3 ms·
Power losses mainly. I did 24V wiring on campers and boats, and it's ridiculous how much copper you have to put in and then still have issues with the voltage d
by lstodd 3y ago
Power losses mainly. I did 24V wiring on campers and boats, and it's ridiculous how much copper you have to put in and then still have issues with the voltage drop.
110 or even better 220V AC is just so much better in that respect. If only people wouldn't call a diode bridge and a couple of capacitors a driver. Which is what you'll find in most of LED bulbs, and which is why they die so fast.
- stavros 3y agoThe adapter would still screw into the 220V bulb socket, but you could then just replace the LED part when it burns out, rather than having to throw out the voltage converter as well.
- lstodd 3y agoWouldn't it be better for the LEDs to not burn out in the first place? Because this was and is achievable.
- stavros 3y agoThat is an orthogonal concern, the two aren't really comparable. It would be good if the LEDs didn't burn out, and it would also be good if we didn't have to throw away both parts when one failed.
- lstodd 3y agoI can't agree with this. If we're redesigning the power supply it's actually much cheaper to make it not cause burnout on the LEDs than to make it replaceable.
- stavros 3y agoIs it less half the cost? If not, I'm in the red as soon as one power supply (or its LED) dies.
- lstodd 3y agoDepends on how hard you are prepared to cut the cost. If you're designing for cheap LEDs, then it might be up to 80% of the cost. But it's worth it because even cheap trash LEDs will last tens of years. If you go for good nice LEDs then maybe 50%. This would be indestructible, but it will cost you.