Ratings for lamp shades based on heat or light output?

[username132]

I keep seeing shades with ratings on for the lights used in power/watts but they give different ratings for incandescents and energy-saving forms which to me makes no sense. If the lamp shade can handle 42 watts of halogen, why not 42 watts of any other bulb type.

 

[JohnW2]

I keep seeing shades with ratings on for the lights used in power/watts but they give different ratings for incandescents and energy-saving forms which to me makes no sense. If the lamp shade can handle 42 watts of halogen, why not 42 watts of any other bulb type.

I may be 'missing something', but think you're essentially right. It's clearly the heat which actually matters, and that essentially relates to power. Indeed, CFLs and LEDs tend to be more efficient (i.e. less heat & more light for a given electrical power) - so, if it can tolerate a 42W halogen, one might expect it to be OK with even more than 42W of CFL/LED, rather than only 12W.

As so often, I don't think the people who write these instructions/labels necessarily know what they are talking about!

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

As so often, I don't think the people who write these instructions/labels necessarily know what they are talking about!

I think that is clearly the case.

Eco Halogen is I presume the same as energy saving; i.e. just lower wattage than normal so whether eco or not is irrelevant.
12W is low energy compared to 42W no matter which type so would equally apply to 12W halogen or other incandescent.
12W led is far more than equivalent light-wise to 42W incandescent so that is incorrect as well.

 

[securespark]

I used to think the same and have installed 21W CFL's in a lot of my shades that say 11W max....to no detriment.

I think it stemmed from the good old days when there were earlier-generation energy saving lamps like the Philips SL that used to get incredibly hot.

These days, especially with cool running LED's, it's no big deal.

 

[JohnW2]

I think it stemmed from the good old days when there were earlier-generation energy saving lamps like the Philips SL that used to get incredibly hot.

Yes, but even then I very seriously doubt whether an appreciably lower powered (but equivalent light output) energy-saving lamp could possibly have put out as much heat as the (appreciably higher powered) incandescent lamp with an equivalent light output. It wouldn't really make much sense.

Kind Regards, John

 

[winston1]

Just yet another example of manufacturers who don't know what they are talking about. Others:
Plugtops
Digital aerials
SMPS referred to as transformers
GU 5.3 lamps referred to as MR16

The list goes on, I'm sure there must be others.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

It might be to do with the type of light materials.

I recently had the plastic diffuser of a ceiling light disintegrate when I took it down to clean - must have been eaten by the higher UV content of the CFLs.

 

[JohnW2]

It might be to do with the type of light materials. I recently had the plastic diffuser of a ceiling light disintegrate when I took it down to clean - must have been eaten by the higher UV content of the CFLs.

Conceivably (although increasing few of the non-incandescents are CFLs, and most consumers would probably assume that "Low Energy" includes LEDs) - but I think you're probably giving too much 'benefit of the doubt' to those people "who don't necessarily know what they are talking about"!

Kind Regards, John

 

[333rocky333]

I think it stemmed from the good old days when there were earlier-generation energy saving lamps like the Philips SL that used to get incredibly hot.

 

[JohnW2]

<advert for Phllips SL lamp>]

Indeed, but if I recall correctly they only came in 18W and 25W - so even if they produced "all heat and no light" (which they obviously didn't) I doubt that they would have got as hot as, say, a 60W incandescent.

Kind Regards, John

 

[Iggifer]

Indeed, but if I recall correctly they only came in 18W and 25W - so even if they produced "all heat and no light" (which they obviously didn't) I doubt that they would have got as hot as, say, a 60W incandescent.

Kind Regards, John

That's assuming they actually pulled 18w & 25w. I've often found older CFLs, particularly 18w PL lamps to get RED hot at the base to the point where some have melted into the lamp holder, and generally are too hot to touch.

 

[JohnW2]

That's assuming they actually pulled 18w & 25w. I've often found older CFLs, particularly 18w PL lamps to get RED hot at the base to the point where some have melted into the lamp holder, and generally are too hot to touch.

I doubt whether they drew a lot more than the stated power, but it's possible that the heat distribution was different from an incandescent. If, as I suppose is likely, most of the heat comes from the 'driver', it might have been concentrated around the base, as compared with more-or-less all over the envelope with an incandescent.

Kind Regards, John

 

[winston1]

I still have a couple of Philips SL lamps in little used areas, an SL 9 and an SL 25. I can confirm the watt load is as stated, though the VA is somewhat higher as the ballests are inductive chokes without power factor correction.
They don't seem to run particularly hot.