Photo Gallery

Home > User galleries > Tuopeek > LP Sodium
Return to the thumbnail page FILE 1/10 See next file Skip to end
Osram 180w SOX This is quite an early 180w SOX LPS shown running in the top image. It’s Philips manufactured but has been labelled Osram. It was manufactured in March 1969. The lower image is of the electrode end of the lamp and there is a mark visible on the discharge tube where they touch close to the electrodes. I have seen this before once in a GEC 135W lamp and wonder if it is partly cause by the strong field between the two electrodes slowly damaging the glass. In this lamp's case, it’s possibly due to mechanical contact, as during run up, lamp expansion actually separated the touching point here by about 3mm. Keywords: Lamps

Osram 180w SOX


This is quite an early 180w SOX LPS shown running in the top image. It’s Philips manufactured but has been labelled Osram. It was manufactured in March 1969. The lower image is of the electrode end of the lamp and there is a mark visible on the discharge tube where they touch close to the electrodes. I have seen this before once in a GEC 135W lamp and wonder if it is partly cause by the strong field between the two electrodes slowly damaging the glass. In this lamp's case, it’s possibly due to mechanical contact, as during run up, lamp expansion actually separated the touching point here by about 3mm.

SOX180.jpg 3SOXd.jpg SOx18.jpg SOH60.jpg SLI60w.JPG
Lamp/Fixture Information
Manufacturer:Osram
Model Reference:SOX
Lamp
Lamp Type:Low pressure sodium
Burning Position:Horizontal
Electrical
Wattage:180w
Physical/Production
Fabrication Date:March 1969
File information
Filename:SOX180.jpg
Album name:Tuopeek / LP Sodium
Keywords:Lamps
Filesize:485 KiB
Date added:09 Feb 2026
Dimensions:2500 x 1927 pixels
Displayed:102 times
DateTime Original:2026:02:01 17:57:17
Exposure Time:1/320 sec
FNumber:f/9
File Source:Digital Still Camera
Flash:No Flash
Focal length:20 mm
ISO:100
Model:NIKON D3400
Software:Adobe Photoshop Elements 2.0
White Balance:0
URL:https://trad-lighting.net/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=1107
Favourites:Add to Favourites

Comment 1 to 9 of 9
Page: 1

AgentHalogen_87   [Mon 09 Feb 2026 at 22:38]
It's the big one! Cool What an absolute marvel of glasswork
Tuopeek   [Tue 10 Feb 2026 at 08:36]
yeah, amazing lamps. Don't think the 180w variant would have been long in production in 1969
Ria   [Tue 10 Feb 2026 at 13:25]
We love big SOX lamps..! We only have one 180W one though, GE branded if I recall correctly. Must fish it out again for a lighting, also the 131W SOX-E one LPS
Tuopeek   [Tue 10 Feb 2026 at 14:20]
The SOX-E 131W is the same size though? Wonder
Sammi   [Wed 11 Feb 2026 at 01:07]
Yes it is. LPS Love
Max   [Thu 12 Feb 2026 at 07:17]
Nice oldie! Interesting to see that it doesn't yet have the mid arctube supports. That black spot between the electrode could be some electrolytic damage, or a mechanical one with some "dirt" in it given that the glass tubes don't touch while in operation. Only way to know for sure is to keep burning the lamp and see if this mark grows or not...
Tuopeek   [Thu 12 Feb 2026 at 11:25]
Not sure when they introduced the mid tube supports. I had a feeling it might have been as late as the 2000s. I also think only Philips had these clips added. Often wondered if they actually reduced the efficiency slightly with the extra thermal conductive path to the outer wall of the lamp. Not sure I'll burn it long enough to test the theory of electrolytic damage but at least there is a record of how it started now here. Smile
Ria   [Fri 13 Feb 2026 at 02:34]
I may be wrong, but I think only Philips had the mid-arc tube supports. I've not seen them on any others, anyway Wonder
Max   [Tue 24 Feb 2026 at 07:07]
Good question. I've not really paid attention to such detail, but I think you're right Ria.

Tuopeek - Philips has used those mid support clips since the 1980s at least. Those certainly increases heat losses by conduction, so this must have a negative impact on the lamp performance, although this should be quite limited overall.

Comment 1 to 9 of 9
Page: 1