Green Chandelier Returns To Its Fire Hazard Roots
Submitted by: Daniel Rutter via Submit a Kludge!
Favorite Comment: Fixer applz says, “It’s so sad when big game hunters are just out for the trophy rack. Obiously this was a 10 pointer from Rudolph’s lineage.”
Add this to your blog:
(Copy & paste code)
You May Like:
AHH! Why would anything ever need to be that bright! maybe this is an environmentally friendly alternative to a lighthouse?
just couldn’t get enough of that good feeling from saving energy!
Is that a christmas tree upside down?
Not only upside down but also inverse. You’ll need some branches to make this festive.
Upside-down and unholy.
Splitting an electrical line is not a fire hazard. The danger comes from pulling too much current through too small a wire. Based on some quick calculation, that thing probably draws under 150 watts, so it’s not a hazard, given that those sockets can handle much more than that. The wiring job at the top looks decent from this angle, so it’s not a shock hazard, either. It’s actually a pretty nice chandelier, it you’re into that sort of thing.
Dan commented on his own blog that the issue with this setup is more likely to be weight than current draw.
No, splitting a line is not a problem at all, providing each link is properly contacting the next. Each change in density, alloy, or substance will cause some sort of energy transduction, whether to heat or harmonic vibration. I doubt the cheap (cheap looking anyway) splitters used here have the high quality contacts necessary for this many links on a circuit. In order to make this safe(r), the contacts would have to be soldered to each other.
The power quality of this system is likely to be compromised with this many CFLs, especially if they are cheap. Typically, cheap CFL fixtures have a total harmonic distortion rate of over %30. This is bad for more sensitive devices, as well as causing audible hums and noises in some cases.
So, what you’re saying is this wreck is real noisy? I’ve found a way to rid me of my in-laws.
fascinating…
And it still uses less electricity than a 100 W bulb…
I have one of these bulbs in my house in a small lamp on a night stand. I wouldn’t buy another one as they don’t throw enough light! I know people who have them all over their houses and I always feel like I need a flashlight in them! My brother tells me that the UK ha all but banished normal bulbs and gone to this type. I’m glad I don’t live there anymore!
Compact florescent bulbs have dramatically improved in recent years. I use them exclusively in my apartment except for my porch light as it uses a light sensor and those don’t like compact florescents. They use less power and last longer than incandescent bulbs. Modern compact florescents cast a lot more light than the older ones.
The nominal wattage ratings on these things are way off – however if you get a Osram Warm Light nominally at 120W (they make these now) – you get something equivalent to a conventional 100 Watt bulb with really pleasant light. And it still only consumes 23 Watts.
And it still produces less light than a 100 watt bulb
Here in the year 2009 the bulbs have improved enough that it’s not an issue anymore.
I had them everywhere. My electric bill dropped 15 dollers a month.
I think this would work. Even if those are 100-watt-equivalent compact florescent lights, the whole thing would probably be less than 150 watts. It’s kinda ugly though.
If by “ugly” you mean “glorious.”
No – just fugly
I agree with Squishy; there’s nothing really creative going on here. Just someone with too much time on their hands. It’s so ugly, it makes me want to trash the lighting section at Home Depot.
How come you don’t get 1000 Watt equivalent with this setup?
Someone’s bright idea of energy conservation
Magic ! a post-modern chrsitmas tree with a touch of neo-expressionism. The artist is clearly ahead of its time !
This is what you get when 1st cousin chandliers reproduce.
One would think they could’ve done a better job on the celing paint tho
I was thinking that too – all that creativity and they couldn’t be bothered to mask or remove the fixture before painting the ceiling?
Australian Christmas tree?
It is in Australia, yes.
Is the “root” fixture zip tied up there or is that wishful thinking?
It looks like they kludged in a ceiling socket to hang this thing.
I think even more appealing is the wonderful ceiling paint job. I mean taking the light down to paint was probably way less difficult than building this mess!
Couldn’t just tape over it.
And duct tape comes in a variety of colors these days.
ITS GIVING US ALL THE REACTIVE POWER WE NEED FOR XMAS
they are either very short people, or have very high ceilings…
Or they have the capability to walk around obstacles.
How many kludge-makers does it take to screw in a lightbulb? The answer to that question just got a lot more complicated.
Win!
Just two, the rest are twisted already.
BONUS win!
Ah yes, the old Arkansas Chandeleer
Not quite – that would involve lights kludged from pickup trucks and/or tractors and tons of duct tape. (Most of my family is from Arkansas. I can make fun of ‘em cause I’s is one of ‘em.)
I won’t go into the phone conversation I had trying to convince one of my uncles that fertilizer doesn’t melt ice on your front walk…
It melts ice if you light it…
My six year old looked at it, and said the person who made this needs to go to “light fixing school.” Sad when even a kindergartner can see something is a bad idea.
The un-Xmas tree everyone!
It’s so sad when big game hunters are just out for the trophy rack. Obiously this was a 10 pointer from Rudolph’s lineage.
And here we have enough fluorescent light bulbs to cause any autistic to become so hyper they won’t be able to be seen by the human eye!
Maybe it’s meant to be a torture device?
Scared of the dark? I’m not scared of the dark! Why would you ask if I was scared of the dark? I’m totally not scared of the dark!
Original source here: http://dansdata.blogsome.com/2009/12/11/a-very-bright-bad-example/
Subby is also creator…and does a pretty decent blog.
D.
For when you absolutely have to totally reproduce the illusion of a 60 watt bulb from the perspective of the power company.
if you were pissed you would burn your face.
It’ll be beautiful after the translucent storage container is mounted over it.
What’s really bugging me is that they are all on the same plane so it doesn’t really look like a chandelier. All it would take is turning some of those a few degrees and this would be art.
Is somebody planning on doing surgery? You have enough light at the top of the room to imitate the sun! When I lived in a tall ceilinged apartment, the landlord thought I was nuts because I put low-wattage lights in the ceiling.I told him I only needed them to get from one room to the other. I put 3-way bulbs on table lamps since that’s where I was. No point in lighting up a whole room to read a book.
Wow, finally “The Green Lantern” went environmentally friendly.
Looks more like an 8-armed supervillain than any chandelier I’ve ever seen.
(For folks who recycle their fl. bulbs, please ignore the following with my thanks for doing your efforts.)
Those bulbs aren’t “green” when you factor in mercury pollution upon disposal. And the splitters can’t be much better (plastic = oil).
A common misconception. If you get your electricity from coal, then you’ve saved more mercury from the power plant’s waste output than the bulb contained.
Frogstein is right. I did a back of the envelope calculation based on 700 MW plant emitting 2.5 kg per day of Hg, with no controls (no baghouses, etc.). Over a life of 10,000 hours, a 30 W CFL would save 0.10 grams of Hg emissions versus an equivalent (in lumens) series of 100 W incandescent bulbs.
Oops! Left out the fact that 51% of electrical energy in the US comes from coal. So, on average, a 30W CFL over a 10K hour lifetime saves 0.05 grams of Hg (about the weight, although not the volume obviously, as a single drop of water). Put baghouses of on the coal plants, and you’re down to a negligible savings in Hg emissions, since each CFL has about 0.005 grams of Hg. But, you’ve saved a lot of CO2 emissions, money, etc. and certainly not increased Hg to the environment.
That just means we need to make coal plants cleaner. If one of these is a mercury bomb, this chandelier is a mercury landmine. I have a toddler in the house. I’m waiting for better LED lighting and skipping the CFLs.
Matrix has my ceiling! Activate the EMP!
Checking the bulbs I have, he’s pulling between 100 -150 watts, depending upon the bulbs. That is high for a single bulb socket, but remember that the heat is dissipated at the base of each bulb. Also add that such circuits are rated (in the USA) to support up to 300 watts (5-60 watt bulbs) at 120vac safely, he is well within safety guidelines. Still, I would not want to be in that room when all ten bulbs warm up. Even though they are not all 60watt output, he has about 500 watts of light there. Very hard on the eyes.
Probably not worse than those bug-frier halogen light bulbs. They would be awesome in Summer if you left the sundeck door open. All sorts of bugs would fly in, land in the light, start to smoke and catch fire.
Yes, now you too can make an Easy-Bake Oven(TM) out of your entire house!
Now if one bulb goes out, the rest stay lit, right?
A Hg Hazmat accident waiting to happen.
I hope it doesn’t come with a dimmer switch. PFZZTZZT!!!!
Perhaps with this many bulbs the flicker which is all too apparent to my eyes (yes, with compact flourescents!) will be next-to-unnoticeable. Or not. Or maybe the hum will be what drives me mad instead.
Long live the incandescant light bulb!
Reading this comment, and others, makes it clear that the US is still in the Pleistocene of CFL technology. Low light output? Hum? Flicker? Instead of a conventional ballast modern CFLs have an electronic converter working at several tens of kHz, way beyond the upper end of the audible spectrum. Consequently, any flicker is at that same frequency, where the eye already stops noticing flicker at 100Hz. And light output is fine too; CFLs sold as X Watt equivalent do have roughly the output of an X Watt incandescent. Maybe not for the first minute or so as the tube still needs to warm up for maximum output, but the difference is not that noticeable.
Sorry, but I still get headaches from brand new flickerescent lights
You wish! Thats one problem of this old fashioned incandescents – they are short lifed. Halogen is a little better, also on energy usage.
It’s actually a stalactlight. Given a CO2 rich environment and a steady flow of electricity the lights will precipitate in this manner. I left one on accidentally when I went on holidays once and it almost ended up touching the ground.
NICE! That’s a great comment
you are sure about the CO2? I think they depend on silica.
Welcome to the home of Benoit Mandelbrot, the originator of fractal lighting.
I could optimise the space a little better though
OK, some of you are on the right track about CFL lamps, and some are way off base.
For the record, actual light output is measured in lumens. The lamp efficacy is measured in lumens per watt. A typical incandescent lamp is about 10-12 lumens per watts. A typical compact fluorescent is about 40 lumens per watt, which is why it is generally considered that a compact fluorescent lamp is about four times more efficient than a standard incandescent lamp.
But here is the catch: the light goes in all directions making them downright perfect for a table lamp. Many people are putting these things into recessed housings (cans), for which they are not suited. So even if the light is four times more efficient, in the can only about 25-30% of the light is getting out of the fixture due to internal reflectances. In that case a halogen PAR lamp may ultimately be more efficient. Also note that some fluorescent systems are substantially more efficient. Linear fluorescent lamps are about twice as efficient as their curled up cousins.
Now, about the flickering and hum, Stoneshop above has it about right. The original fluorescent fixtures (not just compact fluorescent) used magnetic ballasts. A ballast if a piece of gear that both strikes the arc in the lamp and maintains the arc, which is why you need the mercury to begin with. These ballasts with our standard 60hz frequency basically turned the light on and off every 1/120 of a second. This frequency of on/off over and over again is where the typical vibration or humming (buzzing) came from. Virtually all the CLF’s on the market, and many fluorescent fixtures have electronic ballasts which convert the 60hz cycle to usually well over 12kz, well beyond our ability to see and hear. If you are purchasing ANY fluorescent fixture, ensure the ballast is ELECTRONIC and not magnetic. Sometimes people forget that most of these lights need to be on switches and not dimmers. Dimmers are bad, unless the lights are rated for them. Another thing that is bad: ambient temperature. The light output drops substantially when used in cold environments.
Next: color. In every product category there are Mercedes and there are Kia’s. No different with fluorescent lamps and their color and color rendering. A fluorescent lamp uses phosphors on the inside wall of the glass tube, that the UV emitted by the mercury gas converts to visible light. These phosphors are proprietary to each manufacturer. Buy an off brand light, get an off color light. As a lighting specifier, I have found that the GE lights are quite good, followed by Philips and then Osram. Buy the cheaper lights and you get poor color rendering and usually less than advertised life. Virtually all screw-in CFL lamps are 2700 degrees kelvin, which means they are warm in color and trying to replicate an incandescent lamp. But there are a few out there with cooler color (3000K) that may be better for some of you.
as for the chandelier, cool idea – but I certainly don’t want to live under it.
OH SHIT!
WANT
Day 15 after the lightbulb invasion, there aren’t many of us left. Our supply of candles is running low and the streets are impassible… What Gos could do this?!
*edit* What God could do this?! No, no, there is no God, only madness… No, this. is. SPARTAAAAAA!!!!