Halogen for shop lights?

[Illini Pete]

Hey guys. I've almost completed a 36x56 post-framed shed that will be partitioned into a 24x36 shop and 32x36 garage and my question concerns lighting the shop side. The walls are 10' and the trusses are 8' OC and I plan to use OSB for the inside walls, left unpainted or possibly a light gray. I plan to leave the trusses exposed with foam insulation on the bottom of the roof as far as a ceiling. The height to the rook is 18' max. I had been considering 4' fluorescents for the main lighting a couple of separate fixtures over work benches. Then I saw these 4' long 600w(2@150 + 300) halogens at Rural King:
http://www.ruralking.com/shoplight-600-watt-halogen.html
Could these work as main lighting? What are pros and cons? How about over work benches?

Thanks!

 

[kbs2244]

I think they are too "harsh."
But you may not.
Check one out in the store.
Remember there will be a lot of "background" light from the regular store lighting.

 

[KenB]

Very hot, too.

 

[ForceFed70]

Halogen tends to be a very yellow light.

Florescent is much more energy efficient (like twice as efficient or better).

About the only real advantage to halogen is they they are cheap.

 

[Norcal]

Halogen is incandescent on steroids, if you have lots of money to shovel to the PoCo go for it, but it's wasteful.

 

[StaggeringGoat]

Halogen bulbs are basically heaters that give off a little bit of light as a byproduct. The color temperature is terrible to work in. Fluorescents will easily pay for themselves in power consumption.

 

[larry_g]

I had one of the fixtures that had 2 bulbs in it. I found that it was a good light in the cold as it would come on when the Flouro ones would not. I also found it to go through lots of bulbs, a years life was about it.

lg
no neat sig line

 

[jbs]

While it is true that halogen light has a lower color temp (i.e. "yellower") than most fluorescent bulbs, I prefer it to fluorescent because it is full spectrum light. In most cases I also prefer the warmer overall color temp of halogens, but for working, a whiter light it often better.

The main drawback in my view, as has been mentioned, is that they produce a LOT of heat. Not so bad in the winter (in fact, the cheap ones may be one of the least expensive electric heaters you can buy), but bad in the summer. In addition, they radiate well, so you feel the heat when the light is shining on you (as opposed to them just heating the air near the fixture). I for one would be sweating like crazy under halogen lights in summer.

 

[ishiboo]

Those lights are great, however, as people said they are very inefficient compared to florescent. I like the halogen light color.

The biggest issue I had with mine, is the glass lens, bugs crawled into, just as they would a fluorescent.

Instead of nothing happening, the bugs were cooked on the glass and stuck there.

 

[ddawg16]

Halogen tends to be a very yellow light.

Florescent is much more energy efficient (like twice as efficient or better).

About the only real advantage to halogen is they they are cheap.

Make that more like 4-5x more effecient.

Besides the energy, Halogen is a potential fire hazard due to the heat.

If you want color choices? You can get fluorescent has plenty of color choices.....I personally like the 5000K range.

 

[MrMark]

I have some phillips Halogena in my cans and they are way better than the CFL's. I have not noticed any heating and their energy numbers are better than incandescent so there may be some generalizations that are not accurate for all halogen in this thread. As for the light, there is no comparison. The Halogena produce a very natural light. The CFL's are artificial and take time to warm up. They are a poor choice. Maybe halogena are not Halogen but whatever they are I find them to be the best reading and working light I have. I've tried all the CFL's - they ****.

 

[ddawg16]

I have some phillips Halogena in my cans and they are way better than the CFL's. I have not noticed any heating and their energy numbers are better than incandescent so there may be some generalizations that are not accurate for all halogen in this thread. As for the light, there is no comparison. The Halogena produce a very natural light. The CFL's are artificial and take time to warm up. They are a poor choice. Maybe halogena are not Halogen but whatever they are I find them to be the best reading and working light I have. I've tried all the CFL's - they ****.

You have always hated CFL's....so regardless of what facts anyone gives you, you are going to call it BS.....

But me? I like facts.....

Best judge of a bulb is Luminous Efficacy....or, how many lums/watt.

Incandescent 13.8-15.2
Halogen 16.7-19.8
Quartz Halogen at 12-24v 24 lum/w (these are your typical undercabinet lights.
LED (120V) 60-93 (a lot depends on wattage and manf)
Fluorscent T12 60
T8 80-100
CFL 46-75
Low Pres Sodium 100-200

So....summing up the above data.....

A halogen is on average puts out 22% more light than an incandescent...

A CFL puts out 3.5x or better more light than a halogen...4x + more than an incandescent.

A halogen bulb temp can exceed 700 deg F....that makes for a pretty hot light....

As for artificial.....the only light natural light is the sun.....Halogen, incandescent and CFL are all artificial....

 

[Illini Pete]

Thanks everyone who replied! I think I'll pass on these for main lighting and go with fluorescents, mainly based on efficiency, i.e. electrical cost. Someone mentioned the halogens put out "yellow" light. I didn't notice this with a some small halogen work light I used until I broke the lens.

Thanks again,
Pete

 

[jbs]

You have always hated CFL's....so regardless of what facts anyone gives you, you are going to call it BS.....

But me? I like facts.....

Best judge of a bulb is Luminous Efficacy....or, how many lums/watt.

Incandescent 13.8-15.2
Halogen 16.7-19.8
Quartz Halogen at 12-24v 24 lum/w (these are your typical undercabinet lights.
LED (120V) 60-93 (a lot depends on wattage and manf)
Fluorscent T12 60
T8 80-100
CFL 46-75
Low Pres Sodium 100-200

So....summing up the above data.....

A halogen is on average puts out 22% more light than an incandescent...

A CFL puts out 3.5x or better more light than a halogen...4x + more than an incandescent.

A halogen bulb temp can exceed 700 deg F....that makes for a pretty hot light....

As for artificial.....the only light natural light is the sun.....Halogen, incandescent and CFL are all artificial....

It didn't sound to me like he was arguing that the halogens (Phillips Halogena in particular) are more efficient than CFLs ("...their energy numbers are better than incandescent..."), just that they produce better light ("As for the light, there is no comparison").

This is subjective, but I agree. There is more to characterizing the light output than just color temp (in fact fluorescents don't, strictly speaking, have a color temp since they don't produce their light by blackbody radiation) or efficiency. They are rated by correlated color temp, and the numbers are not as good as halogen even for the best (most expensive) tubes/bulbs.

As for the comparison to "natural" light, halogens are, by nature more like sunlight (BTW, firelight isn't "natural"?) in one important sense than fluorescents. They produce full-spectrum light (light across the continuous range of wavelengths of the visible spectrum). Fluorescents are very "peaky" across the visible range of wavelengths.

The fact is, they produce different light. As you stated, fluorescents produce their type of light more efficiently than halogens produce theirs. This is one aspect of lighting. Why is it necessarily the "best judge of a bulb"?

Each needs to decide what is best for his use.

 

[jbs]

Thanks everyone who replied! I think I'll pass on these for main lighting and go with fluorescents, mainly based on efficiency, i.e. electrical cost. Someone mentioned the halogens put out "yellow" light. I didn't notice this with a some small halogen work light I used until I broke the lens.

Thanks again,
Pete

I think fluorescents are a very good choice for general garage lighting. I will also use them. But I will also have some halogen task lighting. I'd really like a dentist light at my workbench for close-up work.

 

[TurnipTruck]

I once worked in a boat shop lit by halogens 20' above the floor. The light was adequate, but very shadowy. We later replaced with 8' fluorescents and the "softer" light was diffused, so we didn't have to squint in the shadows.

 

[z28toz06]

I had a reef tank with a 250 watt 5300k metal halide bulb with a CRI of 93, and I can tell you there is nothing out there I have seen yet that equals the light coming from a MH bulb. That said, there's no way I am going to use them in my shop. they are hot and inefficient.

I just ordered 4 11.5" CFL 85 watt (400 watt equivalent) I will need 2 more to do the short section (10 feet high) I'll build my own fixtures. so for a total of 600 watts, I'll light the whole garage. 32x24.
I'll post pix when I install them.

 

[web]

Mind the CRI when buying fluorescent lights - there are a number of different kinds on the market and the difference (visually) can be enormous. See http://www.eejitsguides.com/environment/esbulbs.html for a short explanation of tube markings. If it doesn't start with an 8 (tri phosphor), replacing with one that does will be an eye opener, especially when finding stuff in a messy toolbox, looking for cracks or other such things where rich contrast is important.

 

[BFBOB]

WRONG on metal halide efficiency!! They average close to 100 lumens per watt. (range is 65-115) Don't take my word-Internet search "Metal Halide Efficiency". The complaint that they're hot is only sorta right. The temperature of the actual light bulb is up there with incandescents, unlike fluorescents. But, they put out about the same amount of heat as a comparable fluorescent; it just comes from a much smaller surface area.
MH lamps are also available in several colors. And lest the quibblers quibble, like fluorescents, they are not continuous spectrum lamps and so the term Color Temperature does not strictly speaking apply. To my eye, the warmer-color MH's give a light very much like halogens, at 1/4 the energy consumption. The only down sides are: high initial cost, several-minute warmup time,and possible sharp shadows, depending on the fixture used.

 

[StaggeringGoat]

I can tell you there is nothing out there I have seen yet that equals the light coming from a MH bulb. That said, there's no way I am going to use them in my shop. they are hot and inefficient.

Metal halide is standard shop lighting. They are roughly as efficient as T8 fluorescents, not quite as good but close. The heat output is about the same as well.

 

[Norcal]

The arc tube temp of metal halide lamps are about 1800F, so there is a bit of heat generated.

 

[StaggeringGoat]

The arc tube temp of metal halide lamps are about 1800F, so there is a bit of heat generated.

Right, they can "seem" hotter, but since the heat isn't coming out of as big of an area as other bulbs it doesn't give you the feeling of being under lights like halogen. 100 watts of halogen, 100 watts of fluorescent, and 100 watts of metal halide all give off the same amount of heat...difference is some give you more light than others.