Lighting Q - how many flourescents

[RickH]

I have recently built a double 'outbuilding' ... I now want to fit
fluorescent lights in each 'bay'

As the ceiling is not boarded - open trusses, there will be no reflection
downwards of light off a ceiling.
I intend using IP65 weatherproof versions, ... anybody know of a guide or even of freeware to calculate, how many & what size I will need.
Floor area is :
In one bay - 2.54 x 8m \This bay has walls on 3 sides - open front, used as car port.
This also has a cross wall providing a 'shed' at one end taking 3m of the 5m run.

And in the other bay.... 3.75 x 8m
This is open at front and one side (wall is post & gallows brackets construction)... and is used as a 'boat shed'

Floor to truss joist is 2.32m

I could fit lights up 100mm or so higher than the joist, so that angle of
dispersion is slightly improved, but if I fit them higher than that the
trusses will cause too many shadows.

Guestimate is to go and fit 2 x 6' double fittings at 1/3rd in from each end in each bay ... but no details to support this.

Read a post elsewhere that 6' fittings are becoming obsolete - but seems no shortage in wholesalers.

 

[Stoday]

You won't find any guide unless you can say what you want the lighting for or what ligh level you want to achieve.

Maybe this helps:

I have seven 1800mm fluorescents in my double garage, which I use as a workshop. The lighting level is, I think, just adequate.

 

[RickH]

OK .... these are outbuildings, so use is occasional ... no bench work, or detailed.

For example if I want to put something into boat, or put boat into shed ... need light to do it.

Is there a guide illumination for
Hundreds of thousands of home are built with garages. so though there might be a guide to illumination.

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[RickH]

Do you mean single or double fittings ?

Both bays are open fronted, and boat shed has one side open as well.

Lights will not get any direct water on them, but as they are in 'outside air' I thought about using IP65 cased lights just to avoid corrosion.

I have noticed that standard fittings start to rust quite easily ... so thought the polycarbonate fittings which have built in reflectors would be worth using.

All cabling will be within conduit ... for physical protection, not for water resistance.

 

[Monkeh]

If you really need ip65 then you will not be able to use T&E cable

Why not?

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[Monkeh]

If you really need ip65 then you will not be able to use T&E cable

Why not?

Because there is no such thing as an ip65 T&E cable termination, in fact there never has been any approved method of terminating it in any conditions.

I believe there is a company in Germany that makes an insert for stuffing glands, the insert has a rectangular hole.

You could argue that T&E cable does not comply with BS7671 because there is not (and never has been) any proprietary way of termination.

http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Products/TLTEG2.html

Seems fine to me.

 

[RickH]

RickH, I meant doubles.

One of the major problems with external fittings is condensation, so polycarbonate sound good but if you get cheap ones or they are not properly sealed you could have problems. From your description you should have good airflow through the outbuilding, personally I would opt for unsealed fittings.

I have a 25 year old out buiding with good ventilation, it is always bone dry and the steel light fittings have not rusted.

The open fronts and one bay with open side, means rain blows in ... it would never get on fittings ... but floor does get wet, so plenty of damp air on times.
The open side is specifically to allow air flow (to dry out boat) ... so it does not stay wet.

I 'thought' that standard Fluorescent would be likely to corrode .... if sealed are not needed - I could look at 'reflector options ... as reflectors would make sense as no ceiling to bounce light downwards.

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Because there is no such thing as an ip65 T&E cable termination

You could argue that T&E cable does not comply with BS7671 because there is not (and never has been) any proprietary way of termination.

If you're bonkers enough you can argue anything.

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[Monkeh]

Other than modifying a gland yourself?

 

[holmslaw]

..