Subject: Re: electronic ballasts

From: [email-masked] (Gallagher - Sean J.)
Date: 26 Jul 1995 18:02:02 GMT

Kirke Coney ([email-masked]) wrote:
: I went to a Sylvania/Osram seminar yesterday. Very nice presentation.
: Any opinions out there of the merits of rapid start vs instant start
: ballasts?  They make a good case for instant start, but then that's all
: they offer. 

>From  my limited experience, I will pass on what I have heard.  It may 
only be marketing fodder by those that make the rapid start.

>From  what I've heard, the instant start are harder on the lamps 
(cathodes) and cause the lamps to have a shorter life than if a rapid 
start ballast was used.  The rapid start ballast are alittle easier on 
the lamps yielding longer lamp life.

I'll stand by to see more educated responses.  This is a question I'd 
like to be more informed on.

---

From: [email-masked] (Kirke Coney )
Date: 26 Jul 1995 12:49:47 GMT

I went to a Sylvania/Osram seminar yesterday. Very nice presentation.
Any opinions out there of the merits of rapid start vs instant start
ballasts?  They make a good case for instant start, but then that's all
they offer.

---

From: "Michael J. Ostaffe" <[email-masked]>
Date: 27 Jul 1995 05:04:32 GMT

> 
> The biggest benefit to most instant start ballasts is that they operate
at a lower wattage than do their rapid start cousins with the same light
output.  An Advance 2 lamp F32T8 electronic ballast operates at 58 watts
with .88 ballast factor, and our 2 lamp rapid start operates at 62 watts.

Our four lamp instant start operates at 112watts, where a competiors 4 lamp
rapid starts operate at approx 120W. This could mean over $40 extra energy costs
over the life of the unit.  

If the lamps are turned on once in the morning and turned off at night, there
should be no difference in lamp life between the two starting methods.
If you are using occupancy detectors, you should use rapid start, since instant
starting should reduce lamp life by up to 25%.

Please me if you have any questions.  I hope that this helps.

Mike Ostaffe
Electronic Product Manager
Advance Transformer Co.
[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (Gallagher - Sean J.)
Date: 28 Jul 1995 13:30:46 GMT

Michael J. Ostaffe ([email-masked]) wrote:

[question of instant start v. rapid start & comments deleted]

: If the lamps are turned on once in the morning and turned off at night, there
: should be no difference in lamp life between the two starting methods.
: If you are using occupancy detectors, you should use rapid start, since instant
: starting should reduce lamp life by up to 25%.

Most T-8 lamps are rated at an average life hours of 20,000 assuming 1 
start every three hours.  Your above statement for same lamp life is 
probably assuming 10-12 hr/start.  At 3hr/start, will using instant start 
electronic ballast result in a low average lamp life than the rated 20,000 
hours?

Will a 3hr/start cycle using rapid start electronic ballasts give you 
more than a 20,000 hour average lamp life?

Thanks for the help.

Sean Gallagher [email-masked]

: Mike Ostaffe
: Electronic Product Manager
: Advance Transformer Co.
: [email-masked]

---

From: "Michael J. Ostaffe" <[email-masked]>
Date: 29 Jul 1995 15:06:24 GMT

> Sean Gallagher [email-masked]

At 3 hours per start, the 20,000 hour T8 lamp should last 20,000 hours 
on a rpaid start circuit, and 15,000 hours on an instant start circuit.
This is the 25% lamp life reduction.  If the lamp is on 10-12 hours per day,
lamp life in both scenarios should reach 23-25,000 hours. and at 24 hours
per day, both should last to 30-32,000 hours.

Since 80-90% of all electronic ballasts sold for the rapid start T8 lamps
are instantstart, the lamp manufacturers are begining to improve their lamps
to operate better while being instant started.

There is ongoing research on the effects of lamp life when being started at
15 min or 30 min per start, which may replicate heavy use on occupancy detectors.
I have not seen the a final report on the subject. However, some have indicated 
that life may decrease to 10-12,000 hours on both starting scenario.

Mike Ostaffe

---

From: Phil Morrow <[email-masked]>
Date: 30 Jul 1995 01:02:39 GMT

>Electronic Product Manager

Let's hope we all have the sense to re-lamp well before these lamps reach 
"25-30,000 hrs."
I don't have a T8 mortality curve in front of me but I wish to make a 
point that when talking about real world lamps that far too few 
installations are re-lamping at the appropriate time to ensure that the 
original spec is met.
Let's stamp out the scourge of 'burnout-only" re-lamping!!!
Just a thought.
Phil Morrow