最有效的表现者:led灯具的质量权衡

N. Miller
{"title":"最有效的表现者:led灯具的质量权衡","authors":"N. Miller","doi":"10.25039/X46.2019.PO139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 2017, several luminaires in the LED Lighting Facts database claimed efficacies between 144 and 210 lm/W. Samples were procured for testing and visual evaluation. Seven luminaire models were ordered, all but one having directly visible LED packages. They underwent photometric testing for comparison to manufacturer-claimed values. All but one performed between 150 and 200 lm/W. Pairs of each type were mocked-up in a lighting laboratory. Direct measurements of the exposed LEDs revealed luminances ranging from 626.000 to 1.150.000 cd/m, with one employing diffusers at 41.500 cd/m. 23 lighting-experienced observers evaluated the luminaires, providing comments and an overall perceived dollar value. Only two luminaires received positive ratings of visual comfort and overall quality, those with either diffusers or reflector optics to reduce direct view of bare LEDs. The three rated highest for monetary value received positive comments in light distribu tion, colour, and visual comfort; the three lowest rated received the most negative glare comments. The highest rated luminaire exhibited the lowest efficacy of 136 lm/W, suggesting that visual comfort, light distribution, and colour quality may be of equal or greater importance to an installation.","PeriodicalId":121032,"journal":{"name":"PROCEEDINGS OF the 29th Quadrennial Session of the CIE","volume":"121 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"TOP EFFICACY PERFORMERS: THE QUALITY TRADEOFFS IN LED LUMINAIRES\",\"authors\":\"N. Miller\",\"doi\":\"10.25039/X46.2019.PO139\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In 2017, several luminaires in the LED Lighting Facts database claimed efficacies between 144 and 210 lm/W. Samples were procured for testing and visual evaluation. Seven luminaire models were ordered, all but one having directly visible LED packages. They underwent photometric testing for comparison to manufacturer-claimed values. All but one performed between 150 and 200 lm/W. Pairs of each type were mocked-up in a lighting laboratory. Direct measurements of the exposed LEDs revealed luminances ranging from 626.000 to 1.150.000 cd/m, with one employing diffusers at 41.500 cd/m. 23 lighting-experienced observers evaluated the luminaires, providing comments and an overall perceived dollar value. Only two luminaires received positive ratings of visual comfort and overall quality, those with either diffusers or reflector optics to reduce direct view of bare LEDs. The three rated highest for monetary value received positive comments in light distribu tion, colour, and visual comfort; the three lowest rated received the most negative glare comments. The highest rated luminaire exhibited the lowest efficacy of 136 lm/W, suggesting that visual comfort, light distribution, and colour quality may be of equal or greater importance to an installation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":121032,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PROCEEDINGS OF the 29th Quadrennial Session of the CIE\",\"volume\":\"121 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PROCEEDINGS OF the 29th Quadrennial Session of the CIE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25039/X46.2019.PO139\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PROCEEDINGS OF the 29th Quadrennial Session of the CIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25039/X46.2019.PO139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2017年,LED照明事实数据库中的几种灯具声称效率在144到210 lm/W之间。采集样本进行检测和目视评价。订购了七种型号的灯具,除了一种外,其余都有直接可见的LED封装。他们进行了光度测试,以与制造商声称的值进行比较。除了一家外,其他所有公司的性能都在150至200 lm/W之间。每种类型的灯都在照明实验室里做了成对的模型。直接测量暴露的led显示的亮度范围从62.6万至1.15万cd/m,其中一个采用扩散器在41.5万cd/m。23名经验丰富的照明观察员对灯具进行了评估,提供了评论和总体感知价值。只有两种灯具在视觉舒适度和整体质量方面获得了好评,它们要么是带有漫射器的,要么是带有反射器的,以减少裸露led的直接视野。在经济价值方面得分最高的三家酒店在光线分布、色彩和视觉舒适度方面得到了积极的评价;评分最低的三个人收到了最多的负面评论。最高评级的灯具表现出最低的效率为136 lm/W,这表明视觉舒适,光分布和色彩质量可能与安装同等或更重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
TOP EFFICACY PERFORMERS: THE QUALITY TRADEOFFS IN LED LUMINAIRES
In 2017, several luminaires in the LED Lighting Facts database claimed efficacies between 144 and 210 lm/W. Samples were procured for testing and visual evaluation. Seven luminaire models were ordered, all but one having directly visible LED packages. They underwent photometric testing for comparison to manufacturer-claimed values. All but one performed between 150 and 200 lm/W. Pairs of each type were mocked-up in a lighting laboratory. Direct measurements of the exposed LEDs revealed luminances ranging from 626.000 to 1.150.000 cd/m, with one employing diffusers at 41.500 cd/m. 23 lighting-experienced observers evaluated the luminaires, providing comments and an overall perceived dollar value. Only two luminaires received positive ratings of visual comfort and overall quality, those with either diffusers or reflector optics to reduce direct view of bare LEDs. The three rated highest for monetary value received positive comments in light distribu tion, colour, and visual comfort; the three lowest rated received the most negative glare comments. The highest rated luminaire exhibited the lowest efficacy of 136 lm/W, suggesting that visual comfort, light distribution, and colour quality may be of equal or greater importance to an installation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信