Internal Ballast Metal Halide PAR38

[Paul M. Eldridge]

Philips recently announced a self-ballasted metal halide PAR38 bulb
that I'm told should be available here in Canada by the end of the
month (some of you may recall seeing a prototype called the 'Rebel'
six or seven years ago).

Initial light output is similar to a 60 watt Halogen IR (1220 lumens
vs. 1110) and CRI comes in at a respectable 87 (although not stated, I
assume colour temperature is 3,000 K). Average rated life is said to
be 10,500 hours and I understand total power draw is in the order of
25 watts.

For more information, please see:
http://www.nam.lighting.philips.com/can/newproducts/retail.php?mode=1

Just curious what others think of this product. Without knowing how
much it will cost it's pretty hard to predict whether it will be a
commercial success, but in terms of technology and packaging, it
certainly looks like a home run (frankly, I can't wait to get my hands
on it).

Ultimately, to be successful, it must compete with some relatively
inexpensive and popular alternatives such as HIR, CFL and, presumably,
over the longer term, LEDs. In addition to price/value, reliability,
longevity, lumen depreciation, colour stability and warm up/restrike
issues could all be potential hurdles.

Anyone want to offer his or her take on it? Also, any speculation as
to whether other major manufacturers will offer a similar product in
the near term?

Cheers,

Paul

 

[Victor Roberts]

Philips recently announced a self-ballasted metal halide PAR38 bulb
that I'm told should be available here in Canada by the end of the
month (some of you may recall seeing a prototype called the 'Rebel'
six or seven years ago).

Initial light output is similar to a 60 watt Halogen IR (1220 lumens
vs. 1110) and CRI comes in at a respectable 87 (although not stated, I
assume colour temperature is 3,000 K). Average rated life is said to
be 10,500 hours and I understand total power draw is in the order of
25 watts.

For more information, please see:
http://www.nam.lighting.philips.com/can/newproducts/retail.php?mode=1

Just curious what others think of this product. Without knowing how
much it will cost it's pretty hard to predict whether it will be a
commercial success, but in terms of technology and packaging, it
certainly looks like a home run (frankly, I can't wait to get my hands
on it).

Ultimately, to be successful, it must compete with some relatively
inexpensive and popular alternatives such as HIR, CFL and, presumably,
over the longer term, LEDs. In addition to price/value, reliability,
longevity, lumen depreciation, colour stability and warm up/restrike
issues could all be potential hurdles.

Anyone want to offer his or her take on it? Also, any speculation as
to whether other major manufacturers will offer a similar product in
the near term?

Cheers,

Paul

This is a self-ballasted ceramic metal halide lamp, and has all the
advantages of similar power CMH lamps, such as excellent color
rendition, color uniformity and color stability. Don't look only at
initial cost. Due to their reduced energy consumption and longer life,
CMH PAR lamps with external ballasts already have lower cost of light
then incandescent lamps and have replaced incandescent-based PAR lamps
in many commercial applications.

I think this self-ballasted CMH lamp will be very successful,
especially in those applications that have not yet been converted to
externally ballasted CMH PAR lamps.

Don't expect versions at much higher power. Since PAR lamps are often
installed in recessed or semi-enclosed fixtures, the power dissipation
capabilities of the integral ballast are limited. Maximum practical
power is probably less than 50 watts, at least until someone invents
new high temperature power electronics technology.

I don't think that LEDs will displace these lamps for quite a while.
The first hurdle that LEDs have to overcome is efficacy, and that
continues to be some way off. The next hurdle will be cost per lumen,
and more importantly cost of light, which is even further out in time.

--
Vic Roberts
http://www.RobertsResearchInc.com
To reply via e-mail:
replace xxx with vdr in the Reply to: address
or use e-mail address listed at the Web site.

This information is provided for educational purposes only.
It may not be used in any publication or posted on any Web
site without written permission.

 

[Paul M. Eldridge]

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 00:20:32 GMT, Victor Roberts

[snip]

This is a self-ballasted ceramic metal halide lamp, and has all the
advantages of similar power CMH lamps, such as excellent color
rendition, color uniformity and color stability. Don't look only at
initial cost. Due to their reduced energy consumption and longer life,
CMH PAR lamps with external ballasts already have lower cost of light
then incandescent lamps and have replaced incandescent-based PAR lamps
in many commercial applications.

I think this self-ballasted CMH lamp will be very successful,
especially in those applications that have not yet been converted to
externally ballasted CMH PAR lamps.

Don't expect versions at much higher power. Since PAR lamps are often
installed in recessed or semi-enclosed fixtures, the power dissipation
capabilities of the integral ballast are limited. Maximum practical
power is probably less than 50 watts, at least until someone invents
new high temperature power electronics technology.

I don't think that LEDs will displace these lamps for quite a while.
The first hurdle that LEDs have to overcome is efficacy, and that
continues to be some way off. The next hurdle will be cost per lumen,
and more importantly cost of light, which is even further out in time.

Thanks, Vic, for sharing your comments -- your insight is very much
appreciated. Personally, I think its an exciting product and hope
other manufacturers soon follow-up with their own offerings. Still,
I'm curious how its life cycle costs will compare with that of HIR,
arguably the 'gold standard' in retail and commercial lighting and, in
particular, the CFL alternative.

A 60-watt HIR that offers similar light output (with the added
benefits of greater switching and dimming flexibility, instant warm-up
and restrike operation and a higher CRI) costs approximately $15.00
CDN. At a rated life of 3,000 hours, we would need approximately
three and a half such bulbs to equal the life expectancy of this new
lamp (about $52.50). Assuming a 35-watt savings, we could expect to
save 367 kWhs over the life of the lamp, or roughly $37.00 at $0.10
per kWh. Additional labour and air conditioning savings are possible,
but presumably, to be cost effective, our CMH lamp would need to come
in at under $90.00 CDN.... realistically speaking, perhaps half this
amount.

While not a direct competitor in all applications, CFLs would seem to
offer similar and, in some cases, better performance in terms of life
expectancy, energy savings and operating performance, all at a very
attractive initial cost (under $10.00 CDN).

Again, I would very much like to see this product become a huge
success for Philips (certainly they deserve a lot of credit for
pursuing this as they have). I simply worry the numbers may not be
all that compelling, and that competing technologies will limit its
market acceptance, at least at these lower wattages. If the
technology could be somehow scaled-up, while ensuring excess heat does
not become an issue, than I think the prospects are considerably
better.

Cheers,
Paul

 

[TKM]

This is a self-ballasted ceramic metal halide lamp, and has all the
advantages of similar power CMH lamps, such as excellent color
rendition, color uniformity and color stability. Don't look only at
initial cost. Due to their reduced energy consumption and longer life,
CMH PAR lamps with external ballasts already have lower cost of light
then incandescent lamps and have replaced incandescent-based PAR lamps
in many commercial applications.

I think this self-ballasted CMH lamp will be very successful,
especially in those applications that have not yet been converted to
externally ballasted CMH PAR lamps.

Don't expect versions at much higher power. Since PAR lamps are often
installed in recessed or semi-enclosed fixtures, the power dissipation
capabilities of the integral ballast are limited. Maximum practical
power is probably less than 50 watts, at least until someone invents
new high temperature power electronics technology.

I don't think that LEDs will displace these lamps for quite a while.
The first hurdle that LEDs have to overcome is efficacy, and that
continues to be some way off. The next hurdle will be cost per lumen,
and more importantly cost of light, which is even further out in time.

Don't forget optics. A CMH PAR lamp should have much higher center beam
candlepower and a distribution more suited to display and downlighting than
anything that LEDs can manage at this point . This characteristic, which
with cost, color and efficacy, is what drives the intended market.

Terry McGowan

 

[Victor Roberts]

Don't forget optics. A CMH PAR lamp should have much higher center beam
candlepower and a distribution more suited to display and downlighting than
anything that LEDs can manage at this point . This characteristic, which
with cost, color and efficacy, is what drives the intended market.

Terry McGowan

Thanks for the additional info Terry. I tend to focus on raw lamp
lumens, one of my many shortcomings

--
Vic Roberts
http://www.RobertsResearchInc.com
To reply via e-mail:
replace xxx with vdr in the Reply to: address
or use e-mail address listed at the Web site.

This information is provided for educational purposes only.
It may not be used in any publication or posted on any Web
site without written permission.