outdoor lighting control: dusk to timed off

[sitelights]

This post addresses automatic operation of outdoor lighting. Everywhere you look you will see lights on in daylight.This wasted energy is attributable to owner absence or inattention, failed photocontrols or timing devices that are incorrectly calibrated.

Landscape lighting applications designed to operate from dusk to a preset off time require either (A) an astronomical time clock which tracks the progress of the seasons and turns lights on at dusk, in the latitude for which it is set, and off at the preset time or (B) a combination timer/photocontrol where the photocontrol is switched on before the earliest possible dusk and in turn switches the lights on at actual dusk and then switches off at a preset time.

Since dusk is a moving target (approximately a minute a day change throughout the year as dusk occurs earlier or later depending on the season) timers must be reset frequently to coincide with actual dusk. Power outages or tripped breakers will also cause timer error. Add to this the semi-annual Daylight Savings Time changes and it is clear that accurate light control is problematic.

In order to solve these timing errors you can utilize an astronomical time clock but it must have battery back-up and DST (plus Leap Year) compensation. I haven't found anything that would do all this for less than $500.00 There is a good alternative to the astronomical time clock (which does not need a photocontrol) in the Grasslin FM/1 digi 42 electronic time switch in combination with a good quality photocontrol. Grasslin Controls Corporation (201.825.9696) http://www.grasslin.com has added DST compensation to this unit as of 1998 and also incorporates up to 7 days (my experience is more like 15 days) of carryover. The digi 42 has been pre-programmed for DST changes until the year 2079.

Another device, an "interval timer" merely turns the lights on at dusk and off after a set interval of time but this does not address the problems of accurate timing. A seven hour dusk to midnight interval in Winter will have the lights on until 4 AM in the Summer. One would have to change the interval frequently to maintain midnight off throughout the year.

It is necessary to "think green" in the outdoor lighting business before some agency decides to "think green" for us. Two hours of lights on in daylight for a 350w system annually at $0.10/kWhr is $25.55 in totally wasted money and energy. The savings achieved through accurate timing continue year after year and if you need payback to justify the cost of an accurate light control system it is there. These wasted kilowatts go on your client's bill not yours and these costs are not seen as a separate charge on their monthly energy bill. It is up to you to act responsibly and do the right thing for the environment and your children's future.

[Eden Lights]

I have installed a Hadco control panel that uses the grasslin timer, but I didn't like the extra box beside the transformer. How do you use the grasslin unit? Mounting and wiring locations??
Thanks

[sitelights]

If a transformer comes equiped with a Grasslin mechanical clock the digital clock is a direct replacement. You simply unplug the line cord, open the case, remove the mechanical unit (two small brass bolts) disconnect the right-angle spade lugs (make a diagram of what goes where for reference) and mount the digital.

You can buy a 300w or 600w (2x300) transformer with the digital clock and photocontrol direct on the web at <www.escortlighting.com>; they also have a line of hand-crafted copper fixtures that are the best in the market.

If you have the R-3 plastic case with the DIGI42 you can remote the case by extending the 120v switched output wire between the case and the transformer. A unmounted DIGI42 is designated "A"; you can remove it from the case and use it as described above as a replacement.

[landscape liter]

Sitelights in a number of places on this site you "shill" for escort. Are you a principle in this company or get some kind of financial renumeration for guiding people to their site? Why would any serious design/installer want to support a company who sells direct to and promotes the Do-it-yourselfer market via a web site with so called "professional" quality equipment ? (I'm not talking big box kit lights here)
In addition you seem to contradict yourself in regards to the Do it yourself market using pro materials. Your website validates the practice by devoting a page to it. In a number of messages on this site you have taken your time to aid do it yourselfers by answering their questions. In other messages you are critical of DIYer activity as well as other tradespeople whom attempt to install professionally without seasoning and experience. What's the deal?

[sitelights]

I don't see any contradictions in what I am doing. Your use of the term "shill" is consistant with the cynicism you express in your post to "Engineering" about "product deficiencies" where you allude to ".. .kick backs...", etc. I praise the good and criticize the bad; I do not need incentives to do this. Escort is a very progressive company with a high quality product line that sells to the DIY market and to lighting professionals. They sell retail and wholesale; unlike other sites that discount to everyone, you must qualify as a professional to receive wholesale pricing from Escort. This small company is introducing a much-improved wedge-base socket that accepts a long-life xenon lamp. It spent a considerable amount of time and money developing this socket while many others continue to use inferior automotive type lamps.

My attitude about DIYers is stated in a post to "Technical Tips" dated 08.15.01 where I go to some trouble to give the member a good response to his question. I have always supported the DIYer because I know that most people are reluctant or unable to spend what it takes to get a professionally designed and installed outdoor lighting system. The DIY market is irrelevant except for the fact that I have done many projects that entailed removing the old DIY equipment and replacing it with professional grade materials. People who have an interest in lighting but have been defeated by the poor performance and high maintenance of DIY kits are a significant and, one could say, pre-sold segment of our market.

It would be helpful if you could direct me to any post where I am critical of the DIYer (as opposed to the DIY market). I try to save my criticism (and my disdain) for shoddy products and poor workmanship in the area of self-proclaimed professionalism. Use of the term "professional" is like "respect"; you have to earn it.

[JC Lighting]

Dear Sitelights,

I currently use the computer interface module from the "Active Home" x-10 kit with an appliance module to control the transformers. The computer interface can be programed to come on at dusk and off at a predetermined time. This unit has a battery backup and knows when dusk is based on latitude etc and deals with Daylight Savings time, but I'm not sure about leap years. This is the best and cheapest (~$65) method I've found. I was wondering what your thoughts are regarding x-10.

Regards,

Jim C.

[sitelights]

My control system of choice was dealt with in depth in the first post on this thread; it is not an ideal system but it is a functional, reliable and economical alternative to the problematic and inadequate mechanical timers prevalent in the business. An astronomical time clock control eliminating the photocontrol part of the timing would be the best of all possible worlds. We replace at least one photocontrol every week, 52 weeks a year; these items "drift" (early "on" or locked "on" in daylight) over time. I have relentlessly pursued a better solution to the problem but it is pointless to trade one problem for another.

I would like to say something positive about the X-10 concept but in terms of direct experience I cannot. Line carrier (LC) systems like the X-10 are subject to error due to spikes, surges and corrupted line voltage; there is "clean" and there is "dirty" 120v/240v current. I believe that the X-10 system actually offers filters or other devices to mitigate the effect of corrupted supply voltage; these "band-aids" may work. Deviations in supply and anomolies in current components can negatively affect the reliability of LC systems and, for a striking example, ballasted systems. I am not dissing the X-10 concept, I am merely drawing attention to the downside of LC control systems. This topic really needs a product review comparing LC and and radio frequency (RF) controllers. I am not going to write this review because I have abandoned both systems; if I don't know enough about something I leave comparative product reviews to those that do. I did test a RF controller in a post "low voltage control devices" in the Product Reviews forum and it worked well and was perfectly suited to the application but I would not design an entire system around it.

In a purely anecdotal mode I can comment on my experience with line carrier (LC) and radio frequency (RF) controls systems. I have been working with a client, the owner of a large estate, for about 8 years and the original control system (X-10) is no longer in use. This X-10 system (installed by others: a licensed and upscale electrical contracting firm) had 36 Leviton controlled receptacles and the top-of-the-line Leviton control panel (an X-10 system under license). The elaborately configured and expertly installed system was disconnected due to signal anomolies despite the fact that this large property had its own power company transformer not shared with any other property. The X-10 derived system simply did not function in a manner that satisfied the client.

Another large-scale installation using RF signal control was wildly aberrant due to (my theory) the close proximity (1,000 yards) to the control tower of a regional airport. I was called in to correct this problem and wound up bypassing it entirely and installing a Grasslin/photocontrol system.

Beyond these experienced problems there is the problem of controlled receptacles used outdoors in an environment beyond their designed parameters. I see that the X-10 system is touted for outdoor applications not by the manufacturer but by the seller. Similarly, RF devices not specifically designed for outdoor use do not inspire confidence if used in an exposed location.

This is the same problem that I outline in other posts: equipment used in an outdoor setting and not designed specificly for low voltage landscape lighting applications is subject to conditions and demands outside of their design envelope.

You would be doing the members of lowvolt.org a great service if you would design and implement a series of tests that would compare the efficacy of these LC and RF systems and share your conclusions with us. If you read the comparative product reviews I have posted you will see that high technology and sophisticated test procedures are not really necessary; when compared, using whatever parameters you choose, some useful information about products is bound to surface.