"David B." wrote:

> I have 18 ga safty wire that I can use to minimize the voltage drop.

LOL ! Forget 12V then !

Only the other day I was looking at ~ 4mm^2 cable feeding 50W halogen fittings.

Graham

Phil Allison wrote:

> "David B."
> >
> > Thanks Phil, Is there any advantage in using low voltage recessed ceiling
> > lighting? Seeing that the fixtures are costlier than line voltage cans,
> > why are they becoming so popular?
>
> **  Its all about the looks.
>
> Spot lighting, pretty effects, full range dimming etc,  et alia.

Also those fittings have little depth so can be flush fitted. You couldn't
easily do that otherwise.

So, what are ppl going to have in their kitchens (the most popular place in the
UK for low voltage halogens)  when incandescents are banned then ?

Back to those exposed tube florries ?

Graham

Hi Ken my mistake the wire is actually 12 ga. its not regular romax . Its
the type used for emergency lighting and fire systems.
Dave

"Ken Fowler" <k...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:s...@comcast.com...
>
> On 13-Jun-2007, "David B." <d...@glis.net> wrote:
>
> > I wanted to know if I would save on the electrtic bill by using 12volt.
Will
> > be doing lanscape and soffit lighting. I have 18 ga safty wire that I
can
> > use to minimize the voltage drop.
> > Dave
> > "Eeyore" <r...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:4...@hotmail.com...
> > >
> > >
> > > "David B." wrote:
> > >
> > > > I want to do some landscape lighting and wondering if using  a
12volt
> > > > system(20 watt bulb) is more efficient than normal 120 volt  (20
watt
> > Bulb).
> > >
> > > Low voltage halogen bulbs are more efficient than 120/230 volt
tungsten
> > > incandescents.
> > >
> > > Was that what you wanted to know ?
> > >
> > > Don't forget about the serious effect of volt drop due to cable
resistance
> > with
> > > low voltage lighting though.
> > >
> > > Graham
> > >
>
> Your 20 Watt lamp will draw ~1.6 amps from 12 Volts.  18 gauge wire might
be enough for one or two
> lamps but will not minimize the voltage drop.  The system is not very
efficient if power is lost in
> the wires.  14 gauge would be better.
>
> Ken Fowler

"David B."
>
>I wanted to know if I would save on the electrtic bill by using 12volt. 
>Will
> be doing lanscape and soffit lighting.


** Then use compact fluoros -  that is something they might be good at.

You can get them now in ratings of  7 watts,  or maybe less in " mini 
spiral"  types with " warm white " colour.




......   Phil

On 2007-06-13, David B. <d...@glis.net> wrote:

> Thanks Phil, Is there any advantage in using low voltage recessed ceiling
> lighting? Seeing that the fixtures are costlier than line voltage cans, why
> are they becoming so popular?

low voltage halogen downlights last longer than mains voltage halogens 
and give better colour etc...


Bye.
   Jasen

On 14 Jun 2007 10:30:36 GMT, Jasen <j...@free.net.nz> wrote:

>On 2007-06-13, David B. <d...@glis.net> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Phil, Is there any advantage in using low voltage recessed ceiling
>> lighting? Seeing that the fixtures are costlier than line voltage cans, why
>> are they becoming so popular?
>
>low voltage halogen downlights last longer than mains voltage halogens 
>and give better colour etc...
>

For the same reason 120 volt bulbs last longer than 240's: a short fat
filament takes longer to evaporate.

John

"Jasen the ASD fucked kiwi MORON "


> low voltage halogen downlights last longer than mains voltage halogens


** Not the comparison that was asked about.


> and give better colour etc...


**  BOLLOCKS.



.......   Phil

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 07:44:23 -0400, "David B." <d...@glis.net> wrote:

>I want to do some landscape lighting and wondering if using  a 12volt
>system(20 watt bulb) is more efficient than normal 120 volt  (20 watt
Bulb).
>


It is much safer to use 12V for domestic outdoor lighting. Depending
on the number of lights you wish to drive you may use either
individual transformers for each lamp or a larger common transformer
for a group of lamps. Because of the importance of maintaining low
volt drop in the 12V cabling you will need to mount the supply
transformer as close as possible to the individual lamp, or in the
case of a common transformer, as close as possible to the centre of
each group of lamps.

In order to get the transformer as close to the lamps as possible it
is usual to mount them on an outside wall or a verandah/porch support
post, or in some cases, in an underground pit. This makes it mandatory
for the transformers to be weatherproof where rain or water is likely
to be encountered, or fully encapsulated for underground use.
Individual lamps can be powered from a plug pack transformer designed
for soft starting low voltage lamps eg Tridonic Atco ACT35-2 (see
p.209 document below). Grouped lamps can be powered using the
weatherproof LVL 6 or 10 series transformers (p.211) or the fully
encapsulated LVL48A series (p.212) for underground applications. There
should be similar versions for 120Vac applications from US
manufacturers.

If using a common transformer, then depending upon the wattage of each
lamp, and the cable gauge & length, you may be able to connect more
than one lamp on a 12V cable run. On longer runs it may be better to
power 1 lamp per cable run. This will need to be determined by what
circumstances and materials apply to your particular situation.

This document
http://www.tridonicatco.com.au/MEDIEN/CAT0304_AU/TRANS.PDF while
applying to Australia where 240Vac mains is the norm, contains
information which is pertinent to low voltage electromagnetic lighting
transfomers used anywhere, particularly with regard to the requirement
for good regulation with variable load to increase lamp life.

Ross Herbert wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 07:44:23 -0400, "David B." <d...@glis.net> wrote:
>
> >I want to do some landscape lighting and wondering if using  a 12volt
> >system(20 watt bulb) is more efficient than normal 120 volt  (20 watt
> >Bulb).
>
> It is much safer to use 12V for domestic outdoor lighting.

Just a thought.

Why not 24V ?

Graham

On 2007-06-14, Phyllis <p...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
> ** Not the comparison that was asked about.
>

not the message I was respondinfg to.



-- 

Bye.
   Jasen