LightNOW

The National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) has published ANSI C136.20, American National Standard for Roadway and Area Lighting—Fiber-Reinforced Composite (FRC) Lighting Poles.

This standard applies to fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) lighting poles used for roadway and area lighting. It includes nomenclature, dimensional data, performance criteria and some interchangeability features for standard poles as well as those that must meet breakaway requirements for poles as described in AASHTO LTS Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals.

A hard or electronic copy may be purchased for $47 by visiting global.ihs.com, or contacting IHS by phone at 800-854-7179 (U.S. only) or 303-397-7956 (international).

The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IES) recently announced publication of IES Approved Method for Photometry of Reflector Type Lamps (LM-20-13), the latest in a continuing series of Lighting Measurement Testing & Calculation Guides.

This method describes photometric testing procedures and reporting guidelines for reflector-type lamps. It is intended that these procedures and guidelines be adopted as the basis of photometry for reflector-type lamps. The application of the described procedures and guidelines will improve reproducibility within a laboratory, improve measurement agreement and facilitate comparison of results between laboratories.

IES Approved Method for Photometry of Reflector Type Lamps (LM-20-13) is available in print or as a PDF download from the IES here.

Philips Lighting’s SchoolVision allows teachers to control lighting intensity and color temperature to effect the right classroom atmosphere and lighting conditions supportive of different learning activities.

Learn more here.

PIXI Lighting’s PIXI FlatLight luminaire is a patent-pending ultra-thin, long-lasting, edge-lit LED flat light that uses the same technology found in high definition televisions to provide bright, uniform, energy-efficient light without glare, flicker or hot spots. At 0.55 inches thick, the fixtures feature an internal driver, allowing them to be flush mounted against any flat surface including ceilings, walls or under the counter. Available in 2700K 1×1, 1×2 and 2×2 (residential); and 4000K 2×2 and 1×4 (commercial) comfigurations.

LED Journal recently published “The Impact of the ‘California Quality LED Bulb,’” an insightful article by Bernie Weir of ON Semiconductor on the impact of the new California Quality LED Lamp Specifications. Check it out here.

Republication of Postings from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Solid-State Lighting Program

by Jim Brodrick, U.S. Department of Energy

This week, the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) CALiPER program released an exploratory study on the problems and benefits likely to be encountered as LED products intended to replace linear fluorescent lamps and luminaires become increasingly popular. Linear fluorescent lamps – specifically, T8s and T5s – are the most-common light sources in our country’s classrooms and offices and are used in a wide range of fixtures, including recessed 2’x 4’s, 2’x 2’s, and 1’x 4’s as well as linear pendants (both indirect and direct/indirect), chalkboard/whiteboard lights, and linear wallwashers. But a growing number of LED products are being offered as energy-efficient alternatives – including T8 LED replacement lamps, integral LED luminaires (2’ x 4’ or 2’ x 2’), and kits to upgrade fluorescent troffers to an LED option.

For the CALiPER study, DOE brought together 18 lighting designers and facility engineers to compare 24 identical pairs of troffers in a simulated office space. Three of those pairs involved fluorescent benchmark troffers, and the rest were LED products – including five pairs of fluorescent troffers retrofitted with LED tubes, four pairs of troffers with LED non-tube retrofit kits, and 12 pairs of dedicated LED troffers. The products were tested at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for flux, color, power quality, and flicker before being evaluated by the 18 experts for photometric distribution, uniformity of light on the task surface, and suitability of the light output for the task, as well as flicker, dimming performance, color quality, safety and certification issues, ease of installation, and energy efficiency.

Compared to the last CALIPER tests on such products, conducted in 2011, the new study shows considerable improvement. On the whole, the LED luminaires proved to be slightly more efficacious than their fluorescent luminaire counterparts, which ranged from 57 to 62 lm/W (with an average of 59.6 lm/W), compared with a range of 55 to 107 lm/W for the LED products (with an average of 80.3 lm/W). But the evaluators identified a number of areas of concern, one being color consistency. The color of the LED troffers varied from manufacturer to manufacturer, even though most were claimed to be 4000K white. This means that architectural projects with multiple luminaire types in a single room could end up with the downlights looking “greener” than the troffers or task lights, for example.

Some of the luminaires with dramatic or odd brightness patterns on the lens or diffuser were identified as being more glaring and as causing more noticeable reflections on glossy computer screens. This was worse for the LED luminaires than for the fluorescents, especially where the manufacturers had not carefully considered the appearance of the troffer lens. But glare proved somewhat enigmatic, in that no traditional measured or calculated photometric quantities were reliable predictors of whether it would be a problem for a given luminaire – except that troffers with maximum lens luminances greater than 20,000 cd/m2 seemed to be more objectionable.

Another issue noted by the study involved LED T8 replacement lamps. Because they emit no light from their back sides, they changed the appearance of troffers (both lensed and parabolic) by increasing the luminance contrast between the lamp and the unlighted reflector behind it – which, when used with an omnidirectional fluorescent tube, would reflect back plenty of light. The result was apparent stripes on troffer lenses, as well as greater perceived lamp brightness in the parabolic louvers.

When it came to dimming, LED products were on par with fluorescents. Both source types were equipped with 0-10V dimming ballasts or drivers, and neither dimmed smoothly and predictably, especially when raised from the “off” setting. More notably, however, about a third of the LED products exhibited annoying flicker in dimmed mode. At this point in time there are no established flicker metrics that would warn specifiers about this problem.

A number of issues were encountered during the installation of the LED tubes and non-tube retrofit kits – for example, there wasn’t enough wire in some troffers to reach across the fixture once the ballast was cut out, and the need for some non-tube retrofit kits to be installed in deeper troffer housings wasn’t noted prominently enough on the spec sheet. These kinds of things could be avoided if manufacturers would observe their products being installed in a range of existing troffer types, and make the necessary product modifications to better facilitate installation as well as approval by the electrical inspector. An electrical inspector could have disqualified more than half of the installed LED tubes and non-tube LED retrofit kits because of either poor assembly or a lack of safety documentation, so it would behoove manufacturers to address this issue in order to avoid costly site certifications.

The CALiPER study shows that LED dedicated troffers can compete with fluorescents in terms of efficacy, and while lighting quality is of some concern, it’s no more so than with fluorescents. The other LED options – replacement tubes and non-tube retrofit kits – don’t perform as well. Although the present study found them to be as efficacious as their fluorescent counterparts, there were concerns about color consistency, glare, dimming, flicker, installation issues, and code approval. Many of these concerns were due to the fact that the existing housings were designed for omnidirectional fluorescents rather than for directional LEDs. Nevertheless, it’s advisable to mock up and visually evaluate LED retrofit products before ordering them for large installations.

Despite the considerable improvement in this class of LED products, there remains more to be accomplished before they emerge as the clear choice over fluorescents. To see a copy the full CALiPER report, please visit www.ssl.energy.gov/exploratory.html.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has released an exploratory CALiPER study on the problems and benefits likely to be encountered as LED products intended to replace linear fluorescent lamps become increasingly popular. Eighteen lighting designers and facility engineers compared 24 identical pairs of troffers in a simulated office space. Three of those pairs involved fluorescent benchmark troffers, and the rest were LED products.

The products were evaluated for photometric distribution, uniformity of light on the task surface, and suitability of the light output for the task, as well as flicker, dimming performance, color quality, power quality, safety and certification issues, ease of installation, energy efficiency and life-cycle cost.

The conclusions included:

* While lighting quality is of some concern with the LED products, it’s no more so than with the linear fluorescent lamps they’re intended to replace.
* LED dedicated troffers can compete with (and beat) fluorescents in terms of efficacy.
* LED replacement tubes and non-tube retrofit kits are as efficacious as their fluorescent counterparts, though there are concerns about color consistency, glare, dimming, flicker, installation issues, and code approval.
* For this reason, it’s advisable to mock up and visually evaluate LED retrofit products before ordering them for large installations.

Click here to see the report.

The Telelumen Light Replicator enables any light to be recorded either in an instant or over time, matched by software, and reproduced.

Mark Rea, Director of the Lighting Research Center, and Zia Eftekhar, former Chairman of Philips Lighting North America, recently sat down to discuss promoting the value of light to end-users.

The resulting 30-minute conversation, focusing on how to measure the actual value of light using new value metrics and how to communicate this value to the public, was recorded and is available in a video here.

Out of 125 submissions from New York City lighting design students, “Atherisch,” designed by Peter Ossi, a BID industrial design major at Pratt Institute, was awarded the grand prize at the Illuminating Engineering Society New York City Section’s (IESNYC) 13th annual student lighting design competition. Ossi receives a $2,000 cash prize and an all-expense paid trip to Paris to visit Debbas L’Atelier.

“This was an especially challenging year for the students,” says Shaun Fillion, chair of the Student Lighting Competition Committee and lighting project design manager, Osram Sylvania. “Past themes have focused on visual lighting cues, such as shadows or the reflection of light. IllumiNotes encouraged entrants to respond to a completely non-visual form, manifesting in their track of choice from Craig Armstrong’s album Piano Works into a silent visual lighting piece. As a result there was more diversity among the projects, as the challenge was limited only by the imagination of the students.”

Atherisch

Ossi’s Atherisch, which is the German word for “ethereal,” was inspired by a piece in Piano Works called Fugue, a piece that according to Ossi,” is a dance of two spirits that breathe a sanguinary yet ethereal feeling of playful reverie.” The concept for his design stemmed from the idea of refracting light through the action of breathing. His first model reflector was operated with his own lungs, breathing through a tube attached to an airtight drum with a diagram of reflective Mylar on one side. In the final model he replaced his lungs with a reciprocating piston driven by a 1 rpm motor and a positive return cam mechanism. The entire mechanical and lighting portion was then encased within a white amorphic, amoeba-like casing made of foam insulation coated with joint compound and painted.

Spectrum

The second prize of $1,000 was awarded to Eunyong Park, a BID Student at Pratt Institute for her installation Spectrum. Different heights of straws make a variety of rhythmical light movements like the notes played in Craig Armstong’s piece Delay. The viewer receives the light at different eye levels and angles that deliver high and low, fast and slow, and loud and quiet sounds of the piece.

A Suspended Storm

Sophia Arrendondo, MP Lighting Design, NYSID was awarded a third prize of $500 for Model for A Suspended Storm. Inspired by Craig Armstrong’s “Weather Storm,” the idea of this installation was to create an image of a storm suspended in time.

“Light and sound are both totally immersive forms of experience, capable of instantly establishing a mood, and there’s a long history of designers and composers seeking inspiration in each other’s work,” says Joseph Clarke, an architectural historian, critic, and PhD candidate at Yale University (co-convener The Sound of Architecture symposium this past fall at Yale), who delivered the event’s keynote address and served on the competition jury. “This year’s theme was also a very open-ended problem, challenging students to stretch their creative boundaries and eliciting an amazing variety of submissions.”

Honorable Mentions includfed Jennifer Wei – BFA Product Design, Parsons The New School for Design; Karina Oumov – BID Industrial Design, Pratt Institute; Carla Ramírez – BID Industrial Design, Pratt Institute; and Marland Backus – BID Industrial Design, Pratt Institute.

The jury included Clarke; Mike Barr, senior account supervisor, Lutron; Juan Pablo Lira, senior designer, Focus Lighting; and Christopher Lubeck, NAFTA head and specification sales engineering and utility relations, Osram Sylvania.