Another new incandescent lamp coming out?!?!

In an era where the major lamp makers and pure LED players are totally invested in LED replacements for incandescent, CFL and halogen general service lamps, some just refuse to give up improving the incandescent/halogen lamp. The news was announced yesterday:

http://ecandescent.com

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/611933709/ecandescent-the-last-bulb-youll-ever-need

Looks like the same basic technology used in my 2 pack of Vybrant 50w 1600 lumen bulbs, but with an additional diode inserted onto the bottom contact of the base.

I have my opinions but i would like to hear from your arguments first.

How the hell is a half-wave rectifier supposed to accomplish all of that?

Underdriven - going from ~110V down to ~85V IIRC ?
I notice they don't seem to mention that efficiency goes down the sink.
Brilliant, the hotwire folks here have had lumens per watt wrong all this time.

People are stupid. What can I say...

Kickstarter page is kind of useless save for the truckloads of feel-good/concerned-parent marketing and heaping piles of rather dishonest FUD; their website has the relevant performance details:

• 100W equivalent : 28W, 1230 lumens, 44 lumens/watt
• 150W equivalent : 42W, 1980 lumens, 47 lumens/watt

Taking performance figures at face value, it's appreciably below CFL efficiency (~70 lm/W). Their wattage equivalencies are also a skosh generous since last I checked a 100W incandescent spits out 1600 lumens - or at least that's what CFL and LED equivalents are doing - so the best apples-to-apples comparison would use eCandescent's "150W" equivalent bulb.

Running a basic TCO analysis, it does come up surprisingly favorable over its claimed ~110k hour operating lifespan:

(admittedly, assuming flat electricity prices over 110k hours is a tad naive but introducing such a variable wouldn't alter the relative spread)

Assuming they make their performance numbers, it's a big leap over other mass-market halogen tech:

• ~110k hour lifespan is impressive
• TCO improvement is also a big bump over both incandescent and halogen
• Not particularly sensitive to hitting claimed life to beat halogen/incandescent TCO

I do wonder about their performance claims, however. If it were so easy to make incandescents hit into mid double-digit efficiency, why didn't the manufacturers do this in order to evade the "incandescent ban" of a few years ago? Save for a handful of truly inconvenient locations, who cares about making a bulb last for 10+ years of continuous operation?

I would need confirmed reports of performance before I bought into these even if their price is only ~$12.50 - I just can't believe some kickstarter entrepreneur has figured out how to extract exceedingly long life and performance from an incandescent when other companies with considerably more resources haven't.

Undervolting an incandescent to make it run longer is not new. There are undervolted incandescents that have been running almost continuously for a century without burning out. As already mentioned, this means that the efficiency is worse. To improve efficiency, they supposedly have a coating that reflects IR back to the filament to make it hotter and more efficiently (thereby reducing life).

So we are given two contradictory features, and an efficiency better than halogen with some new technology apparently no one has figured out before. This seems laughably implausible. This "powerdisc" item also seems suspect. From the description it seems like nothing more than a rectifier, and supposedly increases lifetime by converting from AC to DC (This doesn't make any sense). The lack of any technical details really makes me doubt everything.

So yeah....

good heavens.... has Kickstarter replaced the 30 minute infomercial as a way to hype marginal products? So many inflated claims, so much fear-mongering about CFL, and so little data.

It's interesting to do a web search and look at who is talking about it. Lots of press releases and questionable "articles". This one seems to really work at scaring people about CFLs... " 'It's a scary fact – CFLs are very dangerous,' she reiterates. 'Not only is there mercury in a CFL bulb but CFLs are coated in phosphor. If phosphor comes in contact with skin wounds, it prevents those wounds from healing.' "
http://www.vegas24seven.com/#/?p=40457

It might be a bit more honest to say that CFLs contain phosphors, and if the glass tube breaks, you shouldn't rub the broken glass and phosphors into any open wounds.

I'm thinking I saw something like these power discs say 40 years ago? This new version looks identical and was a peel and stick application. It was certainly before power consumption was a big issue with most people. I think the claim was that these discs somehow cut down on the initial surge current, thus extending bulb life. There were no details about how these worked and no way to verify efficacy. I'm also thinking that these were sold locally — Radio Shack perhaps? I bought a six pack of these on a blister pack and tried them out. In some sockets they didn't work at all, but in others they seemed to light OK. By the time the lightbulb had reached even its normal lifespan, the product was long gone from the market. Today, I would have done some more critical testing. But back then, it was just another failed experiment! Can't see why this latest reincarnation would meet the rather outrageous claims.

oldwesty4ever said:

http://ecandescent.com

Click to expand...

That bulb also appears to be using IR halogen technology– basically a selective reflective coating on the inside of the capsule to reflect back the infrared. These are just beginning to become more popular, I saw IR halogen reflector lights on the shelves of a local store.

Between using lower voltages, and IR halogen technology, this could substantially increase efficiency of incandescent technology.
Thank goodness. I would probably have to lead an armed revolt if incandescent were ever banned.
Don't mess with my bulb's soft warm pleasing glow.

PhotoWiz said:

I'm thinking I saw something like these power discs say 40 years ago? This new version looks identical and was a peel and stick application.

Click to expand...

Now that you mention it, the "power disc" elicited a vague memory of something similar ~30 years ago ... some foam donut that had the secret sauce inside? In addition to allegedly making your bulb last 3 normal human lifetimes it had other miraculous benefits, ie also made your kids respectful and extended the shelf life of milk to 6 months or somesuch.

The one, very important thing, that they don't mention, is the color temperature (CCT) of the bulbs. Normaly it tells you quite nicely how efficient a bulb is (compare a 50h bulb with a 3000h bulb at the same voltage and wattage). Lowering the voltage of a bulb by as much as they say should "destroy" it's efficiency, lower its color temperature to an orange glow and prevent the halogen cycle from properly working. My guess is that they might have improved on the IR-Coating technology, but I find it highly unlikely.

Osram has been offering their IRC bulbs for many years now and they have never improved the technology. At their 3000h of lifetime the bulbs have a slithly low temperature and a relatively high efficiency of around 27 Lumens/Watt. My Hotwire that drives one of those 12V IRC bulbs at around 18.5-19V is at the 41 Lumens/Watt mark. The bulb only lasts maybe 20 hours and blackens quite quickly.

Anders Hoveland said:

That bulb also appears to be using IR halogen technology– basically a selective reflective coating on the inside of the capsule to reflect back the infrared. These are just beginning to become more popular, I saw IR halogen reflector lights on the shelves of a local store.

Between using lower voltages, and IR halogen technology, this could substantially increase efficiency of incandescent technology.

Click to expand...

Because that tech is radically new - totally hasn't been utilized for a decade or more already - and was invented by someone that simply describes themselves as an "entrepreneur" with their global headquarters located in a strip mall adjacent to a Trader Joe's.

Until I see some independent testing done by a respectable source, it's all smoke and mirrors.

Thank goodness. I would probably have to lead an armed revolt if incandescent were ever banned.
Don't mess with my bulb's soft warm pleasing glow.

Click to expand...

That's going to be the strangest call-out for the local SWAT team ever. Let me know when and where so I can break out the popcorn and set the DVR.

The_Driver said:

The one, very important thing, that they don't mention, is the color temperature (CCT) of the bulbs.

Click to expand...

Based on all the complaints I hear about CFL and LED bulbs not working with dimmers and the disappointment at how the color remains constant, my working assumption is that Americans absolutely love dimmers and the extremely low CCT's they produce from incandescent bulbs. Nevermind that this cuts into the disproportionately small amount of blue that the hotwire emits, sends efficiency through the floor, and necessitates over-provisioning of fixtures to hit desired brightness levels - gotta get that warm ~2000K glow no matter how many watts it takes!

I'm going with smoke and mirrors.

I read on another thread on another website where a respected lighting engineer chimed in. He said that extending life by underdriving only works for conventional incandescents. He said the halogen gases shorten filament life when undedriven because the halogen gases attack the cold ends of the filament. He says he thinks with the diodes they will last only 5000 hours instead of the advertised 130K hours.

I knew there was something fishy over the claims. Here's the obvious:

28w 1230 lumens claiming 100w equivalent, 1230 is actually 75w equivalent (1170-1220 lumen)
42w 1980 lumens claiming 150w equivalent, 1980 is actually 115w equivalent (100w is 1600-1750 lumen)

However the 42w lamp already meets the 2020 standard of 45 lumens per watt or greater. The 28w lamp misses the mark by just one lumen per watt, lol. Just bump it to 29w and you get 45 lpw, lol.

Interesting idea, but i think it will remain as a novelty. Some dyed in the wool incandescent fans would go all over these, lol.

The_Driver said:

Lowering the voltage of a bulb by as much as they say should "destroy" it's efficiency, lower its color temperature

Click to expand...

The bulb- or rather filament - is probably designed to operate at a lower voltage.

Basically, there are two main factors to a filament: thickness and length :naughty:. Filaments designed for lower voltages are typically shorter. Filaments designed for higher wattages are thicker. To give the filament a longer life (at the cost of reduction in temperature), keeping the wattage constant, the filament is designed to be both thicker and longer (keeping the resistance value the same).
The reason why lower voltages are typically more efficient is, as you are no doubt able to deduce for yourself by now, that the filament can be thicker, and the decreased length means the heat is distributed over a shorter length of filament, meaning higher temperature. The thickness of the filament helps counteract the increase in temperature, in terms of filament lifespan.

(in case you were wondering, below about 2-6 volts, the efficiency rapidly begins to decrease, due to heat conductance since the filament is so short, and potentially due to voltage drop through the wires bringing the power)

But yes, indeed, if you just use a bulb designed for higher voltages, and reduce the voltage, there will indeed be a big decrease in color temperature and efficiency. In fact, if the voltage decreases by half, the wattage will decrease by a factor of 4 !

The_Driver said:

Osram has been offering their IRC bulbs for many years now and they have never improved the technology. At their 3000h of lifetime the bulbs have a slightly low temperature and a relatively high efficiency of around 27 Lumens/Watt.

Click to expand...

That is because IR halogen is more expensive, so to justify the increased cost they typically design the filament to last longer - at the cost of some decrease in temperature. But the efficiency increase in IR reflectance overall outweighs the decrease in efficiency from slightly lower color temperature.

Instructions on how to do it yourself:

http://www.instructables.com/id/Long-Life-for-Floodlights/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-fZ2PTd7X0

I really wonder what exactly that "power disc" does.
Maybe it has a diode and little capacitor to turn the AC into a steady DC current?
Without the normal fluctuating waveform from outlet AC, that could increase the available current flowing through the filament by a factor of 2.

from their site:

Can you explain more about the eCandescent™ Technology?The eCandescent™ bulb is a combination of the latest incandescent technology that produces the best light you've ever experienced while being energy efficient and the longest lasting light bulb on the planet. The PowerDisc™ evens out and controls the power that goes to the high-tech bulb. By doing this, the bulb runs at a much cooler temperature. Each significant drop in filament temperature exponentially extends the life of the bulb. The eCandescent™ bulb is the most advanced generation of incandescent bulbs on the market. The eCandescent™ uses an industry leading IR coating that recycles wasted heat energy back to the filament, converting it to light. This means that our bulbs use less power, run cooler and creates more light. The 100 watt equivalent combination of the eCandescent™ bulb uses only 27 watts.

Click to expand...

From reading their explanation, it seems that the function of the power disc is to mitigate the effect of being turned on and off. Each time an incandescent bulb is turned on, there is a sudden surge of current through the filament. Being frequently turned on and off reduces the lifespan of a bulb. The reason for this is that a cold tungsten filament conducts electricity with 14 times less resistance than when it is hot. You can verify this by taking an ohm meter to an incandescent light bulb, factoring in the rated wattage and outlet voltage, your calculations should be off by a factor of about 14.
So if they can smooth out the increase in current when the bulb is being turned on, that means they could run the filament at a higher temperature, without a net decrease in lifespan.

IR halogen technology just by itself is about twice as efficient as plain incandescent (bulb lifespan being held constant).

Yes, there are several bits of technology that can be combined together to increase incandescent efficiency:
Halogen, Xenon gas filling, IR reflectance coatings, lower voltage design, and gradual start up electronics

The simplest method to increase efficiency is to design the filament to have a slightly higher temperature (shorter and thinner filament to keep resistance constant), but this results in a dramatic decrease in filament lifespan. And if all sorts of more expensive technologies are being employed within the halogen capsule, one probably does not want the lifespan of such a bulb to be too short.

I had a stupid idea to increase efficiency. Just run 3 bulbs in a series circuit, with each bulb designed for a third of the outlet voltage. In terms of lumens per watt, this would not really be any more efficient than just having a single bulb, but for rooms where 3 different lamps are used, it could indeed be more efficient. For a given wattage, incandescent bulbs are more efficient when designed for lower voltages.

Or maybe even have a circuit switch to be able to switch out one of the bulbs with a bulb in an adjacent room if someone else is home.

The_Driver said:

The one, very important thing, that they don't mention, is the color temperature (CCT) of the bulbs.

Click to expand...

Well, it's IR halogen, so probably 2800-2900K
(this is assuming the filament is being operated at 120v)

oldwesty4ever said:

Another new incandescent lamp coming out?!?!
Looks like the same basic technology used in my 2 pack of Vybrant 50w 1600 lumen bulbs

Click to expand...

you mean the 2x lighting
http://www.2xlightdirect.com/

oldwesty4ever said:

I read on another thread on another website where a respected lighting engineer chimed in. He said that extending life by underdriving only works for conventional incandescents. He said the halogen gases shorten filament life when undedriven because the halogen gases attack the cold ends of the filament.

Click to expand...

There could be some truth to this, if the halogen bulb is consistently run with much less current. But if the dimming is only 50-70% (?) I do not think it will make any difference, in fact the lifespan will still be longer. Reducing the filament temperature just a little has an exponential increasing effect on the lifespan (but on the other hand, increasing the color temperature a little results in a big increase in light output )

I really do not think the bulb being discussed in this thread is very underdriven. That would have a huge negative effect on efficiency.

From the Kickstarter page: "[CFL] pollutes the inside of your home with "dirty electricity" just by turning it on."

Umm. What?

I also emailed them this:

So you're promising savings based on bulb lifespan, but you don't mention the efficiency loss (in Lumens/Watt) by under driving the bulb. You also don't mention the drop in CCT caused by the drop in voltage to the bulb.

To achieve the same level of brightness in a room as CCFL's or LED's, I'd need to run even more of your bulbs than standard incandescents, and since their efficiency is already reduced by the lower drive voltage, it'd be a double whammy for power costs.

While I might save money on bulbs, It'd cost me an arm and a leg in electricity, not to mention Greenhouse Gas emissions.

Click to expand...

I await a reply.