NanoLight LED Bulb - 4000K at 133 lumens per watt

[wws944]

It depends on what you're replacing, how you use it, and where it is in its life cycle. An oft-used incandescent would be an ideal candidate - the ROI will be swift in terms of your electrical bill. A mid-life CFL or recent-gen LED bulb is a poor candidate. A rarely-used incandescent is probably the worst candidate.

Just because something better comes out net week/month/year that's better doesn't invalidate the expense - it's a light bulb, not some $1 million piece of capital equipment that you were depending on remaining bleeding-edge for 2 years to sustain a competitive advantage.

Agreed. Some of us live under oppressive regimes (California...) where "Tiered" utility rates can be in the $0.30-$0.50/KWH range. And as cool as the Switch bulbs look, there are far less costly options. Ignoring CFLs, because I don't like them for all the usual reasons, LEDs make sense now for anything that is used more than, say, 1/2 hour a day. Breakeven on the upfront cost for highly used bulbs (couple hours or more a day) can easily be a year or less.

 

[SemiMan]

Got an email that they are working on certifications and that they will see if they can post independent tests.

 

[bryan_potato]

Very unique design!!
Could the light bulbs come with clear shell?

 

[LEDninja]

Very unique design!!
Could the light bulbs come with clear shell?

The LEDs are on the outside of the case (Those little yellow round dots). There is no need for a clear shell. You will see 5 points of light on each flat surface (55 total by my count). Add a clear shell and you will see the same 5 points of light . It will not turn 55 points of light into one.

Same with CFLs. You see a tube of light. Add a clear shell and you see a tube of light. Not one point of light.

If you need a point source you need to go back to incandescent. (I read and replied to your thread.)

 

[brickbat]

...There is no need for a clear shell....

I'd be curious how UL would view this. They'd somehow have to incorporate another insulation 'layer' within the product, I'm thinking...

(Yes, I know the LEDs themselves see only about 4V, but IME, UL is interested in the isolation under fault conditions, like say when their cheap Chinese transformer shorts...)

 

[SemiMan]

I'd be curious how UL would view this. They'd somehow have to incorporate another insulation 'layer' within the product, I'm thinking...

(Yes, I know the LEDs themselves see only about 4V, but IME, UL is interested in the isolation under fault conditions, like say when their cheap Chinese transformer shorts...)

What transformer ...that would be the issue.

Semiman

 

[brickbat]

Well, yeah if they tried a transformerless off line supply, it'd definitely be an issue. Maybe I'm giving the inventors too much credit, but I was thinking they'd have foreseen that. My point was that even with a transformer, getting this past UL isn't a slam dunk with exposed connections...

 

[Jacob Morris]

Does anybody know the CRI of the bulb?
The quality of light is important!

 

[AnAppleSnail]

Does anybody know the CRI of the bulb?
The quality of light is important!

CRI does not measure light quality. It measures closeness to a black body radiator, which is not ideal light for color perception.

It seems to be about 70. Most people can't tell 80 from 95 in LED sources.

 

[Jacob Morris]

does anybody provides the spectrum information of this product?

 

[LEDninja]

There is no need for a clear shell.

I'd be curious how UL would view this. They'd somehow have to incorporate another insulation 'layer' within the product, I'm thinking...

(Yes, I know the LEDs themselves see only about 4V, but IME, UL is interested in the isolation under fault conditions, like say when their cheap Chinese transformer shorts...)

I was replying to a poster who was looking for an LED bulb that looks exactly like a clear incandescent. He can see the light source through the glass.
I was pointing out that clear dome or not he sees the same 5 dots of light per flat surface.

Agree with you that getting UL listing would be interesting. I have never seen a bulb with exposed/partially exposed LEDs with a UL listing. There is always a glass or plastic cover over the LEDs.

 

[avada]

12 watts in, ~half of that comes out as light, so no surprise the MCPCBs are adequate for heatsinking. I also like that they picked 4000K instead of the much more common 2700K/3000K used by the major manufacturers. 4000K isn't so cool that most people couldn't get used to it, but it looks worlds better than 2700K or 3000K.

Unfortunately the went down to 3500K. http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/TV+Shows/Lang+&+O'Leary+Exchange/ID/2340861667/

 

[avada]

I think that is a reasonable assumption for the 12W. The 10W looks to have closer to 11 LEDs.

I agree Seoul or Edison.

Maybe the 10W version uses 3W LED-s under-driven and that's why it is surface mounted too, because of the extra heat.

 

[avada]

Just some observations on power factor. No stepping on toes intended...
The low PF in most lighting devices with solid state drivers is due to the high crest factor in the current waveform caused by the device drawing current only when the AC voltage is near its peak. This causes harmonics that can be a problem with electrical transmission equipment. Substations often contain devices to deal with the harmonics. They also contain PF correction capacitor banks in the substations and along the distribution route.

I am unclear on how they give a PF rating to such lamps. Vector displacement waveforms from inductive or capacitive loads makes sense and are easy to calculate.

FWIW, residential meters (the old spinning disk type) are unable to measure reactive power and only register real power used. Medium and large industrial customers will often correct power factor on site or may be billed for poor PF.

I don't understand this discussion about PF at all. The measured (payed) power usage is the real power usage so why on earth should I care?

I'd be curious how UL would view this. They'd somehow have to incorporate another insulation 'layer' within the product, I'm thinking...

(Yes, I know the LEDs themselves see only about 4V, but IME, UL is interested in the isolation under fault conditions, like say when their cheap Chinese transformer shorts...)

It only has capacitors no transformers, as evidenced by the video.

 

[AnAppleSnail]

I don't understand this discussion about PF at all. The measured (payed) power usage is the real power usage so why on earth should I care?

Power factor seems to be how sinusoidal-like the AC power is, or the AC power draw is. The short version is, power company equipment is designed for a certain mix of power factors. If (How? Lighting may be 15% of US energy use, but it's certainly not more) low power factor lighting changes the average power factor consumed by the US, the power company would have to change how their equipment works. Who will pay for this? Some areas are installing 'power factor' counting meters that charge you for some fraction of this expense (Or upcoming expense). You'd have to take it up with your utility company since so many handle it differently.

I don't think that it's possible for this light to function without transformers. I'm not sure that capacitors can decrease voltage from line voltage to one appropriate for using fewer than 45 LEDs in series.

 

[avada]

Power factor seems to be how sinusoidal-like the AC power is, or the AC power draw is. The short version is, power company equipment is designed for a certain mix of power factors. If (How? Lighting may be 15% of US energy use, but it's certainly not more) low power factor lighting changes the average power factor consumed by the US, the power company would have to change how their equipment works. Who will pay for this? Some areas are installing 'power factor' counting meters that charge you for some fraction of this expense (Or upcoming expense). You'd have to take it up with your utility company since so many handle it differently.

I see. Well, fortunately around here power companies are not doing such things.

I don't think that it's possible for this light to function without transformers. I'm not sure that capacitors can decrease voltage from line voltage to one appropriate for using fewer than 45 LEDs in series.

Well my light source works with 40 leds. It worked with 1 LED too. Not a complicated circuit, but highly efficient: http://skory.gylcomp.hu/kapcs/led230vrol-szamitas.xls

 

[AnAppleSnail]

Well my light source works with 40 leds. It worked with 1 LED too. Not a complicated circuit, but highly efficient: http://skory.gylcomp.hu/kapcs/led230vrol-szamitas.xls

I forgot that capacitors do that. I don't work with AC enough... And it's interesting to see MS Excel being the universal language.

 

[SemiMan]

I see. Well, fortunately around here power companies are not doing such things.


Well my light source works with 40 leds. It worked with 1 LED too. Not a complicated circuit, but highly efficient: http://skory.gylcomp.hu/kapcs/led230vrol-szamitas.xls

Power companies do that everywhere, but generally only for industrial customers, not residential. In the residential space, regulations are being put in to ensure devices have better power factor.

As our power loads become more and more electronic (and less and less resistive), the requirements for power factor correction in power supplies keeps being applied to smaller and smaller power supplies. Energy Star requires power factor correction in order to get certification for bulbs.

Your circuit while simple (basically Christmas light setup), is sensitive to device parameters (significantly), heat (Vf changes on LEDs) and line voltage variations. It will also produce noticeable flicker and have poor power factor.

The bulb in this thread does not have a transformer, but it does have an inductor and a switch mode supply. Non-isolated power supplies are becoming common in bulbs. That said, I wonder if they will pass UL given the construction method. I have my doubts.

OH, and why should you care? Because YOU do pay for poor power factor already. You pay for the oversizing of generation equipment, oversizing of transmission equipment, installation of power factor correction gear in the distribution system, phase balancing methods, etc. They are all worked into the price you pay at the plug. What you do not pay for is a surcharge for making it worse.

Semiman

 

[avada]

Power companies do that everywhere, but generally only for industrial customers, not residential. In the residential space, regulations are being put in to ensure devices have better power factor.

As our power loads become more and more electronic (and less and less resistive), the requirements for power factor correction in power supplies keeps being applied to smaller and smaller power supplies. Energy Star requires power factor correction in order to get certification for bulbs.

As I understand Energy Star requirements are not something that are enforced, at least around here.

Your circuit while simple (basically Christmas light setup), is sensitive to device parameters (significantly), heat (Vf changes on LEDs) and line voltage variations. It will also produce noticeable flicker and have poor power factor.

The bulb in this thread does not have a transformer, but it does have an inductor and a switch mode supply. Non-isolated power supplies are becoming common in bulbs. That said, I wonder if they will pass UL given the construction method. I have my doubts.

I can refute noticeable flickering, they don't flicker at all.

 

[idleprocess]

Other than time-of-use and cutting out the meter-reader, a driving force for "smart meters" is to charge residential customers for power factor. There is some uproar over this since residential customers pay more than industrial customers for power per-kWH, which has presumably more than paid for the capital expense of managing power factor at the substation with large-scale power factor correction equipment.

Even with a smart meter, the odds that you're going to notice the difference in energy consumption between a .95pf and .75pf 10W load are pretty slim since that's a minuscule amount of power for the average residence. Off-grid with a battery bank you need to manage and the high expense of generation, it might make some difference.