The truth about digital ballasts

[gunnaknow]

I thought that you might like to check this out before considering buying a digital ballast. I had a hunch that the sales hype was too good to be true.

http://growell.co.uk/pr/54/The-REAL-Truth-About-Digital-Grow-Lights.html

 

[ampersand]

its basically all the points that get yelled at anybody who would ask "whats the best digi"... i think it should be stickied

New technologies can often be prone to wildly exaggerated performance claims and never has this been more true than in the case of electronic and digital grow lights. Many of these claims are simply down to ignorance or misinterpretation, but they are repeated so often to growers that many people are making very expensive purchases based on promises that simply cannot be kept.

For this very reason, we have resisted selling any of these lights until we were satisfied that we had the correct information and that the lights were of sufficient standard to be sold in our shops and catalogue. We now do have a unit that we are happy with, but first of all let’s dispel some of the myths surrounding electronic and digital lights.

Are electronic and digital grow lights more efficient?

The technology used in these ballasts is marginally more efficient than traditional magnetic ballasts. To understand where this slight efficiency gain comes from you first need to realise that the stated wattage on a ballast does not accurately reflect its power consumption. A normal magnetic “600 Watt” ballast will use approximately 650-660 Watts of power, the additional 50-60 watts being lost as heat. To achieve the same lumen output from the same lamp an electronic or digital ballast would consume approx 645 Watts, saving between 5-15 watts.

Are electronic and digital grow lights cheaper to run?

The efficiency saving as detailed above makes digital ballasts slightly cheaper to run, but saving thousandths of a penny per hour of operation will take a long time to recoup the additional cost of one of these ballasts compared to a magnetic ballast. If you are going to buy one of these units for reduced electricity bills, then do not bother. They can in fact increase your electricity bills, but we will go into that below.

Do electronic and digital ballasts get more light output from your lamp?

Electronic and digital ballasts have a soft start feature which means that they gradually increase the power to your lamps until they are running at capacity. This allows lamps to be “overrun” at higher wattages, which in turn increases their lumen output. For example, the Sunmaster Plus Digital Ballast can achieve 105,000 lumens from a 600 Watt Sunmaster Lamp as opposed to the normal 95,000 lumens achieved with a magnetic ballast. You are not getting this extra light output for free though – to achieve this light output the ballast uses 700 Watts which will cause you electricity bill to increase slightly. You can’t get anything for nothing in this world!

Do lamps last longer with electronic and digital ballasts?

The soft start of a digital and electronic ballast avoids the normal power spike at start-up of a magnetic ballast, thus increasing the life of the lamp. We would still recommend changing your lamps every 12 months with these ballasts as opposed to 6-9 months with a magnetic ballast.

What about radio interference?

Electronic and digital ballasts (especially earlier models) are notorious for creating radio interference on certain frequencies. It is virtually impossible to completely eliminate this interference for a fully operational electronic grow light, but if cables are shielded correctly then this interference can be reduced to such an extent that it is no longer an issue. It is important to note that the lead between ballast and reflector will emit interference if not properly shielded. The best type of ballast to go for are those where there is a shielded ballast to reflector lead included.

 

[Neptune]

the link provides no data to back it's claims. it's just as bad as the marketing from digi/eballst companies. no data, no truth. show me the tests....

The article still says that Eballsts run bulbs longer, so they agree there.
And the Eballsts are still LIGHT WEIGHT and SILENT. (the biggest, and always overlooked features.)

who gives a fuck about power savings... we're already spending shitloads a month.
That said, lumatek 600w 240v ballsts draw 2.5 amps, whereas my Hydrofarm Xtrasun (magnetic) draws 3.0 amps.


If I changed all 5 of my 600s over to Lumateks, I'd be saving 600w a month, or 75$ a month. Over a year, it pays for the ballasts. Or is lumatek lying about it's amperage draw? nfc.

 

[Guest]

Sounds like that outfit is just whining to me.

I have a digital ballast, and I have had magnetic ones. I won't ever use a magnetic one again if only because they are NOISY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[gunnaknow]

the link provides no data to back it's claims. it's just as bad as the marketing from digi/eballst companies. no data, no truth. show me the tests....

The article still says that Eballsts run bulbs longer, so they agree there.
And the Eballsts are still LIGHT WEIGHT and SILENT. (the biggest, and always overlooked features.)

who gives a fuck about power savings... we're already spending shitloads a month.
That said, lumatek 600w 240v ballsts draw 2.5 amps, whereas my Hydrofarm Xtrasun (magnetic) draws 3.0 amps.


If I changed all 5 of my 600s over to Lumateks, I'd be saving 600w a month, or 75$ a month. Over a year, it pays for the ballasts. Or is lumatek lying about it's amperage draw? nfc.

I'm not tracking data down for you, do your own research. The link was something for people to consider before buying a digi, nothing more. I don't care if they still go ahead and buy one. Good luck to them. The link atleast adds a more realistic outlook on digis than all of the companies making outrageous claims. They don't have to prove shit to anyone with data, when none of the other sites have any proof to back up their outlandish claims about performance. The whole issue around digis arose because of companies making outlandish claims that they haven't backed up with proof, it is they that therefore need to provide data, not those sites that refuse to go along with the hype. Please, make up your own mind, it doesn't bother me what you believe.

 

[gunnaknow]

Sounds like that outfit is just whining to me.

I have a digital ballast, and I have had magnetic ones. I won't ever use a magnetic one again if only because they are NOISY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It doesn't sound to me like they are whining at all! What would they gain from doing so? It would be more profitable for them to go along with all of the hype and stack digital ballasts high, seeing as they are one of the biggest hydro suppliers in the UK. Infact, one of the reasons that they have become so successful is because they are known for being very selective about only selling equipment that they test themselves. They were one of the few companies that refused to sell digital ballasts until the RF interference was sorted out.

 

[Haps]

Fords & Chevys, I'm sticking with my dependable, cheap magnetics.
H

 

[gunnaknow]

It makes sense Haps. If companies want guys like us to buy digital ballasts, they need to provide us with data to back up their performance claims. Otherwise, why pay more? Digis have some benefits in terms of heat and noise but you certainly pay for it in terms of price. For that money, I would want something that is proven to be considerably more power efficient. That's not to say that digis aren't for everyone, they have a valid place in the growlight industry. Just so long as customers know the real deal about exactly what they are getting for their money, which sadly isn't the case right now.

 

[Guest]

It makes sense Haps. If companies want us to buy digital ballasts, they need to provide us with data to back up their performance claims. Otherwise, why pay more?

Because noise does make a huge difference to some of us, especially if you live in an apartment. When I lived in my house, noise wasn't an issue...it most certainly is now. I could not have done the grow I just did if I had a noisy mag ballast.

I don't pay any attention to the claims. My digital ballast does what I need it to do: provide a cool, quiet source of power for my light.

 

[gunnaknow]

Because noise does make a huge difference to some of us, especially if you live in an apartment. When I lived in my house, noise wasn't an issue...it most certainly is now. I could not have done the grow I just did if I had a noisy mag ballast.

I don't pay any attention to the claims. My digital ballast does what I need it to do: provide a cool, quiet source of power for my light.

Oblidio, if you check the edit time on my last post you will see that I was already editing my post whilst you were in the middle of writing your post. You will notice that I have already adressed this issue when editting, before reading your latest post. As I said, digis have their place, for a few people the benefits outway the costs. One of the benefits doesn't seem to be significantly better power efficiency, however and atleast now people are able to consider this when deciding whether or not to buy digis. This isn't an ant-digi thread.

 

[Guest]

Or is lumatek lying about it's amperage draw?

Yes

6 of my 8 600 ballasts are electronic. I love my Lumateks. Once the two coils crap out they're getting replaced with Lumateks.

 

[Ram Beau]

the link provides no data to back it's claims. it's just as bad as the marketing from digi/eballst companies. no data, no truth. show me the tests....

The article still says that Eballsts run bulbs longer, so they agree there.
And the Eballsts are still LIGHT WEIGHT and SILENT. (the biggest, and always overlooked features.)

who gives a fuck about power savings... we're already spending shitloads a month.
That said, lumatek 600w 240v ballsts draw 2.5 amps, whereas my Hydrofarm Xtrasun (magnetic) draws 3.0 amps.


If I changed all 5 of my 600s over to Lumateks, I'd be saving 600w a month, or 75$ a month. Over a year, it pays for the ballasts. Or is lumatek lying about it's amperage draw? nfc.

\\

Neptune, Have you checked out the GGL's that Northcoast is selling now? They are from Humboldt Wholesale.

 

[Neptune]

I have not, you got a link for some mroe info? I will check it out.

I did not mean to be hostile gunnaknow, was just saying that there are still plenty of great reasons to buy digital.

1. bulbs last longer
2. silent operation
7. light weight
3. (possibly) less heat
4. competitive prices... you can get a 600w digital for $200.00 shipped to your door.

I bought one knowing full well that they don't deliver "30% more lumens" than the "standard magnetic ballast"... a load of shit, of course. I am happy with silent operation and longer bulb life, and low weight is nice.

 

[Ram Beau]

http://www.humboldtwholesale.com/products/global_greenhouse.php

Not much info there. Northcoast Horticulture carries them and they say that these puppies out perform the Lumas hands down.

 

[pumpkin2006]

Reality of things

Amps X volts = watts

Magnetics always = more amps, which = more watts. Over time the efficiency goes down with a magnetic (magnet), but off the line, they are only slightly less efficient.

Digitals have a soft-start, which makes bulb's last longer... don't personally care because i replace after 2 grow shows.

Magnetics weight more... eh, I only really move them about once a year.

If the price is right on a digi, then I'll buy it (and did, actually 6 of em), but from now on, the cheapest magnetic on the market is for me. Every magnetic is basically the same, since all the capacitors are the same thing.

There's nothing special about lumateks, except they make a 750w ballast.

 

[coolx]

From the link "We would still recommend changing your lamps every 12 months with these ballasts as opposed to 6-9 months with a magnetic ballast."

this sounds like BS to me as they haven't done any measurements or they would quote them. They're just guessing.

All I know is after 8 months on a 1,000W magnetic ballast I got 2,500 fc, and after 6 months on a 750W Lumatek digi I get 3,200fc ... the soft start tech alone is worth it to me ... else you lose 30% per year - I lost 30% in 8 mos., with a digi I'm losing maybe 5%, so a digi bulb lasts 3 or 4 times as long as a reg one not 33-100%.

 

[Guest]

what noise broz
I always here this mags are noisy i got 2 a few feet away from my head ,,,,,vortex my ac ............i cant barly here shit out of my mag sunsystems..like freakin metallica start playing when they flip on....................................what f%$#ckin noise...........................................ps digi suck monkey dick.........only 4 there rf problems..............i worry more about your neigbors radio and the hillbillyz in the trailer park next door......not being able to watch t.v or listen to radio ,,,,so they are forced to drink ,smoke meth ,beat there wives and kids.........try and lynch......minoritys .....all cuz you had to plug in your digiz...............

then comes y3k.........sattalites fall to earth ........a vortex opens to hell .anda tornado of trailer park swine and coors and mgd cans beat your housedown ........................just cuz your plugged in the digiz

 

[manitu]

Magnetics always = more amps, which = more watts. Over time the efficiency goes down with a magnetic (magnet), but off the line, they are only slightly less efficient.

First of all, the magnetic ballasts use more power because of HEAT!
Electronic ones are more efficient because of LESS HEAT! (But not much)

I doubt that the efficiency of a magnetic ballast declines, but if someone can tell me why.....?

Another issue, not often debated, is unreliable powersupply. The electronic ballasts will run on 200-250v with the same output. It allso will not constantly try to re-ignite the bulb, if the power goes away for a few seconds, but wait a few minutes.

A magnetic unit on the other hand, will have problems igniting some bulbs if the voltage drops belov 215V. Magnetic ballasts will however run even on the crudest square-wave generators.

.manitu

 

[Neptune]

^^^^I have blasted a few bulbs due to power coming up and down with magnetics.
the hot start causes the bulbs to fail..

digitals are better in so many ways, and they ARE fucking cheap now...

 

[Sauce]

I sleep near my cab so obviously I'm going to have a different opinion than someone who has their ballasts in a remote room somewhere. But I love my Lumatek ballast and I would never even consider buying a coil ballast again. Silence is the greatest part about this ballast imo. Plus you can use MH or HPS which is always a plus.

People claim that coil ballasts put out more lumens initially, which is true, but over time the digital ballast is going to win out because the bulb won't be degraded nearly as much.

I got my ballast when mdhydro was closing out their blue version of the Lumateks so it was as cheap or cheaper than most decent coil ballasts.

for Digis

And I agree with Neptune that the article posted is based on little fact that is backed up or can be backup up.