Using CFL's in Incandescent Can Lights

[tx2step]

I commonly see self-ballasted CFL's installed in recessed incandescent can lights. Since the largest self-ballasted CFL's I see are around 23 watts, I can't see where this would cause any problems with heat. I don't think I've ever found a problem that was caused by the CFL -- usually any problems I find are because the can light was poorly installed in the first place. Do any of you guys find any problems with using CFL's in recessed can lights?
Do any of you install them this way yourself?
I have an application where I'm thinking of doing this -- Do you see any problems with it?

 

[weressl]

I commonly see self-ballasted CFL's installed in recessed incandescent can lights. Since the largest self-ballasted CFL's I see are around 23 watts, I can't see where this would cause any problems with heat. I don't think I've ever found a problem that was caused by the CFL -- usually any problems I find are because the can light was poorly installed in the first place. Do any of you guys find any problems with using CFL's in recessed can lights?
Do any of you install them this way yourself?
I have an application where I'm thinking of doing this -- Do you see any problems with it?

If the fixture is not rated specifically for CFL use then - legally - it should not be installed. Technically it should work IF the CFL itself is listed to be suitable for enclosed fixture installation. I always wondered if the can is to be considered an enclosed fixture if it does not have a glass lid.

 

[growler]

I commonly see self-ballasted CFL's installed in recessed incandescent can lights. Since the largest self-ballasted CFL's I see are around 23 watts.
I have an application where I'm thinking of doing this -- Do you see any problems with it?

They make CFL floods that are to be use in recessed can lights.

I have had some customers that are interested in going green (energy conscious ) and these are around 23 watt and rate at or at least say they provide the same light as a 65-75 watt incandescent lamp.

The good thing is they look light regular flood lamps. Not all that expensive, about like a regular flood. You can get them for exterior use also.

 

[tx2step]

CFL flood

CFL flood

The 23W CFL flood is exactly the one I was thinking of using. I've used them in some recessed cans in my own house & they work fine. They should produce less heat than a 60W incandescent lamp. Are there any other concerns?

 

[growler]

The 23W CFL flood is exactly the one I was thinking of using. I've used them in some recessed cans in my own house & they work fine. They should produce less heat than a 60W incandescent lamp. Are there any other concerns?

Just like any other fixture or lamps there are always those that for some reason don't like it.

If you want to dim them you must get a dimmable lamp or a fluorescent dimmer. A power surge will take out any lamp with a balast faster than an incandescent lamp.

I think most people are happy with the CFL floods.

 

[tx2step]

You replace the ballast with the lamp

You replace the ballast with the lamp

One of the other advantages is that you replace the ballast/lamp at one time. There's not a separate ballast (that's hard to get to if/when it goes out). The CFL produces less heat, so they should work fine in a type IC recessed can -- even one that's airtight. For non-dimming applications, I can't see any disadvantage to using an incandescent IC airtight recessed can with a CFL flood lamp in it.

 

[renosteinke]

Weressel, I think we have had a few threaqds on this topic, and I'm afraid you have it exactly backwards.

That is, UL is perfectly happy for you to use any CFL that actually fits in the fixture - unless the markings on the CFL say otherwise.

 

[svh19044]

I commonly see self-ballasted CFL's installed in recessed incandescent can lights. Since the largest self-ballasted CFL's I see are around 23 watts, I can't see where this would cause any problems with heat. I don't think I've ever found a problem that was caused by the CFL -- usually any problems I find are because the can light was poorly installed in the first place. Do any of you guys find any problems with using CFL's in recessed can lights?
Do any of you install them this way yourself?
I have an application where I'm thinking of doing this -- Do you see any problems with it?

Follow the manufacturers instructions. As you already know, most of the ones that look like floods are designed to be placed inside the can...and UPSIDE down (yes, I said it....not in a receptacle thread...a lot of CFL's aren't designed to have their ballast towards the top). However, some of them still aren't designed to be installed in enclosed fixtures, which would mean the obvious, not an open trim.

As to using the highest wattage CFL that's still lower than the incandescent wattage, most lighting fixture manufacturers are clearly straying away from this. A lot of the newer fixtures I have installed have a clearly labeled maximum incandescent AND CFL wattage. People are putting in the highest wattage CFL they can find and the bulbs are burning out prematurely, as well as quite a few recorded instances where a fire occurred do to heat build up of the ballast.

I don't think any CFL manufacturer out there will tell you to install a higher rated CFL in the fixture than the suggested incandescent equivalent. In other words, if you put a 23w CFL (which is probably the R40 equivalent in size) in the fixture that is rated for an R30 65w, the manufacturer would most likely not suggest it. However, that's a bit "IF" and depends on what the manufacturer suggests.

Now on to using CFL's in recessed lights...the most common place for recessed lights is the kitchen. CFL's have HORRIBLE color rendering, and are about the worst choice you can make in a kitchen or a bathroom. You are considerably better off with a halogen, despite the heat. Other downsides are the warm up time to full brightness, inconsistent and limited beam spread, unusual and inconsistent lifespans, glare, and the already noted dimming ability. Lastly, and I have experienced this multiple times, the glass "enclosure" on the CFL floods have tendencies to break off for absolutely no reason. I have had different manufacturers bulbs do this, I installed some (not overtightened), customers installed others.

No, I do not and will not supply or suggest CFL's in recessed lights based on the above.

Weressel, I think we have had a few threaqds on this topic, and I'm afraid you have it exactly backwards.

That is, UL is perfectly happy for you to use any CFL that actually fits in the fixture - unless the markings on the CFL say otherwise.

Do you have any direct references where UL states that you can use a CFL so long as it fits in the fixture? That doesn't sound like something that the UL would suggest.

 

[weressl]

Weressel, I think we have had a few threaqds on this topic, and I'm afraid you have it exactly backwards.

That is, UL is perfectly happy for you to use any CFL that actually fits in the fixture - unless the markings on the CFL say otherwise.

So is the reverse is true also? I seem to recall something discussed, but I don't recall seeing an actual confirming document from UL. On the other hand I believe that the interchangeability was also argued for specific type fixtures only and the example of fixtures listed for hazardous locations were agreed not to be automatically suitable for 'anything that fits'.

 

[marti smith]

See "Luminaire Marking Guide", user markings, in the back of the white book.

 

[weressl]

Weressel, I think we have had a few threaqds on this topic, and I'm afraid you have it exactly backwards.

That is, UL is perfectly happy for you to use any CFL that actually fits in the fixture - unless the markings on the CFL say otherwise.

White Book

66. LAMP REPLACEMENT MARKINGS ? Incandescent and HID type luminaires and track
lighting luminaire assemblies are required to be marked with lamp replacement markings. This
marking may be used in combination with the trim correlation marking in recessed luminaires
(See Note 72). Generally, most fluorescent luminaires are not provided with lamp replacement
markings (See Note 67 for compact fluorescent lamps). The lamp replacement marking for
incandescent luminaires will state, ?CAUTION - RISK OF FIRE. MAX ___ W(ATTS) TYPE ___?,
where the blanks are filled in with lamp type and wattage, and may include the word
?SHIELDED? if intended for use with a tungsten-halogen lamp which has an integral shield.
HID-type luminaries are provided with a lamp replacement marking identifying the replacement
lamp wattage and ANSI designation.

67. COMPACT FLUORESCENT LAMPS ? luminaires that employ a compact fluorescent lamp
with a ballast that is not Class P are marked with the following or equivalent: ?USE ONLY ___
TYPE _____ WATT LAMPS. ?

72. RECESSED LUMINAIRE LAMP REPLACEMENT MARKINGS ? Recessed luminaire
housing or rough-in section may employ a marking system where the lamp replacement
marking is dependent upon the trim or finishing section used. A luminaire housing is marked
?USE ONLY WITH [Manufacturer] [Catalog Number] TRIMS?. A rough-in section is marked
?ROUGH-IN SECTION FOR USE WITH FINISHING SECTION ______?. The blanks are filled in
with manufacturer and trim or finishing section number as appropriate. All recessed luminaries
are marked for lamp replacement ?CAUTION ? RISK OF FIRE. MAX ___ WATTS ___ TYPE?. A
recessed luminaire that requires a different lamp wattage or type for an alternate trim or
finishing section is marked ?CAUTION ? RISK OF FIRE? and a table specifying the trim or
finishing section and the maximum lamp wattage and type permitted for use with it. Alternately
the lamp replacement information can be included on the trim or finishing section. The lamp
replacement markings can be concealed providing the trim or finishing section must be
removed for relamping or it is additionally marked where visible during relamping ?SEE OTHER
(BACK) SIDE FOR RELAMPING INFORMATION.?

 

[kwired]

Good luck finding a luminaire that actually lists edison based compact fluorescents in the list of acceptable lamps.

My opinion has always been that they are intended as an equivelant replacement for the corresponding incandescant lamp that puts out approximately the same light.

If the luminaire has to be marked to accept them there are millions of them that are not allowed to be installed anywhere.

You also are not going to stop the end user from putting anything that will fit in that socket.

I have more than a few times seen 150 watt incandescant lamps installed in a luminaire that was marked 60 watt max.

 

[svh19044]

New Schonbek fixtures list them, as do a number of others.

Good luck finding a luminaire that actually lists edison based compact fluorescents in the list of acceptable lamps.

My opinion has always been that they are intended as an equivelant replacement for the corresponding incandescant lamp that puts out approximately the same light.

If the luminaire has to be marked to accept them there are millions of them that are not allowed to be installed anywhere.

You also are not going to stop the end user from putting anything that will fit in that socket.

I have more than a few times seen 150 watt incandescant lamps installed in a luminaire that was marked 60 watt max.

I have seen 30amp breakers installed on 14g, 15amp intended circuits. It's the same principle, changed by the end user and not really relevant on a "professional" forum. But your opinion is a good one that can be appreciated (equivalent replacement).

 

[tx2step]

Sorry if this has been beaten to death in another thread, but I did a search on it and didn't find anything much. If someone can provide links to those threads I'd really appreciate it. I'm just trying to learn what I can.

The can lights I'm supposed to install will be used down the length of a hallway, so dimming or color rendition aren't an issue. As far as using them in an enclosed fixture, I would think that if the bottom trim is "open" (i.e. no glass or plastic bottom lens) then it's not really "enclosed". But that's must my opinion. The lamps I would put in would be the "75W PAR30 Equivalent"

How can a 6" recessed type IC can light rated for a 75 watt incandescent lamp overheat with a lower wattage CFL lamp in it... even a "23 watt" one? The total load listed on the lamp ballast (I assume that includes the ballast loss?) is .380 amps at 120 V, which is 45.6 watts. That would seem to make the "23 watts" misleading, but overall it's still quite a bit lower than the fixture rating, and the rated lamp life is 8,000 hours.

Now if you install a CFL that was designed to be used "base-down" in a "base-up" position I can see how that might make the ballast fail prematurely.

I'm just trying to get what your own first-hand experience is with self-ballasted CFL's installed in a recessed can light. I haven't installed a whole lot of factory ballasted CFL can lights, but I've seen some of those ballasts fail -- and replacing those ballasts was a real pain. It seems to me like the ease of replacing the self-ballasted CFL type would be worth real consideration.

The lamps I have installed in my own house say "Indoor/Outdoor Interior/Exterior" and say "Ideal for use with these lighting applications" and have a little picture of a recessed can light + a ceiling Mounted track light head + a regular outdoor PAR lamp holder (all are shown base-up). They're 23 watt, R40 shape, with a rated 1100 lumen light output and are supposed to be "120 watt equivalent". They're rated to start at -20 F. I've had 5 installed in 6" cans for 2 years now, and haven't had to replace one yet. They're "Ecosmart" brand & are sold at HD. It appears to me that they are intended to be used exactly as I have installed them...unless I'm missing something???

I haven't put a thermometer up in one of the cans to see, but it has to be cooler than if I was using an R40 incandescent.

What am I missing on this issue?

 

[kwired]

The total load listed on the lamp ballast (I assume that includes the ballast loss?) is .380 amps at 120 V, which is 45.6 watts. That would seem to make the "23 watts" misleading..

.380 amps x 120 volts is 45.6 VA. the difference from the actual wattage is because of power factor. It appears to be pretty low power factor doesn't it - about 50%.

I don't know if 23 watts is the lamp only or if it is the lamp plus any power consumed in the ballast.

 

[Marvin_Hamon]

When I have tried this in fixtures in my own home I have mixed results. I have found that in enclosed fixtures the heat eventually kills the ballast (heat is bad for electronics) so the CFLs don't last very long. I only use the screw in CFLs in open fixtures now where I have not had any problems.

 

[tx2step]

By open fixtures, do you mean like a table lamp? Or would you include a recessed can light with a open baffle trim as an open fixture? Have you had any experience with those?

 

[tx2step]

.380 amps x 120 volts is 45.6 VA. the difference from the actual wattage is because of power factor. It appears to be pretty low power factor doesn't it - about 50%.

I don't know if 23 watts is the lamp only or if it is the lamp plus any power consumed in the ballast.

Yeah, I don't know which it is either -- not enough information & I haven't tried to do any testing. In a residential or small commercial setting, you aren't usually penalized for the power factor -- at least not around here.

 

[hurk27]

I have several cans in my basement, and I use the smaller R-20 7 watt Sylvania floods that are almost to much light which is why I bring this up, I think your going to find 23 watt way to bright for a hallway, unless they want them that bright? 3 are over my fire place, and 4 over my bar area, I wish they made some lower wattages, because the bar area could be a 5 watt or even maybe a 3 watt when those 23 watt reach there full brightness you wont be able to look at them.


In the house I have been in now for 4 years, and the trailer I was living in since 1996, I have nothing but CFL's in both, and have been using them for around 15 years, I found that staying away from off brands is one of the first steps to getting them to last, second allowing heat dissipation is a second, but even ceiling fixtures with enclosed globe can be installed to allow a gap around the globe to allow air to flow around the lamp, I also found that the Sylvania micro mini's last the longest in enclosed fixtures and can's, and taking the outer glass off a couple Sylvania floods reviled the same micro mini type lamp in them also. so this is one brand I use the most, yes they can be pricey, but if one thing I have learned with CFL's is being cheep does not get it.

the most rejection of CFL's are the color, the problem is most do not know what to look for when selecting a CFL, the range is 2700k, 3200k, 4100k, 6500k, with the lower number being the color of an incandescent, and the highest looking almost blue, I find that the higher numbers are what most people complain about, I try to stay with the 2700k rating as you can not even tell it is a CFL if it is behind a frosted globe, I have used 23 watts non-flood micro-mini's in my own shower trim,s to get more light out of them without temp cycling because the cans are only rated for a 40 watt incandescent with the shower trim on it and 60 watt lamps make it cycle on temp, while yes they are not for this purpose, I have yet have one fail, of course these are not newer cans, and are not air tight, but with using these micro mini's have made allot of my customers start switching to CFL's as long as I supply the 2700k color ones.

Also I have never had a Sylvania catch fire, smoke at end of life, or even break unless I rough handled it, FEIT I have had nothing but problems, and were some of the worst, along with other no-names, GE's would be my second choice but I have had a few early failures or DOA out of the box with them, Phelps not too much to say but not a very good CFL of the ones I have tried they didn't last.

Another thing is maybe its the very small diameter tube in the micro mini's don't take very long to get to full brightness, lamps with larger tubes almost take twice the time, and those very large CFL's 40 watts and larger with very larger tubes are awful as they take way to much time to warm up, I had a couple of those in my garage, and they seemed to take 5 minutes before the were full bright, so they came out and 32 watt micro mini's went in, so it seems like the smaller the tubes the faster they reach full brightness.

Boy do I sound like a commercial:roll:

 

[kwired]

The lights in the shower probably do not operate as long as some rooms therefore any heating buildup is reduced because of less run time.

I still think life is also shortened because of number of starts and may very well not be worth it at certain locations like closets, pantries, or any other place where it is turned on for only a minute or two on a frequent basis.