Radium Bulbs and Ballasts??
- Thread starter HOC
- Start date
PaulErik
Premium Member
The ANSI M80 ballast is the recommended and correct ballast for the Radium 250-watt lamp. The Radium 250-watt lamp is a European spec lamp. The North American ANSI M80 standard meets and exceeds the European standard. Using any other ballast in North America will cause the Radium 250-watt lamp to be under driven (operate lamp below wattage rating). The ANSI M80 ballast provides the correct starting voltage, starting current, operating voltage and operating current to the Radium 250-watt lamp.
Stevedola, have you tried another lamp? If yes which one? It sounds to me the Radium lamp is not receiving the correct starting voltage. The only things that could cause the voltage drop from the ballast is the lamp cord length and type of cord or the ignitor is malfunctioning.
The green wire from the reflector and the ballast should always be connected for safety. Grounding the reflector will help with lamp starting. The grounded reflector will act as a grounding plane for the lamp. This is sometimes referred to as a starting aid.
The ballast should emit a buzzing sound (not a humming sound) when no lamp is installed. If you do not hear a buzzing sound the ignitor is most likely faulty. The buzzing is created by the ignitor. Without a lamp installed the ignitor along with the ballast’s secondary coil should be generating a low energy high voltage pulse. The pulsing will emit a buzzing sound.
If the ballast does buzz without a lamp installed it could be the lamp cord from the reflector or a poor connection somewhere. The cord must be 600 Volt rated or higher. Lower voltage rated wire can break down the high starting voltage pulse. Overtime this can even short the cord out. Ballasts equipped with a lamp ignitor do have tighter cord/wire length restrictions. This depends on the ballast and ignitor. Unfortunately I do not know the restrictions and recommendations for the Chinese made Blue Wave ballast. Generally the length should be under 10 feet for reliable operation. In some cases 16 feet maximum may be acceptable if using low capacitance wire and wiring techniques.
One reason it sounds like a starting voltage problem is you have to wiggle the lamp. When you touch the lamp you interact with the lamp’s energy field. This can help the lamp start. When we do lamp testing at work we disconnect the ignitor. You can sometimes start the lamp just by touching the lamp but usually we generate an outside electric field around the lamp to start the lamp more reliably.
Stevedola, have you tried another lamp? If yes which one? It sounds to me the Radium lamp is not receiving the correct starting voltage. The only things that could cause the voltage drop from the ballast is the lamp cord length and type of cord or the ignitor is malfunctioning.
The green wire from the reflector and the ballast should always be connected for safety. Grounding the reflector will help with lamp starting. The grounded reflector will act as a grounding plane for the lamp. This is sometimes referred to as a starting aid.
The ballast should emit a buzzing sound (not a humming sound) when no lamp is installed. If you do not hear a buzzing sound the ignitor is most likely faulty. The buzzing is created by the ignitor. Without a lamp installed the ignitor along with the ballast’s secondary coil should be generating a low energy high voltage pulse. The pulsing will emit a buzzing sound.
If the ballast does buzz without a lamp installed it could be the lamp cord from the reflector or a poor connection somewhere. The cord must be 600 Volt rated or higher. Lower voltage rated wire can break down the high starting voltage pulse. Overtime this can even short the cord out. Ballasts equipped with a lamp ignitor do have tighter cord/wire length restrictions. This depends on the ballast and ignitor. Unfortunately I do not know the restrictions and recommendations for the Chinese made Blue Wave ballast. Generally the length should be under 10 feet for reliable operation. In some cases 16 feet maximum may be acceptable if using low capacitance wire and wiring techniques.
One reason it sounds like a starting voltage problem is you have to wiggle the lamp. When you touch the lamp you interact with the lamp’s energy field. This can help the lamp start. When we do lamp testing at work we disconnect the ignitor. You can sometimes start the lamp just by touching the lamp but usually we generate an outside electric field around the lamp to start the lamp more reliably.
stevedola
Master of my domain
THanks for the info PaulErik and Darg, youve been a big help so far. Ill let you know that the second test fire was successful. It fired the radium bulb perfectly. If the problem arises again I will know that the wire or the ballast is the culprit.
I checked the wire coming from the ballast and the label is as follows:
E164531 16/3 STW VW-1 DRY 105 C + WATER RESISTANT 600V OR e/ULT STW 105 c FT2
The reflector/socket wire is as follows:
1 YLI SJT E228686 VW-1 105 C 300V 3X.824MM(18 AWG) AWIN CUILI SJT 3X.824 MM 18AWG 105 300V FT2
It looks like the wire that coralvue is using is rated 300v and not 600v. I plan on contacting them to inform them of this issue. What problems besides not starting can this create? will it damage my ballast or bulb? Ive cut down the 300v wire to 1 ft but now you have me worried. Would it be the price of 300v wire compared to 600v wire that would lead them to use the lower voltage wire?
I checked the wire coming from the ballast and the label is as follows:
E164531 16/3 STW VW-1 DRY 105 C + WATER RESISTANT 600V OR e/ULT STW 105 c FT2
The reflector/socket wire is as follows:
1 YLI SJT E228686 VW-1 105 C 300V 3X.824MM(18 AWG) AWIN CUILI SJT 3X.824 MM 18AWG 105 300V FT2
It looks like the wire that coralvue is using is rated 300v and not 600v. I plan on contacting them to inform them of this issue. What problems besides not starting can this create? will it damage my ballast or bulb? Ive cut down the 300v wire to 1 ft but now you have me worried. Would it be the price of 300v wire compared to 600v wire that would lead them to use the lower voltage wire?
The insulation is what often determines the voltage rating. The wire itself may be the same guage. The wires themselves may not meet spec because of the insulation or the wire in general but I doubt that is the reason for any starting issues. The wire itself is probably adequate as No common issues with lamps not firing in the same fixtures are reported. Again, this doesnt mean it is technically the "right" wire.
PaulErik
Premium Member
The wire from the ballast is the correct type wire. The reflector wire in is not recommended and is against code for use with many HID ballasts because many ballasts have an OCV (Open Circuit Voltage) at or higher than 300 Volts nominal. Ballasts equipped with lamp ignitors and many electronic ballasts should only be used with 600 Volt minimum rated wire. Ballasts equipped with ignitors and many electronic ballasts generate high voltage pulses (generally between 1000 to 6000 pulse peak Volts depending on the ballast model/spec) which can break down the wire insulation overtime with lower voltage rated wire. 300 Volt rated wire will degrade the starting pulse voltage (voltage pulse height) because of the thinner wire insulation. I’ve seen a few imported products use that or similar wire. My guess to why they use it comes down to cost. In my opinion it is a safety concern. I personally help with product design and specifying. In every application I’ve dealt with HID (High Intensity Discharge) lighting the wiring (wire, connectors and lamp sockets) after the ballast is required to be rated for 600 Volts minimum. The only problems from using the 300 Volt rated wire would be the wire insulation could break down and short out overtime. Lamp starting could also be unreliable with certain ballasts.
Paul, I could be wrong here but believe it's a generic socket assembly that they are using with these pendants. Not surprising that they would not use wire on these type sockets that meet the 600V spec. But again, I could be wrong.
But my point was that that there arent widespread reports of lamps failing to fire with these pendants and the sockets and wiring used, despite it apparently not meeting the 600V spec.
Thats why I doubt that it is the 300V socket wire causing the starting issues.
I also believe that the pendants are probably effectively grounded by way of how the grounded sockets mount to them. I am assuming some here, again, because there are NOT widespread reports of Radium lamps or any other lamps not firing in these fixtures.
If shortening the wire does continue to work for the OP, then great. But Im wondering if it will be a bandaid solution to an actual problem elsewhere ... very possibly the ignitor.
I have the Advance version of the Blue Wave ballasts but I dont think that, even with going to the asian ballast components now, that Sunlight Supply would supply a ballast to pendant wire that would require shortening in order for the ballasts to fire the lamps. Im not so sure that the actual source of the problem has been found yet, even if shortening the wire seems to solve the proble (maybe just for for now however).
PaulErik ... I assume an ignitor can be "weak". Is this a real possibility or is the ignitor always, or usually either good or bad?
stevedola
Master of my domain
I heard back from coralvue today. Doesnt look like theyre going to do much for my situation. Hes saying it meets safety standards and basically Ive been ill informed.
from an email
What kind of ballast are you using and what is the wattage ballast? I can honestly tell you we have sold tens of thousands of ballast and LB reflectors and pendants using all the way up to 1000 watt setups and have never had any issues or questions about our wire gauge all of which have been put under UL listing. Higher gauge wire in lower powered ballast is going to increase resistance from the ballast to the lamp resulting in Startup issues. I as the owner of this company will not violate the UL listing on our products by installing a gauge wire that is not under our UL contract. If you feel you still need to run a higher guage wire you can do so at your own risk. I am sure you will want to believe your friend over us, but I can only assure all our equipment is of the highest saftey standards. If you would like to have your engineer contact us please feel free to have him do so.
If you have any other questions let me know.
David D'Aquin
Owner/President
Vue Technology LLC
from an email
What kind of ballast are you using and what is the wattage ballast? I can honestly tell you we have sold tens of thousands of ballast and LB reflectors and pendants using all the way up to 1000 watt setups and have never had any issues or questions about our wire gauge all of which have been put under UL listing. Higher gauge wire in lower powered ballast is going to increase resistance from the ballast to the lamp resulting in Startup issues. I as the owner of this company will not violate the UL listing on our products by installing a gauge wire that is not under our UL contract. If you feel you still need to run a higher guage wire you can do so at your own risk. I am sure you will want to believe your friend over us, but I can only assure all our equipment is of the highest saftey standards. If you would like to have your engineer contact us please feel free to have him do so.
If you have any other questions let me know.
David D'Aquin
Owner/President
Vue Technology LLC
Its not a question of wire guage, it was an issue of voltage rating of the wire used with the socket. That could be a simple matter of the type of insulation used.
Regardless, Its not the reason for your problem from what I can see. There are not widespread reports of lamps failing to ignite in the Lumebright fixtures. I think the lower voltage rating is due to insulation type which would be an issue over time with the insulation breaking down. Not an immediate issue or cause of the problem and again, that there arent widespread reports of lamps failing to fire, to me, confirms that the socket wire is not to blame in this case.
If your wiring is correct, and it sounds like it is. And the pendant itself is effectively grounded by way of the socket mounting ... which doesnt seem to be an issue either since lots of these reflectors are sold with no issues like you are reporting ... I still think it is in the ballast. Very possibly the ignitor as I mentioned and PaulErik has confirmed as a potential cause.
I asked him more specifically about the ignitor in my previous post. Im sure he will chime in.
But again ... the simple fact that lamp starting issues are NOT being reported as issues with these pendants would have me looking elsewhere for the problem ... I think its ballast related. But it's impossible for me to physically troubleshoot your lighting so thats just what I am thinking from the info posted.
BTW ... PaulErik is the resident halide/lighting tech guru IMO.
Regardless, Its not the reason for your problem from what I can see. There are not widespread reports of lamps failing to ignite in the Lumebright fixtures. I think the lower voltage rating is due to insulation type which would be an issue over time with the insulation breaking down. Not an immediate issue or cause of the problem and again, that there arent widespread reports of lamps failing to fire, to me, confirms that the socket wire is not to blame in this case.
If your wiring is correct, and it sounds like it is. And the pendant itself is effectively grounded by way of the socket mounting ... which doesnt seem to be an issue either since lots of these reflectors are sold with no issues like you are reporting ... I still think it is in the ballast. Very possibly the ignitor as I mentioned and PaulErik has confirmed as a potential cause.
I asked him more specifically about the ignitor in my previous post. Im sure he will chime in.
But again ... the simple fact that lamp starting issues are NOT being reported as issues with these pendants would have me looking elsewhere for the problem ... I think its ballast related. But it's impossible for me to physically troubleshoot your lighting so thats just what I am thinking from the info posted.
BTW ... PaulErik is the resident halide/lighting tech guru IMO.
THe 150 watt Radiums are DE as Im sure you are aware. Magnetic ballast is the M81 ballast but electronics will run them as well although to lower par levels and slightly bluer appearance.
I dont know anything about the Phoenix ballasts. The Galaxy has a good reputation in the hobby although SS warranty support and customer service isnt the best in terms of reputation.
The Icecap 150 watt ballasts are made by Hatch Transformer and are excellent in terms of electronic ballasts. I also like the Power Select 150 watt electronic ballasts. These arent marketed to the aquarium industry but both the Hatch and Power Selects would actually be considered commercial duty ballasts I believe.
Well, I am loving the four 250w Radiums on SLS M80 ballasts. They are about six months old and look great. The four 400w Radiums on SLS M80 ballasts are still looking the same at 6 months, but I know in the next month or two they will start to decline. I am just curious if anyone knows what the PPFD or PAR goes down to on these bulbs past the six month mark.
To my eyes, the 250s look just as bright as the 400s and I am tempted to try 250's next time over my 30" tall acropora tank.
To my eyes, the 250s look just as bright as the 400s and I am tempted to try 250's next time over my 30" tall acropora tank.
PaulErik
Premium Member
It could be very possible the problem could still be the ignitor. In every situation where I’ve dealt with lamp ignitors the ignitor either works or does not. Unfortunately the output voltage of the ignitor is not easily tested. It requires specialized equipment to measure the output safely and reliably. It could be very possible a component in the ignitor circuit is not working correctly or failing and causing the system to not output the specified output spec (pulse height voltage, pulse width and pulse repetition rate). The 300 Volt rated wire could be causing enough of a voltage drop or giving the lamp the wrong pulse timing (pulse repetition rate) which can bring about another problem such as the ignitor not working correctly. This can be the reason why many people have not had issues when using that reflector. I’ve never used or tested 300 Volt wire on ballasts so I personally do not know how much it influences the ballast/ignitor output. I cannot even find any documentation for it because it is not a recommended type wire. Even with certain 600 Volt rated wire an ignitor can generate a high enough voltage pulse to cause leakage. The usually signs are odor of ozone being emitted and wires in close proximity to other conductors or any grounded surface can emit a buzzing sound.
The wire gauge is not the problem. Even higher gauge wire can have slight negative side effects on the starting parameters. The wire gauge and type should be properly and carefully chosen when used with ballasts equipped with an ignitor or with some electronic ballasts. The problem is the wire voltage rating which comes from the wire insulation material and thickness. Using 300 Volt rated wire is against the NEC (National Electrical Code) and will not meet UL (Underwriters Laboratories) standards when used with the majority of metal halide ballasts. I do not know where the owner of CoralVue (Vue Technology LLC) has got his information but it is incorrect. I personally have dealt with HID lighting for many years and even worked with many major commercial manufacturers. The appropriate wire types to be used are clearly documented for manufacturers and suppliers.
The wire gauge is not the problem. Even higher gauge wire can have slight negative side effects on the starting parameters. The wire gauge and type should be properly and carefully chosen when used with ballasts equipped with an ignitor or with some electronic ballasts. The problem is the wire voltage rating which comes from the wire insulation material and thickness. Using 300 Volt rated wire is against the NEC (National Electrical Code) and will not meet UL (Underwriters Laboratories) standards when used with the majority of metal halide ballasts. I do not know where the owner of CoralVue (Vue Technology LLC) has got his information but it is incorrect. I personally have dealt with HID lighting for many years and even worked with many major commercial manufacturers. The appropriate wire types to be used are clearly documented for manufacturers and suppliers.
PaulErik
Premium Member
bdare, most electronic ballasts will operate the 150-watt Radium lamp and many people use that combination without any problems. Some electronic ballasts do not like the Radium 150-watt lamp because of the unusual longer arc length and off spec wattage rating. Problems now a days seem to be rare but some electronic ballasts can show signs of flickering, lamp cycling (on/off/on/off) and unreliable lamp starting. Electronic ballasts will not allow the Radium lamp to operate at the full rated wattage but should drive the lamp at 150-watts plus or minus a few watts. The recommended ballast in North America for the Radium 150-watt lamp is a magnetic ANSI M81 (HQI) ballast. This ballast allows the lamp to operate at the full rated wattage (160-watts nominal) and generally provides the most light output (PAR) without overdriving the lamp (operating the lamp past the wattage rating).
PaulErik
Premium Member
Nanook, are you using the Radium 400-watt lamps on the SLS ANSI M80 ballasts?
This article has some data on aged lamps:
http://www.personal.psu.edu/sbj4/aquarium/articles/MetalHalideLamps2.htm
TABLE V shows the Radium 400-watt lamp. Figure 3 shows the spectral output of the Radium 400-watt aged lamps.Note that the recommended ballast was not used. Ballasts can greatly alter lamp performance initially and overtime. Another thing to point out is the Radium 400-watt lamp has slightly changed recently. The electrical parameters should be the same according to the manufacturer. Some of the 400-watt lamps hitting the market have a shorter arc length and arc tube. This change could possibly change the light output characteristics slightly but no testing has been preformed yet or any data been published.
When using the recommended ballasts for the Radium lamps the 250-watt and 400-watt are close in brightness (PAR output) but the 400-watt lamp should have slightly higher output and has a high color saturation (250-watt Radium color saturation 66% and 400-watt Radium color saturation 70%) which makes the Radium 400-watt lamp appear more blue visually. The small output difference is because of the lamp’s true rated wattage. The 250-watt Radium lamp should operate at 270-watts nominal and the 400-watt Radium lamp should operate at 360-watts nominal when used with the recommended ballasts.
This article has some data on aged lamps:
http://www.personal.psu.edu/sbj4/aquarium/articles/MetalHalideLamps2.htm
TABLE V shows the Radium 400-watt lamp. Figure 3 shows the spectral output of the Radium 400-watt aged lamps.Note that the recommended ballast was not used. Ballasts can greatly alter lamp performance initially and overtime. Another thing to point out is the Radium 400-watt lamp has slightly changed recently. The electrical parameters should be the same according to the manufacturer. Some of the 400-watt lamps hitting the market have a shorter arc length and arc tube. This change could possibly change the light output characteristics slightly but no testing has been preformed yet or any data been published.
When using the recommended ballasts for the Radium lamps the 250-watt and 400-watt are close in brightness (PAR output) but the 400-watt lamp should have slightly higher output and has a high color saturation (250-watt Radium color saturation 66% and 400-watt Radium color saturation 70%) which makes the Radium 400-watt lamp appear more blue visually. The small output difference is because of the lamp’s true rated wattage. The 250-watt Radium lamp should operate at 270-watts nominal and the 400-watt Radium lamp should operate at 360-watts nominal when used with the recommended ballasts.
IRISSERVICE
Member
tagging along...
IRISSERVICE
Member
isn't a m80 for 250w bulbs?
PaulErik
Premium Member
The ANSI M80 ballast is technically only designed for 250-watt lamps. The ANSI M80 ballast will operate the Radium 250-watt lamp as it is intended to. If you are using a 400-watt HQI ballast (none ANSI standard European spec ballast) for the Radium 400-watt lamp the light output will appear more white and will exhibit a shorter usable lamp life than the 250-watt version. An ANSI M80 ballast would actually under power the Radium 400-watt lamp. When the recommended ballasts are used the usable life should be similar for both the Radium 250-watt and 400-watt lamp.
Similar threads
