Why do US lamp parts use an "IP" thread ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Stephen Tashi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lamp parts Thread
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the use of the "IP" thread standard in lamp parts in the USA, exploring reasons for its adoption and comparing it to European practices. Participants express frustrations regarding compatibility with standard hardware store components and delve into historical and economic factors influencing the thread standard.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether there are reasons beyond tradition for the use of the "IP" thread standard in US lamps.
  • One participant suggests that the initial choice may have been economically motivated, as using standard parts would allow consumers to purchase from various sources, reducing manufacturers' profits.
  • Another participant notes that the straight pipe threads used in lamps may have originated from the gas pipes used in earlier gas lamps, potentially simplifying manufacturing and consumer use in the past.
  • Several participants mention "historical accident" as a significant factor in the persistence of the "IP" thread standard, weighing the costs of changing such standards against potential benefits.
  • One participant expresses frustration with historical conventions in physics, using Benjamin Franklin's choice of electric charge polarity as an example of arbitrary decisions that have long-lasting impacts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the reasons for the "IP" thread standard's use, with multiple competing views and interpretations of historical context and economic motivations presented.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the limitations of understanding the historical context and economic factors influencing the adoption of the "IP" thread standard, as well as the unresolved nature of the compatibility issues with standard hardware components.

Stephen Tashi
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Education Advisor
Messages
7,864
Reaction score
1,605
Is there a reason (other than tradition) why lamps in the USA use threaded tubing that has an "IP" thread standard ?

Does Europe have a better approach ?

I find it irritating that the nuts and connectors in the main part of local hardware stores don't fit the threaded tubing in lamps. You have to shop in the "lamp parts" section of the store and the nuts and connectors there are (to me) inconveniently small and delicate.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Stephen Tashi said:
Is there a reason (other than tradition) why lamps in the USA use threaded tubing that has an "IP" thread standard ?

Does Europe have a better approach ?

I find it irritating that the nuts and connectors in the main part of local hardware stores don't fit the threaded tubing in lamps. You have to shop in the "lamp parts" section of the store and the nuts and connectors there are (to me) inconveniently small and delicate.
My belief is that this, like many such things, was done for a very simple reason. Money. If the manufacturers used standard parts, you could buy them from just anyone. This way you have to buy purpose-made parts and they make a bit of money on it. That's probably no longer true in that there are likely now many sources for such parts, but that's my belief about why it started that way.
 
The threads are straight pipe threads. Most pipe threads you encounter (like in plumbing) are tapered. I read somewhere that electric lamps use the straight threads (and the pitches) originally used in the gas pipes in the gas lamp days. Presumably that made the customer's lives easier in 1910 or thereabouts.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: billy_joule
"Historical accident" is the common answer to many such questions. And it is a very good reason. Consider the benefits of changing such a standard compared to the costs. Only rarely do the benefits outweigh the costs.

My pet peeve is the arbitrary choice that Benjamin Franklin made about which polarity of electric charge was called "positive". I wager that one million years from now, physicists will still be using Franklin's convention.
 
anorlunda said:
"Historical accident" is the common answer to many such questions. And it is a very good reason. Consider the benefits of changing such a standard compared to the costs. Only rarely do the benefits outweigh the costs.

My pet peeve is the arbitrary choice that Benjamin Franklin made about which polarity of electric charge was called "positive". I wager that one million years from now, physicists will still be using Franklin's convention.
And cussing all the while.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
15K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
10K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
10K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
Replies
15
Views
41K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K