|
|
|
|
|
#1
09-29-2008, 05:30 AM
|
||||
|
||||
in design everything should be overrated as it will only be at max power when its working at its designed max, if it is above max it means it is working harder than it was ment for, so it probably needs cleaning or was measured with a more acutrate device,
I can see this being true on some of the lower wattage devices as your meter is probably best at reading higher readings, like a digi voltmeter isnt very accurate at milivolts but is far more acurate around 120V because that is where its main use is and was calibrated for that level. 
|
|
#2
09-29-2008, 05:09 PM
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Wow. I'm blown away by the 810w reading for 2-250W lights.
 Everything else looks pretty good though! But yeah, ... wow. Paying 810w to get 500w of light? It sounds terrible.
__________________
-- Tony My next hobby will be flooding my basement while repeatedly banging my head against a brick wall and tearing up $100 bills. Whee!
|
|
#3
09-29-2008, 05:40 PM
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
might be worth while switching your halide ballast to electronic. I would imagine the HQIs are running pretty hot and at very low efficiency at that wattage.
With pumps the rated wattage should actually aways be higher than the steady state. Reason being is the pump will use a more power during start up, using the proper rating allows you to plan your electrical configuration properly to avoid tripping breakers and overloading circuits. However many companies are now rating there pumps at steady state to give the appearance of higher efficiency, in fact I would bet you're actually getting higher peaks than you observed, the device you used simply isn't fast enough to pick them up.
|
|
#4
09-30-2008, 05:02 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
wow thats really bad efficiency on the lights, your only getting 61% efficiency, most MH ballasts are rated at 80%-97% efficient i would be concerned with this and proably retest the lights then try one at a time, seems like your ballast is not operating properly and could be headed for a burnout (definatly the extra heat would not be helping,
Also i would take my bulbs out and put them back in, check for corrosion on connections, and redo all electrical connections as they could be poor and forcing the ballast to pull more amps.
|
|
#6
09-30-2008, 05:47 AM
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
I have no idea exactly how bright your lights are but mine with the hqi ballasts and SE bulbs I am easily getting twice the light that I was getting with DE bulbs.
I expect there to be more watts used and the bulbs to be overdriven (no matter what stircrazy says) Last edited by marie; 09-30-2008 at 06:14 AM.
|
|
#7
09-30-2008, 06:27 AM
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Info taken from sanjays site comparing a 250w SE xm bulb and a hqi ballast with a 400w SE bulb and an ordinary m59 ballast
ppfd of the 250w is 182 and the ppfd of the 400w is only 172. Your getting more light out of your 250w ballast then you would from a 400w ballast
|
|
#8
10-02-2008, 03:29 AM
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Quote:
__________________
 *everything said above is just my opinion, and may or may not reflect the views of this BBS, its Operators, and its Members. If cornered on any “opinion” I post I will totally deny having ever said this in a Court of Law…Unless I am the right one*Some strive to be perfect.... I just strive.
|
Hybrid Mode
