Spiral CFL's vs tubular CFL's

B

bruce78

Active Member
Most bigger wattage cfls are not spirals anyways, but a rather a series of tubes....besides, the convenience outweights the performance benefits if any. Seems to me that if you add up the lumens emitted from the tube, they will be more efficient, but spread over a 4ft tube, it ain't going to be that intense of a light. My setup has 4 x 85 watt cfl and a 150watt hps all on 2 bagseed plants waiting for my order from attitude to come in.
 
lopezri

lopezri

Well-Known Member
DMGIX said:
I do, hold on....... (Philips CFL Tornado) Last Paragraph

(sic)
The helical compact fluorescent lamp was invented by Ed Hammer at GE in 1976. His proposal was to coil a long, thin high efficiency tube into this form, such that it would better match the size and light distribution of a frosted incandescent lamp. However GE felt that coiling glass tubes into this complex shape was not compatible with high speed manufacturing techniques, and the idea was shelved.

It was not until 1992 that GE completed a machine for bending the glass, and samples of the so-called Heliax lamp that it produced were issued to the market that year. Sadly the lamp never made it to mass production, owing to extreme difficulty in controlling the production process.

The commercial introduction of the lamp had to wait a further three years until a Chinese firm, Shanghai Xiangshan, marketed the first successful design. The low labour rates in China allowed this company to economically undertake the manufacture by employing a small army of glassblowers to create the spiral form. Since then the market has taken off and many of the major firms now out-source a spiral CFL lamp from China. This is Philips' first lamp from 2003.

In fact the spiral CFL is a very poor lamp in terms of efficacy. There are two ways to make it. The first is to coil the pre-coated glass tube. This causes damage to the phosphor layer during the deformation of the glass. The second is to first coil the glass, and then coat it. Owing to action of gravity, coating thickness cannot be uniformly controlled. It is too thick on the lower half of each coil, and too thin above. The result is a lamp of lower efficacy than when straight tubes are used, but owing to its compact size the lamp remains popular.
Click to expand...
That's some good info. Any info on what the output differences are comparing spiral to tubular?
 
DWR

DWR

Well-Known Member
i had a dream about this thread yesterday, a big black cfl... with a huge plant in the middle


rofl.. just thought u might want to know...
 
emericakush714

emericakush714

Active Member
DMGIX said:
In fact the spiral CFL is a very poor lamp in terms of efficacy. There are two ways to make it. The first is to coil the pre-coated glass tube. This causes damage to the phosphor layer during the deformation of the glass. The second is to first coil the glass, and then coat it. Owing to action of gravity, coating thickness cannot be uniformly controlled. It is too thick on the lower half of each coil, and too thin above. The result is a lamp of lower efficacy than when straight tubes are used, but owing to its compact size the lamp remains popular.
Click to expand...
I think this is talking more about the light distribution and energy efficiency, NOT growing efficiency. Plus, it says the bottom section of the glass is thick and the topper most is thinner, so, face the top of the bulb towards your crop so the thin parts of the bulb are all facing the crop. Made sense to me.:leaf::bigjoint:
 
%MiSTuRBoMbDiGgItty%

%MiSTuRBoMbDiGgItty%

Well-Known Member
DMGIX said:
Im not saying they dont work DUH obv i've been following many a Amazing grow with them...im just saying the tube ones are CHEAPER TO PURCHASE and MORE EFFICANT!
Click to expand...
I've yet to find a 42w tubular cfl cheaper than a spiral one so please let me know where I can get one...
 
ClosetForest

ClosetForest

Active Member
I currently have a 48" CFL strip light- running 2 40W bulbs in the daylight spectrum. It covers about 6-8 plants but another could do. My Girls are looking great. I was wondering about inserting spiral CFL's inbetween the pots at the bottom of the plant. is this a good idea, or will light be wasted more at the stock rather than at the top? I also included a 14W LED in my setup with majority of Red spectrum for budding. The Hyrdo guy at GreenCoastHydro said HID lights will yield significantly more, is this true if Im running the same wattage? (10-40w lights)
 
F

forlease

Member
I dont remember where i saw it but it was in some grow book(an english guy wrote it). but yeah there were these fluorescents, they were cylindrical but had a little trench going all around it the entire length of the bulb. i really wish i could remember what they were called.
 
I

iNCoGNiTiX

Member
bruce78 said:
Most bigger wattage cfls are not spirals anyways, but a rather a series of tubes....besides, the convenience outweights the performance benefits if any. Seems to me that if you add up the lumens emitted from the tube, they will be more efficient, but spread over a 4ft tube, it ain't going to be that intense of a light. My setup has 4 x 85 watt cfl and a 150watt hps all on 2 bagseed plants waiting for my order from attitude to come in.
Click to expand...
You misunderstand. Tube CFLs not tube fluorescents. They are cfls with rods protruding instead of spirals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top