From: =?UTF-8?B?UGFsaW5kcuKYu21l?= 
Newsgroups: alt.engineering.electrical alt.home.repair misc.consumers.house sci.electronics.basics sci.electronics.repair
Subject: Re: halogen vs energy-saving light bulb.... woes :S
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 17:17:33 +0000

Palindr☻me wrote:
> Dave D wrote:
> 
>> "Palindr?me"  wrote in message 
>> news:11r7rnq5in7rba0@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>>> If it were me in that situation, I think I would have left things as 
>>> they were but use them sparingly - maybe taking out a few lamps, 
>>> rather than complete fittings.
>>
>>
>>
>> With low voltage fittings, running them with bulbs missing or blown is 
>> a bad idea. Each time a bulb goes out on a low voltage halogen, the 
>> secondary voltage on the transformer rises significantly, and the 
>> remaining bulbs will have a shorter lifespan.
>>
> On what do you base this?
> 
> I have just checked this using two transformers - both intended for use 
> with fluorescent lighting.  The voltage did not rise significantly when 
> varying the load between the transformer's maximum rating (120W) and 
> minimum (35W). It also did not rise significantly when increasing the 
> supply voltage by 10%. The manufacturer's spec sheet for the 
> transformers support this. Indeed, all are rated for a range of outputs 
> - eg 35W <-> 110W.
> 
> It is quite possible that the halogens are either mains or have 
> individual transformers. In which case, removing lamps certainly would 
> not matter.
> 
> It is unlikely that the OP has a shared conventional transformer, not 
> designed for use with halogen lamps.
> 
I meant, of course, "intended for use with halogen lighting".

-- 
Sue