Solid State Lighting - New Inventors, ABC, 11 July 2007

[Phil Allison]

"Poxy"

** Make your ( wrong) point or PISS OFF .

"Phil"

** I've already made my point, which was that the Osram Ostar LED units
that were mentioned have notably poor colour rendering.

** A CRI of 80 is actually rather good - better by far than most fluoro
lighting.

I don't believe this is incorrect, nor that difficult to comprehend,
however if you are having problems, I'm happy to explain anything you
don't understand.

** It is totally wrong.

You only need to explain what blog you found that idea on and put it back.




......... Phil

 

[John Tserkezis]

Phil Allison wrote:

You only need to explain what blog you found that idea on and put it back.

Says the man who quotes Wikipedia.

Chuckle.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

 

[John Tserkezis]

Mr.T wrote:

So what happens if one of the string fails?

Er, you'd better hope you have more than one, otherwise you'll be left
wondering what happened - in the darkness.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

 

[Franc Zabkar]

On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:51:20 +1000, "Mr.T" <MrT@home> put finger to
keyboard and composed:

"John Tserkezis" <jt@techniciansyndrome.org.invalid> wrote in message
news:469b1714$0$10708$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Of course there is, the LED's can't be 240V surely.

No, of course not. And I don't see the reason you ask this question
unless
you missed the bit in this thread that places them in series - enough to
give
a suitable average current, along with suitable limits for waveform peaks
and
local power grid variations.

So what happens if one of the string fails?

MrT.

You could have several parallel strings. Perhaps LED traffic lights
have this kind of redundancy built in ???

I wonder if the LEDs in each string could be arranged to spell out a
message in case of failure. That would make it very easy to identify a
faulty driver.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

 

[Phil Allison]

"John Jerk Off "



** FUCK OFF - MORON


]


.......... Phil

 

[Poxy]

Phil Allison wrote:

"Poxy"


** Make your ( wrong) point or PISS OFF .

"Phil"

** I've already made my point, which was that the Osram Ostar LED
units that were mentioned have notably poor colour rendering.


** A CRI of 80 is actually rather good - better by far than most
fluoro lighting.

As I mentioned, the better fluoros using "triphosphor" coatings achieve a
CRI of 90, and the best I've seen claim a CRI of 95 (Kino Flos).

The extent to which on regards variations in CRI as significant is entirely
subjective, but to my mind, a CRI of 80 does not make for a particularly
pleasant light, but I can appreciate that others might find it completely
adequate.

 

[Phil Allison]

" Poxy the Piss Head "

** Make your ( wrong) point or PISS OFF .

"Phil"

** I've already made my point, which was that the Osram Ostar LED
units that were mentioned have notably poor colour rendering.


** A CRI of 80 is actually rather good - better by far than most
fluoro lighting.


As I mentioned, the better fluoros using "triphosphor" coatings achieve a
CRI of 90, and the best I've seen claim a CRI of 95 (Kino Flos).

** What you ACTUALLY wrote was this:

" ... the CRI (Colour Rendering Index) quoted is 80, which makes for
pretty horrible light compared to the better
fluorescents. "

Typical tri-phosphor tubes are rated at CRI = 85 and they are regarded as
possessing EXCELLENT colour quality by commercial and home users alike.

The extent to which on regards variations in CRI as significant is
entirely
subjective, but to my mind, a CRI of 80 does not make for a particularly
pleasant light,

** What mind ????

Deadshit parrots have no minds.

but I can appreciate that others might find it completely adequate.

** Piss off - you posturing old FOOL !!!!




........ Phil

 

[Poxy]

Phil Allison wrote:

" Poxy the Piss Head "


** Make your ( wrong) point or PISS OFF .

"Phil"

** I've already made my point, which was that the Osram Ostar LED
units that were mentioned have notably poor colour rendering.


** A CRI of 80 is actually rather good - better by far than most
fluoro lighting.


As I mentioned, the better fluoros using "triphosphor" coatings
achieve a CRI of 90, and the best I've seen claim a CRI of 95 (Kino
Flos).


** What you ACTUALLY wrote was this:

" ... the CRI (Colour Rendering Index) quoted is 80, which makes for
pretty horrible light compared to the better
fluorescents. "

And that's my opinion. I regard "better fluorescents" as being those with a
CRI of 90 or better. There are plenty available that claim that figure.

Typical tri-phosphor tubes are rated at CRI = 85 and they are
regarded as possessing EXCELLENT colour quality by commercial and
home users alike.

I don't know where this "excellent" superlative came from, but, as I said,
it's subjective. I don't regard a CRI of 80 as being a a pleasant light.

The extent to which on regards variations in CRI as significant is
entirely subjective, but to my mind, a CRI of 80 does not make for a
particularly pleasant light,


** What mind ????

Deadshit parrots have no minds.


but I can appreciate that others might find it completely adequate.


** Piss off - you posturing old FOOL !!!!

My suggestion, Phil, is to confine yourself to posting coherent, rational
arguments, or go shout at traffic.

 

[David L. Jones]

On Jul 17, 8:14 pm, Franc Zabkar <fzab...@iinternode.on.net> wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:51:20 +1000, "Mr.T" <MrT@home> put finger to
keyboard and composed:





"John Tserkezis" <j...@techniciansyndrome.org.invalid> wrote in message
news:469b1714$0$10708$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Of course there is, the LED's can't be 240V surely.

No, of course not. And I don't see the reason you ask this question
unless
you missed the bit in this thread that places them in series - enough to
give
a suitable average current, along with suitable limits for waveform peaks
and
local power grid variations.

So what happens if one of the string fails?

MrT.

You could have several parallel strings. Perhaps LED traffic lights
have this kind of redundancy built in ???

Anyone actually seen one of the new LED traffic lights with a bung LED
yet?
Can't say I've spotted a single one yet.

Dave.

 

[Phil Allison]

" Poxy the Piss Head "

** Make your ( wrong) point or PISS OFF .

"Phil"

** I've already made my point, which was that the Osram Ostar LED
units that were mentioned have notably poor colour rendering.


** A CRI of 80 is actually rather good - better by far than most
fluoro lighting.


As I mentioned, the better fluoros using "triphosphor" coatings
achieve a CRI of 90, and the best I've seen claim a CRI of 95 (Kino
Flos).


** What you ACTUALLY wrote was this:

" ... the CRI (Colour Rendering Index) quoted is 80, which makes for
pretty horrible light compared to the better fluorescents. "

And that's my opinion.

** But it certainly ain't FACT - which IS how you stated it.

Colossal, asinine PITA jerks like "Poxy the Piss Head" think this NG is
a chat room for mental retards.

No it ain't.

Typical tri-phosphor tubes are rated at CRI = 85 and they are
regarded as possessing EXCELLENT colour quality by commercial and
home users alike.

I don't know where this "excellent" superlative came from,

** Because Poxy - YOU know SFA about any damn thing.

Piss the HELL off

- you FUCKWIT bullshitting old FOOL !!!!





......... Phil

 

[John Tserkezis]

David L. Jones wrote:

Anyone actually seen one of the new LED traffic lights with a bung LED
yet?
Can't say I've spotted a single one yet.

I have! The things were in service for several months before I had seen it,
and remember commenting on their "reliability" (or lack thereof).
That said, it's the only failure so far I've seen.

It does narrow down the question of how they're driven though, probably not
in a string unless that one led went short.

The only failure mode I've seen with LEDs was O/C. And I don't remember
seeing more than two of those in my career.

Not counting the ones we intentionally cooked of course... Surprisingly
hardy little buggers. Seen many melt and burn their resin casing to bits
before finally failing...
Yes, yes, we had nothing better to do.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

 

[John Tserkezis]

Phil Allison wrote:

** But it certainly ain't FACT - which IS how you stated it.

Much like you quote Wikipedia as fact?
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

 

[Phil Allison]

"John the Jerk Off "



** FUCK OFF - CRIMINAL MORON





.......... Phil

 

[John Tserkezis]

Phil Allison wrote:

"John the Jerk Off "
** FUCK OFF - CRIMINAL MORON

Is that fact or opinion?

Is it quoted on some Wiki or blog somewhere?
I can't find it anywhere except within your claims on Google Groups.

Where your ramblings are archived forever. Welcome to the real world.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>

 

[Poxy]

Phil Allison wrote:

" Poxy the Piss Head "

" ... the CRI (Colour Rendering Index) quoted is 80, which makes
for pretty horrible light compared to the better fluorescents. "

And that's my opinion.


** But it certainly ain't FACT - which IS how you stated it.

I think most intelligent people can discern a subjective opinion like
"horrible" and make their own judgement as to how to interpret it. I think a
CRI of 80 is unpleasant, a CRI of 95 to my eyes is pretty good, that the
index only allows 15 points between the two is a function of the index, not
my opinion.

Typical tri-phosphor tubes are rated at CRI = 85 and they are
regarded as possessing EXCELLENT colour quality by commercial and
home users alike.

I don't know where this "excellent" superlative came from,


** Because Poxy - YOU know SFA about any damn thing.

Piss the HELL off

- you FUCKWIT bullshitting old FOOL !!!!

Now again, you failed to address my point with a coherent, rational
response. My advice is, again, to confine your comments in this group to
rational and hopefully informative argument (we all know you're capable of
it during your good hours), and save the irrational ranting for shouting at
the traffic.

Now, at the risk of over-playing the man rather than the topic, I'll draw
your attention to this comment:

Colossal, asinine PITA jerks like "Poxy the Piss Head" think this NG is
a chat room for mental retards.

No it ain't.

This statement and language carries with it the implication that you are an
authority on what is permissable with respect to posts to this group. The
very nature of unmoderated newsgroups contradicts this concept, and I
strongly advise that you disabuse yourself of this notion - you are not the
moderator of this group, you have no formal authority in this group and I
doubt your sentiments and attitude are broadly supported within the group.

This forum is completely open - in the best traditions of the Internet - and
the value of your word is proportional to the value of your contribution,
which occasionally is positive, but is often blotted out by bursts of
irrational and, more often than not, vile invective that does nothing to
distinguish yourself as an informed individual.

If you disagree with a stated fact or opion, by all means respond, but spare
us the attitude - the insults, the lame capitalisation and worst (and
saddest) of all, re-naming the subject line - it's, frankly, rather
tiresome.