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
What do LEDs look like?
LED Packages or Light Engines
Osram OSTARLamina Titan
Kelly Gordon
PNNL
January 17, 2006
7
13
What do LEDs look like?
LED Drop-in Replacements
Mule Lighting Lighting Sciences Group Enlux
14
What do LEDs look like?
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
– 8 watts, 344 lumens, 43 lm/W
– 3500 K, 71 CRI
Winner – Undercabinet
48
• PLS Task by Finelite
– 10 watts, 430 lumens, 43 lm/W
– 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
• 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
– ≥ 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
• Minimum Light Output
– 200 lumens
• Zonal Lumen Density
– Minimum 85% of total
light output within 0-60°
zone
• Luminaire Efficacy
– ≥ 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
• Minimum Light Output
– ≤ 4.5˝ Aperture 345 lm.
– > 4.5˝ Aperture 575 lm.
• Zonal Lumen Density
– Minimum 75% total light
output within 0-60° zone
• Luminaire Efficacy
– ≥ 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
• Minimum Light Output
– 150 lumens
• Zonal Lumen Density
– Minimum 85% of total
light output within 0-90°
zone
• Luminaire Efficacy
– ≥ 24 lm/W
Min.85%
Kelly Gordon
PNNL
January 17, 2006
37
73
Category A: Outdoor Porch
“Lakeland” by Progress Lighting
74
Outdoor Step
• Minimum Light Output
– 50 lumens
• Luminaire Efficacy
– ≥ 20 lm/W
Min.85%
Kelly Gordon
PNNL
January 17, 2006
38
75
Category A: Outdoor Step
76
Outdoor Pathway
• Minimum Light Output
– 100 lumens (initial)
• Zonal Lumen Density
– Minimum 85% of total
light output within 0-90°
zone
• Luminaire Efficacy
– ≥ 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
Trac
k - 4
0W
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
Trac
k - 4
0W
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
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