|
Home > Archive > Home Repair forum > July 2005 > Using 100 watt bulb in 60 watt lamp
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Using 100 watt bulb in 60 watt lamp
|
|
| tenplay 2005-07-24, 9:10 pm |
| As I get older, I am needing more light to read and tasks. I have a
couple of lamps that are rated at 60 watts. Is there any harm in using
higher wattage bulbs to increase the illumination? Thanks.
| |
| Paul Franklin 2005-07-24, 9:10 pm |
| On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 11:11:30 -0700, tenplay <tenplay@mail.com> wrote:
>As I get older, I am needing more light to read and tasks. I have a
>couple of lamps that are rated at 60 watts. Is there any harm in using
>higher wattage bulbs to increase the illumination? Thanks.
Yes, often they will overheat. A 100 bulb puts out a lot more heat.
This can melt plastic parts, or even damage the bulb socket and
wiring.
What you can do is replace with a compact flourescent. A 60 watt CF
gives out as much or more light than a 100 watt incandescent but runs
cooler. They are available in shapes that will screw into a standard
lamp socket.
HTH,
Paul
| |
| udarrell 2005-07-24, 9:10 pm |
| tenplay wrote:
> As I get older, I am needing more light to read and tasks. I have a
> couple of lamps that are rated at 60 watts. Is there any harm in
> using higher wattage bulbs to increase the illumination? Thanks.
100 watt bulb produces a lot more heat than a 60 watt bulb and cold
cause a dangerous fire situation! - udarrell
--
Optimizing Air-Conditioner Efficiency
http://www.udarrell.com/air-conditi...rator-coil.html
| |
|
| On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 13:21:56 -0500, udarrell wrote:
> 100 watt bulb produces a lot more heat than a 60 watt bulb and cold
> cause a dangerous fire situation! - udarrell
It cold? Oh my!
--
If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Linux Registered User #327951
| |
|
| On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 11:11:30 -0700, tenplay wrote:
> As I get older, I am needing more light to read and tasks. I have a
> couple of lamps that are rated at 60 watts. Is there any harm in using
> higher wattage bulbs to increase the illumination? Thanks.
What would you *think* the answer to this question would be? Why do you
think the manufacturers bother to put ratings and warnings on things?
Were you born this dumb?
--
If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Linux Registered User #327951
| |
|
| >What would you *think* the answer to this question would be? Why do you
think the manufacturers bother to put ratings and warnings on things?
My personal opinion is that it has more to do with liability than safety. In
the electrical and lighting industry the materials used over the last forty
or so years have improved greatly yet in the case of the lighting industry
the allowable wattage keeps decreasing. It's routine for a lighting fixture
to have a warning not to connect it to wiring rated at less than 90 degrees,
like your going to rewire eighty percent of the houses that want to install
fixtures in them. I don't think so. I'm sure a good portion of these ratings
is just to pass the liability on to you the installer or the consumer
"Dan C" <youmustbejoking@invalid.lan> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.07.23.18.32.50.985081@invalid.lan...
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 11:11:30 -0700, tenplay wrote:
>
>
> What would you *think* the answer to this question would be? Why do you
> think the manufacturers bother to put ratings and warnings on things?
>
> Were you born this dumb?
>
> --
> If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
> Linux Registered User #327951
>
| |
| Doug Miller 2005-07-24, 9:10 pm |
| In article <lwwEe.6953$El3.1757@fe10.lga>, "RBM" <rbm2(remove this)@optonline.net> wrote:
>think the manufacturers bother to put ratings and warnings on things?
>
>My personal opinion is that it has more to do with liability than safety.
[snip]
> I'm sure a good portion of these ratings
>is just to pass the liability on to you the installer or the consumer
Your personal opinion, however, is incorrect. It has everything to do with
safety. I've had the misfortune of needing to replace numerous light fixtures
that previous homeowners used 100W bulbs in, despite the clear warnings
"Danger risk of fire use 60W max". The excessive heat of the 100W bulbs has,
in every case, severely damaged the fixture wires, causing the insulation to
harden, crack, and fall off.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
| |
|
| Doug, I've seen that many times myself. There are certainly types of
fixtures that mount close to ceilings that produce a lot of heat and are
fire hazards, however I still believe that a lot of these ratings are more
for liability than safety
"Doug Miller" <spambait@milmac.com> wrote in message
news:5HwEe.5626$IG2.5416@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
> In article <lwwEe.6953$El3.1757@fe10.lga>, "RBM" <rbm2(remove
> this)@optonline.net> wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Your personal opinion, however, is incorrect. It has everything to do with
> safety. I've had the misfortune of needing to replace numerous light
> fixtures
> that previous homeowners used 100W bulbs in, despite the clear warnings
> "Danger risk of fire use 60W max". The excessive heat of the 100W bulbs
> has,
> in every case, severely damaged the fixture wires, causing the insulation
> to
> harden, crack, and fall off.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
>
> It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
| |
| Joseph Meehan 2005-07-24, 9:10 pm |
| RBM wrote:
> Doug, I've seen that many times myself. There are certainly types of
> fixtures that mount close to ceilings that produce a lot of heat and
> are fire hazards, however I still believe that a lot of these ratings
> are more for liability than safety
So do you suggest the homeowner take the chance? Maybe it will not
burn you home down.
[color=darkred]
> "Doug Miller" <spambait@milmac.com> wrote in message
> news:5HwEe.5626$IG2.5416@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
--
Joseph Meehan
Dia duit
| |
| Doug Miller 2005-07-24, 9:10 pm |
| In article <WQwEe.6955$El3.6112@fe10.lga>, "RBM" <rbm2(remove this)@optonline.net> wrote:
>Doug, I've seen that many times myself. There are certainly types of
>fixtures that mount close to ceilings that produce a lot of heat and are
>fire hazards,
No, it's not the fixture that's a fire hazard. The hazard is in using bulbs
that are too hot for the fixture. That's why limits are posted.
>however I still believe that a lot of these ratings are more
>for liability than safety
Believe what you wish. The fact remains that, when installed correctly and
used with bulbs that do not exceed their rating, fixtures of any type are safe
- and the use of bulbs that do exceed the rating can be dangerous.
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
| |
|
| Yikes Joseph, no I'm not suggesting anyone do anything stupid. I think
common sense has to be applied to his situation and I'm not trying to
evaluate his fixture from where I sit. I base my opinion on what I've seen
in the lighting and electrical industry first hand over the last thirty five
years. Just MY opinion !!!
"Joseph Meehan" <sligojoe_Spamno@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5VwEe.37170$zY4.10101@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
> RBM wrote:
>
> So do you suggest the homeowner take the chance? Maybe it will not
> burn you home down.
>
>
> --
> Joseph Meehan
>
> Dia duit
>
| |
|
| I wish I had a digital camera a few years ago so I could show you the fire
damage done by two ceiling mounted halogen fixtures that were installed
properly using the correct size lamps. Some fixtures are just dangerous and
the more liability the manufacturer can dump on someone else the more they
will.
"Doug Miller" <spambait@milmac.com> wrote in message
news:E3xEe.5632$IG2.2351@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
> In article <WQwEe.6955$El3.6112@fe10.lga>, "RBM" <rbm2(remove
> this)@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> No, it's not the fixture that's a fire hazard. The hazard is in using
> bulbs
> that are too hot for the fixture. That's why limits are posted.
>
>
> Believe what you wish. The fact remains that, when installed correctly and
> used with bulbs that do not exceed their rating, fixtures of any type are
> safe
> - and the use of bulbs that do exceed the rating can be dangerous.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
>
> It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
| |
| deans@wdeans.com 2005-07-24, 9:10 pm |
| Greetings,
As a consumer I am very happy that manufactures have found ways to dump
liability on me. If you actually look at what people purchase, most
every American would agree with me. I only regret that I cannot
purchase a product "as-is".
I know that no matter how hard a manufacturer tries eventually their
products will result in death and the manufacturer will be forced to
pay out millions which comes out of the consumer's pocket. Just look
at the dangers posed by dihydrogen oxide. As you have undoubtedly
read, dihydrogen oxide has been found to be a major threat to the
environment and to human and animal health. Here are the facts:
In 1991, the most recent year for which statistics are available, 4,100
Americans- many of them under the age of 10- died from excessive
dosages of dihydrogen oxide commonly found in many homes and recreation
sites. Our polluted lakes, rivers and oceans are known to contain vast
quantities of dihydrogen oxide. On this, there is no controversy!
Contaminated ground water? Same tragic situation. In California,
Missouri and Georgia families have lost their homes to dihydrogen oxide
contamination. In some applications, dihydrogen oxide is a major
contributor to injuries from falls. In other applications dihydrogen
oxide is a major cause of burns.
Why does America endure this wasteful destruction of our planet, our
children and ourselves? Greed. Simple greed and stupidity. (according
to some) According to me, with my unpopular belief in better living
through modern chemistry, dihydrogen oxide is about the best thing we
have going.
Hope this helps,
William
http://www.magicsoil.com/DiHy/DiHydrogen%20Oxide.htm
| |
|
| not advisable you can get a compact fluorescent that will put out more
light for less watts. A more important thing to look at is where is
the light going? The light for reading should be coming in over your
shoulder to avoid shadows for working on a workbench overhead is OK but
will create shadows 2 lights at the end along with an overhead light
will work best? It is not the wattage you need to look at but the
lumens and the type of lamp or enclosure any lamp or fixture with a
reflector will provide more light to a specific place. A good example
is car headlights most are 55 watts but they vary in brightness
depending on how well designed the housing and reflector are made.
Wayne
tenplay wrote:
> As I get older, I am needing more light to read and tasks. I have a
> couple of lamps that are rated at 60 watts. Is there any harm in
> using higher wattage bulbs to increase the illumination? Thanks.
| |
| George E. Cawthon 2005-07-24, 9:11 pm |
| tenplay wrote:
> As I get older, I am needing more light to read and tasks. I have a
> couple of lamps that are rated at 60 watts. Is there any harm in using
> higher wattage bulbs to increase the illumination? Thanks.
You are getting a bunch of BS answers. First, you
can use the maximum size stated on the fixture,
but don't use a bigger bulb. Some fixture don't
say anything but you can test it by putting your
hand on the shade which can get warm but not hot
unless it is metal. The real solution may be move
the fixture closer or buy new fixtures that use
larger or multiple bulbs, use fixture that are
shorter so the bulb is closer to the work area, or
buy fixtures that allow moving the bulb such as
a parallel extension light.
| |
| Joseph Meehan 2005-07-24, 9:11 pm |
| RBM wrote:
> Yikes Joseph, no I'm not suggesting anyone do anything stupid. I think
> common sense has to be applied to his situation and I'm not trying to
> evaluate his fixture from where I sit. I base my opinion on what I've
> seen in the lighting and electrical industry first hand over the last
> thirty five years. Just MY opinion !!!
But do you think very may people have the ability to make that
evaluation? I am sure you have seem some of the stuff people think is OK.
It is best to stick with the rules here.
PS: I know you did not suggest they ignore the problem, but I am sure
many people reading it would take it that it is fine to ignore the sticker.
[color=darkred]
>
>
> "Joseph Meehan" <sligojoe_Spamno@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:5VwEe.37170$zY4.10101@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
--
Joseph Meehan
Dia duit
| |
|
|
"Dan C" <youmustbejoking@invalid.lan> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.07.23.18.31.18.554589@invalid.lan...
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 13:21:56 -0500, udarrell wrote:
>
>
> It cold? Oh my!
spelling flames are lame, especially when you make them in follow-up post's.
| |
| anoldfart2@invalid.com 2005-07-24, 9:11 pm |
| On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 11:11:30 -0700, tenplay <tenplay@mail.com> wrote:
>As I get older, I am needing more light to read and tasks. I have a
>couple of lamps that are rated at 60 watts. Is there any harm in using
>higher wattage bulbs to increase the illumination? Thanks.
Just be sure you got good fire insurance.
| |
|
| Wayne, can you repost that with proper punctuation so we can figure
out what your probably interesting information is? Your third
sentence is especially problematic. It seems to need a period in
there somewhere. Please provide it and repost. Thanks.
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 18:36:17 -0500, "wayne" <nope@nowhere.com> wrote:
[color=darkred]
>not advisable you can get a compact fluorescent that will put out more
>light for less watts. A more important thing to look at is where is
>the light going? The light for reading should be coming in over your
>shoulder to avoid shadows for working on a workbench overhead is OK but
>will create shadows 2 lights at the end along with an overhead light
>will work best? It is not the wattage you need to look at but the
>lumens and the type of lamp or enclosure any lamp or fixture with a
>reflector will provide more light to a specific place. A good example
>is car headlights most are 55 watts but they vary in brightness
>depending on how well designed the housing and reflector are made.
>
>Wayne
>
>tenplay wrote:
>
| |
| Chip C 2005-07-24, 9:11 pm |
|
Paul Franklin wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 11:11:30 -0700, tenplay <tenplay@mail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Yes, often they will overheat. A 100 bulb puts out a lot more heat.
> This can melt plastic parts, or even damage the bulb socket and
> wiring.
>
> What you can do is replace with a compact flourescent. A 60 watt CF
> gives out as much or more light than a 100 watt incandescent but runs
> cooler. They are available in shapes that will screw into a standard
> lamp socket.
>
> HTH,
>
> Paul
I second the advice, but I differ on the math; around here it's the 23W
CFs that are rated as equivalent to 100W incandescents. If one fits in
the lamp (the 23s are not the smallest) and the lamp isn't on a dimmer
switch or something, you should find that works fine and runs cooler
than the 40.
I use a 23W CF in my shop light. Nice bright light, stays cool in close
quarters and it'll even survive a bit of a bump. Great minds must think
alike, it's one of the bright reader ideas in this month's Fine
Homebuilding.
Chip C
| |
| Don Wiss 2005-07-24, 9:11 pm |
| On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 11:11:30 -0700, tenplay <tenplay@mail.com> wrote:
>As I get older, I am needing more light to read and tasks. I have a
>couple of lamps that are rated at 60 watts. Is there any harm in using
>higher wattage bulbs to increase the illumination? Thanks.
In addition to the possible harm to yourself and your environment, as
pointed out by others, it would most likely shorten the bulb life. If the
bulb can't dissipated the heat its life will be shortened.
Don <www.donwiss.com> (e-mail link at home page bottom).
| |
| San Francisco 2005-07-24, 9:11 pm |
| >"tenplay" <tenplay@mail.com> wrote
> As I get older, I am needing more light to read and tasks. I have a
> couple of lamps that are rated at 60 watts. Is there any harm in using
> higher wattage bulbs to increase the illumination? Thanks.
no harm at all, as long as you don't mind an occasional HOUSE FIRE!
| |
| wjohnston@adelphia.net 2005-07-24, 9:11 pm |
| a reading lamp for your fine print is 250 watts incandescent. try to
use the twist compact flourescents which put out about four times their
input wattage of light. reading your computer online version of the
local newspaper or favorite magazines is easiest when you change the
computer's VIEW - TEXT SIZE to what's comfortable for you, as well as
the focal distance from the eye to the monitor. time for LASIK followed
by some dollar store reading glasses...
| |
| Don Klipstein 2005-07-25, 1:21 pm |
| In article <lwwEe.6953$El3.1757@fe10.lga>, RBM wrote:
>think the manufacturers bother to put ratings and warnings on things?
>
>My personal opinion is that it has more to do with liability than safety. In
>the electrical and lighting industry the materials used over the last forty
>or so years have improved greatly yet in the case of the lighting industry
>the allowable wattage keeps decreasing. It's routine for a lighting fixture
>to have a warning not to connect it to wiring rated at less than 90 degrees,
>like your going to rewire eighty percent of the houses that want to install
>fixtures in them. I don't think so. I'm sure a good portion of these ratings
>is just to pass the liability on to you the installer or the consumer
In my experience, quality of electrical items has largely peaked out in
the 1980's and has gone a little downhill since then.
Meanwhile, it was common for many incandescent fixtures to specify
maximum of 60 watt bulbs as far back as around 1980, when I first noticed
this. This 60 watt limit may have been common even longer.
As for really high temperature rating requirements for supply wires -
this is new. I suspect this is mostly CYA from liability concerns,
although the increasing availability and affordability of non-contact
thermometers could be a reason.
If you add a fixture that requires higer temperature wire than your
building has, you only need high temperature wire from the next junction
box - and you can add a junction box a foot or two away.
If you have a fire starting at an electrical fixture being used other
than as directed, you may need a lawyer, even if the fire started from a
defect or a design flaw rather than the "misuse".
- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
| |
| Don Klipstein 2005-07-25, 2:21 pm |
| In article <e-CdnRz7Wsb_Gn_fRVn-jg@comcast.com>, tenplay wrote:
>As I get older, I am needing more light to read and tasks. I have a
>couple of lamps that are rated at 60 watts. Is there any harm in using
>higher wattage bulbs to increase the illumination? Thanks.
I would make sure you have good bulbs. Not all 60 watt bulbs produce
the same amount of light. Good ones produce 845-890 lumens of light.
Dollar store junkers, Polaroid and Sunbeam junkers and superlonglife
vibration resistant ones produce 600-700 lumens, and 130V superlonglife
vibration resistant ones may produce about 500 lumens at 120V.
Compact fluorescents up to 26 watts (as bright as typical 100 watt
incandescents) should not overheat the fixture, although a 42 watt compact
fluorescent can make the fixture slightly hotter than a 60 watt
incandescent does. (Incandescents produce more infrared than fluorescents
- that's heat in the room but largely not in the fixture.)
However, compact fluorescents of more than about 20 watts (same light as
a typical 75 watt incandescent) can overheat themselves in downward facing
fixtures and small enclosed fixtures.
- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
| |
| Don Klipstein 2005-07-25, 2:21 pm |
| In article <WQwEe.6955$El3.6112@fe10.lga>, RBM wrote:
>Doug, I've seen that many times myself. There are certainly types of
>fixtures that mount close to ceilings that produce a lot of heat and are
>fire hazards, however I still believe that a lot of these ratings are more
>for liability than safety
I recently saw a "banker's light" desk lamp with a tubular 60 watt bulb
have its wires char badly enough to produce a burning odor. The fixture
was rated for 60 watt bulbs.
I suspect this was a design flaw, maybe caused by the engineer assuming
that 60 watt tubular T10 5.25 inch long "showcase" bulbs in the USA not
having a disproportionally hotter surface temperature than 40 watt ones.
Turns out, the 60 watt USA (120V) version is gas filled while the 40 and
25 watt USA versions have a vacuum. The 60 watt one gets burning hot while
the 40 watt one usually stays cool enough to touch. If there are 230V
versions of these bulbs, then I would expect even 60 watt ones to have a
vacuum and have a cooler surface - and to be safe in this "banker's
light".
- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
|
|
|
|
|