Keychain for rapid assessment of the ripple coefficient of energy-saving lamps
A small post about the idea that came to my mind after analyzing the existing possibilities for choosing a high-quality energy-saving lamp.
(Article updated)
')
As you can see, with the growing popularity of alternatives to the usual incandescent lamp, the question of choosing the most high-quality energy-saving lamp from the extensive range that dozens of manufacturers offer us today is becoming ever more acute. And if, in the case of well-known brands like Gauss, for example, one can still be sufficiently confident that the quality is strictly proportional to the price, in many other cases the situation is unknown. On the other hand, is it worth it to immediately pay tangible money for branded lamps? Maybe it is possible to choose a variant from a less well-known (and therefore offering a better price), but representing a brand of at least a quality product?
In response to emerging questions of this kind, hundreds of reviews began to appear and - like the apogee of the idea of ​​mass testing and evaluation - the lamptest.ru service (to which, despite the similarity of my nickname with the name of this service, I have nothing to do), has collected a huge amount of information about a variety of lamps. Both reviews and, of course, convenient lamptest parametric tables provide tangible assistance in choosing a decent lamp. However, reviews and tables have one fundamental philosophical flaw, expressed by the well-known aphorism that it is impossible to embrace the immensity. The range of lamps is much wider than the set that has already been tested, and to keep up with manufacturers who regularly offer something new is extremely difficult. And where is the one hundred percent guarantee that when buying (especially somewhere on eBay) a beautiful fake does not fall?
The described situation gives rise to the natural desire to find some method that would allow oneself and, best of all, directly on the spot to determine the quality of the lamp; at the same time, among the selection criteria, the greatest interest is caused by the ripple coefficient , which I wrote about in detail in my previous articles. Indeed, the power factor is generally not a consumer problem, the color temperature and color rendering index is quite sufficient to be estimated at the “like-dislike” level, and everything is durable with reliability and reliability. It remains the pulsation coefficient, which is impossible to estimate organoleptically (except for very indecent cases), but which, nevertheless, has a perceptible effect on the consumer quality of the lamp. The desire to evaluate it with the help of improvised means is obvious - I regularly meet the references to the “pencil test” in the comments and attempts to use a smartphone camera for the same purpose. Of course, the pencil test cannot be considered a reliable method at all, and the evaluation results for the second mentioned method should be treated with caution, since most cameras specifically apply algorithms for suppressing pulsations of illumination with a frequency of 50 or 60 Hz. Of course, there are professional devices designed specifically to measure the ripple factor, but their prices discourage the desire to buy them for episodic tests of lamps in use. By the way, about episodic tests - as I mentioned in previous articles, the degradation of energy-saving lamps is also reflected in an increase in the ripple ratio (due to degradation of electrolytic filtering capacitors), so periodically checking already installed lamps is a good idea.
I thought about the problem outlined for the time being and finally came to the conclusion that I could offer a solution. Today, I propose to Geektimes’s audience to discuss a device developed by me for rapid assessment of the pulsation coefficient, made in the key-ring form factor.
When developing it, I focused on minimal cost and ease of use. After pressing the button, the device enters the evaluation mode. It is enough to bring it to the switched on lamp, and if its ripple factor is less than 15% (approximately like that of an incandescent lamp or better), the green LED will light up; otherwise, red. Turns off the device automatically.
Such a key fob will not take up much space in your pocket and, if necessary, will replace unreliable tests, although giving an evaluative (yes / no), but an unequivocal result. One of the most obvious application scenarios, in my opinion, is the testing of lamps before buying them in chain stores, which give access to the product and the ability to test its performance and quality.
Currently ready engineering samples. Bringing them to the state of the device, ready for sale, depends entirely on the interest of the audience, in connection with which I would like to ask the readers' opinion on this matter.
PS
If you selected the first option in the survey, you may be interested to get one of the first five samples. They are fully functional, the only thing is, they have no corps yet - in this sense, the project is in the beta stage. On the issue of obtaining a free engineering sample, you can contact my colleague krdmitry .
UPD:
First of all, I would like to thank everyone who spoke in the survey below, comments and personal messages. There were a lot of constructive suggestions and interesting ideas. I have already begun to redesign the device based on the response received.
In addition, it seemed to us from krdmitry that it would be right to give an opportunity to express our opinion to those who for some reason cannot vote at Geektimes. To do this, we offer a survey based on Google Forms .
(Article updated)
')
As you can see, with the growing popularity of alternatives to the usual incandescent lamp, the question of choosing the most high-quality energy-saving lamp from the extensive range that dozens of manufacturers offer us today is becoming ever more acute. And if, in the case of well-known brands like Gauss, for example, one can still be sufficiently confident that the quality is strictly proportional to the price, in many other cases the situation is unknown. On the other hand, is it worth it to immediately pay tangible money for branded lamps? Maybe it is possible to choose a variant from a less well-known (and therefore offering a better price), but representing a brand of at least a quality product?
In response to emerging questions of this kind, hundreds of reviews began to appear and - like the apogee of the idea of ​​mass testing and evaluation - the lamptest.ru service (to which, despite the similarity of my nickname with the name of this service, I have nothing to do), has collected a huge amount of information about a variety of lamps. Both reviews and, of course, convenient lamptest parametric tables provide tangible assistance in choosing a decent lamp. However, reviews and tables have one fundamental philosophical flaw, expressed by the well-known aphorism that it is impossible to embrace the immensity. The range of lamps is much wider than the set that has already been tested, and to keep up with manufacturers who regularly offer something new is extremely difficult. And where is the one hundred percent guarantee that when buying (especially somewhere on eBay) a beautiful fake does not fall?
The described situation gives rise to the natural desire to find some method that would allow oneself and, best of all, directly on the spot to determine the quality of the lamp; at the same time, among the selection criteria, the greatest interest is caused by the ripple coefficient , which I wrote about in detail in my previous articles. Indeed, the power factor is generally not a consumer problem, the color temperature and color rendering index is quite sufficient to be estimated at the “like-dislike” level, and everything is durable with reliability and reliability. It remains the pulsation coefficient, which is impossible to estimate organoleptically (except for very indecent cases), but which, nevertheless, has a perceptible effect on the consumer quality of the lamp. The desire to evaluate it with the help of improvised means is obvious - I regularly meet the references to the “pencil test” in the comments and attempts to use a smartphone camera for the same purpose. Of course, the pencil test cannot be considered a reliable method at all, and the evaluation results for the second mentioned method should be treated with caution, since most cameras specifically apply algorithms for suppressing pulsations of illumination with a frequency of 50 or 60 Hz. Of course, there are professional devices designed specifically to measure the ripple factor, but their prices discourage the desire to buy them for episodic tests of lamps in use. By the way, about episodic tests - as I mentioned in previous articles, the degradation of energy-saving lamps is also reflected in an increase in the ripple ratio (due to degradation of electrolytic filtering capacitors), so periodically checking already installed lamps is a good idea.
I thought about the problem outlined for the time being and finally came to the conclusion that I could offer a solution. Today, I propose to Geektimes’s audience to discuss a device developed by me for rapid assessment of the pulsation coefficient, made in the key-ring form factor.
When developing it, I focused on minimal cost and ease of use. After pressing the button, the device enters the evaluation mode. It is enough to bring it to the switched on lamp, and if its ripple factor is less than 15% (approximately like that of an incandescent lamp or better), the green LED will light up; otherwise, red. Turns off the device automatically.
Such a key fob will not take up much space in your pocket and, if necessary, will replace unreliable tests, although giving an evaluative (yes / no), but an unequivocal result. One of the most obvious application scenarios, in my opinion, is the testing of lamps before buying them in chain stores, which give access to the product and the ability to test its performance and quality.
Currently ready engineering samples. Bringing them to the state of the device, ready for sale, depends entirely on the interest of the audience, in connection with which I would like to ask the readers' opinion on this matter.
PS
If you selected the first option in the survey, you may be interested to get one of the first five samples. They are fully functional, the only thing is, they have no corps yet - in this sense, the project is in the beta stage. On the issue of obtaining a free engineering sample, you can contact my colleague krdmitry .
UPD:
First of all, I would like to thank everyone who spoke in the survey below, comments and personal messages. There were a lot of constructive suggestions and interesting ideas. I have already begun to redesign the device based on the response received.
In addition, it seemed to us from krdmitry that it would be right to give an opportunity to express our opinion to those who for some reason cannot vote at Geektimes. To do this, we offer a survey based on Google Forms .
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/369313/
All Articles