PK Design Lab
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 228

Thread: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

  1. #91

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by andrewwynn
    Oh.. i wanted to add something i missed earlier..

    florescent lighting is the 'bane' of the lighting world.. it sucks in pretty much every possible way.. if it didn't suck so bad, we wouldn't be having this conversation because there would be no point in improving incandescent.
    Non-sense.

    halogen lighting blows away flourescent, period.. people only use FL because it's cheaper, and sometimes because it's cooler, but mostly cheaper is the only reason the technology exists. I get a headache almost instantly from FL. lighting.. it does have a nice side-effect of having no shadow with the 4' or 8' tubes.. i'll take the shadows over the headaches.
    Fluorescent lamps come in many variety, ranging from 2,700K to 6,500K and even outside that range for specialized applications and CRI from low 50's to high 90's.

    When people say "the fluorescent type" they more often than not mean 4100K, 62 CRI cool white that has been around since the 1950's which was operated on a magnetic ballast. Today, many installations use 4100K(this is a matter of choice) 85 CRI lamps operated on an electronic ballast. Actually, the old 40W cool white lamps are banned, because they are inefficient compared to newer types.

    Benefits:
    Well diffused light
    20,000+ hours of average life
    High efficacy
    Moderate initial cost

    Cost means a great deal in world. Do you realize how much it would cost in maintenance and energy cost in institutions, offices and stores if they used halogen lamps? Most of the cost is for energy, so the additional side-harm besides cost is environmental impact. Would you prefer halogen if it cuts $150,000 into the profit each year? I doubt it.


    IRC was developed because people prefer halogen to flourescent.. even IRC doesn't touch FL for efficiency, probably 1/2 as efficient, so where's the logic?
    IRC is used to improve efficiency of halogen lamps where fluorescent lamps wouldn't be ideal, such as accent lighting and other applications needing spot or collimated light.

    I agree that things will be leaning toward LED taking over lighting, but maybe never incan.. LED 'feels' like FL.. it will take over the FL market as it becomes more cost effective to use LED vs FL.. but the shops that really want their stuff to sell will use lighting that makes it look better and for now that is halogen lighting!
    -awr

    That is one of the applications where halogen lamps is preferred, because, improved merchadise apperance means more sale and more sale means more profit. Such practice would be phased out if the increase in profit dosen't surpass increase in energy cost and this is why you only see them in high profit visual appeal merchandise.

  2. #92

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by bwaites
    They are both right on the edge.

    BUT...I thought resistance in the filament rose with temperature, and if the temp is the same, wouldn't the current required to drive it be the same? Or is it a function of the voltage as well?

    AND...I used the exact same reduction in power as I used in increase in heat secondary to the IRC coating to counter that guesstimation anyway. We all know that there is no way it is close to the same!

    Either way, the testing will be interesting!!

    Bill
    The resistance does increase with temperature, but it doesn't mean the increase is proportional to input voltage.

    See my thread.
    http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...d.php?t=111203

  3. #93

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by bwaites
    The temp required for maximum production is still the same. And it doesn't matter how thick you make the filament, it is still going to get so hot that it goes POOF when it reaches that point, right?

    Bill
    For the most part yes.

    Since we don't have perfect retention of energy, you still have cooling and so variables are in place to hit the design criteria of decent life. Temperature is a function of the filament design and they are quite complex. You already know that the filament is a spiral of wire that itself is spiraled. As you alter the space that filament takesup, you also increase its ability to cool itself. So you have a fine balance of determining the guage, length, and topography of the filament to hit the desired life, output and power requirements. It is very difficult to model.

  4. #94

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Handlobraesing
    The resistance does increase with temperature, but it doesn't mean the increase is proportional to input voltage.

    See my thread.
    http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/...d.php?t=111203

    dT = -1.86(R/R0)^2 + 206.6(R/R0) +118

    R/R0 is the ratio of resistance change per temperature change

  5. #95
    *Retired* NewBie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Oregon- United States of America
    Posts
    4,946

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Here are some measurements off some bulbs I tested awhile ago:



  6. #96
    Moderator js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,777

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Guys, I just was previewing a friggin 2 page post and made one single change to fix a missing "[/b]" and lost everything. I had saved the text of the post by pasting it into Notepad, but my ENTIRE COMPUTER locked up.

    GOD I HATE WINDOWS MACHINES! HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE. ANGRY. ANGRY. ANGRY.
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  7. #97

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by js
    Guys, I just was previewing a friggin 2 page post and made one single change to fix a missing "[/b]" and lost everything. I had saved the text of the post by pasting it into Notepad, but my ENTIRE COMPUTER locked up.

    GOD I HATE WINDOWS MACHINES! HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE. ANGRY. ANGRY. ANGRY.


    I feel your pain, I've had a few hour long composition posts get eaten. It is a quote problem with this version of vBulletin. Don't use the quote tags!!! Seems fine for small posts but big ones (or ones that take a while to compose) get lost. I haven't noticed if Firefox is anybetter now that I compose offline.

  8. #98
    Moderator js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,777

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    OK.

    So look, I just don't have time to read everything new in this thread since I last read it (fast). I have only enough time in my lunch break to make this post (AGAIN). So if I am repeating what others have said, I am sorry.

    ****

    Check out this graph I found for the IRC coating:



    This is the radiation curve of the filament with the transmission curve of the coating superimposed on top of it. As you can see it reduces the IR intensities by about 80 percent on average. According to Osram:

    Quote Originally Posted by Osram
    IRC technology (Infrared Reflective Coating)
    Halogen lamps don’t just produce light. 60% of the created radiation are infrared (IR) rays. The innovative IRC technology increases the efficiency of halogen lamps by reflecting a major part of the generated useless IR radiation back to the coil where it is converted into visible light. The infrared reflective coating at the outside of the burner acts as an IR mirror but lets nearly 100% of visible light pass (see figure 2). In comparison to standard halogen lamps it is possible to optimise the lamp in different directions by using the IRC process:

    • more light output
    • less electrical power
    • increased lifetime or
    • a mix of all
    This is stunning. I am amazed. I had no idea it was THIS good.

    As pointed out, the filament will radiate as long as it is hot. It is (very nearly) a black body radiator, whose radiation curve is governed by Temperature. The applied electrical power is only there to make and keep it hot. If you insulate (IRC coating) less power is needed. All of this has been stated, and I think it can't be disputed.

    So, as for questions about what will happen if you add an IRC to a lamp such as the 64625 or 62138, obviously, less power will be needed to maintain the filament temp near its operating point (very near melting). In the case of the 62138, you would simply apply less voltage, because it's total resistance would remain the same because the Temp and geometry would remain the same. Thus lowering V applied would lower the power. It's that simple. Normally lowering V would lower T, which would lower efficiency and CCT, but in this case, the IRC coating returns enough heat to maintain the T, thus maintaining efficiency.

    Or, you could re-design the filament. Make it thinner (thus increasing R) so that it draws less current and thus less power.

    Making the filament run at near melting point, and insulating the capsule as well as the IRC does, will NECESSARILY raise the temperature of the glass envelope. Dramatically. This will be one of the problems with attaining the 60+ LPW efficiency. But even so, according to the IRC data, this is theoretically attainable if the envelope can take the temperature.

    It took me a while for all of this to sink in. Do you all realize what this means? It means nothing less than a REVOLUTION IN INCANDESCENT TECHNOLOGY. A new lease on life.

    The last one was the noble fill gas and halogen trace additive / halogen cycle revolution. And incidentally, after giving it a lot of thought, I believe that this is why Xenon fill gas allows a 10 percent gain which can be used to increase efficiency OR increase filament life, which also implies saving electricity. I disagree with the statement that the xenon only increases efficiency by allowing you to run hotter (due to lower vaporization rate). It is more than that. It returns thermal energy to the filament better, or it insulates better, or something along those lines.

    And the IRC coating is a many fold improvement over THAT improvement!

    And this is why there is not and never will be a formula that relates Voltage and Current and filament geometry to CCT (or T). It can't be done because the missing factor is the HEAT TRANSFER CHARACTERISTICS of the lamp with the surrounding environment.

    And keep in mind that this is why filaments are coiled--not just to pack more effective length in a "shorter" filament, but also to make the same applied current heat the filament better. Coils mutually heat one another by being so close together.

    Perhaps this is another one of the reasons why the 64440 and 64447 IRC lamps have long thin filaments with many turns in the coil--to increase the T for a given applied electrical current. Of course, the draw back is a large filament and poor focusing in a small reflector. But still. It's more efficient.
    Last edited by js; 07-29-2014 at 03:06 AM. Reason: fix image link
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  9. #99
    Moderator js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,777

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    I can't possibly express how friggin' pissed off I am right now at this computer. I tried to post this FIVE TIMES! Un-be-freakin-lieavble. I'm DONE. I'm already over my lunch break and I haven't even had lunch yet.

    Why can't we use Macs here at work? Where is OS X? Oh, man, I hate Windows and IE and the whole damn lot of it.

    So, anyway, I won't have much time to keep up with this thread, so good luck and good hunting, and I hope this helped.

    Obviously, I retract my earlier post. 42 LPW is not the limit. YEE HAAAAA! I'm am wicked happy to be wrong on this one.

    If this can get out there, it means that IRC lamps will compete with HID and beat LED. I am so psyched about this. YA!!! INCANS RULE!!!!!
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  10. #100
    *Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Flushing, NY
    Posts
    5,886

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by js
    If this can get out there, it means that IRC lamps will compete with HID and beat LED. I am so psyched about this. YA!!! INCANS RULE!!!!!
    Remember though that at best IRC will deliver 60 lm/W (a figure which low-power LED has already exceeded by a large margin, and high-power LED will exceed this year), and then only at the expense of very short lamp life. Sure, this might extend the demise of incandescent by a bit, but only in certain specialized lighting applications. I haven't yet seen a IRC bulb for general lighting. And if we want filament life at least equal to 1000 hours, we probably won't exceed the mid 30s.

    My guess is if you need huge amounts of lighting power in a physically small space then it will be long time coming before LEDs can compete. For example, I've seen 1000 watt bulbs the size of my finger. IRC will only make such bulbs better. Still, this is a niche application. What I see happening with incandescents is exactly what happened with amplifier tubes. They'll continue to be made for a long time for a few niche applications where nothing else works, but LED will probably take over 99.999% of their present applications the way transistors did with tube amplifiers. Even with the improvement IRC offers, it just can't compete with the 150 to 200 lm/W on the horizon for LEDs, and it certainly can't touch the 100,000 hour lifetime.

  11. #101
    *Flashaholic* bwaites's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Central Washington State
    Posts
    5,044

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    I keep playing with the numbers, trying to find an equation, and I've come to believe that it isn't a linear or logarithmic equation, but a non-linear one.

    That takes it well outside my expertise, which is relatively small when it comes to math anyway.

    But the best I can come up with is about 53-54 Lumens/watt which actually is not too far off Osrams 35% number.

    That, though, is a theoretical max, at least with the math I can do, and the real world is probably a good 5 lumens or more less.

    So can you break the 42 Lumens/watt rule? Yes, I think so now, but I am convinced that we aren't getting to 60 Lumen/watt, at least with this tech. And I still feel like Incan tech is at point where we aren't going to see much improvement, but I'm sure some of the posters here will tell me I'm all wet.

    Bill
    Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.
    Benjamin Franklin

  12. #102
    *Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Flushing, NY
    Posts
    5,886

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by bwaites
    And I still feel like Incan tech is at point where we aren't going to see much improvement, but I'm sure some of the posters here will tell me I'm all wet.
    For what it's worth I share those feelings. Outside of the ability to concentrate a lot of lighting power in a very small space, something which is mainly suited for a few niche applications, and for the present being cheaper than most alternatives, incandescent offers no compelling advantages over other technologies that large amounts of money would be invested to try to improve it. And it has lots of distinct disadvantages-short life, poor efficiency (even with the improvements from IRC), inability to tune the spectrum to make either colors or different shades of white, high temperatures which are potentially hazardous. LED can take over all general and most focused light applications just fine. Indeed, LED has already bettered incandescent in most key areas except cost. Another thing worth mentioning is R&D money generally tends to go to those technologies which have the potential to improve the most. Power LEDs can potentially increase by a factor of 5 or more over their present 40 lm/W. This pales next to even a 50% improvement potentially possible with IRC. And IRC does nothing at all to improve lamp life.

    IMHO the only thing which will really revolutionize incandescent and possibly give it an extended lease of life would be a new filament material capable of operating at 6500K, combined with IRC (and maybe UVC). Efficiency could potentially exceed 100 lm/W by a large margin. If such a filament cost no more than tungsten, plus had a much longer life at the mentioned 6500K than today's filaments do at 3000K, then incandescent would indeed give LED a run for the money. The only problem is we know of no material which remains solid at those kinds of temperatures.

  13. #103
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Germany, Karlsruhe
    Posts
    323

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by js
    Obviously, I retract my earlier post. 42 LPW is not the limit. YEE HAAAAA! I'm am wicked happy to be wrong on this one.
    That's good to hear from you!

    Quote Originally Posted by bwaites
    So can you break the 42 Lumens/watt rule? Yes, I think so now
    Finally! That's what I tried to explain from the beginning. I wonder why it was so hard to come to that conclusion. :-)

  14. #104
    *Flashaholic* andrewwynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Racine, WI USA
    Posts
    3,764

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    incan's pretty much had its run i think... LED is already just about at the same L/W of a typical incan... the question is if it can get up to fluorescent.

    The benefit of incan at this point is lumen per cubic centimeter.. something that i doubt 20 yrs will get LED into the same place.. so for high power spotlights with instant-on capability.. you either have incan or arc. You'll noticed there are lights out there that have a choice of either 35W HID or 100W incan.. similar amount of light, why does the 100W even sell? because it doesn't take 90-120 seconds to turn on.

    That said.. a 30-50% improvement with high-power lights the like of the mag85 etc.. would be greatly appreciated when battery powered and runtimes typically in the low 20 minute range. I for one have some high-hopes of finding a really nice solution with these particular lamps.

    Example.. if the 35W model can be pushed near 20V.. a stack of 6x3 short A cells will get me 21.6V i can regulate to 20V and boorah! it might actually be white enough to be IMHO useable. I am as bill pointed out.. spoiled by the color (or lack of) with the 64625 lamp.

    -awr


    Regulated hotwire 'the hotdriver' also for Surefire M6 • 3-level high-power LED drop-in for mag. the 'BAM!' click here
    I have disabled PMs.. use the 'email' link instead!Genesis 1:3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light...

  15. #105
    *Flashaholic* bwaites's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Central Washington State
    Posts
    5,044

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Sorry, SpaceMarine, but I had to read and re-read your posts, and then make the numbers work myself.

    I apolgize to you and whoever else, I think it was Winny, who tried to make me see the light! I guess I'm to much of a "prove it to me" kind of guy!

    I'm still not 100% convinced that this is an answer, because I can't drive them hard enough to get anywhere close to the color temps I want in a light, but maybe andrewwynn can.

    I wonder why this has not been done in mass produced lamps for multiple uses? It would seem that it would be ideal for bathroom lighting, art lights, etc, but it may be impossible to get to the white light needed to produce good results in those situations.

    Bill
    Last edited by bwaites; 03-22-2006 at 02:07 PM.
    Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.
    Benjamin Franklin

  16. #106

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by bwaites
    m still not 100% convinced that this is an answer, because I can't drive them hard enough to get anywhere close to the color temps I want in a light, but maybe andrewwynn can.
    Bill
    Then cheat and buy one of those blue automotive bulbs If it reflects back the energy like the IRC then I wouldn't complain


    Quote Originally Posted by AWR
    You'll noticed there are lights out there that have a choice of either 35W HID or 100W incan.. similar amount of light, why does the 100W even sell? because it doesn't take 90-120 seconds to turn on.
    I don't have a problem with my Lexus headlights and I think that is just a critical as the situation we have in this comparo :HID vs incand Cost is the only reason for me. Even when igniting, a good HID will still put out a great deal of light so as to still be very useful.

  17. #107

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by js
    If this can get out there, it means that IRC lamps will compete with HID and beat LED. I am so psyched about this. YA!!! INCANS RULE!!!!!
    But we have LED tech catching up very quickly now. Just look at the 5mm units of a few years ago vs the multi hundred lumen emitters now out. As eff increases with the LED, we will have smaller emitters that will finally remove the biggest problem facing LEDs, poor focusability.


    JS, don't use the quote tag next time. Bold, underline italic etc are fine but the quote is the killer...sometimes

  18. #108
    Flashaholic* Sway's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,663

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by andrewwynn
    The benefit of incan at this point is lumen per cubic centimeter.. something that i doubt 20 yrs will get LED into the same place.. so for high power spotlights with instant-on capability.. you either have incan or arc. You'll noticed there are lights out there that have a choice of either 35W HID or 100W incan.. similar amount of light, why does the 100W even sell? because it doesn't take 90-120 seconds to turn on.
    -awr
    I know this is getting way off course but the warm up time for modern HID's like we are working with is more like 30 to 35 seconds, (rule of thumb 1 second per watt) is very close.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luna
    I don't have a problem with my Lexus headlights and I think that is just a critical as the situation we have in this comparo :HID vs incand Cost is the only reason for me. Even when igniting, a good HID will still put out a great deal of light so as to still be very useful.
    Agreed, they are very bright when you first turn them on, how bright I don't know, wouldn't even wager a guess in this company but it's not like going from 0 to 35 watts in a linear fashion.

    Now back to your regularly scheduled fracas

    Later
    Kelly
    Last edited by Sway; 03-22-2006 at 03:50 PM.
    Lucas Jackson, "Here, Captain"
    Maliciously destroying municipal property while under the influence, What was that?
    "Cutting the heads off parking meters, Captain."

  19. #109
    Moderator js's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    5,777

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Just got an email from Bill and wanted to also post response here.

    I think the key to approaching an upper limit estimate is to look at the transmission curve in my post above for the IRC coating. It looks to me as if 80 percent of the IR is reflected back, and 20 percent transmitted.

    Now, even at max filament temp, the output is still over 50 percent IR. So assume 50 percent. Now 80 percent of that 50 percent is reflected back, which yields a net gain of 40 percent. 40 percent of 42 LPW is 16.8 LPW. Now add that gain to 42 LPW and you get 58.8 LPW.

    For what it's worth. There may be something wrong with my reasoning on this.

    As for LED's already making 60 LPW, well, yes at very low power density. But the high powered Lux III's and V's are not there yet. And why does everyone assume that there is no upper limit to LED technology, but that incan tech is moribund. Could be true, but it also may NOT be true. Still . . . I agree that LED's are going to be taking over. But I disagree that incans are going to go away. Especially not now that IRC tech is in the cards. I had assumed that it was only significant for long life lamps, but theoretically, there is no reason it can't be used in all sorts of lamps.

    I don't care what ya'll say. My enthusiasm will not be damped. You can't rain on MY parade. Especially not if I stop reading this thread. LOL! j/k j/k j/k.
    -Jim Sexton, creator of the M6-R, the TigerLight Upgrades, Fixture-ring lamp potting, the SL60, co-designer of the B90 Upgrade, and proponent of the SF A2, the SF M6 X-LOLA, Titanium, the Haiku, and the LunaSol 20

  20. #110
    *Flashaholic* bwaites's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Central Washington State
    Posts
    5,044

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Understood!

    But a significant portion of that heat doesn't hit the filament, it hits the glass. We can't expect that the 80% of IR is going to all warm the filament, we can't make a reflector that reflects light and get 80% of it out the front, there is no reason to expect that a reflective coating will do it inside the lamp.

    And you have to start out way low and work up to where the most efficient filament temp is, because as it heats more it produces more IR which heats the filament more which increases the IR production which heats the filament more, etc, ad infinitum. So you have to start at a temp which you can be relatively sure won't create the runaway heat. I suspect that is why the IRC is used on LOW POWER lamps!

    So you overbuild the filament, use low power and it will run forever, but I'll bet that as you increase that power, you shorten the life even faster than in a traditional lamp because of that issue.

    Bill
    Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.
    Benjamin Franklin

  21. #111
    *Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Flushing, NY
    Posts
    5,886

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by js
    And why does everyone assume that there is no upper limit to LED technology, but that incan tech is moribund. Could be true, but it also may NOT be true. Still . . . I agree that LED's are going to be taking over. But I disagree that incans are going to go away. Especially not now that IRC tech is in the cards. I had assumed that it was only significant for long life lamps, but theoretically, there is no reason it can't be used in all sorts of lamps.
    No arguing that LED efficiency can't continue to increase forever. If we're talking white LEDs, depending upon the spectrum 100% efficiency would be anywhere from 200 lm/W to 400 lm/W, with 300 lm/W representing a decent balance between color rendering and efficiency. Now we all know nothing in this world is 100% efficient. If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say we'll reach 50% efficiency (150 lm/W) fairly soon and fairly easily. We're already almost there with low-power LEDs (Nichia hit 113 lm/W in February). We'll have 100 lm/W low power LEDs in production late this year, and 150 lm/W probably a year to 18 months later. Power LEDs are usually a year to 18 months behind low power ones, so figure we'll have 150 lm/W power LEDs within 3 years. After that who knows? We may indeed hit a brick wall around 150 lm/W. In any case any further increases will be a long time coming. I think it's likely we'll hit 200 lm/W (67% efficiency) within a decade. I also highly doubt we'll break 80% ever but I'd love to be proven wrong.

    Now let's look at incandescent. IRC could get us close to 60 lm/W if lamp life isn't a huge concern, or more practically might mean household incandescents getting 30 lm/W instead of 16 or 17, unless of course there are practical reasons IRC can't be used there (higher bulb temperature might be one). I honestly don't see how we could get past those numbers barring a new filament material. As for incandescent going away, it won't completely, at least until we have LEDs which output tens of kilolumens in an area no bigger than a present lamp filament. However, those applications which require such a lumen density will remain the last stronghold of incandescent. Probably in ten years you won't even be able to find an incandescent lamp in regular use in most households.

    I don't care what ya'll say. My enthusiasm will not be damped. You can't rain on MY parade. Especially not if I stop reading this thread. LOL! j/k j/k j/k.
    Well, I'll stop short of saying incandescent is completely dead because with modern material technology who knows if we'll find some exotic material which remains solid at temperatures which would vaporize tungsten. I hope that keeps the rain off your parade.

  22. #112
    *Flashaholic* andrewwynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Racine, WI USA
    Posts
    3,764

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    holy cow busy thread today.

    I don't think they can be driven to the color temp we will like either, Bill, but i will definitely be finding out the answer to that. In any event.. my bet is that i can get color temps equal to the 62138 lamp with efficiencies above forty lumen/watt and that's an incredible thing.. if i can get 45 it will be a home-run, and if it's high 40s well grand slam.

    I think that CCT is a limiting factor, also with the rated values of 4000hrs but 3000CCT.. i'm really surprised, and i think that there is a good chance the efficiency savings from the IRC is most helpful at the ffaarrr lower drive levels.

    funny, luna about the blue tint, but a filter absorbs the light and turns it to heat.. helps out with CCT but not efficiency.

    I was exaggerating and my only HID light is my X990.. it's not happy for a good solid minute.. you get 80% of the light in 30 sec, but it's still warming up for a good long time.. also from what i understand on and off is not a good thing for those bulbs.. another thing i like with incan instant on. but also instant off (well, not quite so instant with the likes of the 64625!).

    JS.. looks like your math matched mine almost exactly (57LW max theoretical).

    LOL on the 80% reflector, bill.. true enough, and i think that as they are pushed more more IR will make it through the IRC... my guess is that the effectiveness will go down but it will still be there. regardless of the effectiveness.. even if it was 10% or 2%.. with the 4000hr filament.. they will take some PUNISHING overdrive like DFI has tested already.. and with any luck get the CCT within 300K of ideal.

    as far as the cyclical heat and bounce and heat and bounce.. that's no problem.. IR that bounces back off the inner wall of the envelope but misses the filament will go to the other wall and bounce back and get another chance on the re-rebound... IR that tried to leave the front, bounced back and misses the filament will hit where the fliaments come in and most likely be absorbed or bounce at some funny angle and maybe never leave, but slowly be absorbed by the IRC and warm the envelope or of course each time it hits some will leave.

    In any event.. the filament should behave quite like what we are used to with regular bulbs, just perhaps with a different set of curves to describe the relationship with overdrive since the power getting to the filament is more than the percentage that used to be there.

    re jtr.. totally agreed.. household incan is really obsolete material.. the IRC lamps won't be taking the place of them is my prediction 100%.

    What will replace household incan will be LED.. CFL did a decent job of working its way into houses, and they aren't bad at all actually, but they won't have the reliability of LED lighting once a decade has passed and the bugs are worked out.. with the latest rounds of CFLs being almost identical in size to the incan lamp they replace.. it's really amazing that incan lamps even sell anymore.. but it does take a LOT of hours to make up the cost difference.. say it costs 75 cents for a 60W lamp.. and $3.50 for a 13W CFL with similar output.. the equation .75+60/10000 x = 3.50+13/10000x works out to 585 hrs before break-even.. that's actually not bad.. only like 1/2 yr to pay for the savings if you use the light like 3 1/2 hrs/day... i was expecting it to take longer.. go CFL!

    So.. bring on LED.. when it costs $2-3 for an LED light that can output 500-600L and start replacing CFL... but not having to replace them every couple of years but will last a decade on average.. sweetness.

    -awr


    Regulated hotwire 'the hotdriver' also for Surefire M6 • 3-level high-power LED drop-in for mag. the 'BAM!' click here
    I have disabled PMs.. use the 'email' link instead!Genesis 1:3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light...

  23. #113
    *Flashaholic* bwaites's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Central Washington State
    Posts
    5,044

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    I have yet to find CFL's that last 2 years, lots of hype, but none have made it 2 years and I have tried lots.

    I have about 50 cans with spots in them in my home. I replace about 5-10 month. CFL's slow that to about 3-5, but still!!!!

    I'm not sold on CFL's especially when you count the time it takes to get to full power.

    Bill
    Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.
    Benjamin Franklin

  24. #114
    *Flashaholic* andrewwynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Racine, WI USA
    Posts
    3,764

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    I was trying to be kind. (2 yrs) I have some really neat light-bulb looking CFL that i bought in 2001, still chugging.. the 3 incans i bought that looks almost the same.. i've been using 1 at a time and on the 3rd one.

    some CFLs wwwhhooaa on how slow they are to start, but the ones i have in my bathroom and kithcen light up very quickly.. though they both have a 'soft start' to them.

    -awr


    Regulated hotwire 'the hotdriver' also for Surefire M6 • 3-level high-power LED drop-in for mag. the 'BAM!' click here
    I have disabled PMs.. use the 'email' link instead!Genesis 1:3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light...

  25. #115

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by js
    I don't care what ya'll say. My enthusiasm will not be damped. You can't rain on MY parade. Especially not if I stop reading this thread. LOL! j/k j/k j/k.

    I'm just glad to see you getting another post thru

    What I would like to see is a totally supported filament. This would have to be done with with God knows what (anyone know Lumicera's melting point??). Even diamond wouldn't be for much better use. If the coating is good enough, gas wouldn't be necessary at all and the capsule would hold in much more of the heat. Since the the melting point is not an issue in a fully supported filament structture, you would be able to really drive the hell out of it. Now the simple task of finding a transparent ceramic coating that has at least a 1000deg higher melting temp than tungsten


    EDIT: JTR, just saw your post. We are on the same page but I think ceramic tech is the big unknown at this point. You never know what those boys are cooking up!
    Last edited by Luna; 03-22-2006 at 09:59 PM.

  26. #116
    *Retired* NewBie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Oregon- United States of America
    Posts
    4,946

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by bwaites
    Understood!

    But a significant portion of that heat doesn't hit the filament, it hits the glass. We can't expect that the 80% of IR is going to all warm the filament, we can't make a reflector that reflects light and get 80% of it out the front, there is no reason to expect that a reflective coating will do it inside the lamp.

    Bill
    Actually, you can get reflector coatings that will send 98% out the front. Most people can't afford it, and alot of come lately flashlight makers seem to be wanting to maximize profit for personal gain. So I doubt you'll see Enhanced Protected Silver and other such decent reflector coatings, except from companies like Reva, where you are paying 2500.00 or so for the light.

    The coating you are talking about that kicks the heat back at the surface is called a hot mirror. They aren't that tough to make for those skilled in the art. Lower end versions can easily kick 80% of the Near-IR back at the filament in a globe shaped bulb, while allowing 98% of the visible light to pass through.

    Cold mirrors (opposite of hot mirrors) are often made from very low cost coatings, often Titanium Dioxide and Silicon Dioxide, both of which are very low cost materials. You vary the thickness as well as the stack-up of the layers. It is similar to AR coated glass, process and layer wise. The chamber time can cost 10,000.00 dollars, but you can coat 100,000 bulbs a shot, with the proper chamber, and the cost is only 0.10 a bulb.

    Here is a page for a fella who describes a series and shows the plots for a simple cold mirror:
    http://www.sspectra.com/designs/coldmirror.html

    Hot Mirror:
    http://www.ocioptics.com/dielmir.html

    These folks are over 95% reflective at NIR:
    http://www.kruschwitz.com/Cold/hot.htm

    Or 99% reflective:
    http://www.highend.com/products/dichroic/HotMirror.asp

  27. #117
    *Flashaholic* bwaites's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Central Washington State
    Posts
    5,044

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    I was hoping you'd jump in, Newbie.

    So is it possible to pull the efficiency up to the levels talked about with the coatings?

    js posted Osrams IRC coating info, hope you can take a look at it.

    AND, I understand about the coatings, I wish we could get something reasonably tough and useful in flashlights at a better price!!

    Bill
    Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.
    Benjamin Franklin

  28. #118

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by bwaites
    I have yet to find CFL's that last 2 years, lots of hype, but none have made it 2 years and I have tried lots.

    I have about 50 cans with spots in them in my home. I replace about 5-10 month. CFL's slow that to about 3-5, but still!!!!

    I'm not sold on CFL's especially when you count the time it takes to get to full power.

    Bill
    Were these the lamps you bought for 99 cents to $3 each from Winco or Home Depot?

    Good CFLs do last a long time, especially a kind that has a ballast that cost $20.

    You will see them used in commercial settings. These have a good starting strategy called "programmed rapid start" which really saves the lamp life.

  29. #119
    *Retired* NewBie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Oregon- United States of America
    Posts
    4,946

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    NIR coatings isn't a new concept for bulbs.

    Even plain jane GE has had the coatings for some time now, it is just called something else...

    I thought they came out in 1990, like 16 years ago, but actually it was 1989, so it was 17 years ago the technology was created. There are a number of developments that haven't hit the market, as there wasn't too much demand. I do believe CFL and upcomming LEDs are squeezing in on their market share, and you'll see various improvements show up as time goes on.

    "1989 Halogen-IR™ Par Lamp- First halogen bulb with reflective coating for superior efficiency" -GE Lighting

    More info:

    11. What is special about HIR lamps?

    HIR stands for Halogen-IR. An IR (infrared) coating is placed on the filament tube of some of our halogen lamps. This multiple layer coating not only absorbs UV but also re-directs IR (heat) back onto the filament. By re-directing the IR back to the filament, the lamp produces more light for the same amount of energy and the amount of heat generated by the lamp is reduced when compared to standard Halogen products. Therefore HIR saves money by....
    http://www.gelighting.com/na/busines...halogen.htm#11


    IMHO, there is quite a limit to IRC/HIR, and while they can tweak it for a little more, there isn't much more you'll get out of it.

    In 2003, GE combined HIR with silver based reflectors:
    2003 Retail HIR Halogen PAR 38 - Thin film HIR and silver reflector technologies have 46% higher efficiency than standard halogens.

    In 1962, GE claims to have created the first LED:
    1962 Light Emitting Diode (LED)- Invented by GE. Electricity is transformed into light inside a solid crystal of semiconductor material.

    Sodium Vapor:
    1961 Lucalox® High-Pressure Sodium Lamps- Highest efficacy general lighting source ever

    A robust filament:
    1911 Ductile Tungsten Lamp- Shock-resistant filament enabled automobile and railroad lighting

    1930 Photoflash Lamp- Replaced flash powder used by professional photographers

    1934 Mercury Vapor Lamp- First high-pressure gaseous discharge lamp-better performance and economy



    Even the Japanese have been working on better ways to put the HIR/IRC coatings on the bulbs, this one was filed in 2002 by Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. (Osaka, JP) .

    "BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

    `Journal of Illuminating Engineering Society`, July 1980 (p. 197-203) or some other documents have suggested methods for providing low power incandescent lamps and tungsten-halogen lamps. For this purpose, light bulbs are coated with infrared reflection films to substantially pass only visible light that is selected from light beams emitted from filament portions of the light bulbs.

    In this method, a maximum proportion of the infrared reflection light, which appears to compose 70-80% of the radiation energy, can be reflected inside of the light bulb. The reflected light is focused on the filament coil portion to heat the same portion. Since the filament coil portion is reheated in this manner, the consumed power is reduced by 20-30% in comparison with a conventional light bulb when the illuminance (total value of luminous flux) from the filament portions is equivalent. "
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6635330.html


    Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. (Osaka, JP) also has a patent on their HIR/IRC coated bulbs, filed in 2000:

    "The luminous efficiency of this conventional tungsten halogen lamp increases by about 50% because of the infrared reflecting film 23 and the elliptical arc tube 22. However, since the tungsten halogen lamp has a double-tube structure in which the arc tube 22 is held in the outer tube 24, the structure is complicated and involves a high cost.

    In order to solve the above problems, it is an object of the present invention to provide a tungsten halogen lamp that has a long life and a high efficiency and is inexpensive, and a method for manufacturing the same, by preventing the oxidation of the metal foils. "
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6336837.html


    GE filed for another twist on the HIR/IRC technique in 1989:
    " All of the methods of the present invention also yield light sources that are particularly suitable for allowing infrared or visible reflective coating to be applied to their surfaces. For such reflective coated light sources, the associated lamp leads and their respective seal members of the light source are all encased in the light source during the reflective film coating process and, therefore, are protected against any detrimental reaction of the lamp leads and seals that may otherwise be created by the interaction of ingredients used for the reflective coating. The light sources are particularly suited for use with infrared reflective coating because the light source may be shaped to most effectively reflect the infrared back to the filament."
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5045748.html


    GE also came up with a better way of forming the HIR/IRC coating on the bulb in 1991:
    " One application in which these thin film optical coatings have been found to be useful is to improve the illumination efficiency or efficacy of incandescent and arc lamps by reflecting infrared radiation emitted by a filament or arc back to the filament or arc while transmitting the visible light portion of the electromagnetic spectrum emitted by the filament or arc. This lowers the amount of electrical energy required to be supplied to the filament or arc to maintain its operating temperature"

    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5138219.html
    Last edited by NewBie; 03-23-2006 at 12:57 AM.

  30. #120
    *Flashaholic* andrewwynn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Racine, WI USA
    Posts
    3,764

    Default Re: 60 lm/W halogen bulb. TESTED!!!!

    both of mine have that rapid start i'd call 'slow start'. it's really visible but quick enough to not be a problem.. and i only paid like $3-4/lamp.

    -awr


    Regulated hotwire 'the hotdriver' also for Surefire M6 • 3-level high-power LED drop-in for mag. the 'BAM!' click here
    I have disabled PMs.. use the 'email' link instead!Genesis 1:3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light...

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •