Light bulb efficiencies compared - GIF

[mwmkravchenko]

My problem with the comparison is that it is an unfair comparison. OK, efficiency to me may mean something differently to others, but having spent two decades designing switching power supplies, I chased efficiency.

LEDs are nothing more than current to luminance converters.

Incandecents are basically resistors.

CFLs are voltage devices - ionizing is a potential function.

The converter for the CFL is not designed to function in this setup. There isn't enough storage capacitance in the circuit. That makes it look much worse. I don't have any love lost for CFLs - I dislike them extremely.

However, this setup had the incandesent at a similar intensity to the CFL.

BTW, incandecents make fantastic loads. I was testing a current sensing circuit and the best way I could test various loads was to use incandecents. I found a string of garden incandecents at 11w per bulb and I was able to reliably test down to 5 bulbs in series (11/5 w) as well as 40/60/75/100 as standard bulbs.

After I typed the capacitance line I looked a bit. I haven't examined a CFL inverter in years. It is indeed a tiny amount of capacitance. Not enough to smooth the incoming voltage.

Using incandescents for a load is still among the safest way to energise a item under test or even to act as a dummy load. For higher power an electric water heating element in water of course and for free air a n electric dryer heating element. Fairly low inductance for both too!