Graphene Lightbulb Set For Shops

a reply to: Aliensun

It does not. Eneregy efficiency for our LED products average about 93-94%. How do you double that? At a certain point the gians are negilible.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

My question is how will its luminosity compare to the traditional light bulb. I quit paying attention to these new technologies after finding out the pathetic light put out by the compact fluorescent bulbs, which doesn't compare at all to their larger shop style counterparts. LED's are too expensive, and if you want an LED that puts out a natural looking light comparable to incandescent it will cost you, if you want one better than that it's simply unaffordable.

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Now we have an even better product, even cheaper!

Sounds good. However, Better and Cheaper don't usually make it down to the consumer.

Depending on the Demand, I wouldn't necessarily hold my breath for cheaper prices on a better product.

back in the 90's, I bought LED's (light emitting diodes) for 25 cents each. now, they were low wattage, but I think the markup on them today is still way overpriced. old-style regular filament light bulbs used a lot of heat, but I could buy a sleeve of 4 for 2.19, instead of 12 to 15 dollars for (1) similar LED bulb....the one thing you do save is with electrical-power usage costs

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

the only way to net a "double" is to reduce cost of goods.

The only way to tell is there are any gains is to measure cost of item/cost of operation during its lifetime.

if my business were a large business running several million bulbs across its entire industry (like Wal Mart would), and I have to choose between graphene and led, with graphene having zero improvement in efficiency but costing 8:95 instead of 12:95....

In a business i used to run we always talked about "the power of 1". Just one more dollar for each unit sold....creates an overall increase annually in the tens of thousands (if not more, depending on business). When i go to trim fat on our own expenses, i do it by saving $1000 here and $500 there. Mostly because there isn't any bigger pieces of fat left, but also because i only need to fix 15 things worth $1000 each to add $15000 to our bottom line for the year.

Put in another way that I commonly put it: its called "profit margins" for a reason. Marginal improvements are the key to getting you there.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
the only way to net a "double" is to reduce cost of goods.

The only way to tell is there are any gains is to measure cost of item/cost of operation during its lifetime.

if my business were a large business running several million bulbs across its entire industry (like Wal Mart would), and I have to choose between graphene and led, with graphene having zero improvement in efficiency but costing 8:95 instead of 12:95....

Agreed. Since we are the manufacturer of our own LEDs we are nearing a point where economy of scale is dictating, without a fundamental change in manufacturing, that we are approaching a point where costs reductions due to material and labor changes are reaching a point of diminishing returns.

In a business i used to run we always talked about "the power of 1". Just one more dollar for each unit sold....creates an overall increase annually in the tens of thousands (if not more, depending on business). When i go to trim fat on our own expenses, i do it by saving $1000 here and $500 there. Mostly because there isn't any bigger pieces of fat left, but also because i only need to fix 15 things worth $1000 each to add $15000 to our bottom line for the year.

Put in another way that I commonly put it: its called "profit margins" for a reason. Marginal improvements are the key to getting you there.

Same on our end. The graphene product will help in cost savings (without doing anything for efficiency), however to keep making our product more price competitive will require ever-newer upgrades that may or may not manifest based on the current platform's configuration.

originally posted by: MasterOfTheDamned
My question is how will its luminosity compare to the traditional light bulb. I quit paying attention to these new technologies after finding out the pathetic light put out by the compact fluorescent bulbs, which doesn't compare at all to their larger shop style counterparts. LED's are too expensive, and if you want an LED that puts out a natural looking light comparable to incandescent it will cost you, if you want one better than that it's simply unaffordable.

The higher color rendering LEDs (High CRI) are very close to incandescent bulbs and you would be hard pressed to tell the difference unless you were in the industry.

The major advantage is life-cycle. The new LEDs last 20-50,000 hours which easily offsets the price difference and the price continues to drop.

originally posted by: jimmyx

...but I could buy a sleeve of 4 for 2.19, instead of 12 to 15 dollars for (1) similar LED bulb....the one thing you do save is with electrical-power usage costs

We use a simple ROI calculator when end users bring us this very point.

Your incandescent is lucky to last 1,000 hours while the better LEDs will last 20-50 times that easily. Even at a midpoint, usage-wise, you are at nearly the same price and this is without factoring in the huge energy savings that LEDs provide over incandescent bulbs.

One of the most significant costs in LED lighting, and it would apply to graphene and CFL as well, is the number of independent power supplies and inverters that are duplicated and integrated into them. These are expensive, and involve a great deal of redundant power transistors, capacitors, resistors, diodes and inductors to be distributed in the runs of these lights, each independently converting AC to DC.

The best solution, is to have your home wired for low voltage DC. This is one main switching power supply that will supply the 5-12 volts with on-demand amperage, located next to the mains AC distribution in your house. This will be the future norm in newly built housing, but you can have it done, or do it yourself if you understand how to snake the wiring and put in receptacles in key places in the house. This is also a way to save even more electricity, as this method of providing power is much more efficient. It also completely eliminates the need for most wall-wart devices that are constantly on, and become an unsightly and unmanageable tangle of wires at your AC receptacles.

originally posted by: charlyv
The best solution, is to have your home wired for low voltage DC.

One of the better selling items we manufacture is the low voltage MR lighting typically used in track or can lights. When I get around to redoing my kitchen I cam converting all the cans and the drops to this system.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Did virtually the same thing for a bar area overhang, but did a DYI.
Wonder how much time I could have saved using your system. Interesting.

a reply to: charlyv

You probably saved yourself some money, we only manufacturer they LEDs, the low voltage part you would have to get elsewhere. What we do have though is a remote system that does not require dimmers, is completely programmable and can be retrofitted. I set my lights to look like someone is walking up and down the stair a couple times when we go out for the evening.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

That's different. I like it.

There is not an incandecent light in my house now. It is all LED and CFL. I am working on getting rid of the CFL areas now. I would love to look into this graphene or higher power LEDs, but in either case, the power will be centralized.

originally posted by: Aleister
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I want a grapheme flashlight the size of a needle or a small ring (and I want it now).

I have an LED flashlight the size of a key, so I don't see why it's not doable to do it in the size of a ring. Needle would be hard because it would have to be powered by a battery, which don't come that small yet.

I have to say, I love LED bulbs. Any incandescent that burns out at the house gets an LED replacement. The cost is low enough now that it's not an object.

I like the warm white LEDs color balance. I like that I can't see them flicker the way I can with CCFLs. A lot of them, even though they're "dimmable" aren't really, and that's the only thing. I have some overhead cans in the living room that I will eventually get on a big big ladder and replace (I have really high ceilings in there) and they HAVE to be smoothly dimmable. But I don't dim anywhere else, so if I can find some to go in there when I get around to it, I'll be more than happy to replace them one time in my lifetime and be done with it.

The only CCFLs I have now are in the outdoor spots, and if they get a good LED replacement out there, out they go.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Aliensun

It does not. Eneregy efficiency for our LED products average about 93-94%. How do you double that? At a certain point the gians are negilible.

Exactly my point. There are two ways to look at efficiency increase, and neither work well in that way.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

WOW, had to look up those high color rendering bulbs. They might be worth it if they can really do what they say but it's not going to be cheap to find out. $16 for a 60 watt equivalent, or $20 for 100 watt, I for one always go for the 100 watt too. I only use lights if I want to be able to see very well, I can see quite well in the dark without lights so I am more likely to turn off a light rather than turn it on. This has led to me being called a vampire but whatever.

originally posted by: Bedlam

The only CCFLs I have now are in the outdoor spots, and if they get a good LED replacement out there, out they go.

Look for Wet Location PAR lamps, our company manufactures them in several colors and outputs (along with a few others). I changed all my security and driveway lights over to the 50K version, they are very bright.

originally posted by: MasterOfTheDamned
WOW, had to look up those high color rendering bulbs. They might be worth it if they can really do what they say but it's not going to be cheap to find out. $16 for a 60 watt equivalent, or $20 for 100 watt, I for one always go for the 100 watt too. I only use lights if I want to be able to see very well, I can see quite well in the dark without lights so I am more likely to turn off a light rather than turn it on. This has led to me being called a vampire but whatever.

You can get them for less than that if you look for when some of the online distributors run specials.

originally posted by: Bedlam

I like the warm white LEDs color balance. I like that I can't see them flicker the way I can with CCFLs. A lot of them, even though they're "dimmable" aren't really, and that's the only thing. I have some overhead cans in the living room that I will eventually get on a big big ladder and replace (I have really high ceilings in there) and they HAVE to be smoothly dimmable. But I don't dim anywhere else, so if I can find some to go in there when I get around to it, I'll be more than happy to replace them one time in my lifetime and be done with it.

All LEDs are dimmable but the old standard simple phase shift type dimmers are not so suitable for them (messes up the internal inverter power supplies). A PWM type dimmer would do it very nicely coupled to LV DC LEDs. I've also had very satisfying results using a settable constant current source. Provided sufficient forward voltage is maintained I can get them down to 100 uA or so smoothly and flicker free with (barely) visible light emission.

For a single room where I wanted full range dimmable lighting I'd be installing 12V DC leds and knocking together a simple variable PWM based on a 555 timer driving a mosfet. However, being both lazy and too busy at the same time, if I want it dimmer I just turn lights off