Author Topic: Why was slimline technology never applied to non-integrated CFL lamps?  (Read 698 times)
WorldwideHIDCollectorUSA
Member
*****
Offline

Gender: Male
View Posts
View Gallery

HID, LPS, and preheat fluorescents forever!!!!!!


Worldwide HIDCollectorUSA
Why was slimline technology never applied to non-integrated CFL lamps? « on: July 30, 2022, 01:45:39 PM » Author: WorldwideHIDCollectorUSA
After knowing that most fluorescent tubes and non-integrated CFL lamps often use 4 pins and some non-integrated CFL lamps using 2 pins and an integral glowbottle starter, I have known that some linear fluorescent tubes such as the North American slimline fluorescent tubes often use only 2 pins so that they can be used on high OCV instant start ballasts. I wonder why the same 2 pin starterless instant start technology used in North American slimline fluorescent tubes was never applied to non-integrated CFL lamps.
Logged

Desire to collect various light bulbs (especially HID), control gear, and fixtures from around the world.

DISCLAIMER: THE EXPERIMENTS THAT I CONDUCT INVOLVING UNUSUAL LAMP/BALLAST COMBINATIONS SHOULD NOT BE ATTEMPTED UNLESS YOU HAVE THE PROPER KNOWLEDGE. I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY INJURIES.

James
Member
*****
Offline

Gender: Male
View Posts
View Gallery


WWW
Re: Why was slimline technology never applied to non-integrated CFL lamps? « Reply #1 on: July 30, 2022, 02:34:18 PM » Author: James
It was.  During the mid 2000s several manufacturers introduced very fast-starting CFLi lamps.  They did not succeed partly because they were rather more expensive.  To instant strike an FL lamp requires either a high voltage (which costs more in a CFLi ballast), or an extremely high gas purity in the discharge tube to lower the energy required for ignition.  That also costs very much more, because lamps have to be exhausted more slowly than usual.  Moreover, the life is usually reduced.

The CFLi market used to be fiercely cost-competitive.  It seems that a majority of end users were not willing to pay the high prices for an instant-start lamp.  The reduced life claims vs standard types were also not well received.  The instant-start CFLi therefore disappeared quite quickly after its introduction.
Logged
WorldwideHIDCollectorUSA
Member
*****
Offline

Gender: Male
View Posts
View Gallery

HID, LPS, and preheat fluorescents forever!!!!!!


Worldwide HIDCollectorUSA
Re: Why was slimline technology never applied to non-integrated CFL lamps? « Reply #2 on: July 30, 2022, 02:46:45 PM » Author: WorldwideHIDCollectorUSA
I wonder why starterless instant start 2 pin non integrated CFL lamps that would use remote ballasts like PL-S and PL-C lamps were not developed as well.
Logged

Desire to collect various light bulbs (especially HID), control gear, and fixtures from around the world.

DISCLAIMER: THE EXPERIMENTS THAT I CONDUCT INVOLVING UNUSUAL LAMP/BALLAST COMBINATIONS SHOULD NOT BE ATTEMPTED UNLESS YOU HAVE THE PROPER KNOWLEDGE. I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY INJURIES.

Foxtronix
Member
*****
Offline

Gender: Male
View Posts
View Gallery

Formerly "TiCoune66". Also known here as Vince.


GoL UCs4tSgJSCoCIMGThBuaePhA
WWW
Re: Why was slimline technology never applied to non-integrated CFL lamps? « Reply #3 on: July 30, 2022, 10:32:57 PM » Author: Foxtronix
It is my understanding that slimline fluorescents were much more than just two pins and an instant start ballast. The 8ft size in particular reduced the number of fixtures installed. Their higher wattage probably also meant higher efficiency. Maybe two 8ft tubes was also cheaper than four 4ft tubes?

Plus back in the early 50s, maybe rapid start systems were still not quite reliable enough, making the slimline tubes more appealing. But that's just a guess of mine LOL.
Logged

Print 
© 2005-2024 Lighting-Gallery.net | SMF 2.0.19 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines | Terms and Policies