Led's the future of lighting mc cullough

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

1

1

LEDs – The Future of Lighting?

February 14, 2008February 14, 2008February 14, 2008February 14, 2008

Jeff McCullough, LC

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

2

Today’s Topics

• Introduction

• LEDs “101”

– Along the way we will “bust” some myths

about LEDs

• DOE’s SSL Commercialization Strategy

– Lighting for Tomorrow® Design Competition

– ENERGY STAR® Criteria

– CALiPER® Program

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

2

3

“Solid State Lighting is the

most disruptive technology

to hit the lighting industry in

50 years…”

4

Site Electricity Consumption

Source: Building Technology Program Core Databook, August 2003. http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/frame.asp?p=tableview.asp&TableID=509&t=xls

U.S. Buildings Energy End-Use

Breakdown, 2001

Space Heating

10%

Lighting

30%

Water Heating

9%

Space Cooling

17%

Refrigeration

11%

Electronics

9%

Appliances

7%

Ventilation

4%

Computers

3%

Space Heating

27%

Lighting

21%Water Heating

14%

Space Cooling

12%

Refrigeration

8%

Computers

2%Ventilation

3%

Appliances

7%

Electronics

6%

Total Primary Energy (all fuels)

2390 TWh 37.6 quads

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

3

5

DOE Solid-State Lighting 5 Thrust – Total Program

Guiding technology advances from laboratory to marketplace

6

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Accelerated R&D for White Light SSL

Metal Halide

Pulse start

T-8 lampT-12 ES

Mono

OLED

T-12 fluorescent

Mono

LED

White Light SSL

Laboratory

Effic

acy (lu

mens p

er

watt

)

White Light SSL

Commercial

SSL Laboratory and Commercial Curves, revised May 2006

Year

Conventional Lighting

TechnologiesPotential Growth

for Conventional

Light Sources

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

4

7

White-Light LED Efficacy Targets

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

Year

Eff

ica

cy (

lm/W

)

Laboratory Projection- Cool WhiteCommercial Product Projection - Cool WhiteCommercial Product Projection- Warm WhiteLaboratoryForeign Competition- LaboratoryCommercial Product- Cool WhiteForeign Competition - Commercial Product, Cool WhiteCommercial Product, Warm WhiteForeign Competition - Commercial Product, Warm White

Note: Efficacy projections assume CRI=70 → 80, Color temperature = 5000-6000°K, 350ma drive current, and

lamp-level specification only (driver/luminaire not included), reasonable lamp life.

8

What’s an LED you ask?

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

5

9

How does an LED make Light?

10

LED Types

Courtesy: Lumileds

Indicator Illuminator

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

6

11

What do LEDs look like?

LED Devices

Cree XLamp Philips Lumileds K2 GE Lumination Vio

12


LED Packages or Light Engines

Osram OSTARLamina Titan

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

7

13


LED Drop-in Replacements

Mule Lighting Lighting Sciences Group Enlux

14


Integrated LED Systems

Lighting Services Inc LumeLEX Color Kinetics iW Blast

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

8

15

16

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

9

17

18

Top 5 Reasons not to own

BrightFeet™ Lighted Slippers

#5. They're not machine washable which means they will

never be cleaned during their useful life........ Ewuuuu!!!

#4. Do they come with parental controls to prevent your

children from using them as flashlights..... outside?

#3. Gee.... that's neeeat..... but do they keep your feet

warm?

#2. Do they come with a strap so that they can be warn on

your head for night reading?

…. and the #1 reason not to own BrightFeet Slippers:

Is it really a good idea to wake up your pet Doberman when all he can see are two "beadie" eyes staring him down???

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

10

19

Myth #1:

LEDs create no heat

20

Power Conversion for “White” Light Sources

Incandescent†

(60W)

Fluorescent†

(Typical linear CW)

Metal

Halide‡ LED

Visible Light 8 % 21 % 27 % 15-25 %

Infrared 73 % 37 % 17 % ~ 0 %

Ultraviolet 0 % 0 % 19 % 0 %

Total Radiant

Energy 81 % 58 % 63 % 15-25 %

Heat(Conduction +

Convection)

19 % 42 % 37 % 75-85 %

Total 100 % 100 % 100 % 100 %

† IESNA Lighting Handbook – 9th Ed.

‡ Osram Sylvania

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

11

21

Light Output vs. Junction Temperature (Tj)

22

Anatomy of an LED

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

12

23

Myth #2:

LEDs last 100,000

hours(or forever depending on whom you ask!)

24

Traditional Lamp Life Rating

• Lumen depreciation

vs. failure

• LED life definition

– L70 for general

illumination

• IESNA LM-80 test

procedure in process

Typical lamp mortality curve

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

13

25

Light Output over Time

Courtesy: LRC

26

Myth #3:

LEDs are “White Light”

Sources

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

14

27

28

The Visible Spectra

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

15

29

30

CIE 1931 x,y Diagram

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

16

31

Daylight Spectra

32

3000K Fluorescent Spectra

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

17

33

5000K Fluorescent Spectra

34

How do LEDs make white light?

Courtesy: Lumileds

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

18

35

Myth #4:

LEDs are more efficient

than Fluorescent

36

• “Nichia delivers 92 lm/W at 350 mA”Nov 2006

• “Philips Lumileds shatters 350 mA

performance records with 115 lm/W LED” Jan 2007 (R&D result)

• “Cree achieves 1000 lumens from a single

LED” [ 52 – 72 lm/W] Sep 7, 2007 (R&D result)

• “Seoul Semiconductor to launch 420

lumen LED next quarter” [52 lm/W]Sep 19, 2007

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

19

37

Interpreting Industry Announcements

• R&D result or commercial product?– “25/25” testing

– R&D to market typically 12-24 months

• What drive current is assumed?– High output devices are 350 mA to more than 1 Amp

– Lower current devices usually ~20 mA

• How much total luminous flux per device?

• Luminous efficacy in lumens per watt (lm/W) is

for LED device only, not including driver or

thermal effects

• Chip size varies– Makes apples to apples comparison difficult

38

Terms

Power Input iverBallast/Dr

BF x Lumens Lamp Rated Efficacy System fluor =

Power Input Lamp

Lumens Lamp Rated Efficacy Lamp =

Power Input iverBallast/Dr

Output Light LuminaireEfficacy Luminaire =

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

20

39

Candela Curve

0

50

100

1500

1020

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150160

170180

190200

210

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

310

320

330340

350100 W Incandescent

40

Candela Curve

0

50

100

1500

1020

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150160

170180

190200

210

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

310

320

330340

350100 W Incandescent

Z-LED P4

Luxeon Batwing

Luxeon Side Emitting

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

21

41

Luminaire Efficacy35 lm/W

42

LED energy efficiency is a function of:

LED device efficacy

Thermal management

Driver/power supply efficiencyLuminaire design

+

+

+

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

22

43

Efficiency & Quality Trade-offs

Color Temperature* Efficacy

Color Temperature* Efficacy

CRI* Efficacy

Heat Efficiency / Output

Heat Life / Durability

* Phosphor-converted LEDs

44

2007 SSL Competition

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

23

45

• Niche applications

– Undercabinet and in-cabinet

– Portable desk/task

– Outdoor porch, path, step

– Recessed downlights

• LED luminous efficacy – min requirements

– 40 lm/W for < 5000K

– 50 lm/W for 5000K +

2007 SSL Competition

46

• LR6 by LLF Inc

– 11 watts, 600 lumens, 54 lm/W

– 2700 K, 92 CRI

2007 Grand Prize Winner

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

24

47

• PLS Undercabinet by Finelite


– 3500 K, 71 CRI

Winner – Undercabinet

48

• PLS Task by Finelite


– 3500 K, 71 CRI

Winner – Portable desk/task

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

25

49

• Strata by Progress

Lighting

– 5 watts, 125 lumens

– 25 lm/W

– 3200 K, 70 CRI

Winner – Outdoor

50

Honorable Mention

• Wall sconces by

Justice Design Group

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

26

51

ENERGY STAR® v1.0

52

Activities to Date

• 1st Draft released December 20, 2006

• Stakeholder meeting February 8, 2007

• 2nd Draft released April 9, 2007

• Final Criteria released September 12, 2007

• ENERGY STAR Lighting Partner Meeting in

Phoenix February 25-27, 2008

• Effective date set for September 30, 2008

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

27

53

Scope

• Excludes OLEDs… for now

• Limits coverage to LED systems for “white light”

general illumination only

• Both commercial and residential

• Luminaire efficacy key metric

• Establish 2-category specification:

– Category A: prescriptive specifications for near-term

lighting applications

– Category B: performance specification for all

applications (long-term)

54

Compact Fluorescent Lighting in America:

Lessons Learned on the Way to Market

• Valuable lessons

– Be aggressive about dealing with technology failures that affect main benefit claims

– Know and admit technology limitations

– Don’t introduce inferior products; first impressions are long lasting

– Accurate incandescent equivalency on packaging is critical

– Manufacturers and energy-efficiency groups should coordinate to establish minimum performance requirements

• Use to avoid “CFL Part II”

• Apply to SSL commercialization path

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

28

55

Transitional Two-Category Approach

• Approach recognizes rapidly changing

technology

• Allows early participation of limited range of

SSL products for directional lighting

applications (Category A)

• At some point (~3 years), Category A will be

dropped entirely; Category B then becomes

basis of criteria

Lighting industry is learning the unique issues of

applying SSL to general illumination. Going slow

allows industry and DOE to learn, and adjust

56

Significant Standard and Test Procedure

Activity

• Photometric measurements (IESNA LM-79)– In final ballot

• Chromaticity (ANSI C78.377a)– In final committee Review/Approval cycle

• Lumen Depreciation (Life) (IESNA LM-80)– First draft under development

• Driver Standard (ANSI C82.XX1) – In first committee review

• Definitions (IESNA RP-16)– In second draft and currently in working group review

• UL “Outline of Investigation”

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

29

57

• Establish minimum luminaire efficacy

– Benchmark to fluorescent

• Consistent with current ENERGY STAR lighting

criteria

– Use IES recommendations wherever possible:

Handbook, RP-33-99, etc.

– Use ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1 Lighting sub-

committee consensus system efficacy for CFL

• 58.8 lm/W

• 50 lm/W (lower wattage applications and E* min.)

Category A: Overall Approach

58

Overall Requirements

• Luminaire

– CCTs: 8 nominal CCTs

– Color Spatial Uniformity: 4-step

– Color Maintenance: 7-step

– CRI: ≥ 75 for indoor, silent on outdoor

– Off-state Power prohibited

• Exception for integral controls, limited to 0.5W

– 3 Year Warranty

– Thermal Management

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

30

59ANSI C78.377A DRAFT 3.3 (Nov. 22, 2006)

60

CIE 1931 x,y Chromaticity Diagram - with existing ANSI, "proposed" SSL, LumiLeds' old

and new color bins for white light

2500 K

4000 K

5000 K

6000 K

7000 K

0.26

0.28

0.30

0.32

0.34

0.36

0.38

0.40

0.42

0.44

0.46

0.26 0.28 0.30 0.32 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.44 0.46 0.48 0.50

x

y

Planckian locus Illuminant AD65 Daylight LocusK K

Iso-CCT line: ±0.02 Duv

ANSI

"Proposed"

SSL

LumiLeds

New Bins

LL Old

Bins

Seoul

Seoul

OSRAM

Seoul

Seoul

Nichia

Cree

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

31

61

Overall Requirements (cont.)

• Modules/Arrays

– Lumen depreciation (L70)

• Residential Indoor ≥ 25,000 hours

• Residential Outdoor and all Commercial ≥ 35,000 hours

• Residential Outdoor Luminaires

– Attached to buildings and > 13 watts requires

photo-control

• Power Supplies

– Power Factor

• ≥ 0.7 Residential ≥ 0.9 Commercial

– ≥ 120 Hz Output Operating Frequency

62

Category A: Niche Applications

• Directed light applications

– Energy efficiency potential due to directional

light source

– minimize fixtures losses

• Source relatively close to illuminated

surface

• Relatively modest illuminance

requirements

• Current fixtures ≤ 60% fixture efficiency

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

32

63

1. Undercabinet Kitchen

2. Undercabinet Shelf-mounted Task

3. Portable Desk/Task

4. Recessed Downlights (Res./Com.)

5. Outdoor Wall-mounted Porch

6. Outdoor Step

7. Outdoor Pathway

Category A: Niche Applications

64

Assumptions for Establishing

Luminaire Efficacy

Niche Application

CFL

System

Efficacy

Typical

Fixture

Efficiency

Calculated

Luminaire

Efficacy

Under-cabinet Kitchen 58.8 40% 24

Under-cabinet Shelf-mounted Task 58.8 50% 29

Portable Task 58.8 50% 29

Recessed Downlight (residential) 58.8 60% 35

Recessed Downlight (commercial) 58.8 60% 35

Outdoor Wall-mounted Porch 58.8 40% 24

Outdoor Step 50 40% 20

Outdoor Pathway 50 50% 25

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

33

65

Under-cabinet Kitchen

• Minimum Light Output

– 125 lumens per lineal foot

• Zonal Lumen Density

– Min. 60% in 0-60° zone

– Min. 25% in 60-90° zone

• Luminaire Efficacy

– ≥ 24 lm/W

• CCTs limited to: 2700,

3000 and 3500K

Min. 60%

Min. 25%

Min. 60%Min. 60%

Min. 25%

66

Category A: Under-cabinet Lighting

Philips SSL Solutions

Osram

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

34

67

Under-cabinet Shelf Mounted Task


– 125 lumens per lineal foot


– Min. 60% in 0-60° zone

– Min. 25% in 60-90° zone


– ≥ 29 lm/W

• CCTs Limited to

– 2700K, 3000K, 3500K,

4000k, 4500K and 5000K

Min. 60%

Min. 25%

Min. 60%Min. 60%

Min. 25%

68

Portable Desk Task Lamps


– 200 lumens


– Minimum 85% of total

light output within 0-60°

zone


– ≥ 29 lm/W

• CCTs Limited to

– 2700K, 3000K, 3500K,

4000k, 4500K and 5000K

Min. 85%

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

35

69

Category A: Portable Desk/Task Lighting

Halley LED Desk Lamp6 Watt LED Desk Lamp

70

Recessed Downlights


– ≤ 4.5˝ Aperture 345 lm.

– > 4.5˝ Aperture 575 lm.


– Minimum 75% total light

output within 0-60° zone


– ≥ 35 lm/W

• Residential CCTs

limited to:

– 2700K, 3000K and 3500K

Min. 75%

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

36

71

Category A: Recessed Downlights

Prescolite

Renaissance

Progress

72

Outdoor Wall-mounted Porch


– 150 lumens




zone


– ≥ 24 lm/W

Min.85%

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

37

73

Category A: Outdoor Porch

“Lakeland” by Progress Lighting

74

Outdoor Step


– 50 lumens


– ≥ 20 lm/W

Min.85%

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

38

75

Category A: Outdoor Step

76

Outdoor Pathway


– 100 lumens (initial)




zone


– ≥ 25 lm/W

Minimum 85%

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

39

77

Category A: Outdoor Pathway

78

Category B: Efficacy Based

Performance

• Aggressive efficacy requirement: 70 lm/W

• Simpler; no total flux or zonal lumen

requirements

• Allows for non-directional lighting applications

• Manufacturers able to qualify under Category

B approximately three (3) years after the

effective date

• Serves as future target for manufacturers

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

40

79

In Situ Testing Requirement

• Life (lumen depreciation) determined by in situ temperature measurements of:– Module, Array or “Light Engine”

– Power Supply/Driver

• Testing may be conducted at the same time as UL 1598.

80

UL 1598 Environments

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

41

81

Temperature Measurement Point (TMP)

• Manufacturer designated TMP correlating

to LM-80 test report or power supply

warranty

– Module/Array

• Case Temperature Tc

• Board Temperature Tb

– Power Supply

• Case Temperature Tc

• Could also be Tb for integral Power Supplies

82

Lumen Depreciation Qualification

• Option 1: Component Performance

– Applicable if:

• Module/Array has a current LM-80 test report

• Module/Array has a designated TMP

• TMP is accessible for in situ measurement

– Otherwise manufacturer must use Option 2

• Option 2: Luminaire Performance

– Entire luminaire subjected to LM-80

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

42

83

Lumen Depreciation Passing Criteria

A luminaire passes if the L70 threshold (≥ 25,000

hours for indoor residential and ≥ 35,000 for all

others) …

– if the in situ measured drive current is the same or

lower

AND

– if the in situ measured TMP for the module/array is

the same or lower

… than the LM-80 test report provided for the

module/array.

84

Sample LM-80 Test Report

Courtesy of LRC

L70

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

43

85

Quality Assurance Testing

• Products selected both on a random basis and

through a product nomination process.

• (3) samples of each luminaire purchased

through normal market channels.

• Products tested for:

– Total Luminous Flux

– Luminaire Efficacy

– Correlated Color Temperature

– Color Rendering Index

– Steady State Module/Array Temperature

– Maximum Power Supply Case/TMP Temperature

86

Commercially Available LED

Product Evaluation and

Reporting (CALiPER)

Program

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

44

87

Purposes of CALiPER

• Provide objective, high quality performance information

• Know performance of market available products

– To support R & D planning

– To support ENERGY STAR

• Inform industry test procedures and

standards development

• Discourage low quality products

• Reduce SSL market risk due to buyer

dissatisfaction from products that

do not perform as claimed

88

Testing Program Scope

Commercially-available

SSL products for the

general illumination market• Luminaires and replacement

lamps (white light)

• Indoor and outdoor

• Residential and commercial

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

45

89

SSL Luminaire Testing

• Must measure luminaire as a complete system

• Uses ‘absolute photometry’ rather than ‘relative photometry’

• Based on IESNA draftstandard LM-79

– Photometric testing methods under development

• Stakeholders are not all familiar with these new testing paradigms

SSL energy efficiency is a

function of:

LED device

efficacy

Thermal

management

Driver/power

supply efficiency

Luminaire

design

+

+ +

90

Testing Program Quarterly Process

• Product selection & acquisition

• Multiple independent test labs

• Assembly and analysis of results– Courtesy sharing of results with

manufacturers

– Retesting options

• Publication of results– Summary reports

– Detailed test reports

– Analyses and studies

• “No Commercial Use” Policy

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

46

91

Testing Rounds 1-4 Results

• 70+ products tested

• Focus: overall

luminaire

performance

• Wide range in

products & results

92

SSL Downlight Performance

– Different sizes and

configurations

– Different color

temperatures

– Outputs

• From 29 to 719 lumens

• 389 lumens on

average

– Efficacies

• From 11 to 61 lm/W

• 28 lm/W on average

– CRI

• Maximum = 95

• Average = 76

• 3 RGB products

Range of Output and CCT of SSL Downlight Products

0

200

400

600

800

2” ø

- 3W

4” ø

- 6W

6” ø

- 9W

R30

- 9W

R30

- 9W

6” ø

- 11

W

6” ø

- 12

W

R30

- 14

W

6” ø

- 15

W

7.5"

x7.5

" - 1

6W

R30

- 16

W

PAR

30 -

17W

7"x7

" - 1

5W

6” ø

- 31

W

Track

- 40

W

Ou

tpu

t (L

um

en

s)

Correlated Color

Temperature (CCT)

2650-3000K

3200-3500K

4000-4500K

5900-8000K

Tunable

Range of Efficacy of SSL Downlight Products

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2” ø

- 3W

4” ø

- 6W

6” ø

- 9W

R30

- 9W

R30

- 9W

6” ø

- 11

W

6” ø

- 12

W

R30

- 14

W

6” ø

- 15

W

7.5"

x7.5

" - 1

6W

R30

- 16

W

PAR

30 -

17W

7"x7

" - 1

5W

6” ø

- 31

W

Track

- 40

W

Eff

ica

cy

(lu

me

ns

/W)

Best = 61 lm/W

Worst = 11 lm/W

Average = 28 lm/W

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

47

93

Downlight Benchmarking

--Values for SSL downlight products are from CALiPER testing.

--Values for CFL and incandescents are assembled from CALiPER testing, earlier photometric testing and product catalogs.

--Fixture efficiencies are applied to replacement lamp values (factor depends on lamp type).

Downlight Comparison:

Luminaire Output vs Efficacy for Different Sources

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 20 40 60 80

Efficacy (Lumens/Watts)

Lig

ht

Ou

tpu

t (l

um

en

s) SSL Downlight Fixtures and

Retrofits, 3-40W

SSL R30 Replacement Lamps, 9-

17W

Downlights with Incandescent BR

and A-lamps, 45-75W

Downlights with Halogen PAR38

(FL and IR) Lamps, 50-60W

Downlights with CFLs (spiral, pin, &

reflector), 9-21W

Incandescents & Halogens

CFL SSL

94

Round 4 Replacement Lamps

Replacement Lamps Power Output Efficacy CCT CRI

SSL T8 07-56 25 1058 42 3494 75

SSL MR16, CBCP=283 07-53 3 82 27 3007 74

SSL MR16, CBCP=220 07-59 9 133 16 3338 89

SSL MR16, CBCP=59 07-64 3 75 26 3458 74

SSL Candelabra 07-57 2.2 28 13 2855 71

• T8: Look for direct comparisons with fluorescents in troffers in Round 5

– Respectable performance (42 lm/W), but misleading manufacturer literature

• MR16: not quite competing with 20W Halogen MR16 Flood (40° beam angle)

– ↑↑↑↑ Efficacy: SSL-MR16 @ 16-27 lm/W > 20W Halogen flood @ 9-19 lm/W

– ↓↓↓↓ Output: SSL-MR16 @ 75-133 lm < 20W Halogen flood @ 200-450 lm

– ↓↓↓↓ CBCP: SSL-MR16 @ 59-283 cd << 20W Halogen flood @ ~500 cd

• Candelabra: Low wattage level, advantage or disadvantage?

– No comparably small wattage incandescent products

– CFL 5W candelabra rated at 200 lm (40 lm/W), Halogen 25W rated at 280 lm (11 lm/W)

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

48

95

Task lamps tested• 6 SSL

undercabinets, 11 SSL desk lamps

• 3 fluorescent tube undercabinets, 2 CFL desk lamps

• 1 halogen desk lamp

SSL undercabinets• Perform as well or

better than fluorescent undercabinets

SSL desk lamps• One SSL desk lamp

rivals CFL energy star desk lamp

• Off-state power use ranges from 0 W to 2.6 W, reducing efficacy

SSL Task Lamp Performance

SSL Undercabinets

SSL Desk Lamps

Fluorescent Undercabinets

CFL Desk Lamps

Halogen Desk Lamps

SSL Task Lights

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Measured

Luminaire

Efficacy

Effective

Efficacy

3 hours on/day

EF

FIC

AC

Y (

lm/W

)

CFL & Halogen Task Lights

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Measured

Luminaire

Efficacy

Effective

Efficacy

3 hours on/day

EF

FIC

AC

Y (

lm/W

)

96

Round 4 Direct Comparisons

Same Recessed Wall Fixture, Different Sources

Halogen (20W) CFL (13W) LED (12W)

Luminaire Output (lm) 174 199 154

Luminaire Efficacy (lm/W) 8 16 10

CCT 3085 3956 5166

CRI 98 77 73

Power Factor 0.99 0.97 0.97

Manufacturer Published Values

Recessed Wall

Fixture

Manufacturer

Brochure Output

“Lumens”

Efficacy Calculated

from Manufacturer

IES files

(lumens/W)

CALiPER Measured

Luminaire Efficacy

(lumens/W)

Halogen (20W) 350 8 8

CFL (13W) 900 19 16

LED (12W) 195 5 10

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

49

97

Rounds 1-4 Key Conclusions

• Results include a wide range of products with a wide range of performance. – Be careful not to generalize.

• Product literature not always consistent, not always reliable– Be informed. Request luminaire testing results.

Round 1-4 products designed from 2005-2007, showing some

now clearly rival traditional sources

Great promise for upcoming

generation of SSL luminaires

98

More Info on CALiPER

• Via website

– Summary reports

– Detailed reports

• Must be requested via web

form

• Requestor’s contact information

must be provided

• Must agree to adhere to ‘No

Commercial Use Policy’

http://www.netl.doe.gov/ssl/comm_testing.htm

PNNL-SA-58822

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

50

99

Questions YOU Should Ask if you are

considering LED Lighting

• Show me the lumens!

• Ask for test reports (LM-79, LM-80, etc.)

• Is blue is the new white?

• Ask how they manage heat

• Is your product ENERGY STAR® labeled?

• You want how much for that thing?

100

DOE Solid-State Lighting Website

• Current information on SSL program,

progress, and events

• SSL publications:

roadmaps, reports,

technical fact sheets

• Solicitations

• Register for ongoing SSL UPDATES at: www.netl.doe.gov/ssl

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

51

101

DOE

Fact

Sheets

102

Fact Sheets

• Application series:

– Recessed

– Undercabinet

– Portable desk/task

• Luminaire efficacy

• SSL Standards

• What other topics

would you like to

see?

Kelly Gordon

PNNL

January 17, 2006

52

103

Questions?

DOE SSL Website: www.netl.doe.gov/ssl/

Jeff McCullough

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

(509) 375-6317

[email protected]

Business

Led's the future of lighting mc cullough