Hi all.
Yesterday, while surfing on some e-shop, i saw an esl lamp at (i think) low price.
Does someone know anything about this kind of lamps?

ESL = Electron stimulated luminescence .
This lamp is essentially a miniature Cathode Ray Tube (CRT), without a magnetic or electrostatic deflection, without a shadow mask and with a single phosphor panel unit (Rather than many RGB phosphors pixels in a CRT dispaly), that have rare-earth triphosphors (Rather than the traditional RGB phosphors of CRT display tube). Electrons stikes them to produces light like how a CRT produce a picture.
Colour rendering is same as CFL (Ra8=85). Colour temperature range is the same as CFL and LED (2700K, 3000K, 3500K, 4000K, 5000K and 6500K), and as the electronic power supply, is integrated into the lamp (Like CFL and LED), the life is similar to CFL and LED (6000 hours average), and the efficiency is the same as CFLs (45-60 lm/w).
The only real adventage of ESL over CFL, is the absence of mercury. Otherwise, ESL, like LED, needs to be recycled as any other electronics stuff.

thank you very much!
do you think is an valid incandescent replacement in cold places?

As CRTs aren't affected by temperature, ESL shouldn't reduces performance in cold places, likes LEDs. But unlike LEDs, they willn't have an increase in performance and brightness, but only in lifespan (Down to a threshold, where electrolytic capacitors (If present at all), will reduces performance, as their electrolyte would be frosted.

uhm... according to Vu1 website, their lamp is 25 lm/W; not much impressive 

Given how they work, i would not expect too much efficiency either

As far as driver goes, CRTs are hot cathode tubes so i'd expect ESLs to be hot cathode too, as such they may reqiure more complex ballast (eg permanent heating and the like)

If those have capacitor-less ballast (like some LED ballasts are), there is reliability advantage. If no, then it does not look as interesting. Then, here may be other advantages to look for :

No mercury - greener product

Different failure mode - for example dimming with time and not abrupt failure (ie lamp life rated by light output and not by lamp survival) - which is a big advantage for multiple lamp installations

as electron emitter, will fluorescent cathode act the same in vacuum?

In CRT its about the same - basicaly a filament or filament-heated cathode that emits electrons

But CRTs have life of many years permanent on - they degrade mostly by phosphor degradation. But CRTs have way lower power than lamps as well

as electron emitter, will fluorescent cathode act the same in vacuum?

It would emit the electrons in the same way, but you need a phosphor to convert the electron beam to light.

But CRTs have life of many years permanent on - they degrade mostly by phosphor degradation. But CRTs have way lower power than lamps as well

In CRT's all the beams have to originate from tiny cathodes in order to be focused back into a small spot on the screen, so to get sharp image. And that yield quite high cathode loading, what had to be compensated by the use of really high voltages to get enough energy to emit multiple photons from single electron. The consequence was the degradation of the cathodes, what required more complicated circuits to compensate for it and to avoid overloading, so the useful CRT life become sufficient. Without that the CRT usually lasted for rather short time...

The design of ESL have less restraints than CRT, so it can be made better in all the parameters needed for ESL lamp - bigger electrodes and so on

That is true, but even with that, the performance is way worse than other available technologies. Of course, it is mainly due to it's infancy, so it technically could be improved. But because the technology does not allow to be cheaply manufactured (unlike the LED's), so generate reasonable profit, there would be no investment in that area and all makers would rather invest into the LED, where the performance is already better and yet it is promising to give good return of investments.

That is true, but even with that, the performance is way worse than other available technologies. Of course, it is mainly due to it's infancy, so it technically could be improved. But because the technology does not allow to be cheaply manufactured (unlike the LED's), so generate reasonable profit, there would be no investment in that area and all makers would rather invest into the LED, where the performance is already better and yet it is promising to give good return of investments.

9.99€/bulb on amazon, made (or marked) by paulmann...
it isn't so expensive...

9.99€/bulb on amazon, made (or marked) by paulmann...
it isn't so expensive...

Exactly, the selling prices are low, so where is the margin for the makers?
Nobody would invest a penny into a technology, where the selling prices are already low, while the manufacturing costs have no expectation to go down.
Don't forget, than LED's are sold for $30 (they could be, because their efficacy is nearly twice as high), while their manufacture cost is expected to drop to $3, so the vision of $27 margin on each bulb is quite a strong force pushing everybody into that area...

Quote from: marcopete87 on February 22, 2013, 06:43:47 PM

9.99€/bulb on amazon, made (or marked) by paulmann...
it isn't so expensive...

Exactly, the selling prices are low, so where is the margin for the makers?
Nobody would invest a penny into a technology, where the selling prices are already low, while the manufacturing costs have no expectation to go down.
Don't forget, than LED's are sold for $30 (they could be, because their efficacy is nearly twice as high), while their manufacture cost is expected to drop to $3, so the vision of $27 margin on each bulb is quite a strong force pushing everybody into that area...

in local store i can find them in prices from 4€ to 15€, more if i want some good philips bulbs.

however, if esl don't gain the same efficiency of leds and cfl, i think they'll disappear early.

CFLs have usually 45 lm/w average: Not better than MV lamps.
LEDs have up to 60 lm/w, as a LED lighting product can't reach more than this outside the laboratory. The very high efficiencies of from 75 lm/w to 3 digits lm/w, were actually achieved only with discrete HPLEDs in lab conditions, which in regular uses, either the LED will fry in secs, will have lower efficiency or will be horribly expensive.
The most common reason for the very high brilliance of 5mm LEDs today, isn't some improvments, but these LEDs simply feed with x2 and even more of their rated current (Overdriven).
But even if they are feed with their rated current, they can still have very short life if they are crowded in a very small space, with no cooling spaces. Of course, these LEDs can't depress their heat to the outside world.