More LED bulb options

[Waynedb]

Halogen lamps are much more expensive than incandescent as far as a percentage of initial cost.  I remember getting a 100W incandescent for $.5/lamp versus $1.5 to $2.50/lamp for halogen.  Further I put 6 60 watt equivalent halogen lamps on a 600w Leviton dimmer and the dimmer quit working after a year!  It could have been coincidence, but I'm going to measure some halogen lamps when my digital oscilloscope shows up.

The local utility might be subsidizing the bulbs here, last I looked they were about $1 each in a 4 pack.

 
My complaint (more like a statement of fact) is now I have less options as a consumer.  Whatever happened to letting folks decide what products to buy on their own?!?  The truth about the light bulb ban is manufacturers wanted to have a reason to charge more, and our government wants to dictate how we live and what products we buy and use (and of course get donations from the manufacturers).  It's not like our government has bigger problems to solve or anything...

This is a fact of life that I have gotten used to over time, out here in California they will probably ban breathing one day.

I like that the L.E.D. Bulbs run much cooler and help me stay out of the highest electric rate tier here, I have had zero problems with dimmers and zero L.E.D. Lights fail. I have had some bulbs as long as 5 years now, also I don't really want to be climbing up a ladder to change bulbs that burn out anymore than I have to. I have hallway lights that run dimmed overnight, every night with out any problems.

 

[tmbrown97]

Lol - CA is a horrible state to live in if you hate regulation.  Not as bad as NY but getting close - some cities ban grocery bags! and we bought a new car 2 weeks ago - it still has the Prop 65 warning on the driver's window.  Disneyland has Prop 65 warnings everywhere (at some point I suspect they'll be on the freeways - "CA Air contains toxins known to the state of California to cause Cancer!").  
 
Re: the comment about climbing a ladder to change lightbulbs - by using something like the SA dimmer - that ramp-on vs. a flip switch makes a HUGE difference - literally I've never changed a single incandescent in like 6 years because they NEVER burn out if they're on a switch that ramps on.  
 
Here I switched to LED because power prices are through the roof and anything I can do to save helps.
 
The whole UL/Insurance thing is interesting... if one of these cases ever made it to the news, I think the public would win based on general ignorance - IE how would the random public know to worry about inrush/etc when just trying to be a good citizen and reduce power consumption?  They're gonna be fine - and if not, the LED manufacturers can take on the insurance lobbyists all they want.

 

[Madcodger]

FWIW, we installed good quality (Philips Marathon) dimmable CFLs in our old house about 4 years before we sold it and controlled them with Insteon, and the new owners are still using them 3 years later. No problems except a dud bulb or two that showed up in first month after install. The light quality was so good people used to comment on it, and were surprised They were CFLs. We also tried the big box cheapo bulbs and they were awful. No switch problems attributable to the bulbs, as all was fine after we changed out the early version Insteon switches.

In our newer house we switched to primarily LEDs and have tried a number of manufacturers, almost all of whom were fine (again, a cheapo or two were unusable). And the only switch failure has been on one of the few "incandescent only" circuits!

My point is that newer forms of lighting seem to work just fine if you stick to known, good quality manufacturers. The inrush current info is helpful and I will try to look for that info for bulbs I consider buying, but I suspect for most quality manufacturers the situation is under control.

And as for government mandates, I agree it is annoying and all of is like to make our own decisions. However, we are using much more energy than we can afford for a variety of reasons, and leaving it up to individuals to explore the data, reach a fact-based conclusion and do something about it has proven unsuccessful in just about everything. So I will argue that what we're seeing is action based on science and data, and that in balance it's a pretty good idea. Also, I developed a spreadsheet years ago that helps one calculate their payback for a CFL given hours of use and local power cost (not sure I still have it). For most people in the $0.10-0.12 / kwH range, I seem to recall it was in the 3 year range for payback. LEDs now cost about the same as CFLs did then, so I think you'll see a positive ROI, especially if your utility is subsidizing the cost locally.

 

[Automate]

And as for government mandates, I agree it is annoying and all of is like to make our own decisions. However, we are using much more energy than we can afford for a variety of reasons, and leaving it up to individuals to explore the data, reach a fact-based conclusion and do something about it has proven unsuccessful in just about everything. So I will argue that what we're seeing is action based on science and data, and that in balance it's a pretty good idea.

But there are other options than an outright ban.  I'd rather see the model used on cigarettes.  If you are stupid enough to smoke cigarettes then you are going to have to pay a high cigarette tax.  Then the tax is used to cover some of the health care cost the cigarettes are going to cause.
 
You could just charge 50 cents or so per incandescent bulb tax.  The incandescent is still going to be cheaper so there will be some people that still buy them.  Then use the money from the tax to subsidize greener power.

 

[gatchel]

More goodies from Cree:
 
http://www.geek.com/news/cree-does-it-again-99-xspr-streetlights-promise-1-year-payback-1564495/

 

[etc6849]

Here's some tests of the Philips 100W alien head.  I used a 100mV/A Fluke i30 probe, so you need to take the amplitude value and convert it to amps.
 
You can clearly see the 1-3 amp peaks at each cycle.  I'd bet running 4 of these on a Vizia RF+ 600W dimmer would shorten its life some...
 
On the bright side, there is very little noise.   Much better than Cree.  The Cree LEDs I tried from HD are junk.  Too much switching noise and visible flicker at various brightness levels.  I even measured the flicker using a solar cell and my oscilloscope.  The Philips has no measurable flicker using the same method.
 
PS:  hover over the pics to see the pictures name.  All tests performed using a Vizia RF+ VRI06 dimmer with soft/ramp on.

 

[etc6849]

Here's the best LED lamp I've found:  
Utilitech 100-Watt
 
EDIT:  Same as before 100mV = 1 amp.  Hover over the pics to see the pictures name.  All tests performed using a Vizia RF+ VRI06 dimmer.

 

[etc6849]

For those still using CFL's, I'd be very careful about putting more than one on a dimmer (20 amp inrush current for the one I had).  However, the waveform doesn't look too bad after it's on, but peak current is still high per cycle.

 

[etc6849]

Why tax more?!?  That's the last thing we need is more taxes.  I should be penalized by the government for wanting nice looking dimmable light that will not shorten my dimmers life span?  This is what's wrong with this country.  It's my electric bill, if I want to pay a little more each month and have the means to do it, it's really no one else's business.  It doesn't make me stupid either.
 
I don't see Washington screwing factories or commercial facilities over, and they use waaaaay more energy than my residence.  Why aren't they required to convert to electric ballasts and T8 lamps?  After all their lamps are on 8 hours or more a day...   The whole ban is bull$%^# if you stop and think about it.
 
 

But there are other options than an outright ban.  I'd rather see the model used on cigarettes.  If you are stupid enough to smoke cigarettes then you are going to have to pay a high cigarette tax.  Then the tax is used to cover some of the health care cost the cigarettes are going to cause.
 
You could just charge 50 cents or so per incandescent bulb tax.  The incandescent is still going to be cheaper so there will be some people that still buy them.  Then use the money from the tax to subsidize greener power.

 

[etc6849]

Here's the CFL flicker I captured with a 4.5V solar cell.  Of course, an incandescent will have similar flicker.  It's pretty neat that the LEDs I tried with phosphors have almost no measurable flicker (see second picture, but note the divisions used).

 

[etc6849]

Since someone will want to compare, here's the VRI06 Vizia RF+ dimmer driving a single 100 watt.  Yes, the Utilitech is out performing the incandescent (in terms of waveform smoothness), but the Philips alien head 100 watt looks ok to use after seeing this...  Provided you divide the dimmer capacity by 100W to determine how many Philips lamps you use (don't use the actual rating of 22 watts).
 
Same as before 100mV = 1 amp.  Hover over the pics to see the pictures name.

 

[BLH]

Thank you for all the tests you performed.
Very interesting findings.

 

[mdesmarais]

Nice work!

 

[swaggy]

Thanks for sharing your test results! The Utilitech looks like a nice bulb. It sounds like I need to replace my HAI 35A00 conventional dimmers with the CFL/LED optimized ones (35A00-1CFL). A question on that - on lighting circuits where I currently have a dimmer and one or more Aux switches, do I need to replace the Aux switches (37A00-1) with the CEF/LED dimmers as well or can I still use the Aux switch paired with the new dimmer?

 

[Waynedb]

Thanks for the info etc6849, I picked up a bunch of the Utilitech 100 watt equivalent bulbs a couple of weeks ago and have been happy with them, nice to know they perform well.