For controllability and energy savings in frequently switched applications,Universal Lighting Technologies has introduced the new ULTim8 Programmed Start Series of T8 linear fluorescent ballasts, designed to simplify compliance with legislative and code requirements that call for controllable lighting technologies such as occupancy sensors.
Featuring parallel lamp operation and ultra fast start times (<700 milliseconds), the new ULTim8 Programmed Start Series is engineered to reduce maintenance costs and extend lamp life in applications where lamps are being turned on and off throughout the day, whether manually or via lighting controls.
In addition, these ballasts are part of the NEMA Premium Electronic Ballast Program that identifies the most energy-efficient T8 fluorescent ballasts on the market today. This new addition to the ULTim8 High Efficiency ballast family includes 2-, 3-, and 4-lamp models with both 0.88 (HE) and 0.71(EL) ballast factor options available.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) 2011 Progress Report
The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IES) has published the 2011 Progress Report. (A .pdf link to the complete report at the bottom of this blog).
Each year, the IES Progress Committee offers manufacturers the opportunity to submit significant product developments and improvements to the lighting industry through the IES Progress Report. The mission of the Progress Committee is to keep in touch with developments in the art and science of lighting throughout the world and prepare a yearly report of achievements for the Society. Acceptance in the Progress Report is based on an impartial judging process used by the committee to evaluate each submission on its uniqueness, innovation and significance to the lighting industry.
Of the 261 submittals for 2011, 156 were accepted into the Report. Submissions were made in the following categories: Light Sources, Luminaires, Materials, Power Supplies, Accessories, Research, Publications, and Design Tools. The entries in the Report include a product photo, product name, essential features why it was selected and a contact for more information.
http://www.ies.org/PDF/ProgressReport/PR.pdf
Each year, the IES Progress Committee offers manufacturers the opportunity to submit significant product developments and improvements to the lighting industry through the IES Progress Report. The mission of the Progress Committee is to keep in touch with developments in the art and science of lighting throughout the world and prepare a yearly report of achievements for the Society. Acceptance in the Progress Report is based on an impartial judging process used by the committee to evaluate each submission on its uniqueness, innovation and significance to the lighting industry.
Of the 261 submittals for 2011, 156 were accepted into the Report. Submissions were made in the following categories: Light Sources, Luminaires, Materials, Power Supplies, Accessories, Research, Publications, and Design Tools. The entries in the Report include a product photo, product name, essential features why it was selected and a contact for more information.
http://www.ies.org/PDF/ProgressReport/PR.pdf
Friday, December 16, 2011
Dept of Energy's Jim Brodrick on Round 13 of CALiPER Product Testing
from www.lightnowblog.com
Results of the latest round of CALiPER testing were released recently, and as usual they can tell us a thing or two about the current state of solid-state lighting. As you may know, DOE’s CALiPER program supports testing of a wide array of SSL products available for general illumination, and publishes the results in summary and detailed reports, as well as a searchable database that allows side-by-side comparisons with previous rounds and benchmark products. CALiPER Round 13 focused on three types of LED luminaires for commercial and industrial applications: high-bay luminaires, wallpacks, and 2′x2′ troffers.
One thing it shows is that even in commercial lighting applications, which require high levels of light output and carefully designed light distribution, SSL luminaires are now clearly able to compete on a level playing field with traditional products. Most of the indicators from CALiPER Round 13 shed a positive light on the LED products in these categories, underscoring the fact that obtaining photometric data, understanding how it relates to the needs of the application in question, and comparing SSL and conventional options carefully are key to choosing the right products.
Round 13 shows that the average luminaire efficacy of products continues to increase, and color quality continues to improve. The average luminaire efficacy of the LED products tested in Round 13 was more than 60 lm/W, and most of them met or exceeded the efficacy of the traditional benchmark products tested. And while there were still some LED products that didn’t perform well, particularly with regard to light distribution, there was significantly less variation in product performance than in previous rounds, and a majority were found to meet or exceed manufacturer performance claims. Many of the products tested are taking advantage of the inherent strengths of SSL to achieve uniform light distribution similar to that of conventional luminaires, and in some cases are even improving on the uniformity of distribution.
Of special interest in Round 13 were the 2′x2′ troffers. These were all integral luminaires, with SSL technology designed into the product as a whole in order to take full advantage of it – quite a different animal indeed from the LED products that are designed to simply replace the 4′ linear fluorescent lamps used in 2′x4′ troffers. While those LED linear replacement lamps still fall short of their fluorescent counterparts in terms of light output and distribution, the LED 2′x2′ troffers tested in Round 13 fared much better, with some of them meeting the specifications developed by the DOE Commercial Building Energy Alliances and the DesignLights Consortium, a collaborative of utility and regional energy efficiency organizations.
Despite improvements, Round 13 shows that accurate reporting and product literature are still concerns – not only for LED lighting products, but also for their benchmark counterparts. In all cases, but especially for luminaires, it’s important to know which version of a product the photometric data applies to, and not to assume that other versions of the product perform similarly. The products that were found to have accurate manufacturer claims – which were in the majority – tended to include detailed photometric performance specifications that referenced LM-79 and avoided the use of equivalency statements. Products that omitted this detailed photometric data and made vague equivalency claims tended to fall short of expectations. What’s more, although only a portion of the products carried equivalency claims, most of those claims were found to be misleading or false, which means that buyers and specifiers should examine and understand photometric performance of both the LED products and conventional luminaires that they may be replacing, rather than rely on equivalency statements in product literature. A new DOE Technology Fact Sheet, “Establishing LED Equivalency,” offers guidance on understanding SSL equivalency claims.
Results of the latest round of CALiPER testing were released recently, and as usual they can tell us a thing or two about the current state of solid-state lighting. As you may know, DOE’s CALiPER program supports testing of a wide array of SSL products available for general illumination, and publishes the results in summary and detailed reports, as well as a searchable database that allows side-by-side comparisons with previous rounds and benchmark products. CALiPER Round 13 focused on three types of LED luminaires for commercial and industrial applications: high-bay luminaires, wallpacks, and 2′x2′ troffers.
One thing it shows is that even in commercial lighting applications, which require high levels of light output and carefully designed light distribution, SSL luminaires are now clearly able to compete on a level playing field with traditional products. Most of the indicators from CALiPER Round 13 shed a positive light on the LED products in these categories, underscoring the fact that obtaining photometric data, understanding how it relates to the needs of the application in question, and comparing SSL and conventional options carefully are key to choosing the right products.
Round 13 shows that the average luminaire efficacy of products continues to increase, and color quality continues to improve. The average luminaire efficacy of the LED products tested in Round 13 was more than 60 lm/W, and most of them met or exceeded the efficacy of the traditional benchmark products tested. And while there were still some LED products that didn’t perform well, particularly with regard to light distribution, there was significantly less variation in product performance than in previous rounds, and a majority were found to meet or exceed manufacturer performance claims. Many of the products tested are taking advantage of the inherent strengths of SSL to achieve uniform light distribution similar to that of conventional luminaires, and in some cases are even improving on the uniformity of distribution.
Of special interest in Round 13 were the 2′x2′ troffers. These were all integral luminaires, with SSL technology designed into the product as a whole in order to take full advantage of it – quite a different animal indeed from the LED products that are designed to simply replace the 4′ linear fluorescent lamps used in 2′x4′ troffers. While those LED linear replacement lamps still fall short of their fluorescent counterparts in terms of light output and distribution, the LED 2′x2′ troffers tested in Round 13 fared much better, with some of them meeting the specifications developed by the DOE Commercial Building Energy Alliances and the DesignLights Consortium, a collaborative of utility and regional energy efficiency organizations.
Despite improvements, Round 13 shows that accurate reporting and product literature are still concerns – not only for LED lighting products, but also for their benchmark counterparts. In all cases, but especially for luminaires, it’s important to know which version of a product the photometric data applies to, and not to assume that other versions of the product perform similarly. The products that were found to have accurate manufacturer claims – which were in the majority – tended to include detailed photometric performance specifications that referenced LM-79 and avoided the use of equivalency statements. Products that omitted this detailed photometric data and made vague equivalency claims tended to fall short of expectations. What’s more, although only a portion of the products carried equivalency claims, most of those claims were found to be misleading or false, which means that buyers and specifiers should examine and understand photometric performance of both the LED products and conventional luminaires that they may be replacing, rather than rely on equivalency statements in product literature. A new DOE Technology Fact Sheet, “Establishing LED Equivalency,” offers guidance on understanding SSL equivalency claims.
Monday, December 5, 2011
Trust, but verify: Reducing Risk Prior to LED Implementation
Copied from: http://www.creeledrevolution.com/blog/2011/12/05/trust-but-verify-reducing-risk-prior-to-led-implementation/
Those old enough to remember the 1980s may recall then President Ronald Reagan’s, “Trust, but verify” messaging as part of the United State’s Cold War negotiations with the former Soviet Union. While evaluating LED luminaires may not seem as important as dealing with a nuclear arms race, the same “Trust, but verify” philosophy should be used to reduce risk prior to any large scale implementation of LED products.
But what should you verify? To better limit risk it’s important to understand where risk resides. Some typical questions could include:
• How do I know I’ll get the necessary sustained light levels over the duration of my application?
• How do I know that the luminaire mounting is strong enough to withstand vibration over time?
• How do I know the luminaire and its paint finish are durable enough to resist corrosion?
It’s important to understand the difference between specifying product features versus specifying product performance. Specific product features may imply performance, but by themselves fall short of ensuring any specific level of performance. For example, a street light luminaire that advertises a product feature utilizing four mounting bolts, instead of two, may imply a certain level of increased performance. For instance, it may imply resistance to conditions such as vibration. But without credible performance data that specifically addresses vibration resistance, no assumption regarding a product’s resistance to vibration should be made. Specifying product performance removes product features from the specification and puts the focus on what actually reduces risk, some level of product performance.
Lets get back to the questions. Would the level of risk be more greatly reduced by pointing to either product specific features or credible performance data? Well if the movie Jerry Maguire was about a great lighting designer, he would have probably shouted, “Show Me the Data!” There are relevant standards in place that can be referenced to quantify levels of durability for the three questions above and more. Once the necessary performance level is determined and specified, potential suppliers should verify their ability to provide certain levels of performance with credible data so as to reduce risk.
But, what about product warranties – they minimize risk, right? Although warranties are designed to reduce risk, warranties also present certain risks as well. The first risk is based on the strength and credibility of the company offering the warranty in the first place. Two nearly identical five-year warranties may seem equal at first glance, but if there is a high degree of uncertainty that one of the two companies may even survive for five years, it’s unlikely these two warranties would be viewed as equals. Overall product reliability is another factor to consider when determining the potential strength or value of a warranty. Companies with proven performance are probably less likely to experience catastrophic failures on a scale that may jeopardize their ability to honor warranty claims compared to new companies entering the market.
So the goal to managing risk shouldn’t be left solely to a good warranty. Even the best warranties do not eliminate risk, since associated costs may be incurred should warranty claims need to be made. Therefore, specifying performance during the product selection process is the best way to minimize risk. Remember, “Trust, but verify.”
Those old enough to remember the 1980s may recall then President Ronald Reagan’s, “Trust, but verify” messaging as part of the United State’s Cold War negotiations with the former Soviet Union. While evaluating LED luminaires may not seem as important as dealing with a nuclear arms race, the same “Trust, but verify” philosophy should be used to reduce risk prior to any large scale implementation of LED products.
But what should you verify? To better limit risk it’s important to understand where risk resides. Some typical questions could include:
• How do I know I’ll get the necessary sustained light levels over the duration of my application?
• How do I know that the luminaire mounting is strong enough to withstand vibration over time?
• How do I know the luminaire and its paint finish are durable enough to resist corrosion?
It’s important to understand the difference between specifying product features versus specifying product performance. Specific product features may imply performance, but by themselves fall short of ensuring any specific level of performance. For example, a street light luminaire that advertises a product feature utilizing four mounting bolts, instead of two, may imply a certain level of increased performance. For instance, it may imply resistance to conditions such as vibration. But without credible performance data that specifically addresses vibration resistance, no assumption regarding a product’s resistance to vibration should be made. Specifying product performance removes product features from the specification and puts the focus on what actually reduces risk, some level of product performance.
Lets get back to the questions. Would the level of risk be more greatly reduced by pointing to either product specific features or credible performance data? Well if the movie Jerry Maguire was about a great lighting designer, he would have probably shouted, “Show Me the Data!” There are relevant standards in place that can be referenced to quantify levels of durability for the three questions above and more. Once the necessary performance level is determined and specified, potential suppliers should verify their ability to provide certain levels of performance with credible data so as to reduce risk.
But, what about product warranties – they minimize risk, right? Although warranties are designed to reduce risk, warranties also present certain risks as well. The first risk is based on the strength and credibility of the company offering the warranty in the first place. Two nearly identical five-year warranties may seem equal at first glance, but if there is a high degree of uncertainty that one of the two companies may even survive for five years, it’s unlikely these two warranties would be viewed as equals. Overall product reliability is another factor to consider when determining the potential strength or value of a warranty. Companies with proven performance are probably less likely to experience catastrophic failures on a scale that may jeopardize their ability to honor warranty claims compared to new companies entering the market.
So the goal to managing risk shouldn’t be left solely to a good warranty. Even the best warranties do not eliminate risk, since associated costs may be incurred should warranty claims need to be made. Therefore, specifying performance during the product selection process is the best way to minimize risk. Remember, “Trust, but verify.”
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Luminaire 'Types' for parking lot lighting
Parking facility lighting luminaires are selected based on photometric distribution to specific areas of the lot surface.
Architectural luminaires blend with the total architectural design of the facility. Generally, they achieve efficient and uniform light distribution through reflectors and refractor lenses.
Pole-mounted luminaires can provide illumination at distances of two to two-and-a-half times the mounting height from the pole.
Post-top luminaires offer symmetrical and asymmetrical distribution, in either direct or indirect design. The mounting height is usually limited to no more than 26 feet.
Indirect type luminaires shield the light source from normal view, thus providing excellent glare control along with a good aesthetic appearance. These types of luminaires are used for parking lot lighting and hold lamps of 250W or greater, with a mounting height of 20 feet or more.
High mast systems have a mounting height of 66 feet or more and can cover a large area with a minimum number of poles. Suitable for nonresidential areas, the luminaires of a high mast system can provide symmetrical or asymmetrical distribution using refractors and/or reflectors, or the distribution can be totally indirect.
Roadway fixtures provide a wide range of symmetrical and asymmetrical distributions. The wall-mounted unit is applicable to a narrow area between buildings. The mounting height is usually no more than 26 feet. A wide variety of distribution types are available, generally divided in cutoff and semi-cutoff distribution design.
Architectural luminaires blend with the total architectural design of the facility. Generally, they achieve efficient and uniform light distribution through reflectors and refractor lenses.
Pole-mounted luminaires can provide illumination at distances of two to two-and-a-half times the mounting height from the pole.
Post-top luminaires offer symmetrical and asymmetrical distribution, in either direct or indirect design. The mounting height is usually limited to no more than 26 feet.
Indirect type luminaires shield the light source from normal view, thus providing excellent glare control along with a good aesthetic appearance. These types of luminaires are used for parking lot lighting and hold lamps of 250W or greater, with a mounting height of 20 feet or more.
High mast systems have a mounting height of 66 feet or more and can cover a large area with a minimum number of poles. Suitable for nonresidential areas, the luminaires of a high mast system can provide symmetrical or asymmetrical distribution using refractors and/or reflectors, or the distribution can be totally indirect.
Roadway fixtures provide a wide range of symmetrical and asymmetrical distributions. The wall-mounted unit is applicable to a narrow area between buildings. The mounting height is usually no more than 26 feet. A wide variety of distribution types are available, generally divided in cutoff and semi-cutoff distribution design.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Determining Light Loss Factor
From the Illuminating Engineering Society North America Lighting Handbook:
The light loss factor (LLF) is a fraction that represents the amount of light that will be lost due to things such as dirt on lamps, reduction of light output of a lamp over time, and similar factors. The following items are the individual components of the light loss factor.The total LLF is calculated by multiplying all the individual factors together. No factor should be ignored (set equal to 1) until investigations justify doing so. Lighting calculations should not be attempted until all light-loss factors are considered.
•Luminaire Ambient Temperature Factor
•Heat-extraction thermal factor
•Voltage-to-luminaire factor
•Ballast Factor
•Ballast-lamp photometric factor
•Equipment operating factor (H.I.D. only)
•Lamp-position (tilt) factor (H.I.D. only)
•Luminaire surface depreciation factor
•Lamp Lumen Depreciation
•Luminaire Dirt Depreciation
•Room Surface Dirt Depreciation
•Lamps Burnout Factor
The light loss factor (LLF) is a fraction that represents the amount of light that will be lost due to things such as dirt on lamps, reduction of light output of a lamp over time, and similar factors. The following items are the individual components of the light loss factor.The total LLF is calculated by multiplying all the individual factors together. No factor should be ignored (set equal to 1) until investigations justify doing so. Lighting calculations should not be attempted until all light-loss factors are considered.
•Luminaire Ambient Temperature Factor
•Heat-extraction thermal factor
•Voltage-to-luminaire factor
•Ballast Factor
•Ballast-lamp photometric factor
•Equipment operating factor (H.I.D. only)
•Lamp-position (tilt) factor (H.I.D. only)
•Luminaire surface depreciation factor
•Lamp Lumen Depreciation
•Luminaire Dirt Depreciation
•Room Surface Dirt Depreciation
•Lamps Burnout Factor
Monday, October 31, 2011
DOE seminar provides insight into what is succeeding and current challenges in LED lighting
In a session entitled "State of the industry and market forecast," Jim Brodrick, lighting program manager at the US Department of Energy (DOE), was the lead speaker at the LEDs 2011 conference in San Diego, CA. Brodrick described applications where LED-based solid-state lighting (SSL) is already succeeding as well as the technology shortcomings that are limiting the usage of LEDs in other applications.
Immediately Brodrick pinpointed the reason for the DOE's interest in SSL and investment in the technology. Quoting a DOE report issued earlier this year, Brodrick said that LEDs could yield 233 TWh in energy savings per year if LED lights totally replaced legacy sources in a short list of seven lighting applications – enough energy to power 19 million households.
Purpose-built luminairesBrodrick made a general statement about midway through his presentation that summed up the state of the SSL industry. About LED lighting products, he said, "If you design from a clean sheet of paper, you can come up with products that are really very good." He added that good designs must address all aspects of a luminaire including LED chips, optics, electronics, thermal management, and mechanical design.
It's easy to see where Brodrick's statement applies in readily available products. LED-based tubes intended as replacements for linear fluorescent lamps are still struggling to match the incumbent technology. In contrast, Brodrick said that several LED-based integral luminaires that are designed to replace tube-based troffer fixtures – as opposed to just replacing the tubes - can match or exceed the performance of fluorescent technology.
In general, Brodrick said that SSL is doing extremely well in recessed downlights, outdoor area lights, 2x2-ft troffers (not tube based) and refrigerated-case lights. The technology isn't doing nearly so well in small retrofit lamps including A lamps, the aforementioned linear-replacement segment, and cove lighting especially in cases where the legacy luminaires utilize fluorescent tubes.
LED retrofit lampsBrodrick spent more time discussing the problematic applications, acknowledging the continued interest in LED-based 4-ft tubes given the huge installed base of fluorescent troffers. He said the tubes are getting better and beginning to match the efficacy of fluorescents. But light output and distribution remain a problem as directional LEDs aren't a good match for fluorescent fixtures that were designed for a tube that radiates light around the entire cylinder.
Still, Brodrick said the LED tubes are beginning to work for some applications in terms of light output and cost. Specifically he said that the long life of LEDs make the tubes a fit for hard-to-reach applications. He also said the LED tubes are a good choice where vibration is present or in temperature extremes.
In the area of small replacement lamps including ubiquitous A lamps, Brodrick said that the technology is getting better although he said, "generally they don't match the output, color quality, and light distribution" of incandescent sources.
Brodrick described a recent DOE test of replacement lamps in which the agency visited eight big-box retail stores in the US and purchased 33 LED lamp products to test. He said that most failed to meet basic performance parameters that would satisfy consumers looking to replace incandescent or halogen lamps.
About the retailers, Brodrick said, "Some carry better products than others." The DOE hasn't identified the retailers in a publicly-available report, but Brodrick said the DOE had taken up the matter directly with the retailers to discuss the issue of consumer satisfaction with LED lamps.
Tackling roadblocksBrodrick concluded by discussing some items that the SSL industry needs to address across the entire application landscape. He said that despite the finalization of the TM-21 standard to project LED life, the industry continues to struggle to differentiate between lumen depreciation and luminaire life. We covered that very topic in the article " Understanding the difference between LED rated life and lumen-maintenance life" published in the October 2011 issue of LEDs Magazine. The DOE is working on the problem in conjunction with the Next Generation Lighting Industry Alliance and has published a paper focused on LED luminaire lifetime and reporting.
In terms of color quality, Brodrick said that the LED makers have made significant improvements and that tighter binning is a great benefit to luminaire makers. But he also said, "Color shifts over time are not well understood or predictable." He suggested more research is needed on the topic.
Brighter LEDs are also desirable of course. The DOE continues to raise lumen output and efficacy goals in its SSL Multi-Year Program Plan. In terms of efficacy, Brodrick said, "We're going for 258 lm/W." That's the goal for cool-white LEDs by 2020. For comparison, incandescent lamps are around 12 lm/W.
Tradeoffs were the final topic. In these relatively early days of the LED lighting industry, many conference talks have focused on optimizing every element of a luminaire including light output, color quality, efficacy, adaptive controls, and serviceability. Brodrick expects more affordable products to emerge as industry players identify what tradeoffs to make in specific applications.
Brodrick provided one example in the choice between modular-based approaches and what he calls an integrated luminaire that is purpose built for a single application. He said integrated luminaires typically have fewer components and lower assembly costs. He said modular designs are more convenient and can even be user serviceable but will also generally cost more.
Immediately Brodrick pinpointed the reason for the DOE's interest in SSL and investment in the technology. Quoting a DOE report issued earlier this year, Brodrick said that LEDs could yield 233 TWh in energy savings per year if LED lights totally replaced legacy sources in a short list of seven lighting applications – enough energy to power 19 million households.
Purpose-built luminairesBrodrick made a general statement about midway through his presentation that summed up the state of the SSL industry. About LED lighting products, he said, "If you design from a clean sheet of paper, you can come up with products that are really very good." He added that good designs must address all aspects of a luminaire including LED chips, optics, electronics, thermal management, and mechanical design.
It's easy to see where Brodrick's statement applies in readily available products. LED-based tubes intended as replacements for linear fluorescent lamps are still struggling to match the incumbent technology. In contrast, Brodrick said that several LED-based integral luminaires that are designed to replace tube-based troffer fixtures – as opposed to just replacing the tubes - can match or exceed the performance of fluorescent technology.
In general, Brodrick said that SSL is doing extremely well in recessed downlights, outdoor area lights, 2x2-ft troffers (not tube based) and refrigerated-case lights. The technology isn't doing nearly so well in small retrofit lamps including A lamps, the aforementioned linear-replacement segment, and cove lighting especially in cases where the legacy luminaires utilize fluorescent tubes.
LED retrofit lampsBrodrick spent more time discussing the problematic applications, acknowledging the continued interest in LED-based 4-ft tubes given the huge installed base of fluorescent troffers. He said the tubes are getting better and beginning to match the efficacy of fluorescents. But light output and distribution remain a problem as directional LEDs aren't a good match for fluorescent fixtures that were designed for a tube that radiates light around the entire cylinder.
Still, Brodrick said the LED tubes are beginning to work for some applications in terms of light output and cost. Specifically he said that the long life of LEDs make the tubes a fit for hard-to-reach applications. He also said the LED tubes are a good choice where vibration is present or in temperature extremes.
In the area of small replacement lamps including ubiquitous A lamps, Brodrick said that the technology is getting better although he said, "generally they don't match the output, color quality, and light distribution" of incandescent sources.
Brodrick described a recent DOE test of replacement lamps in which the agency visited eight big-box retail stores in the US and purchased 33 LED lamp products to test. He said that most failed to meet basic performance parameters that would satisfy consumers looking to replace incandescent or halogen lamps.
About the retailers, Brodrick said, "Some carry better products than others." The DOE hasn't identified the retailers in a publicly-available report, but Brodrick said the DOE had taken up the matter directly with the retailers to discuss the issue of consumer satisfaction with LED lamps.
Tackling roadblocksBrodrick concluded by discussing some items that the SSL industry needs to address across the entire application landscape. He said that despite the finalization of the TM-21 standard to project LED life, the industry continues to struggle to differentiate between lumen depreciation and luminaire life. We covered that very topic in the article " Understanding the difference between LED rated life and lumen-maintenance life" published in the October 2011 issue of LEDs Magazine. The DOE is working on the problem in conjunction with the Next Generation Lighting Industry Alliance and has published a paper focused on LED luminaire lifetime and reporting.
In terms of color quality, Brodrick said that the LED makers have made significant improvements and that tighter binning is a great benefit to luminaire makers. But he also said, "Color shifts over time are not well understood or predictable." He suggested more research is needed on the topic.
Brighter LEDs are also desirable of course. The DOE continues to raise lumen output and efficacy goals in its SSL Multi-Year Program Plan. In terms of efficacy, Brodrick said, "We're going for 258 lm/W." That's the goal for cool-white LEDs by 2020. For comparison, incandescent lamps are around 12 lm/W.
Tradeoffs were the final topic. In these relatively early days of the LED lighting industry, many conference talks have focused on optimizing every element of a luminaire including light output, color quality, efficacy, adaptive controls, and serviceability. Brodrick expects more affordable products to emerge as industry players identify what tradeoffs to make in specific applications.
Brodrick provided one example in the choice between modular-based approaches and what he calls an integrated luminaire that is purpose built for a single application. He said integrated luminaires typically have fewer components and lower assembly costs. He said modular designs are more convenient and can even be user serviceable but will also generally cost more.
Monday, October 24, 2011
CALiPER TESTING- ROUND 13 NOW AVAILABLE
The Department of Energy (DOE) Commercially Available Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Product Evaluation and Reporting (CALiPER) Program has been purchasing and testing general illumination solid-state lighting (SSL) products since 2006. CALiPER relies on standardized photometric testing (following the Illuminating Engineering Society, IES LM-79-08) conducted by qualified, independent testing laboratories.1 Results from CALiPER testing are available to the public through detailed test reports for each product tested and through periodic summary reports, which assemble data from numerous product tests and provide comparative analyses.
It is not possible for CALiPER to test every LED product on the market, and LED technology is constantly in flux, so it is important for buyers and specifiers to reduce risk by learning how to compare products and by examining every potential LED purchase carefully. CALiPER summary reports and detailed reports are an extensive resource, providing unbiased photometric data and explanations covering LED product performance in a wide range of lighting applications
Round 13 of CALiPER testing was conducted from June to September 2011. In this round, 19 products (14 LED and 5 conventional products for benchmarking purposes) representing a range of product types and technologies, were tested with both spectroradiometry and goniophotometry using absolute photometry. All 14 LED products were tested following the IES LM-79-08 testing method. To enable direct comparison of results, the 5 benchmark products were also tested using absolute photometry.
Round 13 of testing included three primary focus areas:
1. LED and benchmark high-bay luminaires
2. LED wallpack luminaires
3. LED and benchmark 2' × 2' troffers.
To view a summary of the findings from this Round of testing, please go to the following link:
http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/caliper_round13_summary.pdf
It is not possible for CALiPER to test every LED product on the market, and LED technology is constantly in flux, so it is important for buyers and specifiers to reduce risk by learning how to compare products and by examining every potential LED purchase carefully. CALiPER summary reports and detailed reports are an extensive resource, providing unbiased photometric data and explanations covering LED product performance in a wide range of lighting applications
Round 13 of CALiPER testing was conducted from June to September 2011. In this round, 19 products (14 LED and 5 conventional products for benchmarking purposes) representing a range of product types and technologies, were tested with both spectroradiometry and goniophotometry using absolute photometry. All 14 LED products were tested following the IES LM-79-08 testing method. To enable direct comparison of results, the 5 benchmark products were also tested using absolute photometry.
Round 13 of testing included three primary focus areas:
1. LED and benchmark high-bay luminaires
2. LED wallpack luminaires
3. LED and benchmark 2' × 2' troffers.
To view a summary of the findings from this Round of testing, please go to the following link:
http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/caliper_round13_summary.pdf
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Putting Light Where It's Needed: The Benefits of Task Lighting
by Mark Hogrebe, PhD
(this article appeared in the National Assoc. of Independent Lighting Distributors, Inc. News)
There is a renewed interest in task lighting. "Renewed" because task lighting was all the world had known before our dependence on high-output overhead fixtures. Prior to electrically powered lighting fixtures, seeing at night was accomplished through the use of "task lights" such as candles and oil and kerosene lamps. When the power of electricity was first harnessed, it was applied to crude incandescent "task lights."
For many years, task lighting continued to be the best option for seeing indoors. It was a long time before overhead fixtures would make a significant impact on how work areas were lighted.
First, the technology had to be developed so that overhead fixtures could produce adequate amounts of quality light. For buildings that had been built prior to the application of electricity, it was difficult to integrate overhead lighting into the old structures. Finally, architects had to discover how to efficiently incorporate overhead lighting into new buildings.
Despite obstacles to subduing our need for task lighting, America was convinced that task lights were not necessary in the presence of powerful overhead fixtures. We were shown that adequate foot-candles on the desk top could be produced from overhead lighting – but at what cost? In recent years we have begun to discover some of the costs of total reliance on overhead lighting to illuminate the work surface. The key is total reliance. The best approach for designing an energy-efficient and visually comfortable lighting installation is effective integration of overhead and task lighting.
Benefits for individuals.
Task lighting and productivity. Much research has been conducted on the relationship between lighting conditions and worker productivity. Surveys continue to find that poor lighting and eyestrain are frequent worker complaints. Although it may be difficult to demonstrate a direct cause-and-effect relationship between lighting and performance in real world settings, we can make some common sense observations.
First, we must be comfortable to maintain productivity over the course of a day. There are enough demands and distractions that compete for our energy and concentration. Straining to see should not be one of them.
Seeing should be effortless and automatic. We spend a great deal of time and money trying to make ourselves comfortable so that we can be more efficient and productive. Yet frequently, proper lighting is neglected. If lighting is so poor as to make workers uncomfortable, then efficiency is going to decrease over the long term.
However, once lighting reaches a "critical comfort level," better lighting above and beyond that level will probably not increase productivity. Once lighting surpasses the critical comfort level, many other environmental factors interact to influence productivity.
Task lighting and vision differences.
Our ability to see differs from person to person, and within ourselves, on different occasions. When we are tired or sick, we may see less well than when we are healthy and fresh.
The visual capabilities of individuals of the same age can vary greatly. Older people need substantially more light to see than younger people. Research indicates that the visual performance of those in their 20s is about eight times better than those in their 60s, and almost four times better than those in their 50s.
This increased need for light is due to a number of biological facts in the aging process. For example, the muscle in our eye called the iris, expands and contracts to control the amount of light entering our eye. As with all our muscles, the iris loses some of its flexibility in the aging process, and doesn't open as wide. More light is needed to compensate for the reduced ability of the iris to open wide.
Not only are there obvious vision differences between people, but different tasks have unique lighting requirements. Lighting demands for a video display terminal (VDT) operator are different from a proof reader, which are different from a graphic artist working at a large table where accurate color perception is critical.
Task lighting gives user control.
The major advantage of an adjustable-arm task lighting is that the user controls the lighting of his or her immediate work environment.
The key is "adjustable-arm" task lighting to give the user maximum control of the light level for optimal comfort. Our posture changes during the day. Our tasks vary to some degree. If we have windows, light in the room changes from morning to evening.
In response to these changing conditions, we need to adjust the lighting levels directed on our work in order to reduce eyestrain and fatigue. By raising, lowering, and tilting an adjustable-arm task light, the user determines how much light is needed and the best angle required to avoid direct glare and reflections.
A task light permits an individual to compensate for fluctuations within one's visual acuity from time to time, as well as for variations in ambient lighting.
Further control is provided by task lights that use a parabolic louver to direct light onto the work surface. The louver light control system is ideal for use around computers where you want to eliminate light "spill" onto the screen. The parabolic louver directs light output onto the source document and prevents "wash-out" on the computer screen.
A major advantage of a louver light control system versus the asymmetric method (directing light from the reflector at one angle) is the elimination of direct glare. With the louver system, you cannot see the bright bulb when the lamp head reaches eye level.
Task lighting mounting systems.
There are a variety of options for mounting task lighting in the work setting. Popular methods include a clamp base that attaches to the edge of a desk/table, and the weighted base that sits on top of a desk. Task lights can be mounted on stationary pedestal floor stands or movable caster floor stands.
The newest mounting systems attach task lights to the vertically slotted channels in workstation wall partition panels. Wall partition mounting frees-up valuable desktop space and eliminates the problem of "lack of edges" encountered by clamp-on versions. One option is a single-mount holder which the user places in the channel closest to the work area to be illuminated.
Another mounting option is a track-mount which provides greater illumination coverage for the work surface. The track spans the width of a wall panel and mounts in the slotted channels on both sides. A movable pivot holder for the task light slides along the track length to the desired position. The key factors in selecting a wall partition mounting system are ability to fit the many styles of standards and deep partitions; ease of installation; firm and sturdy mount; versatility to mount more than one specific task light model; a cord management system; and compatibility with standard track accessory items such as hanging paper trays and file folders.
Task lighting and magnification.
Do we need a task light if we have magnification? The answer is yes, because magnification is only half the solution for achieving good vision. Proper lighting is of equal importance. Take an extreme example. How much good would magnification do in the dark? The benefits derived from visual aids such as magnifiers and prescription glasses are entirely dependent upon the lighting conditions in which they are used.
Proper task lighting allows us to get the maximum benefit from a visual aid, and may even allow for reduced magnification. Increasing the amount of light (brightness) directed onto a task will help compensate for small print size or poor contrast. Examples of poor contrast include faded print on white paper, dark print on a dark background, or dim characters on a computer screen.
Bottom-line benefits for business.
The use of a lighting system which integrates task and overhead lighting can have a direct impact on the bottom line by lowering utility dollars.
Instead of trying to maintain proper lighting levels on desktops from overhead fixtures, task lights can do a better job in providing adequate foot-candles. A task light using an 18-watt compact fluorescent will consume far less energy than a typical overhead lighting fixture.
A work environment can maintain lower levels of overhead light by illuminating desktops with energy-efficient task lights. For examples consider an office with 16 workstations illuminated by 16 overhead fixtures each with four T8 32-watt fluorescents. The total wattage when all fixtures are operating is 2,048. If each fixture used two T8 instead of four, and each workstation was equipped with an 18-watt task light, energy consumption would be reduced by 36 percent!
A recent example demonstrates the energy waste that occurs all too frequently. An office manager remarked that, "we don't need those (task lights) to control glare on our computer screens. We installed these filters on the screens to block out glare." This makes no sense in terms of cost reduction and energy conservation. First flood the room with light and then block it out with filters. It is like turning the heat up to 90 degrees in the winter and then opening the window to maintain the right temperature.
Other ways in which the use of task lighting can help control costs are by reducing maintenance costs. Task lights are easy to install, keep clean, and change bulbs. When offices made from wall partition furniture systems are rearranged, task lights are easily moved. Proper lighting is achieved without much worry about the location of overhead fixtures.
Environmental benefits.
Finally, task lighting can have a significant environmental impact by reducing energy consumption of a building's lighting system.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) "Green Lights" program has brought the need for energy-efficient lighting into public awareness. The EPA estimates that lighting accounts for 20 to 25 percent of the electricity used annually in the United States . Lighting for industry, offices, stores, and warehouses represents from 80 to 90 percent of the total lighting electricity use. If energy-efficient lighting were used everywhere it was profitable, the electricity required for lighting would be cut by 50 percent, and aggregate national electricity demand would be reduced by 10 percent. This reduction in demand would significantly reduce power plant emissions, pollutants, and wastes.Many past issues of NAILD NEWS have devoted articles to the environmental impact of lighting and specifically, how to calculate savings in environmental pollutants (NAILD NEWS, December 1990).
In summary, a system that integrates overhead and adjustable-arm task lighting makes good dollar sense for business and the environment.
Task lighting makes good psychological sense by giving individuals control over their own workspace lighting.
(this article appeared in the National Assoc. of Independent Lighting Distributors, Inc. News)
There is a renewed interest in task lighting. "Renewed" because task lighting was all the world had known before our dependence on high-output overhead fixtures. Prior to electrically powered lighting fixtures, seeing at night was accomplished through the use of "task lights" such as candles and oil and kerosene lamps. When the power of electricity was first harnessed, it was applied to crude incandescent "task lights."
For many years, task lighting continued to be the best option for seeing indoors. It was a long time before overhead fixtures would make a significant impact on how work areas were lighted.
First, the technology had to be developed so that overhead fixtures could produce adequate amounts of quality light. For buildings that had been built prior to the application of electricity, it was difficult to integrate overhead lighting into the old structures. Finally, architects had to discover how to efficiently incorporate overhead lighting into new buildings.
Despite obstacles to subduing our need for task lighting, America was convinced that task lights were not necessary in the presence of powerful overhead fixtures. We were shown that adequate foot-candles on the desk top could be produced from overhead lighting – but at what cost? In recent years we have begun to discover some of the costs of total reliance on overhead lighting to illuminate the work surface. The key is total reliance. The best approach for designing an energy-efficient and visually comfortable lighting installation is effective integration of overhead and task lighting.
Benefits for individuals.
Task lighting and productivity. Much research has been conducted on the relationship between lighting conditions and worker productivity. Surveys continue to find that poor lighting and eyestrain are frequent worker complaints. Although it may be difficult to demonstrate a direct cause-and-effect relationship between lighting and performance in real world settings, we can make some common sense observations.
First, we must be comfortable to maintain productivity over the course of a day. There are enough demands and distractions that compete for our energy and concentration. Straining to see should not be one of them.
Seeing should be effortless and automatic. We spend a great deal of time and money trying to make ourselves comfortable so that we can be more efficient and productive. Yet frequently, proper lighting is neglected. If lighting is so poor as to make workers uncomfortable, then efficiency is going to decrease over the long term.
However, once lighting reaches a "critical comfort level," better lighting above and beyond that level will probably not increase productivity. Once lighting surpasses the critical comfort level, many other environmental factors interact to influence productivity.
Task lighting and vision differences.
Our ability to see differs from person to person, and within ourselves, on different occasions. When we are tired or sick, we may see less well than when we are healthy and fresh.
The visual capabilities of individuals of the same age can vary greatly. Older people need substantially more light to see than younger people. Research indicates that the visual performance of those in their 20s is about eight times better than those in their 60s, and almost four times better than those in their 50s.
This increased need for light is due to a number of biological facts in the aging process. For example, the muscle in our eye called the iris, expands and contracts to control the amount of light entering our eye. As with all our muscles, the iris loses some of its flexibility in the aging process, and doesn't open as wide. More light is needed to compensate for the reduced ability of the iris to open wide.
Not only are there obvious vision differences between people, but different tasks have unique lighting requirements. Lighting demands for a video display terminal (VDT) operator are different from a proof reader, which are different from a graphic artist working at a large table where accurate color perception is critical.
Task lighting gives user control.
The major advantage of an adjustable-arm task lighting is that the user controls the lighting of his or her immediate work environment.
The key is "adjustable-arm" task lighting to give the user maximum control of the light level for optimal comfort. Our posture changes during the day. Our tasks vary to some degree. If we have windows, light in the room changes from morning to evening.
In response to these changing conditions, we need to adjust the lighting levels directed on our work in order to reduce eyestrain and fatigue. By raising, lowering, and tilting an adjustable-arm task light, the user determines how much light is needed and the best angle required to avoid direct glare and reflections.
A task light permits an individual to compensate for fluctuations within one's visual acuity from time to time, as well as for variations in ambient lighting.
Further control is provided by task lights that use a parabolic louver to direct light onto the work surface. The louver light control system is ideal for use around computers where you want to eliminate light "spill" onto the screen. The parabolic louver directs light output onto the source document and prevents "wash-out" on the computer screen.
A major advantage of a louver light control system versus the asymmetric method (directing light from the reflector at one angle) is the elimination of direct glare. With the louver system, you cannot see the bright bulb when the lamp head reaches eye level.
Task lighting mounting systems.
There are a variety of options for mounting task lighting in the work setting. Popular methods include a clamp base that attaches to the edge of a desk/table, and the weighted base that sits on top of a desk. Task lights can be mounted on stationary pedestal floor stands or movable caster floor stands.
The newest mounting systems attach task lights to the vertically slotted channels in workstation wall partition panels. Wall partition mounting frees-up valuable desktop space and eliminates the problem of "lack of edges" encountered by clamp-on versions. One option is a single-mount holder which the user places in the channel closest to the work area to be illuminated.
Another mounting option is a track-mount which provides greater illumination coverage for the work surface. The track spans the width of a wall panel and mounts in the slotted channels on both sides. A movable pivot holder for the task light slides along the track length to the desired position. The key factors in selecting a wall partition mounting system are ability to fit the many styles of standards and deep partitions; ease of installation; firm and sturdy mount; versatility to mount more than one specific task light model; a cord management system; and compatibility with standard track accessory items such as hanging paper trays and file folders.
Task lighting and magnification.
Do we need a task light if we have magnification? The answer is yes, because magnification is only half the solution for achieving good vision. Proper lighting is of equal importance. Take an extreme example. How much good would magnification do in the dark? The benefits derived from visual aids such as magnifiers and prescription glasses are entirely dependent upon the lighting conditions in which they are used.
Proper task lighting allows us to get the maximum benefit from a visual aid, and may even allow for reduced magnification. Increasing the amount of light (brightness) directed onto a task will help compensate for small print size or poor contrast. Examples of poor contrast include faded print on white paper, dark print on a dark background, or dim characters on a computer screen.
Bottom-line benefits for business.
The use of a lighting system which integrates task and overhead lighting can have a direct impact on the bottom line by lowering utility dollars.
Instead of trying to maintain proper lighting levels on desktops from overhead fixtures, task lights can do a better job in providing adequate foot-candles. A task light using an 18-watt compact fluorescent will consume far less energy than a typical overhead lighting fixture.
A work environment can maintain lower levels of overhead light by illuminating desktops with energy-efficient task lights. For examples consider an office with 16 workstations illuminated by 16 overhead fixtures each with four T8 32-watt fluorescents. The total wattage when all fixtures are operating is 2,048. If each fixture used two T8 instead of four, and each workstation was equipped with an 18-watt task light, energy consumption would be reduced by 36 percent!
A recent example demonstrates the energy waste that occurs all too frequently. An office manager remarked that, "we don't need those (task lights) to control glare on our computer screens. We installed these filters on the screens to block out glare." This makes no sense in terms of cost reduction and energy conservation. First flood the room with light and then block it out with filters. It is like turning the heat up to 90 degrees in the winter and then opening the window to maintain the right temperature.
Other ways in which the use of task lighting can help control costs are by reducing maintenance costs. Task lights are easy to install, keep clean, and change bulbs. When offices made from wall partition furniture systems are rearranged, task lights are easily moved. Proper lighting is achieved without much worry about the location of overhead fixtures.
Environmental benefits.
Finally, task lighting can have a significant environmental impact by reducing energy consumption of a building's lighting system.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) "Green Lights" program has brought the need for energy-efficient lighting into public awareness. The EPA estimates that lighting accounts for 20 to 25 percent of the electricity used annually in the United States . Lighting for industry, offices, stores, and warehouses represents from 80 to 90 percent of the total lighting electricity use. If energy-efficient lighting were used everywhere it was profitable, the electricity required for lighting would be cut by 50 percent, and aggregate national electricity demand would be reduced by 10 percent. This reduction in demand would significantly reduce power plant emissions, pollutants, and wastes.Many past issues of NAILD NEWS have devoted articles to the environmental impact of lighting and specifically, how to calculate savings in environmental pollutants (NAILD NEWS, December 1990).
In summary, a system that integrates overhead and adjustable-arm task lighting makes good dollar sense for business and the environment.
Task lighting makes good psychological sense by giving individuals control over their own workspace lighting.
Friday, October 7, 2011
Neat new website for LED residential products....
If you are wanting to find a MR-16 LED, for example, and want to compare some of the industries top brands, check out this website...
http://www.ledlamplocator.com/
It will also locate a product based on the specifications you input.
I went through a few scenarios on the website and it seems to be a good reference tool. I would not use it as the end-all-be-all authority, but rather a good starting point for your specific residential LED lighting needs.
To take your search a bit further, check out products available through your home centers, local electrical distributor or lighting showroom.
http://www.ledlamplocator.com/
It will also locate a product based on the specifications you input.
I went through a few scenarios on the website and it seems to be a good reference tool. I would not use it as the end-all-be-all authority, but rather a good starting point for your specific residential LED lighting needs.
To take your search a bit further, check out products available through your home centers, local electrical distributor or lighting showroom.
Monday, September 26, 2011
Street Lighting market shows momentum is behind quality luminaires
A new market-research report from Strategies Unlimited indicates that street-lighting applications are taking off, though the market is currently suffering from a temporary setback.
This article was published in the September 2011 issue of LEDs Magazine.
Revenues in the street- and area-lighting market are expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 12% between 2010 and 2015, according to a new report entitled “LED Outdoor Area and Street Lighting: Market Analysis and Forecast.” LEDs Magazine spoke with Vrinda Bhandarkar, the report’s author and Director of Research for LED Lighting at Strategies Unlimited (San Jose, CA), a unit of PennWell Corporation, who has been tracking the street- and area-lighting market since 2006. Bhandarkar discussed recent developments and pointed to a temporary market standstill in China due to quality issues, great momentum in Europe and the US, and misconceptions about the role of stimulus packages.
LEDs Magazine: How large is the street- and area-lighting market?
Vrinda Bandarkar: In 2010, it was a $327-million market, which is not huge, but street lights are sort of a gateway technology. When street lights become feasible, the markets for area lights, parking-lot lights, flood lights, wall packs, billboard lights and other lighting applications become available to LEDs.
What markets are included in that number?
That includes worldwide capital spending on street lights and tunnel lights; plus area lights, which includes parking-lot lights, canopy lights, flood lights and wall packs. This is a worldwide estimate of the market size, primarily made up of the US, Europe and China. Markets in other countries at this time are quite small.
What kind of growth do you expect going forward?
We are looking at a CAGR for unit growth of 28% from 2010 to 2015. However, because LED luminaire pricing will continue to depreciate, the revenue growth will be lower, at around 12% (see Chart). The slowdown in China is reflected in a temporary setback for the market in 2011.
What has been the role of stimulus packages, such as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009?
The large installations, such as the one that happened in Anchorage, Alaska, and the one that’s currently happening in Los Angeles, were not implemented because of stimulus money. They happened because the cities wanted to reduce their operating costs – both the energy used and the maintenance cost of the street lights. These cities did use some stimulus funding, but more funding was provided through grants and financing through other channels such as environmental groups.
But there are so many cities trying LEDs and those are potentially going to result in full-scale installations very soon. I think that was the role of the stimulus – it exposed city officials to this energy-efficient technology. Many people tend to get comfortable with the status quo, but when you are given money and asked to do something with it that will result in energy savings, you take advantage of something like solid-state lighting. Then, when everyone sees the results, there is strong motivation to want to implement LED lighting throughout the city or municipality. I don’t think this would have happened otherwise.
And what’s going to determine whether these pilot programs go to full-scale implementation, aside from solid performance from the pilot run?
The biggest hurdle for these cities is raising the capital, especially in this difficult economic environment.
Are there other benefits beyond the savings?
Yes, uniformity of light and fewer dark spots. But beyond those qualities, I don’t think we can underestimate the value of the political point it makes.
In your press release, you say the US market has taken the lead in proving the viability of LED technology for outdoor lighting applications. Can you elaborate?
Yes, the US put an early emphasis on street-lighting quality. Through several programs, such as the Department of Energy’s Municipal Solid State Street Lighting Consortium and the DesignLights Consortium, a great deal of effort was made to educate the consumers – meaning the cities – on LED technology, the energy efficiency it can provide, lumen depreciation, and other issues. The DesignLights’ qualified-products list alone gives users a good starting point for selecting luminaires.
What about China?
What happened in China was very different. The local governments encouraged the installation of LED-based street lighting and several programs were implemented. However, instead of getting the expected energy savings, there were many cases of premature luminaire failure. As a result, this year China put their street-lighting projects on hold. They realized the need for standards to ensure the quality of every luminaire that is installed.
What will happen next?
Once China implements some standards, and they may borrow from the existing international standards, the market will ramp back up. The top 10-15 suppliers of street lights will begin bidding for projects again, but that may not happen for another year.
Where do you see the greatest opportunities in this market?
The biggest opportunity exists where old technology is in place – starting with mercury vapor lamps, to fluorescent and incandescent lamps – these are no-brainer applications right now because they pay for themselves in energy savings alone.
Linear fluorescent tubes are common in many parking lots. The fluorescent tubes need to be changed out every year and a half to two years. With exposure to heat, cold and vibration, these fixtures do not perform to their maximum efficiency. They represent another obvious area.
In area lighting, people are also going after high-pressure sodium lights. LEDs offer superior light quality, directionality and the user can reduce lumens and increase uniformity of light, which is the biggest plus for LEDs.
Where do you see maintenance being the biggest factor?
For tunnel lighting, it’s critical. When a tunnel needs to be shut down or partially shut down due to luminaire change-outs, the effect on traffic is very disruptive.
What do you see as the next step for lighting-fixture design in this market?
The luminaire designers, especially in Europe, have gotten very creative artistically. When it comes to shop owners and upscale malls, the buyer will be more swayed by the attractiveness of the luminaire and the security the light provides. This is a different value proposition than when luminaires are being sold to a city based mostly on energy efficiency. I think we will see innovative, interesting luminaire designs going forward.
This article was published in the September 2011 issue of LEDs Magazine.
Revenues in the street- and area-lighting market are expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 12% between 2010 and 2015, according to a new report entitled “LED Outdoor Area and Street Lighting: Market Analysis and Forecast.” LEDs Magazine spoke with Vrinda Bhandarkar, the report’s author and Director of Research for LED Lighting at Strategies Unlimited (San Jose, CA), a unit of PennWell Corporation, who has been tracking the street- and area-lighting market since 2006. Bhandarkar discussed recent developments and pointed to a temporary market standstill in China due to quality issues, great momentum in Europe and the US, and misconceptions about the role of stimulus packages.
LEDs Magazine: How large is the street- and area-lighting market?
Vrinda Bandarkar: In 2010, it was a $327-million market, which is not huge, but street lights are sort of a gateway technology. When street lights become feasible, the markets for area lights, parking-lot lights, flood lights, wall packs, billboard lights and other lighting applications become available to LEDs.
What markets are included in that number?
That includes worldwide capital spending on street lights and tunnel lights; plus area lights, which includes parking-lot lights, canopy lights, flood lights and wall packs. This is a worldwide estimate of the market size, primarily made up of the US, Europe and China. Markets in other countries at this time are quite small.
What kind of growth do you expect going forward?
We are looking at a CAGR for unit growth of 28% from 2010 to 2015. However, because LED luminaire pricing will continue to depreciate, the revenue growth will be lower, at around 12% (see Chart). The slowdown in China is reflected in a temporary setback for the market in 2011.
What has been the role of stimulus packages, such as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009?
The large installations, such as the one that happened in Anchorage, Alaska, and the one that’s currently happening in Los Angeles, were not implemented because of stimulus money. They happened because the cities wanted to reduce their operating costs – both the energy used and the maintenance cost of the street lights. These cities did use some stimulus funding, but more funding was provided through grants and financing through other channels such as environmental groups.
But there are so many cities trying LEDs and those are potentially going to result in full-scale installations very soon. I think that was the role of the stimulus – it exposed city officials to this energy-efficient technology. Many people tend to get comfortable with the status quo, but when you are given money and asked to do something with it that will result in energy savings, you take advantage of something like solid-state lighting. Then, when everyone sees the results, there is strong motivation to want to implement LED lighting throughout the city or municipality. I don’t think this would have happened otherwise.
And what’s going to determine whether these pilot programs go to full-scale implementation, aside from solid performance from the pilot run?
The biggest hurdle for these cities is raising the capital, especially in this difficult economic environment.
Are there other benefits beyond the savings?
Yes, uniformity of light and fewer dark spots. But beyond those qualities, I don’t think we can underestimate the value of the political point it makes.
In your press release, you say the US market has taken the lead in proving the viability of LED technology for outdoor lighting applications. Can you elaborate?
Yes, the US put an early emphasis on street-lighting quality. Through several programs, such as the Department of Energy’s Municipal Solid State Street Lighting Consortium and the DesignLights Consortium, a great deal of effort was made to educate the consumers – meaning the cities – on LED technology, the energy efficiency it can provide, lumen depreciation, and other issues. The DesignLights’ qualified-products list alone gives users a good starting point for selecting luminaires.
What about China?
What happened in China was very different. The local governments encouraged the installation of LED-based street lighting and several programs were implemented. However, instead of getting the expected energy savings, there were many cases of premature luminaire failure. As a result, this year China put their street-lighting projects on hold. They realized the need for standards to ensure the quality of every luminaire that is installed.
What will happen next?
Once China implements some standards, and they may borrow from the existing international standards, the market will ramp back up. The top 10-15 suppliers of street lights will begin bidding for projects again, but that may not happen for another year.
Where do you see the greatest opportunities in this market?
The biggest opportunity exists where old technology is in place – starting with mercury vapor lamps, to fluorescent and incandescent lamps – these are no-brainer applications right now because they pay for themselves in energy savings alone.
Linear fluorescent tubes are common in many parking lots. The fluorescent tubes need to be changed out every year and a half to two years. With exposure to heat, cold and vibration, these fixtures do not perform to their maximum efficiency. They represent another obvious area.
In area lighting, people are also going after high-pressure sodium lights. LEDs offer superior light quality, directionality and the user can reduce lumens and increase uniformity of light, which is the biggest plus for LEDs.
Where do you see maintenance being the biggest factor?
For tunnel lighting, it’s critical. When a tunnel needs to be shut down or partially shut down due to luminaire change-outs, the effect on traffic is very disruptive.
What do you see as the next step for lighting-fixture design in this market?
The luminaire designers, especially in Europe, have gotten very creative artistically. When it comes to shop owners and upscale malls, the buyer will be more swayed by the attractiveness of the luminaire and the security the light provides. This is a different value proposition than when luminaires are being sold to a city based mostly on energy efficiency. I think we will see innovative, interesting luminaire designs going forward.
Monday, September 19, 2011
What's New in HID Ballasts
Written by Craig DiLouie
Published: Electrical Contractor Magazine, August 2011
As with other types of lighting, energy codes and legislation are influencing high-intensity discharge (HID) lighting—high-pressure sodium (HPS), metal halide (MH), and mercury vapor—in this era of regulated efficiency.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 eliminated mercury-vapor ballasts—with specialty ballasts allowed by later legislation—encouraging a switch to HPS or white light. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 eliminated probe-start magnetic ballasts in new 150–500W MH lighting fixtures, increasing demand for pulse-start quartz and ceramic metal halide (CMH) lighting. Pending energy legislation in Congress would eliminate general-purpose mercury-vapor lamps starting January 2016.
Meanwhile, commercial building energy codes continue to impose restrictions on outdoor lighting. California’s Title 24 energy code and the ASHRAE/IES 90.1 2010 energy standard go even further by requiring outdoor lighting to be capable of bilevel switching. And California Title 20 product regulations require 150–500W MH fixtures to achieve a certain level of ballast or fixture efficiency or feature automatic energy-saving lighting controls.
While many of these regulations affect the new construction market, the retrofit/replacement segment also offers opportunity. In 2010, this segment represented 46 percent of HID ballast sales, according to National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) sales data. Popular retrofit options include pulse-start electronic HID (eHID) replacements of existing large-wattage probe-start systems, and eHID/CMH replacement of halogen lamps.
As a result of this pressure, innovation is trending toward efficiency, controllability and smaller size. MH is the most popular HID light source with a massive installed base. As the market is shifting to white light options, most innovation is occurring in the MH category.
The big efficiency story is on the ballast side, where the trend is toward higher efficiency and controllability. The eHID ballast has been around for a long time, but its moment has arrived. Sales of eHID ballasts constituted 17 percent of the $231 million HID ballast market in 2010, up from 15 percent in 2009, according to NEMA. Most of this is in the wattages smaller than 150W segment, where the smaller than 39W pulse-start eHID ballast sales increased 338 percent over 2009 and 40–149W pulse-start eHID ballast sales increased 84 percent. Pulse-start eHID 150–250W ballast sales, however, also increased a healthy 108 percent, while those wattages larger than 250W, with fewer offerings, increased 21 percent.
In the larger than 150W segment, we’re seeing interesting innovations. A number of new ballasts feature digital construction, increasing their capabilities. Many eHID ballasts offer continuous dimming to satisfy energy codes, such as Title 24—usually with a range from 100 to 50 percent of lamp power per NEMA recommendations. Some of these products connect to 0–10V DC controls or DALI, enabling them to join a control network.
Another recent breakthrough in high-wattage eHID ballasts is the adoption of a low-frequency square wave shape, already popular in low-wattage CMH systems. The low-frequency square wave shape reduces wear and tear on the lamps, producing better performance.
Some ballasts can be used to operate both MH and HPS lamps, providing eHID options to HPS that were previously lacking and with fast HPS restrike. Finally, we’re starting to see more offerings for higher wattage lamps. Legislation and development has focused on 150–500W MH, but there are viable retrofit opportunities above 500W.
Some products worth a look include Sylvania Quicktronic MH, Sylvania Metalarc Powerball 200W system, GE UltraMax, Sylvania Quicktronic QHO (outdoor product), Universal Lighting Technologies 210W, Philips CosmoPolis programmable digital ballast, Metrolight SmartHID Plus and Empower digital ballasts.
In the smaller than 150W segment, the big story is 15W and 20W systems with eHID ballasts available in an extremely compact size, with the ultimate goal being to make the ballast “disappear.” This objective permits smaller fixture designs to open new track and other applications in both new and existing buildings. With extremely compact components, CMH lighting fixtures are approaching the factor and size of low-voltage MR16 halogen systems, offering an attractive alternative to traditional incandescent and halogen sources.
Let’s start with 20W, until recently the smallest MH system available. A 20W CMH system might replace a 75W halogen lamp, for example. To support CMH as a viable alternative, ballast manufacturers are producing extremely small electronic ballast designs. New ballasts from GE, Universal Lighting Technologies and Hatch Transformers measure about one-sixteenth the size of a standard eHID ballast, allowing for smaller products.
Even smaller than 20W is the recently introduced 15W system. An example is the Sylvania Metalarc Powerball 15W T4 CMH lamp and Super Mini ballast producing output comparable to a 12V, 50W MR16 and savings of up to 32W per lamp (25 percent energy savings compared to the 20W option). This system allows HID to be substituted for lower wattage lamps where the 20W system might be considered too bright.
Market pressure is driving an extraordinary level of innovation in HID ballasts, creating new opportunities in both new and existing buildings.
Published: Electrical Contractor Magazine, August 2011
As with other types of lighting, energy codes and legislation are influencing high-intensity discharge (HID) lighting—high-pressure sodium (HPS), metal halide (MH), and mercury vapor—in this era of regulated efficiency.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 eliminated mercury-vapor ballasts—with specialty ballasts allowed by later legislation—encouraging a switch to HPS or white light. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 eliminated probe-start magnetic ballasts in new 150–500W MH lighting fixtures, increasing demand for pulse-start quartz and ceramic metal halide (CMH) lighting. Pending energy legislation in Congress would eliminate general-purpose mercury-vapor lamps starting January 2016.
Meanwhile, commercial building energy codes continue to impose restrictions on outdoor lighting. California’s Title 24 energy code and the ASHRAE/IES 90.1 2010 energy standard go even further by requiring outdoor lighting to be capable of bilevel switching. And California Title 20 product regulations require 150–500W MH fixtures to achieve a certain level of ballast or fixture efficiency or feature automatic energy-saving lighting controls.
While many of these regulations affect the new construction market, the retrofit/replacement segment also offers opportunity. In 2010, this segment represented 46 percent of HID ballast sales, according to National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) sales data. Popular retrofit options include pulse-start electronic HID (eHID) replacements of existing large-wattage probe-start systems, and eHID/CMH replacement of halogen lamps.
As a result of this pressure, innovation is trending toward efficiency, controllability and smaller size. MH is the most popular HID light source with a massive installed base. As the market is shifting to white light options, most innovation is occurring in the MH category.
The big efficiency story is on the ballast side, where the trend is toward higher efficiency and controllability. The eHID ballast has been around for a long time, but its moment has arrived. Sales of eHID ballasts constituted 17 percent of the $231 million HID ballast market in 2010, up from 15 percent in 2009, according to NEMA. Most of this is in the wattages smaller than 150W segment, where the smaller than 39W pulse-start eHID ballast sales increased 338 percent over 2009 and 40–149W pulse-start eHID ballast sales increased 84 percent. Pulse-start eHID 150–250W ballast sales, however, also increased a healthy 108 percent, while those wattages larger than 250W, with fewer offerings, increased 21 percent.
In the larger than 150W segment, we’re seeing interesting innovations. A number of new ballasts feature digital construction, increasing their capabilities. Many eHID ballasts offer continuous dimming to satisfy energy codes, such as Title 24—usually with a range from 100 to 50 percent of lamp power per NEMA recommendations. Some of these products connect to 0–10V DC controls or DALI, enabling them to join a control network.
Another recent breakthrough in high-wattage eHID ballasts is the adoption of a low-frequency square wave shape, already popular in low-wattage CMH systems. The low-frequency square wave shape reduces wear and tear on the lamps, producing better performance.
Some ballasts can be used to operate both MH and HPS lamps, providing eHID options to HPS that were previously lacking and with fast HPS restrike. Finally, we’re starting to see more offerings for higher wattage lamps. Legislation and development has focused on 150–500W MH, but there are viable retrofit opportunities above 500W.
Some products worth a look include Sylvania Quicktronic MH, Sylvania Metalarc Powerball 200W system, GE UltraMax, Sylvania Quicktronic QHO (outdoor product), Universal Lighting Technologies 210W, Philips CosmoPolis programmable digital ballast, Metrolight SmartHID Plus and Empower digital ballasts.
In the smaller than 150W segment, the big story is 15W and 20W systems with eHID ballasts available in an extremely compact size, with the ultimate goal being to make the ballast “disappear.” This objective permits smaller fixture designs to open new track and other applications in both new and existing buildings. With extremely compact components, CMH lighting fixtures are approaching the factor and size of low-voltage MR16 halogen systems, offering an attractive alternative to traditional incandescent and halogen sources.
Let’s start with 20W, until recently the smallest MH system available. A 20W CMH system might replace a 75W halogen lamp, for example. To support CMH as a viable alternative, ballast manufacturers are producing extremely small electronic ballast designs. New ballasts from GE, Universal Lighting Technologies and Hatch Transformers measure about one-sixteenth the size of a standard eHID ballast, allowing for smaller products.
Even smaller than 20W is the recently introduced 15W system. An example is the Sylvania Metalarc Powerball 15W T4 CMH lamp and Super Mini ballast producing output comparable to a 12V, 50W MR16 and savings of up to 32W per lamp (25 percent energy savings compared to the 20W option). This system allows HID to be substituted for lower wattage lamps where the 20W system might be considered too bright.
Market pressure is driving an extraordinary level of innovation in HID ballasts, creating new opportunities in both new and existing buildings.
Monday, September 12, 2011
Are you ready for some football???? Stadium lighting case-study, that is...
Ready for football: GE ingenuity scores at Dallas Cowboys Stadium
As the largest NFL venue ever built, the Dallas Cowboys' billion–dollar stadium is an engineering marvel. GE's contribution to the project -- cost-effective and energy-efficient lighting and electrical distribution equipment -- has satisfied the Texas-sized expectations of the Cowboys organization. For GE Appliances & Lighting, the charge was to go on offense, developing and delivering stadium lighting that provides uniform and maintained light across the field, while eliminating glare and shadows for fans in the stands and at home.
“Our stadium has capacity for as many as 100,000 people, and our football games are some of the most watched in the NFL, so making sure our field has effective lighting is imperative to our business,” says Jack Hill, general manager, Cowboys Stadium. “We needed a proven and robust solution that could enhance and sustain the viewers' experience and GE delivered.”
Sports lighting
At the onset of the project, GE laid out a photometric design that took into account the complex problem of maintaining uniform lighting and light levels on the field that would eliminate shadows and glare for fans, as well as the multitude of High Definition TV (HDTV) cameras positioned throughout the stadium. “This is a complex process that takes substantial design time to render an optimal solution that works within the consulting engineer and architect's requirements,” says Jack Bohner, GE's commercial director – sports and entertainment. “This crucial step serves as the roadmap for delivering uniformity and continuity of light that provides a consistent appearance, style and light quality from any vantage point.”
The result of the GE-recommended design required 668 1500-watt PowrSpot® III luminaires with glare control and 96 1500-watt UltraSport™ luminaries with hot re-strike. The combination of these 764 luminaires makes up the main event lighting, or the entire football field's horizontal surface beyond the sidelines and end zones but not into the stands.
GE's innovative UltraSport offers advanced design light output and efficiency with excellent visibility and color rendering for players, spectators and broadcasters. It features a “hot re-strike” capability that enables the fixture to come back on almost instantaneously during a temporary loss of power. This attribute is critically important during sporting and other large stadium events since standard high-intensity-discharge (HID) sport lighting requires 11 to 15 minutes to cool down and come back on after a momentary loss of power. “Having thousands of fans sit in the dark for 15 minutes is not acceptable,” Bohner adds. “GE's technology solves this problem efficiently and really enhances the quality of light in the Cowboys stadium.”
GE's customized lighting solution of UltraSport and PowrSpot luminaires provides 300 foot candles of maintained light level on the field, which is above the NFL specification of 250 foot candles. Generally, the higher the foot candle level the better for the viewer, as long as it alleviates glare, hot spots and shadows for fans and cameras. In addition, 60 1500-watt PowrSpot III luminaires (non-event lighting) were supplied for use as house and security lighting. Click here for more information about GE sports and stadium lighting.
LED lighting
The organization also engaged a lighting design firm, Craig Roberts Associates, Inc., (CRA), to analyze and design the lighting schematic in some of the suites and club space. The result was a more sophisticated and thoughtful lighting design.
Stephanie King, principal designer with CRA, worked to design the LED cove lighting. “We installed LEDs wherever an architectural opportunity presented itself,” she notes.
CRA integrated coves into dropped soffits, created lighted coffers, and incorporated up lighting within suspended decorative elements. Because of the linear footage involved, incandescent lighting was not an option. CRA specified the GE LED Cove Lighting System for its rich color quality, LED color consistency, integral driver and dimming simplicity.
“The use of GE LED lighting systems in coves has become an irresistible proposition for many businesses,” says GE's Bohner. “Paybacks based on the cost of the product and comparative energy and maintenance costs will invariably show that the GE LED Cove lighting system is preferable to halogen systems. The GE LED system offers a 50,000-hour rated life, so it could run continuously for more than five years.”
King adds: “We wanted to make the spaces feel warmer. It imparts a more residential feel while respecting the contemporary design and functionality of the stadium.” Click here for more information about GE LED Cove lighting.
Electrical distribution
Since sustained power in a stadium is imperative, GE developed a robust solution that includes 70 substations, 15 switchboards and a variety of other electrical distribution products to provide emergency power during an outage or surge. GE's quiet, reliable transformer operation requires no vaults for installation so the transformers can be located right at the load to provide the correct voltage for the stadium's requirements. This eliminates the need for long, costly, low-voltage feeders.
“Given the space constraints in the electrical rooms, the substations were a challenge to fit, but our manufacturing team and suppliers came up with an efficient size design that suited the space perfectly,” says Bohner. “Our solution is an ideal combination of technology and teamwork that exceeded original specifications and provides reliable and energy-efficient power for the stadium now and into the future.“
http://www.gelightingsolutions.com/lighting-news-releases/ready-for-football-ge-ingenuity-scores-at-dallas-cowboys-stadium
As the largest NFL venue ever built, the Dallas Cowboys' billion–dollar stadium is an engineering marvel. GE's contribution to the project -- cost-effective and energy-efficient lighting and electrical distribution equipment -- has satisfied the Texas-sized expectations of the Cowboys organization. For GE Appliances & Lighting, the charge was to go on offense, developing and delivering stadium lighting that provides uniform and maintained light across the field, while eliminating glare and shadows for fans in the stands and at home.
“Our stadium has capacity for as many as 100,000 people, and our football games are some of the most watched in the NFL, so making sure our field has effective lighting is imperative to our business,” says Jack Hill, general manager, Cowboys Stadium. “We needed a proven and robust solution that could enhance and sustain the viewers' experience and GE delivered.”
Sports lighting
At the onset of the project, GE laid out a photometric design that took into account the complex problem of maintaining uniform lighting and light levels on the field that would eliminate shadows and glare for fans, as well as the multitude of High Definition TV (HDTV) cameras positioned throughout the stadium. “This is a complex process that takes substantial design time to render an optimal solution that works within the consulting engineer and architect's requirements,” says Jack Bohner, GE's commercial director – sports and entertainment. “This crucial step serves as the roadmap for delivering uniformity and continuity of light that provides a consistent appearance, style and light quality from any vantage point.”
The result of the GE-recommended design required 668 1500-watt PowrSpot® III luminaires with glare control and 96 1500-watt UltraSport™ luminaries with hot re-strike. The combination of these 764 luminaires makes up the main event lighting, or the entire football field's horizontal surface beyond the sidelines and end zones but not into the stands.
GE's innovative UltraSport offers advanced design light output and efficiency with excellent visibility and color rendering for players, spectators and broadcasters. It features a “hot re-strike” capability that enables the fixture to come back on almost instantaneously during a temporary loss of power. This attribute is critically important during sporting and other large stadium events since standard high-intensity-discharge (HID) sport lighting requires 11 to 15 minutes to cool down and come back on after a momentary loss of power. “Having thousands of fans sit in the dark for 15 minutes is not acceptable,” Bohner adds. “GE's technology solves this problem efficiently and really enhances the quality of light in the Cowboys stadium.”
GE's customized lighting solution of UltraSport and PowrSpot luminaires provides 300 foot candles of maintained light level on the field, which is above the NFL specification of 250 foot candles. Generally, the higher the foot candle level the better for the viewer, as long as it alleviates glare, hot spots and shadows for fans and cameras. In addition, 60 1500-watt PowrSpot III luminaires (non-event lighting) were supplied for use as house and security lighting. Click here for more information about GE sports and stadium lighting.
LED lighting
The organization also engaged a lighting design firm, Craig Roberts Associates, Inc., (CRA), to analyze and design the lighting schematic in some of the suites and club space. The result was a more sophisticated and thoughtful lighting design.
Stephanie King, principal designer with CRA, worked to design the LED cove lighting. “We installed LEDs wherever an architectural opportunity presented itself,” she notes.
CRA integrated coves into dropped soffits, created lighted coffers, and incorporated up lighting within suspended decorative elements. Because of the linear footage involved, incandescent lighting was not an option. CRA specified the GE LED Cove Lighting System for its rich color quality, LED color consistency, integral driver and dimming simplicity.
“The use of GE LED lighting systems in coves has become an irresistible proposition for many businesses,” says GE's Bohner. “Paybacks based on the cost of the product and comparative energy and maintenance costs will invariably show that the GE LED Cove lighting system is preferable to halogen systems. The GE LED system offers a 50,000-hour rated life, so it could run continuously for more than five years.”
King adds: “We wanted to make the spaces feel warmer. It imparts a more residential feel while respecting the contemporary design and functionality of the stadium.” Click here for more information about GE LED Cove lighting.
Electrical distribution
Since sustained power in a stadium is imperative, GE developed a robust solution that includes 70 substations, 15 switchboards and a variety of other electrical distribution products to provide emergency power during an outage or surge. GE's quiet, reliable transformer operation requires no vaults for installation so the transformers can be located right at the load to provide the correct voltage for the stadium's requirements. This eliminates the need for long, costly, low-voltage feeders.
“Given the space constraints in the electrical rooms, the substations were a challenge to fit, but our manufacturing team and suppliers came up with an efficient size design that suited the space perfectly,” says Bohner. “Our solution is an ideal combination of technology and teamwork that exceeded original specifications and provides reliable and energy-efficient power for the stadium now and into the future.“
http://www.gelightingsolutions.com/lighting-news-releases/ready-for-football-ge-ingenuity-scores-at-dallas-cowboys-stadium
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Changing an exterior light bulb at 1,768 feet-MUST SEE VIDEO!!!
Think your job is tough? Stressful? Today we lighten things up a little, with a neat video showing a man scalling an exterior tower to change the light bulb at the very top of it.
Be careful, your hands may get sweaty just watching this!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFMHjDqHL_Y
Be careful, your hands may get sweaty just watching this!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFMHjDqHL_Y
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Definitions of IESNA Luminaire Classification System (LCS) and BUG Ratings
The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) defines the light distribution and optical control of roadway and area lighting luminaires by the number of zonal lumens expressed as a percentage of the total lamp lumens. These classifications allow designers to choose the proper product to control spill light, light trespass, and sky glow. The LCS replaces the older IESNA Cutoff Classification System.
The BUG Rating system categorizes luminaires according to the amount of Backlight, Uplight and Glare that they have, and is calculated based on the number of lumens in the various LCS secondary zones. A luminaire's BUG Rating may be used to evaluate its optical performance related to light trespass,sky glow, and high-angle brightness control.
There are three major zones that designers need to reference when creating an outdoor lighting design. These three zones are the Front Lighting Zone, Back Lighting Zone and Upper Lighting Zone. These three areas are further divided into secondary zones to allow the designer to control unwanted light while selecting luminaires with the proper distribution to put light where it is needed. These zones are described below:
•FL (Forward Low) – This zone ranges from nadir (0) to 30 degrees vertical and counter-clockwise from 270 to 90 degrees horizontal (in front of the luminaire). The light emitted in this zone reaches from directly below the luminaire to 0.6 mounting heights from the luminaire.
•FM (Forward Medium) – This zone ranges from 30 to 60 degrees vertical and counter-clockwise from 270 to 90 degrees horizontal (in front of the luminaire). The light emitted in this zone reaches from 0.6 to 1.7 mounting heights from the luminaire.
•FH (Forward High) – This zone ranges from 60 to 80 degrees vertical and counter-clockwise from 270 to 90 degrees horizontal (in front of the luminaire). The FH can contribute to light trespass. However, it can be used to illuminate larger areas. The light emitted in this zone reaches from 1.7 to 5.7 mounting heights from the luminaire.
•FVH (Forward Very High) – This zone ranges from 80 to 90 degrees vertical and counter-clockwise from 270 to 90 degrees horizontal (in front of the luminaire). The light emitted in this zone reaches beyond 5.7 mounting heights from the luminaire. The FVH can contribute to light trespass if near the site perimeter. This is also the angle range most responsible for glare.
•BL (Back Low) – This zone ranges from nadir (0) to 30 degrees vertical and counter-clockwise from 90 to 270 degrees horizontal (behind the luminaire). The light emitted in this zone reaches from directly below the luminaire to 0.6 mounting heights from the luminaire.
•BM (Back Medium) – This zone ranges from 30 to 60 degrees vertical and counter-clockwise from 90 to 270 degrees horizontal (behind the luminaire). The light emitted in this zone reaches from 0.6 to 1.7 mounting heights from the luminaire.
•BH (Back High) – This zone ranges from 60 to 80 degrees vertical and counter-clockwise from 90 to 270 degrees horizontal (behind the luminaire). The BH can contribute to light trespass especially from perimeter fixtures. However it can be used to illuminate larger areas. The light emitted in this zone reaches from 1.7 to 5.7 mounting heights from the luminaire.
•BVH (Back Very High) – This zone ranges from 80 to 90 degrees vertical and counter-clockwise from 90 to 270 degrees horizontal (behind the luminaire). The light emitted in this zone reaches beyond 5.7 mounting heights from the luminaire. The BVH can contribute to light trespass, especially from perimeter fixtures. This is also the angle range most responsible for glare.
•UL (Up Low) – This zone ranges from 90 to 100 degrees vertical and 360 degrees around the luminaire. The UL is responsible for contributing the most to sky glow, especially as observed from great distances.
•UH(Up High) – This is the highest uplight value and ranges from 100 to 180 degrees vertical and 360 degrees around the luminaire. Light emitted more directly upward affects sky glow directly above a city.
Backlight, Uplight, Glare (BUG) Rating System
The Backlight, Uplight, and Glare ratings may be used to evaluate luminaire optical performance related to light trespass, sky glow, and high-angle brightness control. These ratings are based on zonal lumen calculations for the LCS secondary solid angles. Each rating, B, U & G, has six ranges, numbered 0 - 5. The lowest rating value, 0, is the strictest, and a rating of 5 essentially means no restrictions. For example, a Backlight rating of B0 is very restrictive, while B5 means no restrictions on the backlight emitted from the luminaire. B2-U0-G1 would be an example of a complete luminaire BUG Rating.
Monday, August 29, 2011
OLED's- defined & explained.
OLEDs are evolving as complementary sources for indoor lighting, says Verbatim’s JEANINE CHROBAK-KANDO, who provides an overview of technology, desirable characteristics and the current status of today’s OLED lighting products.
+++++
This article was published in the June 2011 issue of LEDs Magazine. Here are excerpts from the article:
Organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs) now appear in a host of commercial electronics applications, most commonly in mobile phones, MP3 players, radio display panels in high-end cars, tablet PCs, and other consumer gadgets. An understanding of OLED technology has been with us for over half a century since researchers at Nancy-Université, France, first observed electroluminescence in organic materials in the 1950s. The affect was only apparent when relatively high voltages were applied to the materials.
The technology currently employed is attributed to W. Tan and A. VanSlyke, and was invented while these researchers were working at Kodak. The breakthrough was to produce a technology that operated at a low voltage and was relatively economical to manufacture. Today’s OLED construction is based upon a Kodak patent, and in November of 1997 Touhoku-Pioneer started the first mass-production of OLEDs, initially for car dashboard displays.
The first OLED screens in personal digital assistants (PDAs) appeared in 2004. By 2008 consumer electronics companies were demonstrating large-screen televisions with high resolution, high contrast ratio and peak luminance of 600 cd/m2.
The drivers of OLED development in these display applications have been the need to reduce cost, weight and power consumption and to provide a better user experience through improved contrast and viewing angle. But what about OLEDs as general light sources?
How OLEDs work
OLEDs work by sandwiching a layer of organic material between two electrodes, an anode and a cathode, and depositing the whole thing onto a substrate, typically glass or plastic. When a low DC voltage is applied to the electrodes (positive to the anode, negative to the cathode), light is emitted when electrically-charged particles (holes and electrons) combine within the organic film. The characteristics and intensity of light emitted, and how it is extracted from the OLED assembly, determine its suitability for lighting applications.
OLEDs need a large emission surface to be suitable for lighting applications so that they emit sufficient light to be useful. The quality of light, usually expressed as its color rendering index (CRI), is important in rendering colors accurately. Low-power operation, meaning high efficiency in converting electricity to light, is vital in a world focused on reducing energy consumption and CO₂ emissions. Also, in common with the requirements of OLED displays, OLED lights should not contain hazardous substances, need to be simple to operate, and must exhibit fast on/off response.
The CRI of a light source is determined by shining the light onto eight different-colored tiles, numbered R1 to R8, and analyzing the spectrum of the light reflected from the tiles. In general, CRI is quoted as the Ra value, which is the average figure across all of the test colors (R1-R8). R9, the color red, is not used in the calculation of Ra, but is important within the spectrum of human vision, so a high R9 figure is also desirable in OLED lighting. The wavelength of light above R9 (approximately 650nm) contributes little to human vision. Today’s OLED panels exhibit an R9 value of 84 and an Ra of greater than 80.
What’s available today? The latest dimmable, color-tunable and white-tone-tunable OLED panels are available in sizes up to about 140 x 140 mm. They offer luminance of approximately 1000 cd/m2 at a color temperature of 3000K, enhanced by a light-extraction film on the luminous surface. Power consumption is about 2W. Panels are typically between 3.6 mm and 8.65 mm thick and have an operating life of over 8000 hours before the output falls to 70% of its initial value.
The white tone is tunable from 2700K – a typical warm-white figure – to about 6500K, equivalent to bright sunlight. Using a simple 3-channel electronic controller located on the back of each panel, the color can be tuned virtually instantaneously. Using this feature, together with dimming, the emotional impact of a lighting scheme based on OLED panels can be changed to reflect the mood required for the environment. For example, bright, white light may be desirable in the morning but more subdued, relaxing lighting with muted colors may be preferable towards the end of the day.
The technical protocols for RGB color tuning (DMX) and dimming (DALI) are well established, and low-cost controllers are widely available. Panels are easily calibrated and matched using the controllers to compensate for differences between panels cased by manufacturing process variations. In the near future, there is an expectation that the DALI protocol will be extended to include all aspects of color control, as well as dimming functions.
OLEDs are not yet ready to replace general indoor lighting, as has been suggested by some enthusiasts. However, they are now at the stage where they complement ambient lighting and task lighting to produce beautifully-balanced lighting schemes both in places of work and in the home. Their potential in retail environments and other public spaces is unlimited, and their low power requirements meet the demands of the most ardent environmentalists.
Friday, August 26, 2011
Formulas for determining Group Relamping and Spot Relamping Costs
There are a variety of reasons to practice group relamping, in which a set of lamps is replaced at a scheduled time, rather than spot relamping, in which lamps are only replaced when they burn out. Most of these reasons apply to fluorescent and high-intensity discharge (HID) lamps rather than incandescents, which have much shorter lifetimes.
• Group relamping requires much less labor per lamp than spot relamping. A worker might take as long as a half hour to retrieve and install a single lamp. If all the materials were on hand for a large number of lamps, a worker could move systematically from fixture to fixture and cut the required time to about 3 minutes per lamp. The process would also be less disruptive, because group relamping is usually done outside working hours.
• Group relamping is easy to schedule and delegate to outside contractors, who have special equipment and training.
• Group relamping provides brighter and more uniform lighting because lamps are replaced before their output has fully depreciated. Direct energy benefits result if the designer, anticipating group relamping, uses a smaller safety factor.
• Group relamping offers increased control over the replacement lamps, reducing the chances of mixing incompatible lamps—such as those with different color temperatures.
Group Relamping Cost
Annualized Cost ($) = A x (B + C)
A = Operating Hours/Year ÷ Operating Hours Between Relampings
B = (Percentage of Lamps Failing Before Group Relamping x Number of Lamps) x (Lamp Cost + Labor Cost to Spot Replace 1 Lamp)
C = (Lamp Cost, Group Relamping + Labor Cost to Group Relamp 1 Lamp) x Number of Lamps
Spot Relamping Cost
Average Annual Cost ($) = (Operating Hours/Year ÷ Rated Lamp Life) x (Lamp Cost + Labor Cost to Replace 1 Lamp) x Total Number of Lamps
GROUP vs. SPOT ANALYSIS
T8 lensed troffers
Group relamping has higher lamp costs but much lower labor costs, in this case providing a 31 percent overall savings. Group relamping also provides additional benefits in lighting quality and easier facility management.
Relamp cycle (hours) Average relamps per year Average material cost per year Average labor cost per year Total average cost per year
Spot relamping on burnouta 20,000 525 $1,391 $3,150 $4,541
Group relamping at 70% of rated life)b 14,000 750 $1,988 $1,125 $3,133
——————— —————— ——————— —————
Difference 225 $597 -$2,025 -$1,428
(31% savings)
Notes:
a. Assumes labor costs of $6.00/lamp for relamping and cleaning, material cost of $2.65/lamp, and 3,500 hours/y operation.
b. Assumes labor costs of $1.50/lamp for relamping and cleaning, same material costs and operating hours as for spot relamping.
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Determining Target Light Levels
The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America has developed a procedure for determining the appropriate average light level for a particular space. This procedure (used extensively by designers and engineers) recommends a target light level by considering the following:
•the task(s) being performed (contrast, size, etc.)
•the ages of the occupants
•the importance of speed and accuracy
Then, the appropriate type and quantity of lamps and light fixtures may be selected based on the following:
•fixture efficiency
•lamp lumen output
•the reflectance of surrounding surfaces
•the effects of light losses from lamp lumen depreciation and dirt accumulation
•room size and shape
•availability of natural light (daylight)
When designing a new or upgraded lighting system, one must be careful to avoid overlighting a space. In the past, spaces were designed for as much as 200 footcandles in places where 50 footcandles may not only be adequate, but superior. This was partly due to the misconception that the more light in a space, the higher the quality. Not only does overlighting waste energy, but it can also reduce lighting quality.
Within a listed range of illuminance, three factors dictate the proper level: age of the occupant(s), speed and accuracy requirements, and background contrast.
For example, to light a space that uses computers, the overhead light fixtures should provide up to 30 fc of ambient lighting. The task lights should provide the additional footcandles needed to achieve a total illuminance of up to 50 fc for reading and writing. For illuminance recommendations for specific visual tasks, refer to the IES Lighting Handbook, or to the IES Recommended Practice No. 24 (for VDT lighting).
•the task(s) being performed (contrast, size, etc.)
•the ages of the occupants
•the importance of speed and accuracy
Then, the appropriate type and quantity of lamps and light fixtures may be selected based on the following:
•fixture efficiency
•lamp lumen output
•the reflectance of surrounding surfaces
•the effects of light losses from lamp lumen depreciation and dirt accumulation
•room size and shape
•availability of natural light (daylight)
When designing a new or upgraded lighting system, one must be careful to avoid overlighting a space. In the past, spaces were designed for as much as 200 footcandles in places where 50 footcandles may not only be adequate, but superior. This was partly due to the misconception that the more light in a space, the higher the quality. Not only does overlighting waste energy, but it can also reduce lighting quality.
Within a listed range of illuminance, three factors dictate the proper level: age of the occupant(s), speed and accuracy requirements, and background contrast.
For example, to light a space that uses computers, the overhead light fixtures should provide up to 30 fc of ambient lighting. The task lights should provide the additional footcandles needed to achieve a total illuminance of up to 50 fc for reading and writing. For illuminance recommendations for specific visual tasks, refer to the IES Lighting Handbook, or to the IES Recommended Practice No. 24 (for VDT lighting).
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Load Shedding Ballasts- explained.
A building’s demand for electric power is the sum of the power required to run its electrical equipment in operation at any given time. Demand rises and falls as equipment is turned on and off. Peak demand is the highest level of demand over a given period. It’s the most expensive power the utility must produce, and these high costs are passed along to customers. Demand charges can represent 25% of a commercial building’s electric energy costs.
To encourage its customers to reduce demand during peak demand periods, utilities, independent system operators (ISOs), and other power providers are offering demand-response programs that provide financial incentives to building owners who agree to curtail load on request—either at scheduled times or during an emergency.
Building owners can significantly reduce their electric utility costs, therefore, if they can curtail load on a schedule, in response to price signals, or on demand by a utility—a strategy called load shedding. When it comes to lighting, this means switching or dimming. To address this need, the major manufacturers have begun introducing load-shedding ballast products.
Load-shedding ballasts:
* Provide a way to reduce input power upon an external demand
* Can be instant-start or program-start
* Can be bi-level switching, bi-level dimming or continuous dimming
Dimming is preferable to switching in occupied spaces in which users perform stationary or critical tasks—i.e., where changes in light output should be unnoticeable to a high degree.
How low can light levels go before occupants object? In developing a prototype for load-shedding ballast technology subsequently commercialized by lamp and ballast maker OSRAM SYLVANIA, the Lighting Research Center studied the question and concluded that they could dim the lamps by as much as 40% for brief periods without upsetting 70% of the building’s occupants or hindering their productivity. LRC studies also showed that nine out of 10 occupants accepted the reduction when they were told that it was being done to reduce peak demand.
Solutions are generally classified as low voltage (respond to a control signal from low-voltage wiring) or line voltage (respond to a control signal from line-voltage wiring). Low-voltage solutions enable integration of the ballast with other control strategies such as daylighting control and scheduling. Line-voltage solutions are well suited for retrofit because no low-voltage wiring needs be installed, just a signal transmitter.
To encourage its customers to reduce demand during peak demand periods, utilities, independent system operators (ISOs), and other power providers are offering demand-response programs that provide financial incentives to building owners who agree to curtail load on request—either at scheduled times or during an emergency.
Building owners can significantly reduce their electric utility costs, therefore, if they can curtail load on a schedule, in response to price signals, or on demand by a utility—a strategy called load shedding. When it comes to lighting, this means switching or dimming. To address this need, the major manufacturers have begun introducing load-shedding ballast products.
Load-shedding ballasts:
* Provide a way to reduce input power upon an external demand
* Can be instant-start or program-start
* Can be bi-level switching, bi-level dimming or continuous dimming
Dimming is preferable to switching in occupied spaces in which users perform stationary or critical tasks—i.e., where changes in light output should be unnoticeable to a high degree.
How low can light levels go before occupants object? In developing a prototype for load-shedding ballast technology subsequently commercialized by lamp and ballast maker OSRAM SYLVANIA, the Lighting Research Center studied the question and concluded that they could dim the lamps by as much as 40% for brief periods without upsetting 70% of the building’s occupants or hindering their productivity. LRC studies also showed that nine out of 10 occupants accepted the reduction when they were told that it was being done to reduce peak demand.
Solutions are generally classified as low voltage (respond to a control signal from low-voltage wiring) or line voltage (respond to a control signal from line-voltage wiring). Low-voltage solutions enable integration of the ballast with other control strategies such as daylighting control and scheduling. Line-voltage solutions are well suited for retrofit because no low-voltage wiring needs be installed, just a signal transmitter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)