Toronto Union Station Revitalization | ?m | ?s | City of Toronto | NORR

[steveintoronto]

The light fixtures in the Great Hall are not great enough for the Great Hall. They are nice, but lack any scale of presence worthy of such a large space. I like the light colour, as it goes well with the structure and material. But the amount of light is not sufficient, and it is not distributed well. It leaves the Great Hall feeling dingy and haggard instead of elegant.

I'm an electronic technologist, and LEDs have always fascinated me, but what looks good on paper, and what the retina and cortex discern are two very different things. LEDs can be so harsh that even for pilot lights on equipment, (guitar amplifiers, for instance) manufacturers are switching back to filament bulbs. And it's more than just colour temperature and wave-front contiguousness, but that's a whole other discussion in itself.

Here's the future:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/...nt-light-bulbs-as-mit-makes-them-more-effici/

I quickly Googled that, MIT and others have published papers on the web on it. It got scant mention in the mass media, and yet it's re-revolutionary.

Hopefully when lighting is considered for 'Onion' Station, it will be forward compatible with much more *friendly* light.

I can now update this. Quick comment revisiting what Don wrote: Clearly he makes good points. The Great Hall looks clean and *sanitary*....but that's the problem, it's lit like a latrine, one built for function, not satisfaction. And even then, not that well lit, at all. I've seen street lighting far more effective in creating a mood, as well as the necessary function of seeing.

Some readers mentioned LED lighting, and even though I'm an electronic technologist, and have just finished working on projects utilizing LEDs, huge numbers of them in displays, I ended up at odds with the designers, as I thought LEDs were a harsh, uninviting and *clinical* way of doing it. Plus there are technical issues I won't go into, thus my research into thermally emissive sources (a la filament).

And now the other harshly lit shoe drops!

Streetlights leading to health questions

Councillors ask for study into blue light effects

• Metro Canada (Toronto)
• 21 Sep 2016
• Luke simcoe Metro | toronto

Ethan MillEr/GEtty iMaGEs FilE
City of Las Vegas field electrician John Meier replaces a streetlight with a new LED fixture in 2011.
A plan to convert Toronto’s street lamps to LED lights has a pair of local councillors feeling a bit blue.

Mary-Margaret McMahon and Stephen Holyday are asking the city to study the health effects of LED lights, known for their blue hue.

“If you’ve ever used an iPad or an iPhone at night, you’ll notice it has an effect on your eyes and changes some chemistry,” Holyday told Metro.

The vast majority of street lamps in Toronto use conventional sodium bulbs, but Toronto Hydro has installed 150 LED streetlights on six streets across the city as part of a pilot project.

The bulbs can reduce energy and maintenance costs, said Toronto Hydro spokeswoman Tori Glass. The plan is to eventually roll out the new bulbs citywide.

Before that happens, Holyday and McMahon have some questions about whether the lights will prevent people from getting ample shuteye – or prevent drivers from seeing pedestrians crossing the road.

The American Medical Association recently issued a statement warning the “improper” use of LED streetlights can negatively impact both sleep and safety.

“Brighter residential nighttime lighting is associated with reduced sleep times, dissatisfaction with sleep quality, excessive sleepiness, impaired daytime functioning and obesity,” the association said.

As well, the association found blue LED lights can create worse nighttime glare than conventional lights, decreasing “visual acuity” and “creating a road hazard.”

The medical association suggests cities use LED bulbs with lower light temperatures, thereby reducing the amount of blue light emitted.

Pedestrian advocacy group Walk Toronto says they’re still studying the potential impacts of LED streetlights. However, Walk Toronto member Michael Black said safety should trump any concerns about beauty rest.

Holyday said he’s not opposed to rolling out LED lights, he just wants the city to “get it right.” His joint motion with Coun. McMahon will be considered at next week’s public works and infrastructure committee meeting.

Glass said Toronto Hydro will follow any direction it receives about streetlights from city council.

http://www.pressreader.com/canada/metro-canada-toronto/20160921/281522225561376

This comes as absolutely no surprise to me. The strobe effects alone are such that you transmit gigs of bits over optic fibre, LEDs switch on and off at "light speed". Some of that harshness can be addressed by using filtered DC instead of AC current, but it still leaves the colour temp conundrum. LEDs make fluorescents look like the candlelight in Barry Lyndon by comparison.
How Stanley Kubrick Shot Barry Lyndon Using Natural Light ...

The answer, more than ever, is to treat eyes to what they evolved with over the eons: Thermally emitted photons. And that's filament lighting.

I'm intrigued with how warm the Royal York lighting in the pic posted by Don is. Must visit and take a look. Any bets on it being filament? It certainly looks it, unless that pic was filtered. LED lighting is penny-wise, cortex foolish. And LED claimed longevity, btw, is proving to be a crock of cracked crickets, but that's another topic.

http://news.mit.edu/2016/nanophotonic-incandescent-light-bulbs-0111

 

[Forgotten]

I can now update this. Quick comment revisiting what Don wrote: Clearly he makes good points. The Great Hall looks clean and *sanitary*....but that's the problem, it's lit like a latrine, one built for function, not satisfaction. And even then, not that well lit, at all. I've seen street lighting far more effective in creating a mood, as well as the necessary function of seeing.

Some readers mentioned LED lighting, and even though I'm an electronic technologist, and have just finished working on projects utilizing LEDs, huge numbers of them in displays, I ended up at odds with the designers, as I thought LEDs were a harsh, uninviting and *clinical* way of doing it. Plus there are technical issues I won't go into, thus my research into thermally emissive sources (a la filament).

And now the other harshly lit shoe drops!

http://www.pressreader.com/canada/metro-canada-toronto/20160921/281522225561376

This comes as absolutely no surprise to me. The strobe effects alone are such that you transmit gigs of bits over optic fibre, LEDs switch on and off at "light speed". Some of that harshness can be addressed by using filtered DC instead of AC current, but it still leaves the colour temp conundrum. LEDs make fluorescents look like the candlelight in Barry Lyndon by comparison.
How Stanley Kubrick Shot Barry Lyndon Using Natural Light ...

The answer, more than ever, is to treat eyes to what they evolved with over the eons: Thermally emitted photons. And that's filament lighting.

I'm intrigued with how warm the Royal York lighting in the pic posted by Don is. Must visit and take a look. Any bets on it being filament? It certainly looks it, unless that pic was filtered. LED lighting is penny-wise, cortex foolish. And LED claimed longevity, btw, is proving to be a crock of cracked crickets, but that's another topic.

http://news.mit.edu/2016/nanophotonic-incandescent-light-bulbs-0111

This is almost an Elizabeth May level of ignorance of science and technology. LED's can be made in any colour temperature and without flicker and all of it is available in stores now. Hard to believe street lighting companies and interior designers wouldn't have access to $10 advanced technology.

Make no mistake, they didn't pick orange sodium lamps because they looked good or because they're safer. They only picked it because it was cheap to buy and or maintain. Orange candle light makes streets even more unsafe than the alternatives.

 

[steveintoronto]

Nice rant there, Forgotten. Perhaps a reference or two might help it be factual? I've already addressed a number of issues with LED lighting, but you insist on believing salesman spiel instead of actual research.

For now, feel absolutely free to dispute this: (It was passsed unanimously by the membership based on the research presented)

June 14, 2016

AMA Adopts Community Guidance to Reduce the Harmful Human and Environmental Effects of High Intensity Street Lighting
For immediate release:
June 14, 2016

CHICAGO - Strong arguments exist for overhauling the lighting systems on U.S. roadways with light emitting diodes (LED), but conversions to improper LED technology can have adverse consequences. In response, physicians at the Annual Meeting of the American Medical Association (AMA) today adopted guidance for communities on selecting among LED lighting options to minimize potential harmful human and environmental effects.

Converting conventional street light to energy efficient LED lighting leads to cost and energy savings, and a lower reliance on fossil-based fuels. Approximately 10 percent of existing U.S. street lighting has been converted to solid state LED technology, with efforts underway to accelerate this conversion.

"Despite the energy efficiency benefits, some LED lights are harmful when used as street lighting," AMA Board Member Maya A. Babu, M.D., M.B.A. "The new AMA guidance encourages proper attention to optimal design and engineering features when converting to LED lighting that minimize detrimental health and environmental effects."

High-intensity LED lighting designs emit a large amount of blue light that appears white to the naked eye and create worse nighttime glare than conventional lighting. Discomfort and disability from intense, blue-rich LED lighting can decrease visual acuity and safety, resulting in concerns and creating a road hazard.

In addition to its impact on drivers, blue-rich LED streetlights operate at a wavelength that most adversely suppresses melatonin during night. It is estimated that white LED lamps have five times greater impact on circadian sleep rhythms than conventional street lamps. Recent large surveys found that brighter residential nighttime lighting is associated with reduced sleep times, dissatisfaction with sleep quality, excessive sleepiness, impaired daytime functioning and obesity.

The detrimental effects of high-intensity LED lighting are not limited to humans. Excessive outdoor lighting disrupts many species that need a dark environment. For instance, poorly designed LED lighting disorients some bird, insect, turtle and fish species, and U.S. national parks have adopted optimal lighting designs and practices that minimize the effects of light pollution on the environment.

Recognizing the detrimental effects of poorly-designed, high-intensity LED lighting, the AMA encourages communities to minimize and control blue-rich environmental lighting by using the lowest emission of blue light possible to reduce glare. The AMA recommends an intensity threshold for optimal LED lighting that minimizes blue-rich light. The AMA also recommends all LED lighting should be properly shielded to minimize glare and detrimental human health and environmental effects, and consideration should be given to utilize the ability of LED lighting to be dimmed for off-peak time periods.

The guidance adopted today by grassroots physicians who comprise the AMA's policy-making body strengthens the AMA's policy stand against light pollution and public awareness of the adverse health and environmental effects of pervasive nighttime lighting.

###

Media Contact:
AMA Media and Editorial
Pressroom: (312) 239-4991
Email: media@ama-assn.org

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/news/news/2016/2016-06-14-community-guidance-street-lighting.page

You can read more about it here:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/21/health/led-streetlights-ama/

I repeat my recommendation, since you obviously missed it: "Make Union Station lighting forward compatible". What's your problem with that exactly? Do you sell LEDs?

I have extensive experience working with them. If you have some technical issues, then by all means, let's discuss them. I've already mentioned filtered DC supplies (filter, in the tech sense: reservoir capacity) to address the flicker, but it still leaves problematic issues the retina and cortex have trouble handling.

How about those really efficient new plastic chairs, eh? Much cheaper, last longer, much harsher. They come in all sorts of colours...

This is almost an Elizabeth May level of ignorance of science and technology.

Spoken like Stephen Harper's Science Minister. Anyone for Creationism?

Perhaps you'd care to set MIT straight? Or do you not bother to read on what the latest breakthroughs are? Or does MIT cue Mitt Romney for you?

Researchers combine the warm look of traditional light bulbs with 21st-century energy efficiency.

David L. Chandler | MIT News Office
January 11, 2016

Press Inquiries
Share
Comment
Traditional light bulbs, thought to be well on their way to oblivion, may receive a reprieve thanks to a technological breakthrough.

Incandescent lighting and its warm, familiar glow is well over a century old yet survives virtually unchanged in homes around the world. That is changing fast, however, as regulations aimed at improving energy efficiency are phasing out the old bulbs in favor of more efficient compact fluorescent bulbs (CFLs) and newer light-emitting diode bulbs (LEDs).

Incandescent bulbs, commercially developed by Thomas Edison (and still used by cartoonists as the symbol of inventive insight), work by heating a thin tungsten wire to temperatures of around 2,700 degrees Celsius. That hot wire emits what is known as black body radiation, a very broad spectrum of light that provides a warm look and a faithful rendering of all colors in a scene.

But these bulbs have always suffered from one major problem: More than 95 percent of the energy that goes into them is wasted, most of it as heat. That’s why country after country has banned or is phasing out the inefficient technology. Now, researchers at MIT and Purdue University may have found a way to change all that.

The new findings are reported in the journal Nature Nanotechnology by three MIT professors — Marin Soljačić, professor of physics; John Joannopoulos, the Francis Wright Davis Professor of physics; and Gang Chen, the Carl Richard Soderberg Professor in Power Engineering — as well as MIT principal research scientist Ivan Celanovic, postdoc Ognjen Ilic, and Purdue physics professor (and MIT alumnus) Peter Bermel PhD ’07.

Light recycling

The key is to create a two-stage process, the researchers report. The first stage involves a conventional heated metal filament, with all its attendant losses. But instead of allowing the waste heat to dissipate in the form of infrared radiation, secondary structures surrounding the filament capture this radiation and reflect it back to the filament to be re-absorbed and re-emitted as visible light. These structures, a form of photonic crystal, are made of Earth-abundant elements and can be made using conventional material-deposition technology.

That second step makes a dramatic difference in how efficiently the system converts electricity into light. One quantity that characterizes a lighting source is the so-called luminous efficiency, which takes into account the response of the human eye. Whereas the luminous efficiency of conventional incandescent lights is between 2 and 3 percent, that of fluorescents (including CFLs) is between 7 and 15 percent, and that of most commercial LEDs between 5 and 20 percent, the new two-stage incandescents could reach efficiencies as high as 40 percent, the team says.

The first proof-of-concept units made by the team do not yet reach that level, achieving about 6.6 percent efficiency. But even that preliminary result matches the efficiency of some of today’s CFLs and LEDs, they point out. And it is already a threefold improvement over the efficiency of today’s incandescents.

The team refers to their approach as “light recycling,” says Ilic, since their material takes in the unwanted, useless wavelengths of energy and converts them into the visible light wavelengths that are desired. “It recycles the energy that would otherwise be wasted,” says Soljačić.
[...]

http://news.mit.edu/2016/nanophotonic-incandescent-light-bulbs-0111

 

[Forgotten]

Even though you deleted your response I invite you to go to any large electronics supplier and have a look at their inventory. You'll be able to buy any type of light you want from around 2000K to 10000K and any power transformer that provides flicker free lighting. If you or I can buy it and have it delivered next day so can the big lighting companies or designers. The problem is the people putting out the proposals and designs don't know what they're doing.

On the second point, I don't need to explain. Check any lighting supply store and you can find sodium bulbs up to 400 watts for $15-20 in single unit buys. Higher wattages are a bit more. They're dirt cheap and that's the only reason why they're used everywhere. I tell no lies.

 

[steveintoronto]

"Lighting Store"? Fascinating reference there. Don't forget to fill up the tank with leaded while you're at it.

I deleted the last post to compose a more extensively referenced one. Sorry to confuse you with science. I've been designing and servicing LED arrays for decades.

 

[EnviroTO]

The answer, more than ever, is to treat eyes to what they evolved with over the eons: Thermally emitted photons. And that's filament lighting.

There is nothing scientific about this comment. This is "the old way is the good way" type logic that anti-science is filled with. A photon is a photon, and photons with the same energy are identical regardless of whether or not they were created by LED or filament lighting. That isn't to say that some LED lights aren't harder on your eyes and the issue is in how AC to DC conversion is done to ensure constant flow of light. Using filament lighting is just wasting energy.

 

[steveintoronto]

A photon is a photon, and photons with the same energy are identical regardless of whether or not they were created by LED or filament lighting.

Speaking of "Science"....you display an incredible lack of understanding physics. A photon isn't the point of discussion. Wavefronts and their nature are. You might as well say "An atom is an atom" when comparing the toxicity of Ozone to Oxygen. Same atoms, just a different arrangement, thus a different molecule.

This is "the old way is the good way" type logic that anti-science is filled with.

"Anti-Science" would be not reading the evidence supplied, and the newest breakthroughs, not to mention not referencing it. Not that you'd be doing anything like that now...

Yet again, for those that refuse to read: (click on the"click to expand" indication at the bottom of the following)(get help if you need it)

Traditional lightbulbs – that is to say, cheap incandescent varieties – are typically only five percent efficient, losing 95 percent of energy to the atmosphere. The MIT team determined they could wrap the filament with a special crystal structure inside the bulb’s glass to “recycle” energy that is usually lost. The result, according to tests on the proof-of-concept design, is an incandescent bulb that emits the familiar warm glowing light while reaching efficiency levels up to 40 percent. In addition to being a huge improvement over traditional bulbs, MIT’s new bulb also blows LED and fluorescent lighting out of the water, since those typically top out around 14 percent efficiency.

The other huge selling point of the new bulb is the quality of the light it emits. Rather than a clinical white light like LEDs, the updated incandescent shows colors more naturally, mimicking daylight more closely. That accomplishment is measured in a bulb’s “color rendering index,” and traditional incandescent bulbs rate 100, matching daylight hues exactly. The closest an LED or fluorescent bulb can come is 80, but most modern energy-efficient bulbs on the market today rate much lower.

“An important feature is that our demonstrated device achieves near-ideal rendering of colours,” said principal research scientist Ivan Celanovic. “That is precisely the reason why incandescent lights remained dominant for so long: their warm light has remained preferable to drab fluorescent lighting for decades.”

http://inhabitat.com/mit-makes-a-warm-incandescent-light-bulb-nearly-3x-more-efficient-than-leds/

Well at least Enviro got "filament" right. Forgotten evidently has no idea that Sodium bulbs are arc, not filament. It's amazing how some who love to lecture on "science" can't get their facts straight, let alone produce reference.

And I repeat yet again: "I hope that Union Station makes their lighting forward compatible" with the next huge jump in lighting. Ostensibly the tendency for wiring will be back to standard code 120 or 240 V. The reduced current needed per lumen output means the wiring gauge needed for LEDs and their drivers will be multiples more than needed for 'super' filament types, but better too much than too little. Industrial level of LED lighting is almost always run low voltage (typically 12V) which might allow for forward compatible super filament 12V types if manufactured as direct replacements. LED drivers, however, might have trouble handling the initial turn-on surge for cold filaments. This is something that should be addressed in the design stage before reno'd Union is stuck with what might rapidly become an obsolete and *inefficient* mode of lighting.

 

[mdrejhon]

LED drivers, however, might have trouble handling the initial turn-on surge for cold filaments. This is something that should be addressed in the design stage before reno'd Union is stuck with what might rapidly become an obsolete and *inefficient* mode of lighting.

I suspect a lot of old wiring for, say, the Great Hall, will probably remain especially if the late-1970s reno put in some good modern wiring still in good shape. Those are overkill for LED. Many lights will probably remain Edison screw sockets, assuring forward compatibility. But I realize a lot of LED fixtures are 'integrated', like the new LED cobra streetlamps (preventing forward/backward compatibility)

FWIW, I've equipped my house with CRI 90+ LEDs darn near impossible (for most, anyway) to distinguish in an enclosed lamp. Those recently gotten cheap now (For example, 2016-model IKEA bulbs; 4.99ea or dimmable 6.99ea -- none of that CRI 80-or-less crap). Plus a few antique-look 'filament' LED bulbs. 2700K for the ones that usually stay dimmed brighter, and 2200K for the ones that usually get dimmed dimmer; as there is no dim-to-redden behavior in 'filament' LED bulbs.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Not to dismiss the idea of using LEDs (and it is getting OT), but same colour temperature does not mean same light:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/tec...-fluorescent-vs-led-ultimate-light-bulb-test/
http://www.ledsmagazine.com/article...ximize-success-with-leds-part-4-magazine.html

AoD

 

[steveintoronto]

Doing some digging on what is being proposed for Union's lighting, and came across this:

Union Station Heritage Lighting Consulting Services for the Great Hall
[...]

http://www.merx.com/English/SUPPLIER_Menu.Asp?WCE=Show&TAB=1&PORTAL=MERX&State=7&id=309830&src=osr&FED_ONLY=0&ACTION=&rowcount=&lastpage=&MoreResults=&PUBSORT=2&CLOSESORT=0&IS_SME=N&hcode=8EE5ZjYTr1xBBy0/C5yc0w==

As to 'turn on current in-rush surge' for cold filament lighting, there's an inexpensive way to address that, as is done with vacuum tubes (my specialty, albeit I do solid state too) and it's a form of semiconductor, albeit the resistance has a negative co-efficient, so as it gets cooler, resistance increases, thus making for a much longer life thermionic device. It's termed a "varistor". There are other ways of addressing the challenge, and normally the impedance of the wire feeing a bulb is suffice to offer some 'in-rush protection', but if LEDs are later upgraded to 'super bulbs', best their drivers are taken right out of the circuit, as LEDs themselves may be more efficient than older style filament bulbs, but their attendant circuitry dissipates huge amounts of heat, and is a weak spot for longevity in itself. In the event, varistors might be built right into the new 'super bulbs'. It would be much more efficient to run them on 'line' current (120 or 240 V) as even step-down transformers have inherent insertion loss.

Back to Union's present lighting. A surprising number of hits show Googling:
Enter into Google: toronto union station lighting

I'll paste in two examples of the Great Hall, as taken along with what Don Valley posted two days back, it shows a radical difference in apparent colour temp from the same lighting, but a different capture medium:

Similar amounts of natural light coming through the windows, but a *radically different* visual result. That could be for a number of reasons, (not least filtering) but it underlines the inability of posting pictures to make the point on lighting effect.

Edit: Alvin's post just went up while composing this one. Indeed, the two pics I posted illustrate how difficult it's going to be to compare effects of lighting in an objective way. Or the inverse: "Same light does not mean same colour temperature"

but same colour temperature does not mean same light:

Second Edit: Alvin posted a superbly good reference citing highly technical research in his second link. LED companies usually try and hide from the obvious optical shortcomings *as that pertains to the human psyche*, this article defines them, so they can be better addressed. They *cannot* be fully addressed, as the article makes clear. As I mentioned in a prior post, the eyes, like our auditory, olfactory and other sense, evolved to best suit the needs to survive. It's no mistake, for instance, that the range of human hearing matches that of the human voice. Think about it...ditto the eyes optimized to candle-light and other flame sources as well as daylight. (Night and day vision)

Article states:
"It is rather standard practice today to increase the color saturation of digital photos using image processing software."

And that is a form of "filtering" as we see in the pics posted of the Great Hall. I went to the web source of the second, the 'warm' one, and it's saturated to the point of appearing to be a painting.

But this raises another important aspect of visual acumen:
"While matching the SPD of an LED to the V(λ) curve as closely as possible will make a very efficient and therefore bright light, it will not make white light. For that, we need some light on the blue and red ends of the spectrum even if the light at those wavelengths contribute little to brightness perceived by the eye. For cool white LEDs this is rather easy to do, by simply letting enough of the blue light from the LED leak through the phosphor."

And the effect of this is similar, if not the same, as *theatre lighting*! It not only creates a matrix that sums to the whole visible spectrum...it changes depth perception too! I won't even begin to try and define that one here, but suffice to say those who wear glasses will notice a peculiar change when shifting from glass to plastic lenses. Not only is the thickness of the lens reduced, with plastic, you get a 'rainbow halo' due the non-linearity of overall spectrum diffraction of plastic (some plastics are far worse/better than others) that the psyche does eventually compensate for (think software compensation, done all the time in digital optics), but often at the expense of headaches and fatigue...and a different sense of distance with the same refractive index! Stereoscopy has a large role to play in that, but it's not the complete explanation.

LEDs have very similar effects in many cases. It's far more than just colour temp. Echoes of the 'analog v digital' discussions on both audio and now movies, the latter playing odd tricks beyond those wanted with the recent spate of 'derived' 3D effects.

Hopefully those in charge of redoing the lighting in the Great Hall will be as good at what they do as acousticians are with concert halls. There's been as many failures with renovation affected acoustics in great music halls as there have been successes, not the least because "art is in the eye of the beholder". Efficiency as the end-all throws the baby out with the birth experience.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Maybe the holodeck computer could change the color spectrum frequency to an individual's liking.

 

[44 North]

Most go trains take up the whole length of those tracks as they are at least 10 or 12 cars long now. The only short trains in Union station these days are the via rail trains and the often park them on the same tracks as each other. The only exception is the 3 days a week that the Canadian is in Toronto.

Correct, having 12-car 300m trains stopping at either side of Union isn't optimal. But if we were to use 2, 4, or 6-car trains (50m, 100m, 150m) I think there could be merit. Aside from UPX we're not running this type of setup now, but I was under the impression that with the long-delayed increase in GO frequency we'd move toward shorter trains (e.g electrified express, express, ad2w, possible conversion of a line to metro standards). I was just curious if such a thing as a central surface waiting area with buffer stops on either side was ever considered prior to the revamp.

Yet again, for those that refuse to read: (click on the"click to expand" indication at the bottom of the following)(get help if you need it)

http://inhabitat.com/mit-makes-a-warm-incandescent-light-bulb-nearly-3x-more-efficient-than-leds/

I'd be interested to see what comes of this. I personally preferred filament lighting. The newer LEDs seem ok so far, but they're still too new to gauge whether they'll last as long as claimed. Seemed the CFs never lasted as long, and that any money saved from energy reduction was lost on account of their high-cost/short-lifespan.

 

[steveintoronto]

Maybe the holodeck computer could change the color spectrum frequency to an individual's liking.

lol...it's not as wild as it sounds. They already have "tunable" LEDs, made possible as described in the second link Alvin posted. Colour temp can be altered considerably, but other aspects (like the coherence of the wavefront) can't, albeit a phased array *might* soften that aspect somewhat. No matter what you do with LEDs, they still seem robotic and harsh compared to filament bulbs, albeit the halogen bulbs (very high temp filament) are also very blue biased, so much so that they carry warnings to use UV screens with them. Corneas were getting sintered.

Correct, having 12-car 300m trains stopping at either side of Union isn't optimal. But if we were to use 2, 4, or 6-car trains (50m, 100m, 150m) I think there could be merit. Aside from UPX we're not running this type of setup now, but I was under the impression that with the long-delayed increase in GO frequency we'd move toward shorter trains (e.g electrified express, express, ad2w, possible conversion of a line to metro standards). I was just curious if such a thing as a central surface waiting area with buffer stops on either side was ever considered prior to the revamp.

I think Track 3 is being used akin to this already. Just passed over Track 3 platform again yesterday from an incoming Lakeshore East train to UPX, and there were passengers on Track 3 obviously waiting for a train. Of course, you mean to *physically* split the track, and if a concept that I'm touting for "pre-RER" on the Bramalea to Union stretch being run by the F59s on tap to be retired/sold and three coach trains running every 15 mins, it would certainly utilize that arrangement well. Whether or not there's room for a waiting area by splitting the track is an open question, I'd favour some sort of run-through option on that track, and a waiting area on the other side of the north wall from Track 3 when it opens, but Track 3 could certainly offer a service akin to UPX. In lieu of buffers, a 'locked out' switch might be acceptable for regs, I'm unsure on the requirements for two trains stopping near end-to-end. Let's see what others post on the regs, and other suggestions, but once split in some manner, even with UPX using that track to stop further west, some arrangement of two shorter trains can be hosted on Track 3 plus the existing UPX.

I'd be interested to see what comes of this. I personally preferred filament lighting. The newer LEDs seem ok so far, but they're still too new to gauge whether they'll last as long as claimed. Seemed the CFs never lasted as long, and that any money saved from energy reduction was lost on account of their high-cost/short-lifespan.

There's a raging debate ongoing in the industry at this time. I was involved in finding a fix for *thousands* of LEDs browning out and completely failing for a massive display in Edmonton. That's as much as I can divulge on detail, but my suggested fix was to bathe them in mineral oil since they were already being used in test tubes for the purpose of display. Designer didn't like that concept (it also softened and dispersed the light better, as well as cooling the device junction) and decided in the end to replace them with much higher quality ones. We'll know in a few years whether that buys more time or not.

The established manufacturers are in a tizzy claiming theirs meet the longevity claim, but some studies debunk that, seeing only 75% of them lasting the claimed lifetime. The established names (there's four of them, three are European) blame the Chinese knock-offs for the problems, but the problem is intrinsic in the nature of the device. There's a lot of miffed customers out there, especially ones who use them for billboards and other forms of advertising.

 

[mdrejhon]

I'd be interested to see what comes of this. I personally preferred filament lighting. The newer LEDs seem ok so far, but they're still too new to gauge whether they'll last as long as claimed. Seemed the CFs never lasted as long, and that any money saved from energy reduction was lost on account of their high-cost/short-lifespan.

They do! It is actually conservative.
20,000 hours is actually 150,000 hours for many of them, if run in non-enclosed dry indoor fixtures. The 20,000 hours is a worse-case number.

LEDs are also used in optic fibers as a lowerrturning on/off million times per seconds.

I have 50 LED bulbs, some now pushing 8 years old 24/7 as safety (early Philips from 2008-2009, at 40 dollars a bulb), and none of the bulbs died except for one store brand model that was outdoors and its wetness seal got broken.

At least one bulb I have, exceeded 50,000 hours already. Real life hours. One that was running mostly 24/7 as a safety light for almost a decade. A Philips original, the first 'practical' LED 60-watt replacement from almost a decade ago.

Granted some cheap generics WILL fail. But good brands like Philips do oven tests and for those, the 20,000 hours is wickedly conservative... They may have cheapened a bit since, but the LED 60-watt replacement lightbulbs today no longer have/need heatsinks as they start to exceed 100lumen/watt.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

Correct, having 12-car 300m trains stopping at either side of Union isn't optimal. But if we were to use 2, 4, or 6-car trains (50m, 100m, 150m) I think there could be merit. Aside from UPX we're not running this type of setup now, but I was under the impression that with the long-delayed increase in GO frequency we'd move toward shorter trains (e.g electrified express, express, ad2w, possible conversion of a line to metro standards). I was just curious if such a thing as a central surface waiting area with buffer stops on either side was ever considered prior to the revamp.

First I don't think go transit is interested in shorter trains as it would mean more of them to meet the current level of passengers. Second Union station is what's called a through station and isn't set up to be used with tail tracks, because all trains go through it there used to be more tracks to bypass the platforms by go transit has taken those over to increase their use.

Another thing to add Union station was never designed for commuter trains it was initially designed for use by Canadian National and Canadian Pacific passenger trains the predecessors of Via rail. Go transit has only been using it since 1967.