What's your average single phase measured voltage? Is 251V at point of measurement common?

[Rodders53]

Does anybody know whether "modern" lamps - LED, halogen etc or even fluorescent, are more or less tolerant of under or over voltage?

30-odd years ago buying a bulb was straightforward, nowadays there's a huge choice!

Halogens are just tungsten filament lamps in a halogen-filled (quartz or other hard glass, the halogen scouring the tungsten off the glass to redeposit on the filament) and will have the same life issues with voltage.

(I had a chart somewhere once upon a time showing lifetime, colour temperature and brightness with voltages...)

Fluorescents have a similar life issue to do with the heater filaments at the ends. (Any resistive heating element is going to have reduced lifetime by running hotter due to higher input voltages).

Modern leds should be highly tolerant of voltage changes --- indeed some are rated to run from 100V to 250V or more,I believe? But some designs will be better than others, and component cost cutting can be taken too far.

 

[eveares]

I often see 253 late at night. We’re about 350m from the transformer, and looped from next door. Often see dips to 230, it’s noticeable in the summer with a fan on as you hear the pitch change.

I’ll get some pics of my cheapo plug in meter.

Wow, that is high! Ever seen it above 253v?

 

[eveares]

And what's the lowest "normal" voltage one has seen in person?

 

[JohnW2]

Most are less tolerant. Cost cutting design being the biggest culprit.

Maybe, but in the case of LEDs that 'less tolerant' is very much compensated for by a much longer average life. In the days of incandescent bulbs,I always had to change 'many every month' in my house - with LEDs it's now 'a few a year', at most.

 

[JohnW2]

Wow, that is high! Ever seen it above 253v?

As I said, if he's experiencing 253 V at 350m from the transformer, then those closest to the transformer will presumably be getting 'frighteningly high'' voltages!

 

[SUNRAY]

Maybe, but in the case of LEDs that 'less tolerant' is very much compensated for by a much longer average life. In the days of incandescent bulbs,I always had to change 'many every month' in my house - with LEDs it's now 'a few a year', at most.

I have exactly the opposite situation, the cost of CFL and now LED replacements far exceeds the cost of energy used in filament bulbs. I suspect I'm now on a hiding to nowhere now as our office/toy room/guest room triple fittinghas just blown its second bulb in 18 years so now I don't have any quartz spares, I imagine I won't be able to find anything that will A) fit or if I can B) will survive in the limited space.

 

[eveares]

I have exactly the opposite situation, the cost of CFL and now LED replacements far exceeds the cost of energy used in filament bulbs. I suspect I'm now on a hiding to nowhere now as our office/toy room/guest room triple fittinghas just blown its second bulb in 18 years so now I don't have any quartz spares, I imagine I won't be able to find anything that will A) fit or if I can B) will survive in the limited space.

Are you saying that you prefer incandescent and halogen lamps over LED's and CFL's? I would much rather 17 x GU10 5W LED spots in my kitchen diner than 17 x 50W Halogen lamps. (85W vs 850W).

 

[SUNRAY]

Are you saying that you prefer incandescent and halogen lamps over LED's and CFL's? I would much rather 17 x GU10 5W LED spots in my kitchen diner than 17 x 50W Halogen lamps. (85W vs 850W).

But there I reboard the ceiling and get rid of 17 lights worth of horrible shadows.

 

[JohnW2]

I have exactly the opposite situation, the cost of CFL and now LED replacements far exceeds the cost of energy used in filament bulbs.

I was talking about lifespan and numbers, not cost.

However, even in terms of cost, LEDs win hands down for me. At today's electricity prices, one 100W incandescent on for, say, 4 hours per day costs £35 or so per year to run and, given that (having found that they re just as 'good' as expensive 'reputable brand' ones) I always buy the cheapest LEDs I can find, I could buy umpteen of them for the price of running the one incandescent for a year

 

[fixitflav]

Most are less tolerant. Cost cutting design being the biggest culprit.

Is that a reply to my #13?

 

[bernardgreen]

Is that a reply to my #13?

Yes it is a reply to your post 13

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Does anybody know whether "modern" lamps - LED, halogen etc or even fluorescent, are more or less tolerant of under or over voltage?

30-odd years ago buying a bulb was straightforward, nowadays there's a huge choice!

That will depend on the LED driver, if it uses one. The drivers often tend to have a quite wide range of input voltage, and the drivers can be either built into the lamp, or an external unit. Those without a driver, tend to be much less tolerant of over voltage.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Modern leds should be highly tolerant of voltage changes --- indeed some are rated to run from 100V to 250V or more,I believe? But some designs will be better than others, and component cost cutting can be taken too far.

The ceiling fan/light unit I installed here last week, quotes input as 65 to 265v, 50/60Hz.

Halogen, and tungsten lamps, need to be closely matched to the supply voltage. If the lamp voltage were over specified, then the lamps would be red/yellow, and with less light output. Under specify the voltage, and the lamps would have a reduced life. The ones commonly on sale, until recently, were 240v. Since 'harmonisation', many importers, brought in 230v tungsten lamps, maybe thinking that since harmonisation, they were fine for use in the UK, but they would only last a matter of a few weeks, before they burnt out. Shops, and wholesalers especially, would stock and range of wattages, but a range of voltages.

Back in the day, before the UK settled on a 240v single phase mains, there were lots of variations, even in the same towns. Around here, from memory, it varied from 200v to 250v.

 

[eveares]

But there I reboard the ceiling and get rid of 17 lights worth of horrible shadows.

Agree it is hindsight not the best way to light the room, but how would you light a room what measures 6.8m long by 3.75m wide and has a kitchen island at one end with a cooker hood coming down from the ceiling.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Agree it is hindsight not the best way to light the room, but how would you light a room what measures 6.8m long by 3.75m wide and has a kitchen island at one end with a cooker hood coming down from the ceiling.

The very best lighting, is lighting which minimises shadows, especially those shadows produced by you, on a surface upon which you are trying to work. Linear florescent strips, appropriately aligned or their modern LED equivalents, are the best form of practical lighting. LED point sources, especially in a low ceiling, are absolutely the worst option.