LEDs and incandescent lighting are often compared against each other, as LEDs are designed to supersede traditional lighting technologies, including halogen lamps. For homeowners, maintenance is a key factor to take into consideration during purchase and usage.
Below takes a closer look at how the two lighting options differ, when it comes to maintaining lighting systems over long-term use.
Lifespan and Shock Resistance
While it’s true that LEDs come with higher upfront costs, the units are less expensive to maintain over time. By comparison, incandescent bulbs must be replaced more than 20 times in order to match the 50,000-hour average lifespan of LEDs. With this in mind, individuals looking for a long-term solution to powerful lighting should use LEDs.
Depending on the location the lights are installed in may determine the type of maintenance required. In outdoor locations, garages and basements, fixtures are more prone to damage. Incandescent lights need more protective components to withstand rough contact, since the bulbs are filament based.
LED lights can survive minor bumps and shock, due to their solid-state builds. This may also be advantageous for locations with limited space, as homeowners would not need to protect the lamps with cage guards or a bulky cover.
The Last Squeeze
In some cases, the last phase of the light’s lifecycle still offers usable illumination, at a depreciated rate. This allows the individual to delay maintenance and still utilize the light, before looking for a replacement.
When incandescent lights are at their last leg, the units fail completely. The bulbs go from 100 percent illumination to zero. This makes immediate maintenance necessary to maintain illumination in the area.
LEDs have a tendency to gradually fail over time, decreasing their output levels, as the diodes slowly run out. For homeowners, this ensures a certain level of lumen retention before complete failure.