here it is

[StirCrazy]

ya it is the one with 66 replies.. VHO or Power compact. I did come across a little hard on my first replynow that I look back but this energy for nothing realy bugs me .. this is why I am going to do a tactfull reply

Steve

[StirCrazy]

In Response to statements made by ASH (Andy) I am left with an unpleasant taste in my mouth. I have always thought Ice Cap to be the standard in electronic ballasts but a few facts that have turned up show it to be not what it clames.

First in a thread Vho or Power compacts
( http://www.reefcentral.com/vbulletin...threadid=49133 )

On Reef Central there was a comment made stating that "An additional advantage of Icecap is energy savings. Four 110 watt VHO's would only draw 270 watts of power." well this peeked my interest and I got into the conversation wondering how 440 watts of light out put could be produced with only 270 watts of power.. also there was a clame of VHOs being good for over 2 years on a Ice Cap ballast how could this be, when I used to run VHO's they were good for 6 months.. So this drew my attention even more. I thought those statements might have been a type O but it was replied that it wasn't.

So after a couple post from the other guy Andy come into the thread and posts

"From Icecap:
Let me shed some light on this. But for the 6 year bulb life claim, what this thread says about our product is on the mark. When the ballast was designed it was decided to match conventional output of light, not match conventional consumption of energy. We have manufactured a 220V version that consumes a lot more energy but it runs hot and there's a diminishing return on the light output per watt as it is increased. By using about 270-watts to drive 4 X 4-ft VHOs our only crime is saving energy and giving you a much longer lamp life.
PC are what's new and this hobby thrives on new. We're currently testing some thinner lamps that are linear but promise to push the PC to the back page. What's nice is the same Model 430 or 660 will run them, just like the PCs, but they'll provide a longer life and be more efficient at putting the light where you want it. The design of the PC doesn't lend itself to lighting a tank IMO. How much of its output makes it to where you want it? I think they're fine for situations where space is the major factor, at least until we show you what's coming.
Anyway, back to work so that the next long thread will be about some really innovative lighting.
Andy"

Well to say the least this didn't sit well with me.. But my suspicions were starting to form that the were in fact under driving lights which would account for the longer life and the low power consumption.. So I decided to go fishing in the
sponsor Q&A forums for Ice Cap and I found another link called "Here is one for the masses"( http://www.reefcentral.com/vbulletin...threadid=40017 ) now in this thread on the 5th of October some one asked about the power usage of the Different Ice Cap ballasts and the reply was finally posted on the 25th of October stating

" Here's a start:
Model 430 2-lamps
NO 48" T-12 = 143
NO 48" T-8 = 151
VHO 72" T-12 = 200
55-watt PC = 148

Model 430 3-lamps
NO 48" T-8 = 216

Model 660 4-lamps
NO 48" T-12 = 255
NO 48" T-8 = 268
VHO 48" T-12 = 269

Model 3000 2 lamps
NO 48" T-8 = 60

All wattage figures include total wattage consumed by the bulbs and ballast .
Andy"

On the 15th of November some one else thought that data looked funny and posted

"Andy,
Can you comment on the the data you posted earlier

Model 660 4-lamps
NO 48" T-12 = 255
NO 48" T-8 = 268
VHO 48" T-12 = 269

Last line 4 VHO T-12 VHO using only 269 watts on a model 660. Doesn't this strongly suggest that a model 660 significantly under powers these 48" VHO bulbs. Shouldn't it be 440W + the power used by the ballast?

What am I missing?"

8 days later (23 Nov) Ice Cap replied

"From IceCap:
Sorry, but thankfully we've been very busy. I will try to add to the list next week.

Regarding the under-powering, this is one of the reasons we never made a big thing about saving energy, because invariably people would say then there's not enough power. Truth is I've never had anyone post, my VHO's are dim when I use an IceCap ballast. High frequency output which adjusts its strength many times per second depending on the lamp load it senses is much more efficient than blasting lamps the conventional way, which also explains the longer lamp life we provide.

We are working on a higher output version of the Model 660 which will consume up to 500-watts on a larger load than currently allowed but it's not close to being sold as of yet. It's still in a 220V only version and runs too hot as far as I'm concerned.
Andy"

So from all that Ice Cap is admitting that is it under powering the bulbs to get the longer life. A few calculations to throw out at 269 watts of line current a Ice Cap ballast is only providing 65.9 watts to each 110 watt 48" VHO bulb you have hooked up.. And this is assuming a 98% efficiency in the ballast. That also means that your expensive VHO bulbs you bought are only being powered to 59.9 % of there rated capability. The interesting fact was that with a NO 4 ft T12 bulb a 660 would light 4 of them to 255 watts.. That means a NO bulb is being powered by 62.5 watts (assuming a 98% efficiency) this is incredible.. No wonder everyone says it makes NO as bright as VHO or does it.. Not really, it does increase the NO bulb by 1.5 times but it is still a far cry from what a VHO SHOULD be. But hey if you want to use NO bulbs this is great.

Now that we have gone through all this it leaves a question in my mind on weather I want a ice cap or not even if it was only to power my actinic.. I still have to wonder how bright the lights would be if they were getting the proper power..

StirCrazy

[StirCrazy]

I wonder if reef central will ban me for questioning oneof its sponcers? .. oh well to late now I guess

[Troy F]

Isn't the most important thing to look at PAR? Haven't Icecap ballasts been tested against the competition?

[StirCrazy]

not that I have found.. they have been sold on the premmisis of the energy savigns and there ability to handle multi light configurations. and the ability to overdrive NO lights from what I have been able to find.. the ice cap home page makes no mention of anything so you can't get anything specific out of them

Steve

[reefburnaby]

Hi,

Yeah...I knew something was up when I saw those numbers....that's why I did the Icecap clone....here's another one of my theories...

VHOs are notorious for having massive dropoff in output for the first 100 hours. Say, it starts at 7000 lumens and drops to 5000 lumens. So...that's like going from 100% to 71% output. On top of that, most VHO ballasts are design to operate at 85% maximum output - to save power. So, thats 60.3% output at 100 hours. Now...suppose the Icecap does not drive it as hard...so that it's output dropoff is not as steep...say only 5%-10% loss (typical NO, T8 numbers). We are talking about 50% to 55% of the original VHO .... pretty close to a regular 60.3% VHO. So...that's why it doesn't really pay to drive tons of power in to a VHO. Part of the reason why VHOs fail so fast is the current that is passed through them...1.5A vs 430mA in a NO (regular) or PC (roughly the same current...but not quite).

So...I hope that explains why. It has nothing to do with high frequency drive blah blah blah... That fixes a different design problem. [img]images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

As for your PC vs VHO question...PC has more lumens and it is slightly more efficient than VHOs. The problem with PCs is that the actinics suck and lamps are expensive (55WPC costs more than 1 VHO). If you don't mind power inefficiency...MH is the way to go [img]images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Hope that helps.
- Victor.

[StirCrazy]

hehe you need to come to the Island .. I have seen one VHO bulb a 36" and they wanted 80.00 for it LOL

thats why I am going NO bulbs for my actinic and thinking about over driving them

Steve

[DJ88]

Victor,

I'll be talking to you soon about your little ballast overdrive thingy.. [img]images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

lol

[reefburnaby]

$80 for VHO...okay...you should open a fish store [img]images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] No wonder you guys load up on fish stuff everytime you come over.

I thought you guys were really rich...or I was really really cheap....

- Victor.

[DJ88]

Victor I hope you dont mind that I quoted your theory.. I coudln't have expressed it better myself.

Kinda getting curious about all of this.

Even wondering about swapping my Icecap for overdriven.. or even using a different VHO ballast to drive those expensive VHO lamps I bought..