Jump to content

Talk:High-intensity discharge lamp

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merge & redirect

[edit]

Hi,

as all HID lamps are in fact Gas-discharge lamps, so I propose to include the content of this article in "Gas-discharge lamp" (and to set a redirection to Gas-discharge lamp).

Andreas —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.130.42.195 (talk) 13:04, 5 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

That is an excellent suggestion; this article should in fact be a section of Gas-discharge lamp. Consolidating the two articles will likely improve the rate and extent of overall improvement. Any other voices want to chime in? —Scheinwerfermann T·C20:05, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arc light

[edit]

It is a form of ARC light. Why not add that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericg33 (talk • contribs) 07:54, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HID headlamp retrofits

[edit]

I have (twice now) restored appropriately supported, verifiable text regarding the widespread illegality of installing HID light bulbs in car headlamps intended to take halogen filament bulbs, in response to an IP-only editor replacing the supported assertions with technically inaccurate material probably derived from what the IP-only editor thinks she or he understands from a seller of such retrofit HID bulbs. This most recent time, I have supplied seven high-quality references for the assertion, to global regulatory sources and official interpretations thereof (in direct answer to the IP-only editor's edit-summary assertion that there's no such law). For now, I am assuming good faith on the part of the IP-only editor, who is probably just eager to contribute to the project. Once she or he sees the strong support for the present text, it's to be assumed and hoped she or he will come to understand that it is correct and appropriate. Once the matter is settled, perhaps the list of refs can be pared down. —Scheinwerfermann T·C01:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some edits to this section of the article. The references were close to being correct, but I'm afraid they were all described inaccurately as being applicable to "HID headlamp retrofits", which is too broad, given that certain kinds of HID retrofits are clearly allowed. The references actually nearly all explicitly referred to "HID conversion kits", with the NZ reference even helpfully supplying a concise definition thereof (which I have now included in the article). In addition, I have attempted to clarify the applicability of the referenced ECE regulations to motorbikes (there isn't any) and inserted non-Daniel Stern sourced URLs where possible. The Hella catalogue reference is a little troubling, as it is clearly self-serving marketing material (Hella manufactures approved HID retrofit products), but I have left it (or, rather, a non-Daniel Stern sourced URL to it) in for the moment as it mentions specific German regulations. (Not that I have anything against Mr Stern, but I think Wikipedia is better when the base of support for an article does not rely so much on just one guy's Web site.) JZH (talk) 21:22, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Almost totally agree with your edits and thoughts here, but the Hella ref is not promotional for Hella products. —Scheinwerfermann T·C00:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

End of end-of-life

[edit]

I have only touched the final paragraph. Wording was poor in places. One reference was to an open public forum, so I removed that reference. Some statements were well supported by a Phillips PSDS, but the link was to a general page rather than to the actual PSDS, and the placement of the ref didn't make it clear which statements were thus supported. The "typical scenario" statement was only supported by the forum ref, so I removed it. And although it's obvious that mercury is hazardous waste, actual disposal requirements vary around the world, and so I qualified that statement -- but also moved it inside the PSDS reference because the PSDS does support it. The list of reasons for lamp explosion is not supported by the reference, which only lists use beyond "intended life expectancy" and "who knows why", so I removed the list of reasons -- they can be added back if a reference is available. Paleolith (talk) 22:41, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Reference 9 goes to a deleted You-tube video, but I can't discover how to edit it. Please would someone who knows how do this ? Thanks. Darkman101 (talk) 08:13, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why CFLs are being pushed instead of this?

[edit]

If it is more efficient than Compact Fluorescent Lamps, why aren't HIDs being promoted more than CFLs? What is the downside? --TiagoTiago (talk) 19:40, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, they're not more efficient than CFLs (sodium & mercury bulbs excepted). Nor are they more efficient than LED's. Both of those are generally much more efficient then HIDs. HIDs are still used where CFLs or LEDs can't do the job. Namely operation in wide temperature range (CFLs don't like cold, LEDs don't like hot) or at high brightness levels. They tend to produce 'harsh' light - that is light which is not composed of a continuous spectrum, but have light output concentrated at a few wavelengths. Most do not provide good color rendition. --66.41.154.0 (talk) 00:41, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They are far more bright than necessary where CFLs and LEDs are used, and the arc is usually hot enough to produce retina damaging UV blackbody radiation. --AkariAkaori (talk) 11:06, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

new HID lamps and alpha particles and Mercury heavy ions

[edit]

I would swear there's some type of defect in the way they are manufacturing parking lot lamps that is causing them to emit sometime of radiation that is really annoying as heck. Does anybody have any idea what radiation is cause this?

I was seriously wondering if people are getting bombarded with alpha and mercury heavy ions? and don't know about it because there isn't a no common detector for these types of radiation at whatever energy levels would be emitted by a failing or detective street lamp. Specifically, energy efficient bulbs, or maybe some type of high intensity discharge lamps that projects its radiation over a wide area of a parking lot with radiation entering windows of nearby buildings.

I was wondering If some of this radiation could leak into hotel rooms through windows because just the other day I was talking with some other contractors staying in the hotel that admitted that they couldn't stand the last hotel because they had something really annoying about the radiation emitted from the lights at night when the parking lot lights were turned on. it actually feels a bit like you are getting pelted by sometime when you stand right underneath of a failing night. Microwaves? ultrasound? ELF? heavy ions? alpha particles?

I was considering UV radiation, except that should burn people after some time... so my search made me wonder if heavy ions were to blame. Any ideas? Recently I see posting online about cancer rates are expected to rise over the next decade, like maybe there's a group evil Chinese/asian manufactures new-world order that know they are secretly poisoning people in the united states with heavy ions because they purposely manufacture our light bulbs the wrong way... they already tried to poison our food supply, home manufacturing material, our beards with faulty defect razors that pull your hairs out, and clothes that are purposely sewn wrong to make people in the US look fat or poor, etc...

Ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science‎. This page is not a forum.--Auric talk 17:06, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not suitable for automotive use needs to be addressed

[edit]

This article reads like an advertisement. There is very little negative information. These lights are dangerous! In fact as of 2014 most automotive uses should be called Assault Lights since they dangerously disrupt other drivers.

How best to annotate that these are not OK? that they cause confusion in other drivers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.230.233 (talk) 09:40, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on High-intensity discharge lamp. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:24, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Three-letter codes.

[edit]

Can someone add information about codes that I was once told were meaningful, even important to identify an HID lamp type?

From memory, and some recent web searching, I cobbled together a short list: SOX = High pressure sodium SON = Low pressure sodium HPL = Mercury HPI = Metal halide I'm sure there were several more like those... They were helpful when choosing ballasts (and starters if needed).

I'm sure I remember the existence of what appeared to be standard tables of this type, but now there is next to nothing that is not fragmented, and maybe proprietary (mostly Philips). I even found a web site FULL of documented types dating back more than a century! Not one of their many documents listed these types or any more general classification. WHY did something that appeared once to be a formal means of identifying a lamp vanish and break down so effectively?! This needs resolving, and preferably from someone with a deep understanding of the history. Please, do it before all holders of such knowledge are DEAD. Also, assuming that many proprietary codes have degenerated as meaningful identifiers to the point where the recent rise of ANSI codes exists, it would be nice to have an explanation of why, after FIFTY YEARS, it seems that Europe and the USA cannot ever agree to a standard! We can all guess, but does anyone really KNOW? Even direct replication of soem standard table might be a very useful addition to the article, IF it is standardised enough not to cause unrest the instant anyone tries to do it. :)

81.187.19.110 (talk) 16:35, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:High-intensity_discharge_lamp&oldid=1198645085"