|WikiProject Energy||(Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)|
Sources on standards
NOTE: I'd like to find a reference to ANSI or similar standards so that we can remove the commercial links. NEMA (National Electrical Manufacturers Association ) seems like a likely source, but I can't find the document there. Help please!
Unfortunately many of these designs are proprietary and second sourcing can be difficult. If there is an ANSI or NEMA number it is likely based on the original design of a particular manufacturer. This is the case with light bulbs, where published codes are a result of the original manufacturer's application for an ANSI code. Also, information currently posted on manufacturer's web sites is often sketchy. I had to use a paper copy of a 1990 catalog in my possession rather than refer to the current catalog because many designs have been dropped and are no longer available.
Many of the statements I've made are summarizations or recollections of design engineering best practices. Sources are from lectures, on the job training, design analysis and other non published sources. Someone (I believe it was Ed Kook) wrote that the development of the ellipsoidal spotlight was one of the most significant advances in lighting control of the 1930's & 40's and would not have been possible but for the development of the "base up" bulb design and the introduction of the Alzak aluminum reflector to replace silvered glass. --Mccainre (talk) 20:25, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
More Edison Screws
Here in the UK, the main traditional 250V bulb bases are:
BC (Bayonet Cap); ES (Edison Screw[E27 ?]; SES (Small Edison Screw)
Most traditional torches, 1.5 to 6 Volt use: MES (Miniature Edison Screw)
Wouldn't this page be more appropriately called: Lightbulb Bases ? (As the bulbs are the primary part, that which is seen and measured and specified (and repeatedly replaced); sockets are (important but relatively) secondary ?)
(P.S. Its FLUORESCENT not FLOURESCENT, think FLU not Flo. Flour makes pastry, not light !)
Lots of "what", no "why"
Like so many electrotechnology articles, we might as well be copying a parts catalog as writing an encyclopledia. A list of socket trivia is not an article. Some explanation of *why* sockets are what they are would be worthwhile; the rest of it we can get from Sylvania or Osram or GE's catalog. --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:47, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
You are missing the point. Much of the material I've added of a technical nature is no longer in publication. A good example is the General Electric Large Lamp Catalog - the current edition of which omits about 50% of the material relating to bulbs, bases & sockets that an edition from the 1960s contained. A similar case may be made for Osram/Sylvania's current lampholder catalog. Old designs are no longer well documented. We are trying to ARCHIVE information for HISTORICAL REFERENCE purposes, not espouse any preference for one design or another.
A lighting fixture designer NEEDS dimensional information in order to design new equipment. YOU may consider such information to be useless, but millions of dollars can hinge on the availability of such information. Mccainre (talk) 05:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- Anyone who takes a Wikipedia article as his sole source of design information is ...well, let's say...recklessly trusting. An encyclopedia is not the place to list tables of socket dimensions. This isnt't the handbook of luminaire design. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:49, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia has the space (and the knowledgeable editors) to include far more information about a subject than any traditional paper encyclopedia. It seems reasonable to me that we should take full advantage of this.
I am an electronic technician, and many times I come to Wikipedia looking for technical details that might seem trivial to other people, but are of great interest and usefulness to me. Where else might I find such a great store of technical information all in one place ?
Dumbing down content
It is very important for people to understand the reasons behind decisions made in the construction of commonplace objects. If you omit such information because it is "too technical" then you show your own ignorance of the subject. Accept that others include details because they are relevant to the understanding of the concept.
For example: my inclusion of the UL standard of 1000 amps per square inch of cross sectional area at 60°C is vital to understanding why the posts on the mogul bi-post socket are so large and why this socket might require a #4 feeder wire.
- If we could find a suorce documenting the design decisisons specifically about lamp bases, that would be great. But a UL cookbook standard for bus bars is not relevant to the geometry and application of a terminal on a lamp - you are familiar with the literature and must recognize that "1000 amps per square inch" is a convenient cook-book number that has a book-full of qualifications and exceptions; even the Copper Development Association Web calculator doesn't use that as a fixed rule, and they want to sell as much copper as possible. Right now we don't even mention how or why the Edison screw base won out over a dozen competitors. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:56, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
As a frequent reader of Wikipedia, I appreciate these small technical details (such as the current density guideline discussed above) because they: 1) Are usually not easy to find unless I know to look for them, and 2) Provide useful information to a person such as myself who develops and maintains electro-optical equipment for a living, and 3) Encourage people to be more inquisitive, and help to tie together unvoiced observations ("I wonder why (s)he wrote that? So that's why those pins are so large!") — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 18:58, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Types used around the world?
I'm wondering if anyone can start a section on types commonly used around the world, e.g. "Sockets in use around the world".
The Edison screw is the most popular for household lightbulbs in North America, and the Bayonet mount is used in the UK, India, Australia, New Zealand, and parts of the Middle East and Africa, but a comprehensive table or map would be really useful! thanks to anyone in advance! Facts707 (talk) 05:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
So this article is back again, and once again is basically just a listing of different light bulb bases. If that's what this article is going to be about, then why not rename this article "List of light bulb bases" or something similar.
What's the point of all this "Construction and materials" stuff?
By the way, the proper term is "lamp socket" or "light socket" ("lamp holder" is also a term that manufacturers seem to be using these days, instead of the original term "lamp socket").
- (1) See my comment above in "Lots of "what", no "why"".
- (2) "Lightbulb Socket" is the most commom term used to denote such items in regular colloquial English. Darkman101 (talk) 10:41, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Many connectors missing
Many connectors missing like R7S or gu10 or H4. Also photos would be nice, I didn't understand the difference between pin and post attachments until I went elsewhere and understood the difference in scale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 10:25, 5 October 2012 (UTC)