N:Vision CFL's

Some very interesting discussion of the very same topics we covered here at:

formatting link
"Norway, which generates over 99% of its electrical power by hydroelectric [12]would actually see an increase in mercury emissions if they move to CFLs."

It seems that the cost equations are still being worked on!

There are lots of competing claims, the most interesting among them being CFL equivalency ratings are overblown. A poster to the discussion at wikipedia says that his tests show that CFL's claimed to be equivalent to a

100W lightbulb are actually noticeably dimmer. This is something I mean to test since I "scored" a number of the N-Vision CFL's at Home Depot tonight:

762148549236.....9R4023 floodlight.....$7.47

762148582328.....23W 2Pk..................$7.97 762148581925.....19W 2Pk..................$7.97 762148581444.....14W Mini 4Pk...........$7.97 762148588429.....42W Bulb.................$9.97

Even though it's bigger than the bulb it's going to replace (and that's an issue) the 42W does indeed "snap on" to near full brightness much faster than the older bulb, a Lights of America triaxial bulb. The 42W bulb comes with two plastic clips that are not mentioned anywhere on the package. The look like they could be used the way some lampshades have a wire clamp for the bulb that supports the shade, but it's hard to tell.

The Nvoice in-store display had a staggering variety. Some of the warnings on the bulbs are new to me (do not use near marine radios or in emergency exit signs). I'll have to dig out my Gossen Luna Pro lightmeter so I can make some meaningful measurement if the CHA research committee stipulates it to be accurate enough for the purpose! (-:

(Some more preliminary results - I guess I am not going to bed tonight, but playing with lightbulbs instead!)

The N:Vision bulbs work in my porch light, a fixture controlled by a generic X-10 wall switch. No other CFL has been able to do that without flashing at about 4 on/off cycles per second. I detect a slight pulsing but it's my wife, who's TDY, who will decide if that's objectionable.

The Monterey detects no "signal sucker" effects from the bulbs when used in a table lamp, but I've had to change the way I test due to the strong signals emitted by the XTB. I locate an outlet that's far enough away from the lamp and the test transmitter (both plugged into the same outlet strip) to register under 4 volts. Then I swap out bulbs, looking for any change in readings. There were none. Noise was reported to be about 10-12 millivolts in both bands that are tested. That's quite acceptable.

The light from the bulb appears much dimmer than the 60W incandescent it replaced, but that's understandable because it's 14W and that's equivalent to a 40W incandescent, IIRC. Hard to describe the difference in lighting quality but the front door cam view has changed. I'll probably test the 19W in that fixture next because I want good lighting for the front door cams.

I've found that the bulbs are dimmable - sort of - even though that use is disclaimed. I'm amazed at how low they will dim - just a ghostly glow - but there's a dual pronged problem of both flicker and noise. I'm going to run one for a few hundred hours in a dimmed mode to see if it causes early failure. I have found that there are dim levels that minimize the buzz and flicker. I suspect I'm seeing and hearing the beat frequency oscillation that Jeff discussed earlier at the levels that flicker or hum badly.

I hear a slight buzz on the front door audio that is not present with an incandescent but I think that will end up being a cable re-routing issue.

The spotlight is an interesting beast as well, and it's very odd shape actually fits into one of the table lamps that so far has rejected all but the tiniest of CFL bulbs. That meant that CFL's were unusable because of the heavy lampshade. The light's not even enough to use as is in that lamp, but I can see other interesting possibilities since the reflector diffuses the harsh shadows some other lamps have produced.

On the whole, my impression is that these will be a great asset to X-10 users as they appear to be the most X-10 friendly CFL's I've run across to date. The price is entirely comparable to Target and War-Mart. Thanks for the heads up, Marc. CHA at its best!

OK - last report. I started this message at 11PM and now it's 5AM. The police just stopped by because the neighbors called and said they thought someone was stealing my porch lightbulb or trying to break in! Now it's time to get an hour or two of sleep.

Now for the bad news! The new N:Vision bulb will NOT turn off remotely and I noticed the wall switch was humming loudly, even undimmed. The 14W runs cheaply enough that I could afford to run it 24/7 and it would still cost less than an incandescent, but that's not what I wanted. I don't want to go after that switch, either, because it's on an outside wall and it won't stand any more tugging on the sixty year old wires without serious risk of breaking. That means digging out the wires, replastering, repainting, yada, yada, yada and that's not going to be happening, especially around tax time! I'll bet there's no neutral at that switch. Back to incandescents or forward to forever-burning CFLs. Or even WORSE,

*manual* control of the light!!!!!!

Tomorrow I will trace the circuit to see if putting an XTB as close to the porchlight as possible on that circuit leg will "blast" through whatever's blocking the signal, mostly for curiosity's sake. The porchlights are a really bizarre run that goes up to the attic, across and down at the front and IIRC, there may be no other outlets or lights on that circuit to easily tap into.

Nuts! )-:

On the plus side, near-instant on, good cold weather performance, limited dimming, no X-10 EMI and no X-10 signal sucking are nothing to sneeze at!

-- Bobby G.

Reply to
Robert Green
Loading thread data ...

So they cost 7.5-40 times as much as an incandescent?

I can understand why they might put out EMI that interferes with certain radio bands. Battery powered emergency exit signs would be a problem.

If there's no X-10 EMI why can't you turn them off?

formatting link
snipped-for-privacy@yahoogroups.com

Reply to
Dave Houston

I suppose so. It's clear they're much more expensive to buy, and in a world where people take out car and payday loans to squeak by, there are a lot of people who are never going to make the buy-in. Unlike you, the electric company doesn't charge us a fee for using too little juice. )-: We got the largest electric bill ever last month.

I didn't think about the battery powered issue but those are usually 12V bulbs, not 110VAC, true? It still seems an odd warning to me.

You tell me. I was as surprised as anyone that it wouldn't turn off except from the switch pushbutton. Best guess is no neutral wire and some bizarre interaction with the switch. The very same bulb gave no problems mounted in a floor lamp controlled by a plain vanilla lamp module. I can't easily measure the EMI in situ for the porch light unless I use a socket adapter with a outlet to plug in the Monterey or ESM1. There just aren't any outlets accessible on that circuit leg. It's just the porch, side and basement stairwell lights.

I am going to try a few benchtop setups with other types of X-10 switches to see if there's something peculiar to the switch at the front door but I suspect it's back to incandescents, at least at that location. Aside from not turning off remotely, the light slowly pulsates and the wall switch itself hums like a banshee. There were no remote turn-off problems when the same bulb was used with a lamp or an appliance module. Just the damn wall switch!

The bulb that I was running dimmed for longevity tests was pulsing on and off, very slowly this morning. More accurately it was pulsing from very dimmed to half dim. I suspect it's temperature-related drift. The big advantage of these bulbs is that they will operate at full brightness quite nicely on a lamp module, and that means they will respond to ALL LIGHTS ON, something that the CFL/appliance module/filter setup I use now will not.

Since they specifically disclaim dimming abililties, I consider it gravy! One thing that seems interesting is that the pulsing effect is not consistent from module to module. The bulb that pulses in the porch fixture does not pulse (or cause the same loud hum) when in the floor lamp connected to the lamp module.

Don't count on answers this weekend. It belongs to the IRS. )-:

-- Bobby G.

Reply to
Robert Green

Don't know where you are located but here in So Cal SCE is subsidizing bulbs (N:vision in particular) at out local Home Depot. I can get 4 PAR 30 interior flood for less than 10, 6 60 watt equiv for about that too. If I get there today I will note the prices and post them.

Indeed, we have high standards here ;-)

Is it dimmer? Relay switches all have a snubber circuit around the contacts which can cause flickering. The answer is a change in components value. N:vision and other newer bulbs are more prone to this that older ones. I have seen the flickering only on single bulb circuts and not on multiple bulb ones. A voltemeter accross the load/neutral lines should show it as well.

I also have one 60 watt equivalent in an exterior light that does not seem to like the cold. However, it looks to be more of a fixture issue.

We have found that the 60 and 75 watt equivalent N:visions are bright enough immediately that any warm up time for full brightness is quite tolerable. However it is much more obvious with the PAR 30 replacements. Not sure as to why, one would think they are the same internally.

The other point with CFLs is heat. We have a Halo recessed shower fixture that has a low heat protection threshold. Even a 40 watt incandescent would trip it even though it is rated for 60 watt continuous. Electrician said that it happens a lot with the shower kit, and said that changing it may not fix it. I put in a 60 watt equivalent N:vision. More light and no more heat issues.

Dan Wright

Reply to
Dan Wright

I'm interested in your light meter numbers. Don Klipstein (Great Internet Lightbulb Page) says most CFLs he has measured put out significantly less light than claimed. He doesn't say that about the n:vision ones but he did note that they buzzed.

It would also be of interest to know what your Kill A Watt says for Power Factor.

formatting link
snipped-for-privacy@yahoogroups.com

Reply to
Dave Houston

How many watts does your refrigerator use? We were treated to hundreds and hundreds of lines of posts on this topic with lottsa discussion. Follow-up? Summary? Results?

Spectral response of the meter is important esp wrt fluorescents. The spectra of 5500K and 3500K n:vision compact fluorescents are here:

formatting link
Using a Zone VI-modified Pentax spotmeter, in a windowless bathroom with off-white walls, in 1/3 stop increments relative to incandescent, I measured: Incident Reflected Reflected on axis, off wall, off wall, 1 minute ~5 seconds 1 minute warmup GE 60 watt 820(?) lumen incand. 0 0 0 n:vision Soft White ~2700K +1 0 +1 n:vision Bright White ~3500K +1 0 +1 n:vision Day Light ~5500K +2 -2 +2

Each of the CFLs puts out more light than the reference 60 watt incandescent when warm.

The warmup period for the 2700K and 3500K is completely negligible starting from room temperature (I previously posted data showing rapid warm-up starting at 0F (-18C)).

As the physics would suggest, the 5500K takes longer to warm up. But it is both perceived and measured as brighter. Both of these "higher" measurements might be the results of the spectra and meter and eye sensitivities.

HTH ... Marc Marc_F_Hult

formatting link

Reply to
Marc_F_Hult

This is consistent with what I previously reported, also qualitatively.

This is consistent with what I previously reported. With a dimmer that can be accurately set every time (not, eg X-10 WS-467's ) the dimming function would/will be completely useable if dimming doesn't damage the lamp and noise is still in check.

One useful task would be to compare light output vs power (watts) consumed for incandescents Vs the n:vision CFLs. The resulting efficacy curve should significantly favor CFL's .

What I have done, if anything, is counter-balance obsolete, bad advice with a few facts. The vast majority of folks don't have to do anything more complicated than "Just Do It".

Factoid reported by Lutron: The average number of light dimmers in US households is 1.5. Think about that in the context of how very little any of the discussion in CHA means to most folks, and why CFLs make sense for the vast majority of folks.

...Marc Marc_F_Hult

formatting link

Reply to
Marc_F_Hult

Not really. The _data_ used in the equations is changing to reflect changes in the actual characteristics of actual CFLs in use. The form of the equation, by and large, stays the same.

The complete absence of meaning _data_ and subsequent numerical analysis ("equations") in CHA is what has changed through several actual analyses of actual costs and benefits of actual CFLs in actual use in an actual home (like mine).

The CHA CFL naysayers (as in "CFLS are a really bad idea") post vague, false information because up-to-date, real data does not support the conclusions they want to promote. Here's an analogy they would understand: "They bet against the winning horse and are trying to sell you their losing tickets after the race is over".

There is lotsa junk out there. Buy junk; get taken.

The major manufacturers' data is generally accurate to within the measurement techniques and the comparative assumptions used.

Stuff posted on wikipedia is stuff posted on wikipedia.

...Marc Marc_F_Hult

formatting link

Reply to
Marc_F_Hult

[snip]

To which you might add:

-- Even greater efficacy than incandescents when dimmed

-- Lower overall mercury discharge than the additional mercury from coal-fired power plants from additional energy consumed by incandescents

-- Large cost savings owing to reduced electrical consumption

-- Positive carbon balance environmental benefits

-- Reduced environmental impacts from mining

(Incrementally; not a panacea.)

...Marc Marc_F_Hult

formatting link

Reply to
Marc_F_Hult

No. Of course not. More purposeful misinformation

When was the last time you priced a halogen floodlamp?

At my Home Depot, the 6 packs of 60-watt equivalents came out to $1.70 each.

Would? Or might? How many marine radios and battery-powered emergency exit signs is there in the typical home?

I have found that the built-in electronics go wacky when the AC voltage to them goes below a certain threshold when dimmed. There is hysteresis in the effect. This occurs even with hard-wired, 20-amp dimmers with toroidal chokes the size of donuts and with no X-10 anywhere in the house.

...Marc Marc_F_Hult

formatting link

Reply to
Marc_F_Hult

The Luna Pro hasn't been used for years. Twenty or more. I *think* I know where it is and it's NOT with the W-2's that need processing!!!

I've never used the KilloWatt for PF readings. Any tricks, tips or traps? There was an interesting comment on the Wiki discussion page about what might happen if all the lighting loads in the US went from incandescent to fluorescent.

As I was looking at my desk full of new bulbs I realized there are lots and lots of tests to perform. Base up v. base down. Radio interference. One thing I have found very compelling as a test of comparative illumination is to deliberately seriously underexpose a frame that's focused on two lamps in bare sockets against white wall. The "bloom" around each lamp becomes very apparent, with the brighter lamp's "white" area being conspicuously larger. The sensor in my Nikon is pretty closely adjusted to match human vision.

My most pressing interest is to figure out why the porch light won't turn off remotely! I have a number of similiar wall switches that I will test, including those that have easily accessible outlets on the same circuit leg.

Jeff, what happens if I stack 2 XTB's together? (Just kidding!)

Tax time.

-- Bobby G.

Reply to
Robert Green

I was referring to what happens in areas that use no coal. It complicates the mercury equation in Norway, at least. They were putting no mercury in the environment before but the use of CFL bulbs gives them a recycling issue. I was also thinking about what John said about CFL's tending to be used during off peak hours, and those are typically not fueled by coal as much as other sources. I don't believe there's really solid data on recycling yet, either, since so many bulbs are new. We don't know if their owners will recycle them responsibly. Those unknowable events are still in the future and can't really be "solved for" can they?

Did you mean "meaningful?" (-: There's no doubt in my mind that circumstances dictate certain decisions. If someone's using so little juice they're being charged extra, they aren't going to see much benefit. If someone like me sees the highest bill they've ever seen for electricity, it's going to mean CFL's *have* to come on line.

I prefer to think it's merely a case of YMMV. For the sake of peace as much as anything else.

This is something I intend to test, and believe that can be tested rather easily. More importantly it can be tested with standardized equipment (assuming neither your 'scope card nor my Luna Pro have dematerialized) and visually with a simple underexposed photograph of both sources side by side as I explained elsewhere.

-- Bobby G.

Reply to
Robert Green

Screw the bulb into a table lamp. Plug the table lamp into the Kill A Watt. Plug the Kill A Watt into a wall outlet. Select PF. Record the reading.

formatting link
snipped-for-privacy@yahoogroups.com

Reply to
Dave Houston

Huh?

The color temperature of a light source is determined by comparing its hue with a theoretical, heated black-body radiator. The Kelvin temperature at which the heated black-body radiator matches the hue of the light source is that source's color temperature, and it is directly related to Planck's law of black body radiation.

An incandescent light is very close to being a black-body radiator. However, many other light sources, such as fluorescent lamps, do not emit radiation in the form of a black-body curve, and are assigned what is known as a correlated color temperature (CCT), which is the color temperature of a black body which most closely matches the lamp's perceived color. Because such an approximation is not required for incandescent light, the CCT for an incandescent light is simply its unadjusted Kelvin value, derived from the comparison to a heated black-body radiator.

Michael

Reply to
Slammer

I'm in the Wash, DC area. Didn't you used to be? There was no sale I was aware of - I just stopped by shortly before closing and grabbed an assortment to test. Pepco/Vepco doesn't appear to have a program, although I've heard of some independent organizations offering at least a free bulb to each household that switches over.

I've searched three boxes of photo gear to no avail. I may have been hasty in promising the Luna Pro to measure light output. I have fallback positions, though.

It's the pushbutton variety of an X-10 WS-467, IIRC. It normally runs from an X-10 Pro LCD timer or via keychain controllers via a Rex

Fortunately, that might have to wait until next year to test.

The warm-up times are indeed excellent. We can only hope they remain that way over the life of the bulb which we can only hope will be as long as they say it will!

Are there any issues you know of regarding base up v. base down installs?

They'll definitely keep the house cool in the summer. The 42W can be handled by the glass after running for two hours. Try that with an incandescent 150W, its listed equivalent.

-- Bobby G.

Reply to
Robert Green

I'd like to point out that all these bulbs, for sale in the USA, are subject to and must comply with the FTC Lamp Label Rules. These specify a voltage of 120VAC and output in AVERAGE INITIAL lumens, power consumed in AVERAGE INITIAL wattage and life of each lamp in hours.

Rated Life is a median value of life expectancy - the total operating time at which under normal conditions 50% of any large group of initially installed lamps are expected to be still burning.

In an incandescent lamp, light is generated by heating the filament to incandescence. The hotter the filament, the MORE EFFICIENT it is in converting electricity to light. However, when the filament operates hotter, its life is shortened so the design of each lamp is a balance between efficiency and life. This is why lamps of equal wattage may have different lumen ratings and different life ratings.

Reply to
Slammer

0.6 or there abouts.

But why? Consumers are charged in kW-Hr not kVA-Hr. There is no VAR penalty. If there were, a capactior could be used to correct the power factor.

Reply to
Slammer

Roger. Another interesting thing about dimmed N:Voice bulbs is that they brighten substantially if I pass my had near the glass tube. It's almost like the glass balls with the long sparks that emanate from the center that find their way into lots of scifi films.

What will the power factor tell us? I tested the 23W floodlight and the 14W bulbs and their PF is .61. The old GE helical CFL comes in at .65. A new

60 watt incandescent reads .99 "pee effs" (-: The bulb that was on extended dim is already demonstrating significant darkening at the ends of the tubes. Dimming may not be terribly healthy for it. My fox and hound tracer wand reports a rising and falling tone emanating from the lamp base in the dimming mode but no seriously noisy emissions like an active RF transmitter makes.

-- Bobby G.

Reply to
Robert Green

[More that just "mercury" discussion unrelated to subject restored!!!!]

What's it to you, bub? I'm not here to do your bidding. You're confused about how things work around here. You get ignored by most clear thinking people when you go into your harpie mode as you just have. I'm sure DW's wondering how he got his head handed to him for having an opinion that wasn' t exactly yours. You *are* a hoot. But perhaps not the way you think.

Adults had intelligent discussion (in a discussion group, figure that!) and my problem got solved. We both know you're looking for information to harp on. What do you honestly think your chances of getting information from me or ANYONE when your ill intent is showing as plain as the tattoos on Brittany's skull? That's bizarre behavior, buddy. I've been told than unappropriate social response can be a sign of Alzheimer's or Asberger's Syndrome. Normally I just ignore you when you get bilious, but if there's a medical reason I would feel badly if I didn't note that I see disturbing symptoms. If CHA were a live meeting hall, some of the things you say would leave jaws hanging.

And now you go from attack mode back to "how ya doing bub" mode as if there was no perceptible change in tenor. That's just spooky and it's always where I start another 30 day rip. Thanks for the pointer to N-Vision. No thanks for the bile.

-- Bobby G.

Reply to
Robert Green

Rated life is subjective for a number of reasons, as average lifetime lumens. If bulbs are subjected to dimmers, they may fail prematurely, far before their rated life. Lots of CFL's will be run from lots of PIR and lots of dimmer controllers simply because those devices are already out there. If their mid-life useful light output drops enough for a consumer to notice, it may be retired long before the testing says it ought to have been. If these conditions occur on a large scale, the amount of mercury that ends up in landfills and the net cost to society to clean it up may be seriously understated.

Hopefully my lightmeter will show up eventually so I can see for myself. So far, to my IR cam at the front door, the CFL seems noticeably dimmer. I'm assuming that's because the tungsten bulb has a much, much higher IR output than the CFL bulb.

-- Bobby G.

Reply to
Robert Green

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.