LED Lights and Garage Door Opener???

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:31:44 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 17:13:16 -0700, John Larkin
><jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:15:30 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
>><speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:
>>
>>
>>Good grief, I've been having the same erratic problem: the garage door
>>will go up but won't close. I overhauled all the mechanics, cleaned
>>the limit switches, tweaked the big nasty dangerous spring, all that.
>>It appears to be a control problem, not a mechanical one. And after a
>>while it started working again. The receiver/motor box is straddled by
>>two light sockets on the ceiling, with CFs, drived from a motion
>>sensor. The bulbs inside the Genie housing are still incendescents.
>>
>>Next time it acts up, I'll try incandescents for the ceiling lights.
>>
>>John
>>
>
>And sweat the day when you can't get incandescent light bulbs any more
>because you've been told that they are too inefficient! 

I doubt that will happen, though they may well disappear from grocery
store and convenience store shelves, and the price will likely go up
to dollars a bulb from dimes a bulb. 

>I'm sure we're going to see a sharp rise in residential fires in the
>next 10 years, too... Mostly due to cheap chinese CFL lamps failing
>when used in locations that are totally inappropriate, a move forced
>by those who "think" they know best for everyone. 

Who forces consumers to buy cheap flea-market unapproved products? 

We usually buy Philips brand, and they always carry the appropriate
approval marks. All products with authentic (!) cULu markings (or
equivalent) should not cause an excessive number of fires. One of the
major contributors to home fires in the past couple of decades has
been halogen lamps in poorly designed fixtures that can allow the
extremely hot bulb envelope to come into contact with flammable
materials. We've still got some incandescents in the dining room, but
most everything else has been warm-white electronic ballast CFL for
years now. They're a far cry from the flickery 100Hz
ting-ting-ting-flicker-start lamps I remember from my first budget
trips to Europe. I still have a bunch of ceramic-based 85W halogen
floods in my office (along with some under-counter flourescents and
accent MR16 halogens and LEDs) because the raw lumens for my aging
eyes are just not available from equivalent CFLs. 

BTW, I put CFL lamps in our mb shower a few years ago, and it seems to
be working just fine. I did coat the lamp bases with silicone
conformal coating before installing to protect against any steam that
gets into the fixture. Nice and bright, starts instantly, and they
have outlasted the incandescents by ~3:1 so far (a bit of a hassle to
replace- ladder, screwdriver etc.). 

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:04:54 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:31:44 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:
>
[snip]
>>
>>And sweat the day when you can't get incandescent light bulbs any more
>>because you've been told that they are too inefficient! 
>
>I'm goint to order a few cases of them, a lifetime supply, before they
>become illegal. I suspect there will always be an ebay black market,
>too.

http://www.1000bulbs.com/Light-Bulbs/

I buy case lots of commercial grade 130V incandescents... standards
and floods :-)

[snip]
>
>Next we'll have expensive LED bulbs that "last up to 100,000 hours"
>with crappy electronics. Nearly all the green LED traffic lights in
>San Francisco have failed, in interesting patterns, and had to be
>replaced. Only the greens, for some reason.
>
>John

That's odd, they seem to do quite well here in AZ.  Maybe it's the fog
in San Fransicko ?:-)
		
                                        ...Jim Thompson
-- 
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
| Phoenix, Arizona  85048    Skype: Contacts Only  |             |
| Voice:(480)460-2350  Fax: Available upon request |  Brass Rat  |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com |    1962     |
             
      The only thing bipartisan in this country is hypocrisy

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message 
news:09ibs5dqho0sul6rlhc57r4qi2jtf8efks@4ax.com...
> I'm goint to order a few cases of them, a lifetime supply, before they
> become illegal. I suspect there will always be an ebay black market,
> too.

I'm going to hope politicians aren't dumb enough to completely outlaw them.

> CFs don't work in cold locations, and most can't be dimmed, and most
> won't work with 2-wire motion sensors.

This is a fair statement, but...

-- Dimmable CFLs vs. non-dimmable one is primarily a cost issue today; you can 
readily find dimmable ones at a Home Depot or similarly well-stocked store, 
but you end up paying a couple bucks more per each.  Over time I wouldn't be 
surprised if that cost difference diminishes to the point where they pretty 
much all become dimmable.  (Remember how some early CFLs still flickered at 
turn-on, using a bi-metallic strip-based starter and magnetic ballast, but 
that these were slightly cheaper than the all-electronic versions.)

-- I've noticed that these days some motion sensors advertise that they will, 
in fact, work with CFLs (and one can presume the ones that don't advertise 
this won't :-) ) -- I suspect the design changes amounts to a slightly bigger 
capacitor or something; nothing significant once the problem is well-defined. 
It's kinda a hack anyway to get the power for your circuitry when you're 
"in-line" with the controlled device; motion sensors that have their own full 
power connection (hot, neutral and ground) always struck me as preferable, but 
of course I realize this isn't easily retrofittable into existing fixtures in 
almost all cases.  In any case, this problem as well I expect to largely 
disappear over time.

> Next we'll have expensive LED bulbs that "last up to 100,000 hours"
> with crappy electronics.

I'm amazed at just how expensive the LED bulbs are right now -- I remember the 
first CFLs being in the $20-$25 range, whereas the first big (e.g., 
replacement for 60+ watt incandescents) LED bulbs are more like $40-$60!

(But just so that it's clear -- I think banning incandescent bulbs is a really 
stupid idea, as there will always be applications where incandescents are the 
best option.)

---Joel

In article <vgkbs55fbnh59sqe49vhdciv4jpq0blvcd@4ax.com>, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:04:54 -0700, John Larkin
><jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:31:44 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:
>>
>[snip]
>>>
>>>And sweat the day when you can't get incandescent light bulbs any more
>>>because you've been told that they are too inefficient! 
>>
>>I'm goint to order a few cases of them, a lifetime supply, before they
>>become illegal. I suspect there will always be an ebay black market,
>>too.
>
>http://www.1000bulbs.com/Light-Bulbs/
>
>I buy case lots of commercial grade 130V incandescents... standards
>and floods :-)
>
>[snip]
>>
>>Next we'll have expensive LED bulbs that "last up to 100,000 hours"
>>with crappy electronics. Nearly all the green LED traffic lights in
>>San Francisco have failed, in interesting patterns, and had to be
>>replaced. Only the greens, for some reason.
>>

100,000 hours at half power and low ambient temp.
I see many failed lights now.
greg


>
>That's odd, they seem to do quite well here in AZ.  Maybe it's the fog
>in San Fransicko ?:-)
>                
>                                        ...Jim Thompson

In article <ZSlxn.171679$Bs1.83180@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com>, "Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgroups@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message 
>news:09ibs5dqho0sul6rlhc57r4qi2jtf8efks@4ax.com...
>> I'm goint to order a few cases of them, a lifetime supply, before they
>> become illegal. I suspect there will always be an ebay black market,
>> too.
>
>I'm going to hope politicians aren't dumb enough to completely outlaw them.
>
>> CFs don't work in cold locations, and most can't be dimmed, and most
>> won't work with 2-wire motion sensors.
>
>This is a fair statement, but...
>
>-- Dimmable CFLs vs. non-dimmable one is primarily a cost issue today; you can 
>readily find dimmable ones at a Home Depot or similarly well-stocked store, 
>but you end up paying a couple bucks more per each.  Over time I wouldn't be 
>surprised if that cost difference diminishes to the point where they pretty 
>much all become dimmable.  (Remember how some early CFLs still flickered at 
>turn-on, using a bi-metallic strip-based starter and magnetic ballast, but 
>that these were slightly cheaper than the all-electronic versions.)

I have worked with good dimmable ones in the past. I bought some Costco Feits
and one failed on turn on, and the dimmable feature is a joke.
Good ones are probably still near $15 a piece.

greg


>-- I've noticed that these days some motion sensors advertise that they will, 
>in fact, work with CFLs (and one can presume the ones that don't advertise 
>this won't :-) ) -- I suspect the design changes amounts to a slightly bigger 
>capacitor or something; nothing significant once the problem is well-defined. 
>It's kinda a hack anyway to get the power for your circuitry when you're 
>"in-line" with the controlled device; motion sensors that have their own full 
>power connection (hot, neutral and ground) always struck me as preferable, but 
>of course I realize this isn't easily retrofittable into existing fixtures in 
>almost all cases.  In any case, this problem as well I expect to largely 
>disappear over time.
>
>> Next we'll have expensive LED bulbs that "last up to 100,000 hours"
>> with crappy electronics.
>
>I'm amazed at just how expensive the LED bulbs are right now -- I remember the 
>first CFLs being in the $20-$25 range, whereas the first big (e.g., 
>replacement for 60+ watt incandescents) LED bulbs are more like $40-$60!
>
>(But just so that it's clear -- I think banning incandescent bulbs is a really 
>stupid idea, as there will always be applications where incandescents are the 
>best option.)
>
>---Joel
>

John Larkin wrote:
> 
> Next we'll have expensive LED bulbs that "last up to 100,000 hours"
> with crappy electronics. Nearly all the green LED traffic lights in
> San Francisco have failed, in interesting patterns, and had to be
> replaced. Only the greens, for some reason.


   I see a lot of failing red ones around here, along with the green.
Some have already been replaced once, when over half of the LEDs went
dark. It's interesting to look at them through the tinted  top edge of
the windshield. They sure don't match them. Their intensities vary all
over the place.


-- 
Lead free solder is Belgium's version of 'Hold my beer and watch this!'

In article <q9dbs5hsep3nihtv1f4uf9k1n5i7l6hqlb@4ax.com>, PeterD wrote:

>And sweat the day when you can't get incandescent light bulbs any more
>because you've been told that they are too inefficient! 
>
>I'm sure we're going to see a sharp rise in residential fires in the
>next 10 years, too... Mostly due to cheap chinese CFL lamps failing
>when used in locations that are totally inappropriate, a move forced
>by those who "think" they know best for everyone. 

  The incandescent ban taking effect in stages from January 2012 to 
January 2014 has a set of loopholes wide enough to reroute the Mississippi 
river through, in my words.

http://members.misty.com/don/incban.html

(I did hear recently that part of what I thought the 2012 stage was is 
now set to take effect in January 2013.)

  Sadly, some incandescents will be replaced by some loopholers that are 
even less efficient than the ones being banned (rough/vibration service
and traffic signal).

  Meanwhile, most residential usage of motion sensor lights that I see 
uses reflectorized R or PAR or BR floodlight and spotlight incandescent
lamps, which are exempt from the 2012-2014 bans.  These light fixtures 
(typically outdoors in my experience with residential use of motion 
sensor lights) appear to me to be the worst place for CFLs that I can 
think of at this moment, except for use in ovens.

  (And appliance lamps are another exemption from the 2012-2014 ban.)

  Other exemptions include tubular bulbs of showcase and refrigerator and 
exit sign types, globular bulbs of decorative and vanity types, 
flame-shaped bulbs used in chandaliers, ones with design voltage outside 
the range of 110-130 volts (even if only outside to an extent to hold up
in a court case), and ones with light output outside the range of 310-2600 
lumens (I am guessing possibly both at 120 volts and at their design 
voltage that is in or at one end of the 110-130 volt range).

  This means that low voltage incandescents including automotive 
incandescents and most incandescents used for indicator lamps, all common
120V incandescents of wattage 20 watts or less, and the vast majority of 
25 watt 120V incandescents are exempt.  Some 150 watt 120V incandescents 
and most 120V incandescents 200 watts or more are exempt on basis of 
producing more than 2600 lumens.

  Incandescents with bases other than E26 and E27 are exempt from the 
2012-2014 USA ban.  That alone covers pretty much everything of wattage
7.0 watts or less (already exempt on basis of luminous output), the vast
majority of low voltage incandescents including automotive (at least
generally already exempt on basis of design voltage or luminous output or
both), a majority of halogen lamps, and nearly all projector lamps.

  (Many projector lamps are also exempt on basis of producing more than
2600 lumens, and a few are also exempt for being designed for design 
voltage of 82V requiring a diode in halfwave rectifier manner when powered 
by 120 volts AC.)

  Incandescents exceeding an energy efficiency standard that can be met or
exceeded by good usage of "HIR technology" are exempt.  Philips has one or
more likely two already on the market for over a year including at Home 
Depot, as for ones that are exempt from the 2012-2014 USA incandescent 
lamp ban on basis of energy efficiency and for no other reasons.  These
would be Philips "Halogena Energy Saver".  The one producing 800 lumens
from 400 watts is exempt according to all sources that I have run into.
The one producing 1600 lumens from 70 watts is exempt according to most
but not all sources that I have run into.

  I hope I said enough already, although it appears to me that the USA
2012-2014 incandescent lamp ban has probably around 10 to a dozen,
possibly more, get-arounds (mostly lesser such as "plant grow lamp", 
colored lamp, blacklight incandescent, bug non-attracting light, infrared,
left-hand-thread screw base, marine, at least 4 others) that I did not 
mention above and that I do mention in above-mentioned:

http://members.misty.com/don/incban.html

 - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

In article <4BC630D4.4812E944@earthlink.net>, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>
>John Larkin wrote:
>> 
>> Next we'll have expensive LED bulbs that "last up to 100,000 hours"
>> with crappy electronics. Nearly all the green LED traffic lights in
>> San Francisco have failed, in interesting patterns, and had to be
>> replaced. Only the greens, for some reason.
>
>   I see a lot of failing red ones around here, along with the green.
>Some have already been replaced once, when over half of the LEDs went
>dark. It's interesting to look at them through the tinted  top edge of
>the windshield. They sure don't match them. Their intensities vary all
>over the place.

  My experience with LED traffic signals in Philadelphia and suburbs 
thereof is that the LED ones are showing their superiority.

  Please keep in mind that Philadelphia gets more extreme high temperatures
than much of Florida.  I have already lived through merely a July 1995 day
in Philadelphia fair-chance getting hotter than Miami was ever officially 
noted to have achieved, some chance tying Miami's record high temperature 
in combination with dew point that is high even for Miami!

  (PHL airport or closest-to-there official weather station determined
that at 4 PM "local time" July 15th the temperature was 102 F [peaking 
that day at a slightly different time at 103 F.])

  (I have a tale or 2 to tell about atmosphere temperature at 102 F, and
some cause to discount much-hotter)...

 - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 06:28:47 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:


>  My experience with LED traffic signals in Philadelphia and suburbs 
>thereof is that the LED ones are showing their superiority.
>
>  Please keep in mind that Philadelphia gets more extreme high temperatures
>than much of Florida.  I have already lived through merely a July 1995 day
>in Philadelphia fair-chance getting hotter than Miami was ever officially 
>noted to have achieved, some chance tying Miami's record high temperature 
>in combination with dew point that is high even for Miami!
>
>  (PHL airport or closest-to-there official weather station determined
>that at 4 PM "local time" July 15th the temperature was 102 F [peaking 
>that day at a slightly different time at 103 F.])
>
>  (I have a tale or 2 to tell about atmosphere temperature at 102 F, and
>some cause to discount much-hotter)...
>
> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

Municipalities in northern climates that converted to LED traffic
lights are having to send work crews out to de-ice them. The LED's
don't radiate enough heat to de-ice themselves.

Hammy wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 06:28:47 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
> Klipstein) wrote:
> 
>>  My experience with LED traffic signals in Philadelphia and suburbs 
>> thereof is that the LED ones are showing their superiority.
>>
>>  Please keep in mind that Philadelphia gets more extreme high temperatures
>> than much of Florida.  I have already lived through merely a July 1995 day
>> in Philadelphia fair-chance getting hotter than Miami was ever officially 
>> noted to have achieved, some chance tying Miami's record high temperature 
>> in combination with dew point that is high even for Miami!
>>
>>  (PHL airport or closest-to-there official weather station determined
>> that at 4 PM "local time" July 15th the temperature was 102 F [peaking 
>> that day at a slightly different time at 103 F.])
>>
>>  (I have a tale or 2 to tell about atmosphere temperature at 102 F, and
>> some cause to discount much-hotter)...
>>
>> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
> 
> Municipalities in northern climates that converted to LED traffic
> lights are having to send work crews out to de-ice them. The LED's
> don't radiate enough heat to de-ice themselves.

This seems unlikely. LED traffic lights are efficient but to that extent 
there is still enough waste heat at least in the UK up to latitude 55N. 
It must take exceptional conditions for snow to accumulate on them.

In the US there is already a fairly simple piece of bent metal solution 
for wind blown snow clogging up the sun visor cowling.

http://www.ledsmagazine.com/news/7/1/4

Regards,
Martin Brown