Latest CALiPER Tests Find Advances in LED Lighting Performance and Consistency

Nov. 18, 2011
The evolution of solid-state lighting continues to advance with improved performance, including better light output and lower variability, according to the U.S. Department of Energy’s program for testing and evaluating light-emitting diode (LED) lighting systems

The evolution of solid-state lighting continues to advance with improved performance, including better light output and lower variability, according to the U.S. Department of Energy’s program for testing and evaluating light-emitting diode (LED) lighting systems.

Round 13 of the Commercially Available Light-Emitting Diode Product Evaluation and Reporting (CALiPER) Program looked specifically at LED high-bay, wallpack and two-foot by two-foot LED troffer luminaires.

“On average, the Round 13 LED luminaires show a significant improvement in efficacy over LED luminaires tested in 2009 and 2010, with a minimum efficacy close to the average observed in 2009-2010. In addition, the variation in performance across the Round 13 LED luminaires is less than in 2009-2010 products; that is, there were smaller differences between minimum and maximum efficacy, power factor, CCT (correlated color temperature) and CRI (color rendering index).”

In each of the categories, CALiPER testers found luminaires that performed according to claims made in their manufacturers’ marketing literature and Lighting Facts labels, and some that did not. In some cases the LED units outperformed the conventional fixtures used as benchmarks.

“When compared to similar products using conventional light sources such as fluorescent, HPS, or metal halide, the LED luminaires provided similar or better color characteristics and comparable or better luminaire efficacies, on average,” said the DOE. “Some of the LED luminaires also provided equal or better light output and preferable distributions. There were still, however, large differences in performance across the LED luminaires, with some products not performing as rated and many not meeting manufacturer equivalency claims.”