# Pharox: 3.4W LED = 40W incandescent bulb



## PhotonBoy (Feb 22, 2007)

http://www.lemnislighting.nl/html/home3.html#nieuws

"...Lemnis Lighting, a technology company focussed on the lighting market and managed by two members of the Philips family, introduces a new lamp today. This new lamp has a 90% lower energy consumption when compared to a standard 40 Watt light bulb. The new LED lamp, named Pharox, has a life span of over 50,000 hours and can be used in and around the home. The Pharox lamp emits a warm white light and is environmentally friendly when compared to other LED lamps, as the production does not include phosphor...."

_('Scuze me if this is a dupe; I did a Google search of the forum first and found nothing.)_


----------



## Erasmus (Feb 22, 2007)

500 lumen from 3.4W equals 147 lumen/W. I want to see that before I believe it.


----------



## 2xTrinity (Feb 22, 2007)

> 500 lumen from 3.4W equals 147 lumen/W. I want to see that before I believe it.


Wow, finally something that's a more efficient to those pesky energy-hungry 9W CFLs I have around the house. I wonder how long it will take to pay for itself at the price they're asking? (The CFLs were $2)


----------



## 270winchester (Feb 22, 2007)

it may be possibe with a divice that big, if they have 8 small dies far away from each other and have enoug heatsinking while severely underdriven.

BTW where did they say its output is 500 lumens? I have seen some dim 40 watt light bulbs in my life.


----------



## PhotonBoy (Feb 23, 2007)

A cost analysis:

http://www.raisethehammer.org/blog.asp?id=510


----------



## Ken_McE (Feb 24, 2007)

_Pharox is the first 3.4 watt LED lamp with a light output which can be compared to a standard 40 watt (flame) light bulb.
_
You will note that they use a rather odd unit to measure its light output. Is a "flame light bulb" one of those incans with a flickery orange filament that is supposed to resemble a candle?


----------



## PhotonBoy (Feb 25, 2007)

I'm not sure of the 'flame' reference. I read it to mean a 40W standard incandescent bulb.


----------



## Ken_McE (Feb 25, 2007)

PhotonBoy said:


> I'm not sure of the 'flame' reference. I read it to mean a 40W standard incandescent bulb.



Yes, that's the impression you were meant to get. You will notice that they don't give an actual output.


----------



## 3rd_shift (Feb 26, 2007)

It still may be interesting to see something like this hit the retail scene.
I would like to try one.


----------



## gadget_lover (Feb 26, 2007)

Since the page is obviously translated from a different language, it's quite possible that they are not pulling any tricks. Incandescent would be likely to translate to flames.

Daniel


----------



## Led_Blind (Feb 26, 2007)

By what i have seen online a typical home incan is at about 10lm\w and home ccfl's are at around 50-60lm\w.... Seul leds are beating ccfl's at about 70-80lm\w 

So to compare 100watts incan 
- thats about 17w of ccfl 
- about 12.5w of seul-cree led.

So to be equivelant to 40watts of incan
- 7ish watts of ccfl and 
- 5 watts of seul-cree led.

Perhaps if you under drive all the seul-cree leds then you can achieve 100lm\w that means for 40w of incan you need 4w of seul-cree led....100w incan, 10w led

Just wonder if the 40w incan they used was from the 40's and age blackened?? Or is this another leap in led tech.....


----------



## PhotonBoy (Feb 26, 2007)

I think the recent focus on more efficient lighting is a good move, since any reduction in energy in this area will have a significant effect in reducing atmospheric pollution, solid ash waste, global warming, consumption of fossil fuels (which will disappear eventually) and decreasing demand for additional power plants, both nuclear and conventional.


----------



## LEDependent (Feb 27, 2007)

I see "flame" as a reference to a flame-shaped candelabra bulb.


----------



## 2xTrinity (Feb 27, 2007)

LEDependent said:


> I see "flame" as a reference to a flame-shaped candelabra bulb.


This seems like a somewhat disingenuous comparison though as the actual product they are selling looks like a standard type-A incandescent replacement shape, not a candelabra bulb. I would like to see a warm white LED replacement for those, especially one that was dimmable. Unfortunately to do the job right IMO the entire fixture would need to be designed to use LEDs from the beginning, rather than using self-ballasted devices. 

I'd love to see an LED device for example use a combination of cool and warm white LEDs, then only dim the output of the Cool white one (or dim that output faster) so that the apparent color temp goes down in much the same way as an incandescent lamp.


----------



## Duesentrieb (Mar 2, 2007)

the technical information of www.lemnislighting.nl writes: "...A 3-Watt Lemnis lamp has the same capacity as these lamps. Typically, it will produce 60 lumen per Watt at low power levels, which will increase linearly." I dont know if this includes the losses of the driver (110V, 220V), it depends on this, if it can compete with with CREE or SEOUL.


----------



## Ken_McE (Mar 2, 2007)

gadget_lover, good point. I just wrote to [email protected] and asked what the output is in lumens. I'll post if they reply.


----------



## Chris M. (Mar 3, 2007)

I can help out with this, as this lamp was featured in February`s _Lighting_ (was Lighting Equipment News). 

According to the article where one was tested and evaluated:
It uses four red, three green and one blue chip, mounted together on an advanced ceramic heatsink. Produces 75 lumens of 3000K "white" light at a CRI of only Ra24. 4 watts at 19 lumens per watt, and it can`t be dimmed. It costs the equivalent of about US$35 each.

Might not sound very impressive, but _Lighting_ were overall quite pleased with it, and it looks pretty good to me too - though not perfect, it is another step on the LED lighting ladder that should lead on to better things, and might serve some niche purposes such as decorative or low level lighting. Leave one on in the bathroom so you can find your way in and out at night perhaps?

The only other downside was the fact that at the time of release, they were only being offered to customers of one Dutch "green" energy supplier. I don`t know if they have since been offered to the general public, but I would be keen to know. Any Oxxio customers here got any they don`t use? This lamp collector would be very interested in buying one or two.


----------



## brickbat (Mar 3, 2007)

Chris M. said:


> Produces 75 lumens of 3000K "white" light at a CRI of only Ra24. 4 watts at 19 lumens per watt, and it can`t be dimmed. It costs the equivalent of about US$35 each.



Yikes! If this is true, there's a problem brewing. Buyers are being mislead (misLED?) The fact that Lemnis promotes this product as somehow better is a wee bit misleading. The only 'better' characteristic I see is it's claimed 50k hour life. I've seen the 'white' light from a Lamina ceramics tri-color LED - not good, IMHO.

So what this leads to is people being wary of LED lighting. There's still a lot of folks who don't like CFLs becaues they tried one early on, had a bad experience and remember it.

Chris M, is Lighting Equipment News online? I'd like to read their article...


----------



## Ken_McE (Mar 3, 2007)

_


Chris M. said:



...It uses four red, three green and one blue chip, mounted together on an advanced ceramic heatsink. Produces 75 lumens of 3000K "white" light at a CRI of only Ra24. 4 watts at 19 lumens per watt,

Click to expand...

_


Chris M. said:


> The mix of LEDs shows that they are using the LEDs to their best efficiency and trying for a white mix. Their division between colors approximates the division between different cone types in the human eye. The usual problem with this RGB approach is that you get "fringing" of different colored shadows and highlights around things.
> 
> I am familiar with CRI, but what is "RaCRI"?
> 
> ...


----------



## Ken_McE (Mar 3, 2007)

3rd_shift said:


> It still may be interesting to see something like this hit the retail scene. I would like to try one.



Find a Dutch forum member, ask them to go to:

http://www.oxxio.nl/Oxxio/Thuis/Producten/Lamp/

and see what's involved in getting one. Remember to check if it'll work on your mains voltage.


----------



## Wim Hertog (Mar 3, 2007)

Ken_McE said:


> _
> 
> 
> Chris M. said:
> ...


----------



## Chris M. (Mar 3, 2007)

Unfortunately LEN (now just called Lighting) is not online, and you have to have a subscription to get it. I would try and scan/PDF the article to post, but fear the thought police would make me remove it so better not.

Colour fringing should not be an issue with this lamp, since the dies appear to be behind a frosted dome at the top, diffusing the light. The _Lighting_ article does refer to a colour shift during operation though, coming from the different colour dies reacting differently to an increase in temperature. The red dies seem to dim a little more than the blue and green as the colour starts off warmer, though it is only from 2700K to 3000K as it is apparently very well heatsunk. 

Pretty sure that "Ra" is just shorthand for Colour Rendering Index. So Ra24 just means a CRI of 24.

I think the claim they make of "40 watt incandescent equivalent" relates to spot intensity on the floor if you hang one up in the middle of a room, rather than total luminous intensity. Of course, not taking into account that the old fashioned glass bulbs also throw light sideways and upwards too, which can be useful. Where this lamp may be welcome is in recessed can type lights that waste the sideways light of a regular bulb. Wall-washing decorative lamps are another potential use. 

Reading the article again, you know, this`ll teach me to read the whole thing and not just see they awarded it three stars - the conclusion they made was actually that it is a product a little ahead of its time. And that "more creative applications that draw on their tiny proportions, richness of colour, flexibility of control and other unique advantages are where he LEDs are winning". 

Still think it`s an interesting idea though. The only other commercial LED product I have seen (and own) is the spotlight produced by Enlux, which uses a whole load of red, orange, green and blue dies. That one is actually very bright and consumes 20 watts. Probably has a better CRI too due to using orange dies as well as R/G/B.


----------



## Wim Hertog (Mar 3, 2007)

OK, I just read the oxxio page and they write the following:

- There's only 1 way to get these: being an oxxio customer and ordering the lamp through the online store using a special client number which is written on every oxxio invoice (=you monthly electricity bill).

- If your interested, but not an oxxio customer, you can fill in you data here: http://www.oxxio.nl/lampinteresse/ and they will let you know when the lamp is available for the general public.

- No further technical info on the website.

Maybe one of our Dutch members is an oxxio customer...?


----------



## 2xTrinity (Mar 3, 2007)

> I think the claim they make of "40 watt incandescent equivalent" relates to spot intensity on the floor if you hang one up in the middle of a room, rather than total luminous intensity. Of course, not taking into account that the old fashioned glass bulbs also throw light sideways and upwards too, which can be useful. Where this lamp may be welcome is in recessed can type lights that waste the sideways light of a regular bulb. Wall-washing decorative lamps are another potential use.


I can think of a better way to imporve the efficiency of a recessed can fixture that wastes the sideways light from a regular bulb -- use a reflector bulb! Calling this 75 lumen lamp a 40W equivalent is outright lying. If they're basing it on spot intensity, they should compare it to a 40W PAR lamp of the same beam angle. Finally, if this thing is only producing _19 lumens per watt_ you can actually beat that efficiency _WITH A 40W HALOGEN BULB_! Honestly, something as bad at the Pharos product should be in legal trouble for false-advertising in my opinion.

As far as the issue of CRI, that unit is so deceptive as to be almost useless IMO. It's a measurement of how much a light source varied from a blackbody radiator of the same color temp. It can only be used to compare lights of the same color temperature -- a fluorescent though that is 75CRI at 4000k may actually render light more accurately than one that is 85CRI at 2700k (if you compare the lighting provided by T8 linear tubes used to light most home improvement stores to the 2700k CFLs they have in the lamps for sale you can see what I mean) Also, CRI only tells you _how much_ a light source differs from blackbody, not the way it differs -- a light could be make things look more vivid, or it could make them look dull/sickly and have the same CRI value.



> Pretty sure that "Ra" is just shorthand for Colour Rendering Index. So Ra24 just means a CRI of 24.


The color rendering is probably pretty bad, but it will certainly render color better than a typical high pressure sodium lamp, which also has a CRI of around 24. Again, this shows how useless the CRI unit is.



> So what this leads to is people being wary of LED lighting. There's still a lot of folks who don't like CFLs becaues they tried one early on, had a bad experience and remember it.
> 
> Chris M, is Lighting Equipment News online? I'd like to read their article...


This is true. The same is true of linear fluorescent -- people atuomatically think of magnetic ballasted T12s, and are shocked when they see how nice our T8 fixtures are by comparison, most don't even know such good products even exist. The same is true of CFLs, a lot of brands are great, others are utter crap -- if someone isn't an expert on lighting though it would be very easy for them to get burned with a crappy brand and in turn never look into energy efficient lighting again.


----------



## Ken_McE (Mar 8, 2007)

I contacted Roos Kriek at Lemnis Lighting. It's a 200 Lumen bulb, the equivalent of a 25 watt incan. 

Should I say anything about the article to him??


----------



## 2xTrinity (Mar 9, 2007)

Ken_McE said:


> I contacted Roos Kriek at Lemnis Lighting. It's a 200 Lumen bulb, the equivalent of a 25 watt incan.
> 
> Should I say anything about the article to him??


Hmm. It must not be the same then as the 75 lm product referred to by the other post. That's definitely a good thing, in that case I take back the harsh words of my last post . 200 lumens is not bad at all for 3.4W, that's about 60 lumens per watt, reasonable for underdriven high-intensity LEDs including fixture losses. Premium Seould LEDs could probably push a bit more if underdriven, but then you'd be stuck with 6500k only, if this thing is truly warm white (3000-3500k) then that's pretty good.


----------



## Wim Hertog (Mar 9, 2007)

2xTrinity said:


> Hmm. It must not be the same then as the 75 lm product referred to by the other post. That's definitely a good thing, in that case I take back the harsh words of my last post . 200 lumens is not bad at all for 3.4W, that's about 60 lumens per watt, reasonable for underdriven high-intensity LEDs including fixture losses. Premium Seould LEDs could probably push a bit more if underdriven, but then you'd be stuck with 6500k only, if this thing is truly warm white (3000-3500k) then that's pretty good.



This one uses an RGB cluster, so you can't compare it to phosphor white LEDs. I find 200 lm figure at 3.4W very hard to believe...


----------

