Goodbye to the fluorescent lamp: designing an LED-based replacement for CCFL strip lights
Jaume Tarradellas, Technical Solutions Manager, Future Electronics (Spain)
 |
READ THIS TO FIND OUT ABOUT:
 |
- The benefits of implementing solid-state lighting
- The optical, electrical and mechanical factors to be taken into account when designing an LED lighting system
|
 |
|
|
Until recently, there was no alternative light-source to rival
fluorescent for efficiency and cost. But power LEDs are now
starting to offer a competitive $/lumen performance:
improvements in power LED design and manufacturing mean
that the flux (quantity of light) per device is continually rising,
while the cost per device stays fairly constant. The equation is
turning in favour of the power LED. Jaume Tarradellas,
Technical Solutions Manager, Future Electronics (Spain)
outlines a LED-based alternative.
Almost anyone who has ever worked in an office will be familiar with the cold-white,
shadowless light produced by most fluorescent strip lights. Indeed, the
fluorescent tube is, today, the most common choice of light source where the
system designer requires very high efficiency and reasonably good colour
rendering. Commonly available in the T5 format, fluorescent strip lights have
an obvious appeal to business and home users, because they are cheap to buy
and low on electricity cost.
Despite their popularity, fluorescent tubes have significant drawbacks: they
offer a limited lifetime (typically less than 20,000 hours); they contain mercury, a
toxic chemical which requires special disposal arrangements; they are more
difficult to drive than incandescent lamps; and they often require bulky optical
fixtures to optimise light-distribution and hide the unsightly tube.
In fact, there are a number of reasons why the market is interested in
adopting power LEDs as an alternative light source to fluorescent tubes:
- Efficiency
- Small-size
- Long-life – system designers can achieve power LED lifetimes of more
than 50,000 hours. This is particularly important in applications where
replacement of failed lamps is awkward or dangerous
- Environmental benefits – unlike fluorescent tubes, power LEDs
contain no mercury
- Colour output – power LEDs are available in a variety of ‘white’
versions with colour temperature ranging from 2,700K to 10,000K
- Control - LEDs can be dimmed using the pulse-width modulation
technique, which maintains efficiency from 0% to 100% of maximum-output
This article describes research work by Polymer Optics Limited (POL) in
the UK, which shows how an LED-based luminaire can replace a standard
1.2m fluorescent strip light. It shows, using data from POL, that a luminaire
designed using LUXEON Rebel LEDs from Philips Lumileds can achieve a
similar light output to that of a high-performance fluorescent strip light
while consuming a similar amount of power.

Fig. 1: Photometric distribution from the fluorescent tube on a 3.6m x 2.4m plane at 1m range
Setting the base line: analysis of a typical fluorescent strip light
The benchmark for POL’s LED designs was a scaled model of a typical
fluorescent-tube. POL used a standard GE 4ft (1.2m) 28W T5 tube, with a
colour temperature of 6,500K. This tube is nominally specified to provide
2,450 lumens under normal operating conditions. To make it easier to
perform a raytrace analysis of the light output from the LED system, the
1.2m tube was scaled down to 300mm. The 300mm scaled fluorescent
tube model was rated to emit a luminous flux of 640 lumens while
consuming 7.3W.
The fluorescent-strip system showed a peak luminous intensity of
380 lux at the centre of the photometric distribution pattern projected on
to a 3.6m x 2.4m plane at 1m range, with an illumination distribution as
shown in Figure 1. If the LED system was to rival the fluorescent luminaire,
it would need to provide a comparable output and distribution of light,
while consuming around the same amount of power.
Designing an LED-based alternative: key considerations
Among the important benefits of power LEDs are their long lifetime and
their high efficiency. System design choices have a large impact on both
these factors, and it is important for the designer to know how to balance
the effects of temperature, drive current, number of devices and cost in
order to match the performance of a fluorescent strip light.
For instance, in order to make an LED system competitive on cost with
a fluorescent light, it must offer a very long lifetime: this balances the
higher bill of materials cost (attributable to the LEDs) against the high
repair and lamp replacement costs of the fluorescent system.
The GE tube used in the study has an average rated life of 20,000 hours.
Power LEDs are not specified with a similarly straightforward average
rated life. LEDs do not fail completely in the way that an incandescent
lamp does; rather, lumen output declines gradually over time. So LEDs
have a lumen maintenance rating, which shows how long it takes for
lumen output to decline from its initial peak. Many LED vendors quote a
70% lumen maintenance figure in datasheets, but in truth, the system
designer can choose whether to target a higher or lower lumen
maintenance figure than this, depending on the desired lifetime/re-lamping
interval for the luminaire and the expected usage.
The designer has a choice to make not only over the lumen-maintenance
percentage, but on how to achieve it. Put simply, the higher
the junction temperature at the silicon die, the quicker lumen output will
decline. In the same way, a higher drive-current also reduces lumen
maintenance more quickly, as well as lowering efficiency. Comprehensive
lumen maintenance information for the LUXEON Rebel device from
Philips Lumileds used in the study by POL is available in document RD07
at www.my-ftm.com/080936.

Fig. 2: Optic design for LED-based strip light replacement
LEDs replacing a strip light: a practical implementation
POL’s optical assembly for a fluorescent tube-like light distribution is of
similar dimensions to a typical tube, so it can be retrofitted into existing
strip light fittings (see Figure 2). The optical assembly can also be made in
a modular fashion, so that a number of different strip-light lengths can be
retrofitted from basic LED optical modules.
The strip-light replacement model is a 300mm assembly using six equi-spaced
LUXEON Rebel LEDs (part number LXML-PWC1-0100) from Philips
Lumileds. The manufacturer’s rating for the LEDs specifies a 100 lumen
output, or flux, at a thermal pad temperature of 25°C. But the flux of an
LED varies depending on the junction temperature of the device, which in
turn is affected by the ambient temperature, enclosure design and so on,
and these factors will be different in every application. Flux declines as
temperature rises.

Fig.3: Strip Light Replacement photometric distribution on 3.6m x 2.4m plane at 1m range.
POL’s design is therefore modelled on an 80 lumen output, which is a
conservative estimate of the output that most real-world designs will
achieve. Thus the six LEDs produce a total input light flux for the system of
480 lumens. The choice of the LUXEON Rebel LED is important, because
the device’s high efficacy – up to 100 lumens/Watt – helps the LED
system compete with the very high efficiency of fluorescent technology.
The raytrace of the strip-light replacement design gives an illumination
distribution as shown in Figure 3. It achieves a similar lighting effect to
that of the fluorescent luminaire.
The efficiency of this LED design is around 65%. The strip-light
replacement optic diffuses light over a wide area; diffusion results in light
loss. Nevertheless, the strip-light replacement achieves a peak luminous
intensity of 320 lux, which compares well with the 380 lux peak
illuminance achieved with the fluorescent strip light, especially
considering that the input luminous flux of the LED system is 25% lower
than the input flux: the fluorescent system input flux is 640lm whilst the
LED system input flux is 480lm.
A final consideration in comparing the results of the design analyses is
that the 300mm-equivalent fluorescent tube has a scaled power
consumption of 7.3W; the LED luminaires consume around 1.2W per LED,
for a total of 7.2W.
Conclusion
This practical implementation of LED-based strip lighting by POL
demonstrates that an LED system can achieve better illuminance than a
fluorescent system for applications that require directed light, and
comparable illuminance for applications that require even lighting of a
wide area, while consuming the same amount of power.
The LED system, however, avoids the drawbacks of fluorescent lighting,
and in particular a restricted operational lifetime, with its high associated
repair and replacement costs. The LED strip light also contains no
mercury, and eliminates the end-of-life disposal problems associated with
fluorescent lamps. It also provides greater potential for control, for
instance by changing the intensity or colour of the light output.