Three of the judges who assessed the product categories at the Lighting Design Awards have said some LED figures were completely misleading.
Colin Ball from BDP, Harry Triggs from manufacturer TM Lighting and Rod Bastable from Bastable Lighting Services were the three judges. They said that because the judging panel was joined by a doctor of optical physics and a specialist in bonding and thermal engineering this gave them the authority to question some of the more ‘outlandish’ manufacturer lifetime figures.
I think some of the things that people were stating were grossly inaccurate. Having a couple of doctors on the panel added a level of accuracy and realism. By looking at the way some companies were bonding their LED light bulbs to the chip board, we could see that people weren’t going to be achieving good junction temperature. Some people were coming in and quoting 70,000 hours, which was unrealistic I think they were taking figures from the LED manufacturers and just transferring it to their product. In my view, I’d say only about 50% of the products were realistically quoted.
Ball agreed with Triggs in that the claims were unrealistic and supported his point by saying:
Another manufacturer claims a light output ratio of 95% for one product. I’m sorry but that’s just a naked LED.