PUBLISHER'S LETTER
Publisher & Editor-in-Chief
Leo Simpson, B.Bus.
Editor
Greg Swain, B.Sc.(Hons.)
Technical Staff
John Clarke, B.E.(Elec.)
Robert Flynn
Darren Yates
Reader Services
Ann Jenkinson
Advertising Manager
Paul Buchtmann (02) 979 5644
Mobile: (018) 28 5532
Victorian Representative
Hugh Anderson Ply Ltd (formerly
McDonald Woodside & Associates
Ply Ltd), 119 Market St, South Melbourne, Vic 3205 . Phone (03) 696
5411. Contact: Ian McDonald.
Extolling the virtues of fluorescent lights
In this month's issue we are presenting a compact inverter for running
fluorescent lights from a 12V battery supply. There are three versions ,
catering for the very small fluoro tubes, up to those rated at 36W or 40W.
We think that they will be popular for people who want to use fluorescent
lights on boats, caravans and recreational vehicles, and on homes and
farms which are far from the mains supply.
The particular attraction of fluorescent lights in these applications is
that they are so highly energy efficient - much better than incandescent
lamps.
All of which begs the question as to why fluorescent lamps have fallen
so much out of favour as far domestic use is concerned. Why is it so? From
our viewpoint, it seems as though there has been a concerted campaign by
architects and interior decorators in home improvement magazines to
deprecate fluorescent lights. They have been criticised because they put
out a "harsh" light and have ugly fittings.
And it is true that most fluorescent tubes do have a bluish light which
gives a far from true colour rendition, compared to ordinary daylight. It is
also true that most fluorescent light tubes emit a small amount of ultraviolet light which is regarded as undesirable (although it is far less than
the amount of UV in daylight.
When it is all added up, fluorescent lights have had a "bad press". It is
about time they were put back into perspective. For a start, they are very
efficient - about 5 or 6 times more efficient than typical incandescent
lamps. They also last about 15 to 20 times longer than incandescents.
But the potential energy and money savings are even bigger when you
see the inefficient downlight fittings which are now advocated in kitchens
and family rooms. The lamps used in these fittings are not only expensive
but they tend to overheat and have a short life.
In fact, it is now not unusual to walk into a modern kitchen which may
have 600 to 700 watts of incandescent downlights on and yet still be
poorly lit - so much for the vagaries of fashion.
If you compare the cost of operating a twin 40W fluorescent light fitting
with an equivalent amount of incandescent lamps (say 400 watts, 15,000
hours, 8 cents per kWH), the potential cost saving is around $600 if you
include the cost of replacement incandescent lamps. Which means that
the current kitchen lighting fashions are pretty silly.
Leo Simpson
Regular Contributors
Brendan Akhurst
Jennifer Bonnitcha, B.A.
Garry Crall, VK2YBX
John Hill
Jim Lawler, MTETIA
Bryan Maher, M.E., B.Sc.
Jim Yalden, VK2YGY
Bob Young
Photography
Glen Cameron
Editorial Advisory Panel
Philip Watson, MIREE, VK2ZPW
Norman Marks
Steve Payor, B.Sc., B.E.
SILICON CHIP is published 12 times
a year by Silicon Chip Publications
Ply Ltd. All material copyright©. No
part of this publication may be reproduced without prior written consent of the publisher.
Printing: Magazine Printers Ply
Ltd, Rozelle, NSW 2039; Macquarie
Print, Dubbo, NSW 2830.
Distribution: Network Distribution
Company.
Subscription rates: $42 per year
in Australia. For overseas rates,
refer to the subscription page in
this issue.
Liability: Devices or circuits described in SILICON CH IP may be
covered by patents. SILICON CH IP
disclaims any liability for the infriflgement of such patents by the
manufacturing or selling of any such
equipment.
Editorial & advertising offices:
Unit 39, 5 Ponderosa Pde, Warriewood, NSW 2102. Postal address: PO Box 139, Collaroy Beach,
NSW 2097. Phone (02) 979 5644.
Fax (02) 979 6503.
ISSN 1030-2662
FEBRUARY1991
3
|