Talk:Lightbulb socket

Energy Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Electrical engineering

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electrical engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electrical engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electrical engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Electrical engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Electrical engineeringelectrical engineering articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Sources on standards

NOTE: I'd like to find a reference to ANSI or similar standards so that we can remove the commercial links. NEMA (National Electrical Manufacturers Association ) seems like a likely source, but I can't find the document there. Help please!

(moved from article text) Melchoir (talk) 01:54, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately many of these designs are proprietary and second sourcing can be difficult. If there is an ANSI or NEMA number it is likely based on the original design of a particular manufacturer. This is the case with light bulbs, where published codes are a result of the original manufacturer's application for an ANSI code. Also, information currently posted on manufacturer's web sites is often sketchy. I had to use a paper copy of a 1990 catalog in my possession rather than refer to the current catalog because many designs have been dropped and are no longer available.

Many of the statements I've made are summarizations or recollections of design engineering best practices. Sources are from lectures, on the job training, design analysis and other non published sources. Someone (I believe it was Ed Kook) wrote that the development of the ellipsoidal spotlight was one of the most significant advances in lighting control of the 1930's & 40's and would not have been possible but for the development of the "base up" bulb design and the introduction of the Alzak aluminum reflector to replace silvered glass. --Mccainre (talk) 20:25, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More Edison Screws

Here in the UK, the main traditional 250V bulb bases are:

BC (Bayonet Cap); ES (Edison Screw[E27 ?]; SES (Small Edison Screw)

Most traditional torches, 1.5 to 6 Volt use: MES (Miniature Edison Screw)

Wouldn't this page be more appropriately called: Lightbulb Bases ? (As the bulbs are the primary part, that which is seen and measured and specified (and repeatedly replaced); sockets are (important but relatively) secondary ?)

(P.S. Its FLUORESCENT not FLOURESCENT, think FLU not Flo. Flour makes pastry, not light !)

Darkman101 (talk) 05:18, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We haven't even touched the miniature lightbulb bases yet. That might best be covered in its own page. --Mccainre (talk) 20:27, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Given the desire of others to omit too many specifics, perhaps we need to split this page and create a new page for a Table of Lightbulb Bases Mccainre (talk) 17:04, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But we have already articles atEdison screw and Bayonet mount that list socket trivia. Just how many splinters do we need? --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:49, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am reminded that the Edison screw sockets are also used in some places for fuses, and that while I was young I put a light bulb into the fuse socket as a safeguard against short circuits. 70.27.152.243 (talk) 19:10, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of "what", no "why"

Like so many electrotechnology articles, we might as well be copying a parts catalog as writing an encyclopledia. A list of socket trivia is not an article. Some explanation of *why* sockets are what they are would be worthwhile; the rest of it we can get from Sylvania or Osram or GE's catalog. --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:47, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are missing the point. Much of the material I've added of a technical nature is no longer in publication. A good example is the General Electric Large Lamp Catalog - the current edition of which omits about 50% of the material relating to bulbs, bases & sockets that an edition from the 1960s contained. A similar case may be made for Osram/Sylvania's current lampholder catalog. Old designs are no longer well documented. We are trying to ARCHIVE information for HISTORICAL REFERENCE purposes, not espouse any preference for one design or another.

A lighting fixture designer NEEDS dimensional information in order to design new equipment. YOU may consider such information to be useless, but millions of dollars can hinge on the availability of such information. Mccainre (talk) 05:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who takes a Wikipedia article as his sole source of design information is ...well, let's say...recklessly trusting. An encyclopedia is not the place to list tables of socket dimensions. This isnt't the handbook of luminaire design. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:49, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has the space (and the knowledgeable editors) to include far more information about a subject than any traditional paper encyclopedia. It seems reasonable to me that we should take full advantage of this.

I am an electronic technician, and many times I come to Wikipedia looking for technical details that might seem trivial to other people, but are of great interest and usefulness to me. Where else might I find such a great store of technical information all in one place ?

Only in Wikipedia can the entries be so "encyclopedic", that is, covering a subject so (reasonably) exhaustively. Darkman101 (talk) 09:48, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dumbing down content

It is very important for people to understand the reasons behind decisions made in the construction of commonplace objects. If you omit such information because it is "too technical" then you show your own ignorance of the subject. Accept that others include details because they are relevant to the understanding of the concept.

For example: my inclusion of the UL standard of 1000 amps per square inch of cross sectional area at 60°C is vital to understanding why the posts on the mogul bi-post socket are so large and why this socket might require a #4 feeder wire.

Mccainre (talk) 05:30, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If we could find a suorce documenting the design decisisons specifically about lamp bases, that would be great. But a UL cookbook standard for bus bars is not relevant to the geometry and application of a terminal on a lamp - you are familiar with the literature and must recognize that "1000 amps per square inch" is a convenient cook-book number that has a book-full of qualifications and exceptions; even the Copper Development Association Web calculator doesn't use that as a fixed rule, and they want to sell as much copper as possible. Right now we don't even mention how or why the Edison screw base won out over a dozen competitors. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:56, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As a frequent reader of Wikipedia, I appreciate these small technical details (such as the current density guideline discussed above) because they: 1) Are usually not easy to find unless I know to look for them, and 2) Provide useful information to a person such as myself who develops and maintains electro-optical equipment for a living, and 3) Encourage people to be more inquisitive, and help to tie together unvoiced observations ("I wonder why (s)he wrote that? So that's why those pins are so large!") — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.55.200.20 (talk) 18:58, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Types used around the world?

I'm wondering if anyone can start a section on types commonly used around the world, e.g. "Sockets in use around the world".

The Edison screw is the most popular for household lightbulbs in North America, and the Bayonet mount is used in the UK, India, Australia, New Zealand, and parts of the Middle East and Africa, but a comprehensive table or map would be really useful! thanks to anyone in advance! Facts707 (talk) 05:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eh?

So this article is back again, and once again is basically just a listing of different light bulb bases. If that's what this article is going to be about, then why not rename this article "List of light bulb bases" or something similar.

What's the point of all this "Construction and materials" stuff?

By the way, the proper term is "lamp socket" or "light socket" ("lamp holder" is also a term that manufacturers seem to be using these days, instead of the original term "lamp socket").

—{|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|} 19:05, 18 April 2012 (UTC).[reply]

(1) See my comment above in "Lots of "what", no "why"".

(2) "Lightbulb Socket" is the most commom term used to denote such items in regular colloquial English. Darkman101 (talk) 10:41, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: (2), could you provide evidence of this? Because I've often seen "light socket", etc., used by average Joes (if not just "socket"). —{|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|} 05:52, 4 May 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Many connectors missing

Many connectors missing like R7S or gu10 or H4. Also photos would be nice, I didn't understand the difference between pin and post attachments until I went elsewhere and understood the difference in scale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.98.161.81 (talk) 10:25, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I came looking for GU10 too. 91.125.202.31 (talk) 10:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Me too: what's a G24q?(q=quad, 4 pins. 24mm between pin centers. Maybe.) Unfortunately, I have no access to ANSI standards, and am not about to spring for them just to get the dimensions of a few sockets. Wish ANSI could find a better funding model.Captain Puget (talk) 02:43, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong name

The proper term is Lamp Base, and not Lightbulb Socket. 81.187.1.83 (talk) 00:35, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 5 October 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 00:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lightbulb socket → Lamp base – Correct name for this, amongst those skilled in the arts (and all the official references) Andy Dingley (talk) 22:12, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the USA, a "lamp base" is a home/office décor object that sits on a table top, often with an accessory lamp shade attached to its top. Instead of renaming to "lamp base", how about "lamp receptacle" or "lamp socket"? Both of these terms are commonly used by manufacturers and accurate descriptions of the devices covered in this article. Lambtron (talk) 13:10, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:Common name, although the current title may be too UK-centric. The term lamp base is going to baffle most general readers. The article actually uses lampholder socket in the text which may be a better title. SpinningSpark 13:41, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Lamp Base could mean part of the light bulb. Lamp base could be the bottom part of a floor standing lamp. Constant314 (talk) 20:55, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Also, for a pendant light I would say that the ceiling rose is the lamp base, not the socket. SpinningSpark 21:00, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the lamp base is a lamp without the lightbulb socket, such as is found in all electrical lamps. Further, for non-electrical lamps, the lamp base is the poirtion without the oil reservoir or the candle holder. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 02:36, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

History Section

There is no history section that ties together the relations between the different types of socket available today. I've heard that the bayonet socket was designed to overcome limitations of the Edison screw, specifically that thermal expansion/contraction causes Edison type sockets to unscrew, leading to increased resistance of the loose connection, resulting in heating of the contact points which may cause fire. I can't find any solid references to back this up, that's why a history section is needed.

There seems to be an amazing amount of zealot behaviour espousing the views of Edison/bayonet being better or worse than each other. Even the Bayonet_mount article seems lacking (or biased), since it makes no reference to when modern bayonet sockets for lighting (eg: B22) became commercially available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.101.115.19 (talk) 01:53, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Add an alternate name "light socket"?

Would anyone be opposed to my adding this alternate name? The article Fitting already uses it.--Adûnâi (talk) 01:35, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lightbulb socket. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://archive.is/20130816132543/http://www.ledgu10dimbaar.nl/website/index.php?TreeItem=391161&NewsItem=28097 to http://www.ledgu10dimbaar.nl/website/index.php?TreeItem=391161&NewsItem=28097

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:32, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possible consolidation of overlapping WP articles on lamp caps and lampholders.

A discussion is taking place at Talk:Bi-pin_connector#January_2018_rename_suggested on the possible consolidation of overlapping WP articles on lamp caps and lampholders. Please make any comments there, rather than here. JimmiCheddar (talk) 18:21, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Designation of base vs. designation of bulb

Ambiguity concerning designations exists at 2018-09-09. For example the Tn designations under "Fluorescent tubular lamp standards" refer to the bulb rather than base. The Tn designation can apply to an incandescent lamp with a wedge base as in this page under "Details + Specification". Regards, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 15:21, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]