farnell.com/v-tac/667-vt-8-40/grill-fitting-40w-led-120cm-6400k/dp/LA07398

Do you really think the Integral LED ones:
https://www.toolstation.com/integral-led-lightspan-ip20-ik08-batten/p16505
Or LAP ones:
https://www.screwfix.com/p/lap-oxbo-single-4ft-led-batten-18w-2100lm-220-240v/465pp#BVQAWidgetID

Are actually much better?

I have one of the 4ft V-TAC retrofit tubes in an existing fixture already in the garage and have had no issues with it so far.

G

 

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 16861
  • Country: lv
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #42 on: April 06, 2022, 12:54:20 pm »
These were the V-TAC battens that I was thinking of getting:

https://cpc.farnell.com/v-tac/667-vt-8-40/grill-fitting-40w-led-120cm-6400k/dp/LA07398
This is surprisingly decent for V-TAC, 120 lm/w.
Quote
Do you really think the Integral LED ones:
https://www.toolstation.com/integral-led-lightspan-ip20-ik08-batten/p16505
Or LAP ones:
https://www.screwfix.com/p/lap-oxbo-single-4ft-led-batten-18w-2100lm-220-240v/465pp#BVQAWidgetID

Are actually much better?
All of them have about the same efficiency, 116-120 lm/w
 

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7764
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #43 on: April 06, 2022, 12:56:08 pm »
I have also some V-TAC LED bulbs and strips. No problems so far.
 

Offline PushUp

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 173
  • Country: de
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #44 on: April 06, 2022, 08:47:18 pm »
This topic is too big, to give a comprehensive reply...but what is always true: "don't trust any label or imprint"!   ^-^

Just a short note, from what I have experienced so far:


1. OSRAM (2700K / 8.5W / 68mA)

My experience:
- OSRAM does not last very long, but you can repair them easily
- the power factor is very bad: 0.59 PF






2. NEDIS (2700K / 11W / 70mA)

My experience:
- I am quite happy with this brand
- the power factor is not that bad: 0.89 PF






3. OSRAM filament Cool White (4000K / 11W / 52mA)

My experience:
- filament means = beyond repair (at least for me!)
- as it is "cool white" the power factor is very good: 0.95 PF (the best power factor for LEDs I have seen so far)
- in contrast to "cool daylight filament": 0.61 PF (6500K / 10W)
- and in contrast to "warm white filament": 0.59 PF (2700K / 11W)






...i will probably check some more led fluorescent lamps in the future...


Here my two G13 (120cm) LED fluorescent lamps as a comparison: a cheap one from "Müller Licht" with 0.54 PF and a more expensive one from Osram with 0.92 PF. When I am not mistaken the Osram was the same price as the complete LED fluorescent lamp from "Müller Licht" in an IP65 housing with 2 x G13, 120cm; of course not the best build quality, but you get what you pay for... ;-)


Müller Licht G13, 120cm (4000K / 18W / 151mA)
with the worst power factor for LEDs I have ever seen: 0.54 PF






...and here the whole lamp with 2 x G13, this time with a power factor of: 0.58 PF for both LED fluorescent lamps in the IP65 housing:






OSRAM LED SubstiTUBE STAR ST8S, 120cm (6500K / 16.4W / "no info" mA)
with the 2nd best power factor for LEDs I have seen so far: 0.92 PF






Cheers!  ;)
« Last Edit: April 09, 2022, 08:53:16 pm by PushUp »
 
The following users thanked this post: thm_w, timenutgoblin

Offline cdev

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 7350
  • Country: 00
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #45 on: April 08, 2022, 12:41:36 pm »
If you are concerned about rising levels of mercury in the air, especially if you live in an area where its a serious problem for any one of many reasons, (Use of certain kinds of coal, or tilling of land may be two) you should invest in a bunch of NAC, and take it daily, whenever you remember to. Not only will this improve health generally by raising glutathione, but it will also allow your body to rapidly remove Hg from your body via the glutathione route.

It will also make you more resistant to a great many diseases. Your body needs glutathione more and more as you age and NAC is the best way I know of to ensure you get enough of it.

You cant ingest it orally, its made from cysteine, glutamine and glycine in your diet, cysteine being the rate limiting one.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=n-acetyl-cysteine
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=glutathione


...since youre concerned about elemental Hg in the atmosphere, you're clearly concerned about glutathione as thats (depleting glutathione in our bodies) elemental Hg's main adverse effect, from what I know.

You can read more at nutrition.org for free.


As we get older we need more and more cysteine in our diets. (whey and dairy products being the most abundanbt dietary source besides n-acetyl-cysteine. I usually buy a kilo of it at a time and ensapsulate it in big OOO caps because its handy to have around. One effect of doing this is hearing loss prevention. Lots of little things like that.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2022, 12:43:15 pm by cdev »
"What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away."
 

Offline Psi

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9946
  • Country: nz
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #46 on: April 08, 2022, 01:02:29 pm »
I Highly recommend you only ever buy LED lights that you can control their output power on. Then run them at lower than rated power.
Either using a dimmer, variable power supply or whatever.

Set them up so they run under 60degC.  If you can't touch them with your finger then they are running too hot.
A lot of the LED lights you by run at 85degC. They are engineered to fail.

This is why I love LED strip. It spreads the heat dissipation from ~100 leds over many meters of strip instead of in one big ball.
And if the psu fails you can replace the psu without replacing the leds themselves.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2022, 01:04:11 pm by Psi »
Greek letter 'Psi' (not Pounds per Square Inch)
 

Offline madires

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7764
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #47 on: April 08, 2022, 01:33:40 pm »
This is why I love LED strip. It spreads the heat dissipation from ~100 leds over many meters of strip instead of in one big ball.
And if the psu fails you can replace the psu without replacing the leds themselves.

:-+ And they are great for creative lighting. Got a broken LED tube? Remove the PCB strip, stick a 12V LED strip on the aluminium and you'll have a nice workbench light which will last for a long time.
 

Offline Siwastaja

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8172
  • Country: fi
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #48 on: April 08, 2022, 02:06:41 pm »
If you are concerned about rising levels of mercury in the air ... you should invest in a bunch of NAC

While NAC is pretty benign and likely won't cause ill effects (and has some legitimate uses and positive effects), it's weird how you recommend this not based on factual mercury levels in the air, but based on concerns thereof. By what mechanism does the NAC sense the concerns and help with them?

For your concerns, I'd recommend homeopathic products. They are less likely to do any harm than actual nutritional supplements (or medication).
 

Offline mazurov

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 524
  • Country: us
Re: I thought LED lights were efficient?
« Reply #49 on: April 08, 2022, 06:56:22 pm »
I Highly recommend you only ever buy LED lights that you can control their output power on. Then run them at lower than rated power.
Either using a dimmer, variable power supply or whatever.
Also, the supply in some of LED lights is not potted so you can derate the light itself.
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine - RFC1925
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf