View Single Post
Old 04/06/2007, 12:19 PM   #2
Premium Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Fond du Lac, WI
Posts: 2,040
Re: Hello Al, long time no see...

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9661900#post9661900 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hahnmeister
After one year, 8 hours per day on a timer, on the IC ballast, the pheonix bulbs were only retaining about 65% of their output.
It's interesting that your 2 Phoenix bulbs had only 65% of their original output after a year while all mine had about 75%. I assume your IC ballasts are the "new" style. The original IC MH ballasts had some problems. Unless yours were bought over about 4 or 5 years ago they should be the new ones. If these are the same ballasts it suggests that operating conditions may well play a significant role in MH bulb degradation. My lights are all in Reef Optix III reflectors. What reflectors are you using?

The PFO HQI ballast ran the bulbs much brighter, and slightly whiter, but after a year of running 8 hours per day, still kept about 85% of its output! After a year, the bulbs looked whiter as well: no yellow tint, but they do look more daylight like a true 14,000K... not bad really.

Were these in the same reflectors as the bulbs on the IC ballasts? If the reflectors were the same it would suggest that the bulbs will last longer on an "HQI" ballast over an IC electronic.

The lower output of the IC (compared to M80) running DE bulbs should be proof enough, as if a higher frequency is supposed to make up for lower wattage to the bulb, then the output should be the same, no? Otherwise, an underpowered halide would end up with some of its contents burning into the quartz because it doesnt get excited enough, causing the potential output from those gasses to be lost, as well as blocking the output from the remaining gasses. I mean, if a higher frequency is supposed to make up for less power, then we should see just as many photons from a HQI run bulb as a IC one, right?

I don't know enough about the engineering principles behind MH bulb and ballast function to confirm your speculations about high frequency ballasts etc. I don't know if the high frequency alone will necessarily make the output of the bulb the same as with the standard, non-electronic ballast. There may well be other factors coming into play. OTOH, it is frequently said that relative "overdriving" of a bulb will make it burn out sooner and slight "under driving" will help it last longer. Your results would lead one to question that claim.


ReeferAl is offline   Reply With Quote