Rewiring a ballast. Help needed.

[Sam Goldwasser]

I apologize for the error.


The OP has described 5 wires going to a 4-pin lamp - so (at least) one
lamp pin must have two wires. One of those 5 wires goes directly to
the power line. He must not connect the starter to the lamp pin that
is connected to the power line. As you know, the starter is to be
connected from one end of the lamp to the other, and connected to the
side of each electrodes that is not connected to the ballast or power
line per _your_ diagram

Oh, then all he should be doing is substituting the glow starter for the
switch contacts. He shouldn't have to rewire the socket.

--- sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ Mirror: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/
Repair | Main Table of Contents: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/REPAIR/
+Lasers | Sam's Laser FAQ: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/sam/lasersam.htm
| Mirror Sites: http://repairfaq.ece.drexel.edu/REPAIR/F_mirror.html

Note: These links are hopefully temporary until we can sort out the excessive
traffic on Repairfaq.org.

Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is
ignored unless my full name is included in the subject line. Or, you can
contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs.

 

[Victor Roberts]

Oh, then all he should be doing is substituting the glow starter for the
switch contacts. He shouldn't have to rewire the socket.

You are correct, However, I was not suggesting he rewire the sockets,
only that with the limited info he provided we could be sure which 2
of the 4 contacts on the switch should be used for the starter.

--
Vic Roberts
http://www.RobertsResearchInc.com
To reply via e-mail:
replace xxx with vdr in the Reply to: address
or use e-mail address listed at the Web site.

 

[Terry]

But it must match his lamp. While the Op did not give us lamp data, he
indicated it was a 40-watt ballast. Therefore I am assuming the lamp
is a 40-watt or 34-watt lamp (until I get better information.) If the
OP lives in the US, I do not believe he can purchase a glow starter
for 40-watt lamps since they will not operate from 120 volt power
supplies.** if the OP lives in a part of the work where the normal
supply voltage is 220 to 240 volts, he should be able to find a glow
starter.

Not sure if that ** is correct? Reason is I have some older non working
older type fluorescents fixtures that I intend to update and respray that
have those little aluminum can type starters that definitely worked on 115
AC.
Some others have been converted to use the more modern type of ballast that
does not require starter.
In fact 50 years ago IIRC most/many f.fixtures used starters. They had/have
a little neon and a resistor inside and yes you had to have the right kind
of starter.
The more modern ballast without the starter (not the even more modern
electronic) is a lot more convenient. My reason for renovating older
fixtures is that I've got a lifetime supply of good used and new ballasts!
Also about 100 tubes (which are not that expensive anyway) at least 60% of
which are good! And other useful bits. All that is needed is a bit of
sanding a can of white spray paint and some time.
And also yes the simple fluorescent on top of our cooking stove has that
push and hold to start pre-heat type switch. The ballast for the fluorescent
in that, AFIK, is just a choke (series inductor)?
Have fun.

 

[Terry]

I'll try and locate a glow bottle. I live in a small town in Canada, and
there is not a lot of selection in some of the local stores. I'll try
Radio Shack and the local lumberyard, but I am not holding my breath. I'll
have to wait until I can get down to the "Big City" and see if I can
locate one there.
How would I wire the glow bottle into the circuit that I described? (With
the intention that the light is "always" in On mode. The timer will be
taking care of turning it on and off.)
Thanks, Sean

Sean I think I've got some starters somewhere I'll see if I can find them.
But if it's standard four footer tube might be simpler but a bit more
expensive to use a non-starter type ballast? All the spare ballasts I got
are for the two 40/34 watt type tube fixtures.
Email if you wish.
Another Terry. Newfoundland Canada.

 

[James Sweet]

Sean I think I've got some starters somewhere I'll see if I can find them.
But if it's standard four footer tube might be simpler but a bit more
expensive to use a non-starter type ballast? All the spare ballasts I got
are for the two 40/34 watt type tube fixtures.
Email if you wish.
Another Terry. Newfoundland Canada.

Installing a rapid start ballast is an option, though he'll have to fit a
grounded power cord to ground the reflector for that approach, and the high
humidity above the fish tank may prevent reliable starting. If I were doing
this myself I'd pick up an electronic ballast for an F32T8 tube and retrofit
it to T8, but then the old preheat start 40W T12's worked pretty well, the
ballasts tend to run the tubes hotter than the newer RS stuff.

 

[Victor Roberts]

Not sure if that ** is correct?

Sorry for the confusion. I said "power supply" thinking "power supply
to the lamp" and was thinking that all preheat circuits use a simple
series inductor (or resistor). I was unaware of preheat circuits that
use a step-up transformer until this thread. (Still seems silly in
view of rapid start ballasts.) With a step-up transformer, the voltage
supplied to the lamp is well over 120 volts.

Reason is I have some older non working
older type fluorescents fixtures that I intend to update and respray that
have those little aluminum can type starters that definitely worked on 115
AC.

These must use a step-up transformer.

--
Vic Roberts
http://www.RobertsResearchInc.com
To reply via e-mail:
replace xxx with vdr in the Reply to: address
or use e-mail address listed at the Web site.

 

[James Sweet]

These must use a step-up transformer.

--

They do, and they were quite common at one time. One other advantage they
have is that they lack separate windings providing continuous power to the
filaments in the tubes so the total power consumption is several watts
lower.

 

[Victor Roberts]

They do, and they were quite common at one time. One other advantage they
have is that they lack separate windings providing continuous power to the
filaments in the tubes so the total power consumption is several watts
lower.

The power savings is perhaps 1 watt per lamp and perhaps another watt
in the ballast. The downside is much shorter lamp life. Rapid Start
ballasts are by far the most common type of EM ballast use for 4-foot
fluorescent lamps in the US.

--
Vic Roberts
http://www.RobertsResearchInc.com
To reply via e-mail:
replace xxx with vdr in the Reply to: address
or use e-mail address listed at the Web site.

 

[T-M]

We need some input from Terry here, but we developed the 34-watt T12
energy saving lamp while I was working at GE Lighting in the
mid-1970's. One problem with the lamp was that due to the lower lamp
voltage the 34-watt lamp placed more voltage stress on the internal
capacitor in rapid start ballasts. When the new 34-watt lamp was
installed in fixtures with old rapid start ballasts, many of the
capacitors, which were near end of life anyway, blew. So these
ballasts must have been almost 20 years old by 1975- which means they
were popular by the mid-1950s. By the mid-1970's the 40-watt rapid
start lamp was nearing the end of its life due to the new 34-watt
rapid start lamp.


Well, we had lots of Power Groove lamps at Nela Park along with its
inventor - who I believe was Gene Lemmers - who also co-invented the
rapid start ballast, I believe with John Aicher. Terry, can you help
here? The Power Groove lamp was introduced by GE about 1956 and was a
rapid start lamp, so the basic rapid start system must be older than
that.

--
Vic Roberts
http://www.RobertsResearchInc.com
To reply via e-mail:
replace xxx with vdr in the Reply to: address
or use e-mail address listed at the Web site.

Rapid start circuits appear to date from the early 1950s. I have a GE
publication dated 1/56 that describes them and calls them "new", but
which devotes most of the fluorescent section to switch-start circuits. I
remember seeing my first rapid start installation while in college
about 1958 and being fascinated by the smooth starting of a room
full of fixtures without the usual blinking and flickering that
characterized switch-start lamps.

The F90T17 is still a listed lamp in the GE Catalog; however I was surprised
to see the comment that they were used for streetlighting. The light
output is low (about 5000 lumens) for its size. A 40 watt T17 was
promoted for its low surface brightness and touted as one of the few
fluorescent lamps that could be used in bare-tube installations with little
glare.

For streetlighting, (in the US anyway) I thought that either 800 mA or 1500
mA T12 lamps were the only ones commonly used. The 4-foot
1500 mA T12 lamp is rated for about 6200 lumens.

Power Groove lamps are also still listed, but only
in the 8-foot size. I've seen them also used for streetlighting, area
lighting (gas stations) and billboard lighting. The grooved tube increases
the phosphor surface area compared to smooth lamps and also increases the
arc length for a given physical length. If you ever have a chance to
examine a Power Groove lamp, feel the grooves near the center. Two of them
are deeper than the others and they provide the "cold spot" that controls
the amount of mercury in the arc. Power Groove lamps became fairly widely
used in the 1960s (they appeared in 1958, I think) and were primarily
promoted for
high-bay industrial lighting.

I don't know if Gene Lemmers was the inventor. It's certainly likely. Gene
continued working at Nela Park well into his 80s and commented to me
once that he wanted to match the number of his patents to his age before
retiring.

Terry McGowan

 

[James Sweet]

The power savings is perhaps 1 watt per lamp and perhaps another watt
in the ballast. The downside is much shorter lamp life. Rapid Start
ballasts are by far the most common type of EM ballast use for 4-foot
fluorescent lamps in the US.

From what I've read, it's more like 3-6 watts per lamp, which if you're
talking 500 lamps in a decent sized building can be somewhat significant. I
haven't looked at what it does to lamp life, but instant start is the worst
for that. It gets confusing too that most commercial or industrial types are
specified at 10 hours per start, while residential lamps are rated for 3
hours per start. Lifespan drops dramatically with more frequent starting
cycles.

 

[Victor Roberts]

[snip]

Power Groove lamps are also still listed, but only
in the 8-foot size. I've seen them also used for streetlighting, area
lighting (gas stations) and billboard lighting. The grooved tube increases
the phosphor surface area compared to smooth lamps and also increases the
arc length for a given physical length. If you ever have a chance to
examine a Power Groove lamp, feel the grooves near the center. Two of them
are deeper than the others and they provide the "cold spot" that controls
the amount of mercury in the arc. Power Groove lamps became fairly widely
used in the 1960s (they appeared in 1958, I think) and were primarily
promoted for
high-bay industrial lighting.

I don't know if Gene Lemmers was the inventor. It's certainly likely. Gene
continued working at Nela Park well into his 80s and commented to me
once that he wanted to match the number of his patents to his age before
retiring.

Terry McGowan

Terry - thanks for all the good information. I thought that Gene
Lemmers was the inventor because I remember a lot of debates with Gene
and Ed Hammer in the basement of Fluorescent Engineering, 437 I think,
about why the Power Groove was more efficient than a normal 96" T17
lamp. Gene was a big proponent of the square cross section placing the
phosphor closer to the discharge, as he like to say, but there was
also the increased arc length as you point out.

--
Vic Roberts
http://www.RobertsResearchInc.com
To reply via e-mail:
replace xxx with vdr in the Reply to: address
or use e-mail address listed at the Web site.

 

[Victor Roberts]

From what I've read, it's more like 3-6 watts per lamp, which if you're
talking 500 lamps in a decent sized building can be somewhat significant.

The power consumption in each electrode of a normal current rapid
start lamps is 1 watt, or 2 watts per lamp. When you remove external
electrode heat the arc voltage increases slightly and the net arc
power increases by 1 watt for the same current. So, the net power
reduction in the lamp is 1 watt. To get 3 to 6 watts per lamp +
ballast the rapid start ballast would have to have an internal power
loss of 2 to 5 watts per pair of lamp power windings, which is much
too high to be reasonable.

haven't looked at what it does to lamp life, but instant start is the worst
for that.

I don't know where you get your data by the life of preheat lamps is
far worse than instant start lamps. That is one reason why preheat had
virtually disappeared from the US market in favor of rapid start and
instant start. Preheat remains popular only for lamps that can be run
directly from the power line with a simple series inductor or
resistor. For 120-volt circuits this limits lamps to 2 feet long for
T12 diameter. In those location of the world where the line voltage is
220 to 240 volts, preheat and a series inductor is used with 4-foot
lamps.

It gets confusing too that most commercial or industrial types are
specified at 10 hours per start, while residential lamps are rated for 3
hours per start.

Fluorescent lamps are rated on a 3 hour on, 20 minute off cycle. This
includes what might be called commercial and residential types, though
there is no formal distinction between the two. You may be confused by
the fact that HID lamps are rated at 10 hours per start.

Lifespan drops dramatically with more frequent starting
cycles.

Most dramatically for preheat and instant start lamps. Less
dramatically for rapid start. And for well designed programmed rapid
start systems there can be virtually no loss of life. Osram sells a
programmed rapid start CFL in Europe that is rated for 500,000 starts.

--
Vic Roberts
http://www.RobertsResearchInc.com
To reply via e-mail:
replace xxx with vdr in the Reply to: address
or use e-mail address listed at the Web site.

 

[JM]

quoting:

I'll try and locate a glow bottle. I live in a small town in Canada, and
there is not a lot of selection in some of the local stores. I'll try Radio
Shack and the local lumberyard, but I am not holding my breath. I'll have to
wait until I can get down to the "Big City" and see if I can locate one
there.

The starter/glow bottle for 4 foot, 40W tubes are usually labled "FS-4" .

It's generally not a good idea to use 34W tubes with preheat/switch start
ballasts.

You have 4 wires in the "switch", correct? For the two wires that go to the
each of the tube ends, put the starter in between those. You can just wrap
the wires around the prongs of the starter, and insulate with black tape.
The other two wires should be the "hot" side for the ballast. Just connect
those together with a nut so that the light is "on" all the time, (but will
be switched externally with a timer.)

 

[Sean]

Thanks for the offer. I'm going to try and locate either a glow bottle or
another ballast the next time I am in "The Big City".
I just have to be careful because the ballast has to fit into a pretty small
space in the aquarium lighting unit.
Thanks again for the offer.
Sean.

 

[Sean]

One other question while on the topic of replacing ballasts and fluorescent
lights....
I am remodelling an empty unit to make a bookstore and they currently have
about fifteen to twenty 8 foot double tube lights throughout the store. (The
store is about 2500 square feet.)
I am considering replacing them all with about 50% more 4 foot units. (So
about 22 - 30 units.)
I am considering doing this mostly due to the high price of 8' tubes and
ballasts. (In this part of Canada the 4' tubes go for about $1.40, while the
8' go for about $6-$7). Also the ballasts for the 8' bulbs costs about $30,
whereas I can get a whole 4' unit for about that price. ($20 for a cheaper
one that will probably break down in a few years, $30 - $35 for one that
will hopefully last.)
So there are actually two questions:
1) Will I retain a similar amount of light from replacing those units? (I
know that their will be a small drop in light, but I just wanted to know how
noticeable it would be? Or should I just double the number of 8' units and
achieve near the same amount of light?)
2) Is it going to be cost effective over 10 -15 years to replace all these
units? (Or am I wasting a lot of money trying to avoid spending $6 - $7 on
the 8' tubes and $30 on a few new ballasts to replace the 3 or 4 that are
burnt out?)
Thanks for reading this long post, and for any answers or suggestions.
Sean.

 

[JM]

quoting:

One other question while on the topic of replacing ballasts and fluorescent
lights....
I am remodelling an empty unit to make a bookstore and they currently have
about fifteen to twenty 8 foot double tube lights throughout the store. (The
store is about 2500 square feet.)
I am considering replacing them all with about 50% more 4 foot units. (So
about 22 - 30 units.)

I am considering doing this mostly due to the high price of 8' tubes and
ballasts. (In this part of Canada the 4' tubes go for about $1.40, while the
8' go for about $6-$7). Also the ballasts for the 8' bulbs costs about $30,
whereas I can get a whole 4' unit for about that price. ($20 for a cheaper
one that will probably break down in a few years, $30 - $35 for one that
will hopefully last.)

$1.40 - is this for 34w, 40W, or T8 tubes? The local GESupply sells 34w CW
tubes for about $1.30 currently, and about $2.50 for T8. 40W tubes are
currently about $2.25 .

8' for $6 to $7 - Is this for 60W or 75W tubes?

So there are actually two questions:
1) Will I retain a similar amount of light from replacing those units? (I
know that their will be a small drop in light, but I just wanted to know how
noticeable it would be? Or should I just double the number of 8' units and
achieve near the same amount of light?)

Things to consider:

It all depends on 60W vs 75W tubes in the 8' lights now, vs T8 or 34W or 40W
in the new lights.

Generally, old and most new magnetic 8' ballasts light 75w tubes to nearly
full rated output. Same with old and most new magnetic ballasts for 4' 40w
tubes.

34w tubes start out about 15 percent lower at full rated output, but they
always never light more than 94 percent of their rated output on any ballast,
even if that ballast was previously lighting a 40W tube at nearly full
output. The same goes for 8' 60W vs 75W tubes on same ballast.

Typical T8 ballasts light T8 lamps to 88-92 percent of their rated output.
You generally have to seek out ballasts that light T8 lamps to something near
or over 100 percent of their rated output.

2) Is it going to be cost effective over 10 -15 years to replace all these
units? (Or am I wasting a lot of money trying to avoid spending $6 - $7 on
the 8' tubes and $30 on a few new ballasts to replace the 3 or 4 that are
burnt out?)
Thanks for reading this long post, and for any answers or suggestions.
Sean.

Generally, yes if you go with T8. (even better if you get ballasts that light
the tubes to nearly or above their rated output.) If you ever consider
saving energy with those 34W or 60W tubes - skip them. Go straight to T8.
If you do decide to stay T12, just stay with 40W or 75W tubes. Don't use
those 34w or 60W tubes, they are rather poor.


BTW, did you read my post about fixing your fish tank light?

 

[TKM]

One other question while on the topic of replacing ballasts and
fluorescent lights....
I am remodelling an empty unit to make a bookstore and they currently have
about fifteen to twenty 8 foot double tube lights throughout the store.
(The store is about 2500 square feet.)
I am considering replacing them all with about 50% more 4 foot units. (So
about 22 - 30 units.)
I am considering doing this mostly due to the high price of 8' tubes and
ballasts. (In this part of Canada the 4' tubes go for about $1.40, while
the 8' go for about $6-$7). Also the ballasts for the 8' bulbs costs about
$30, whereas I can get a whole 4' unit for about that price. ($20 for a
cheaper one that will probably break down in a few years, $30 - $35 for
one that will hopefully last.)
So there are actually two questions:
1) Will I retain a similar amount of light from replacing those units? (I
know that their will be a small drop in light, but I just wanted to know
how noticeable it would be? Or should I just double the number of 8' units
and achieve near the same amount of light?)
2) Is it going to be cost effective over 10 -15 years to replace all these
units? (Or am I wasting a lot of money trying to avoid spending $6 - $7 on
the 8' tubes and $30 on a few new ballasts to replace the 3 or 4 that are
burnt out?)
Thanks for reading this long post, and for any answers or suggestions.
Sean.

SNIP

It sounds like there are some other questions that ought to be asked. Don't
you want to know:

1. What kind of lighting should I have to sell the most books?
2. How can I get that lighting for the least cost over the next 10-15
years?

Given that you're thinking about cost effectiveness over the next 10-15
years, it isn't the tube cost or even the fixture cost that is going to
impact you over time; it's the cost of energy (even if you have a 5 cent
hydro rate). For every dollar you spend for lighting over those years, 90
cents or more will be for electricity and that includes the cost of lamps,
fixtures and even the cost of money should you have to borrow to install the
lighting.

At least go to a local electrical distributor and talk to the lighting
specialist (call around until you find a distributor that has one). As a
business, you should get at least a contractor price on lamps and fixtures.
Or consider hiring a lighting designer to do the job. It's a rare designer
who can't save your his/her fee on a job like this just by recommending the
most cost effective solution.

Terry McGowan

 

[[email protected]]

One other question while on the topic of replacing ballasts and fluorescent
lights....
I am remodelling an empty unit to make a bookstore and they currently have
about fifteen to twenty 8 foot double tube lights throughout the store. (The
store is about 2500 square feet.)
I am considering replacing them all with about 50% more 4 foot units. (So
about 22 - 30 units.)

Here, Britain, 8' tubes are mostly 125w, with some being 100w.
Presumably youve got 60w 8'. Basically the longer the tube, the better
the efficiency.

I am considering doing this mostly due to the high price of 8' tubes and
ballasts.

.... you have all the 8' ballasts already, no extra spend needed. Re
tubes, they last long enough for there to be no hurry, if you have
anough that work now.

(In this part of Canada the 4' tubes go for about $1.40, while the
8' go for about $6-$7). Also the ballasts for the 8' bulbs costs about $30,
whereas I can get a whole 4' unit for about that price. ($20 for a cheaper
one that will probably break down in a few years, $30 - $35 for one that
will hopefully last.)
So there are actually two questions:

1) Will I retain a similar amount of light from replacing those units? (I
know that their will be a small drop in light, but I just wanted to know how
noticeable it would be? Or should I just double the number of 8' units and
achieve near the same amount of light?)

2) Is it going to be cost effective over 10 -15 years to replace all these
units? (Or am I wasting a lot of money trying to avoid spending $6 - $7 on
the 8' tubes and $30 on a few new ballasts to replace the 3 or 4 that are
burnt out?)

Thats the impression I get, but do the numbers. What does it cost you
to fix he few 8'ers and provide tubes, what does it cost for 4'...

I'd look at just replacing a small number with 4', just as needed, but
do it in one area to ensuer it looks decent, using the good 8' lamps in
that area to repair or replace the dead ones elsewhere.


NT

 

[Victor Roberts]

Here, Britain, 8' tubes are mostly 125w, with some being 100w.
Presumably youve got 60w 8'. Basically the longer the tube, the better
the efficiency.

Yes, longer is more efficient, but only if all else is equal. Modern
4-foot T8 lamps are more efficient than just about any 8-foot T12
lamp. The only 8-foot T12 lamps that may come close require rare earth
phosphor coating which makes the lamp very expensive (due to its large
size and low sales volume) and only about 0.5 lm/W more efficient than
the comparable 4-foot T8 lamp (per data in the Philips catalog.) Plus,
this data is taken at 50/60Hz, so the OP will get a boost of 10% ( 9
lm/W) in the lamp efficacy alone by switching to T8 and electronic
ballast plus an additional boost of at least 10% from the more
efficient electronic ballast.

As Terry has pointed out, the cost of electricity to operate the lamps
over the life of the new fixtures is far higher than the cost of the
lamps and ballasts and fixtures.

--
Vic Roberts
http://www.RobertsResearchInc.com
To reply via e-mail:
replace xxx with vdr in the Reply to: address
or use e-mail address listed at the Web site.

 

[NSM]

Thanks for the offer. I'm going to try and locate either a glow bottle or
another ballast the next time I am in "The Big City".
I just have to be careful because the ballast has to fit into a pretty small
space in the aquarium lighting unit.

If you can find the ones with the electronic ballast (Shop Lights) they are
TINY.

N