Fluorescent ballasts anyone?
in [Design]
|
Prev: Tank Depth
Next: New Book of Rules
From: Don Klipstein on 5 Jul 2006 19:11 In article <e8gpvd$1os$1(a)nntp.aioe.org>, Sergey Kubushin wrote: >Don Klipstein <don(a)manx.misty.com> wrote: >> In article <e8f6ou$9vr$1(a)nntp.aioe.org>, Sergey Kubushin wrote: > >[dd] > >> Best I can find is two Philips products... >> >> G36T6H and G36T6VH. >> >> The G36T6H is a nominally 39 watt lamp with nominal length 36 inches and >> supposedly a germicidal lamp with "high" ozone production. Philips >> product number is 046677-28888-6. >> >> The G36T6VH is a nominally 39 watt lamp with nominal length 37 inches >> (including lampholders for this one) and supposedly a germicidal lamp with >> "very high" ozone production. Philips product number is 046677-28887-3. > >Yeah, they're fine and I do also have two of those but unfortunately my, >sorry for an expression, "ozone generator" is 33-1/2" long so they don't fit >in it. The original bulb was called UWQ-825T5/40W and it's 30" long. > >> Maybe ask bulbs.com if they can get you any. Both are supposedly >> "slimline" single pin models, presumably "instant start", and I recommend >> getting an engineer at Philips to recommend a ballast for you. > >Yeah, that's exactly what I'm trying to avoid. I don't believe in exclusive >ballasts for $150 each and Philips engineers to buy a mere ballast. This is >NOT rocket science, it's just a low pressure bulb that's only difference >from a regular fluorescent bulb is lack of luminophore. I don't want >Philips, Sylvania, GE etc. bulbs and matching ballasts because one never >knows when they start caring of our health and discontinue those bulbs or >replace them with something "even better". A want _a_ bulb and _a_ ballast >that I can buy in _a_ department store. I don't see germicidal lamps in department stores or home centers, and rarely in any hardware stores. Also, the ones more interchangeable with ordinary fluorescent lamps appear to me tend to be made with a kind of glass that passes the 254 nm main germicidal line but blocks the 185 nm ozone-forming line. I *would* check to see if either of the lamps that I mentioned above are current product of 2 or better still all 3 of the "Big 3". That would indicate it being a more "industry-standard" lamp with availability likely well into the future, although still being a specialty one. - Don Klipstein (don(a)misty.com)
From: Sergey Kubushin on 5 Jul 2006 20:31 Don Klipstein <don(a)manx.misty.com> wrote: > In article <e8gpvd$1os$1(a)nntp.aioe.org>, Sergey Kubushin wrote: >>Don Klipstein <don(a)manx.misty.com> wrote: >>> In article <e8f6ou$9vr$1(a)nntp.aioe.org>, Sergey Kubushin wrote: >> >>[dd] >> >>> Best I can find is two Philips products... >>> >>> G36T6H and G36T6VH. >>> >>> The G36T6H is a nominally 39 watt lamp with nominal length 36 inches and >>> supposedly a germicidal lamp with "high" ozone production. Philips >>> product number is 046677-28888-6. >>> >>> The G36T6VH is a nominally 39 watt lamp with nominal length 37 inches >>> (including lampholders for this one) and supposedly a germicidal lamp with >>> "very high" ozone production. Philips product number is 046677-28887-3. >> >>Yeah, they're fine and I do also have two of those but unfortunately my, >>sorry for an expression, "ozone generator" is 33-1/2" long so they don't fit >>in it. The original bulb was called UWQ-825T5/40W and it's 30" long. >> >>> Maybe ask bulbs.com if they can get you any. Both are supposedly >>> "slimline" single pin models, presumably "instant start", and I recommend >>> getting an engineer at Philips to recommend a ballast for you. >> >>Yeah, that's exactly what I'm trying to avoid. I don't believe in exclusive >>ballasts for $150 each and Philips engineers to buy a mere ballast. This is >>NOT rocket science, it's just a low pressure bulb that's only difference >>from a regular fluorescent bulb is lack of luminophore. I don't want >>Philips, Sylvania, GE etc. bulbs and matching ballasts because one never >>knows when they start caring of our health and discontinue those bulbs or >>replace them with something "even better". A want _a_ bulb and _a_ ballast >>that I can buy in _a_ department store. > > I don't see germicidal lamps in department stores or home centers, and > rarely in any hardware stores. Also, the ones more interchangeable with > ordinary fluorescent lamps appear to me tend to be made with a kind of > glass that passes the 254 nm main germicidal line but blocks the 185 nm > ozone-forming line. Yep, _all_ those interchangeable with regular fluorescents are of "non-ozone" variety. > I *would* check to see if either of the lamps that I mentioned above are > current product of 2 or better still all 3 of the "Big 3". That would > indicate it being a more "industry-standard" lamp with availability > likely well into the future, although still being a specialty one. They are. But, unfortunately, they are longer than I need :(( However I'm seriously considering building my own ozonator with those lamps. They seem to be available and they are relatively cheap. --- ****************************************************************** * KSI(a)home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. * * Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. * ******************************************************************
From: Mike Monett on 5 Jul 2006 20:44 Sergey Kubushin <ksi(a)koi8.net> wrote: > However I'm seriously considering building my own ozonator with those > lamps. They seem to be available and they are relatively cheap. Sergey, I was under the impression UV couldn't make a very strong ozone concentration, and you needed corona discharge to reach 3% or more. Is there a special reason you want to use lamps besides cost and availability? Regards, Mike Monett
From: Rich Grise on 5 Jul 2006 22:05 On Wed, 05 Jul 2006 20:44:47 -0400, Mike Monett wrote: > Sergey Kubushin <ksi(a)koi8.net> wrote: > >> However I'm seriously considering building my own ozonator with those >> lamps. They seem to be available and they are relatively cheap. > > I was under the impression UV couldn't make a very strong ozone > concentration, and you needed corona discharge to reach 3% or more. Is > there a special reason you want to use lamps besides cost and availability? > I can't imagine how lamps can make ozone in liquid water, no matter what the wavelength, or transparency of the envelope. Maybe it's just germicidal lamps and the water goes through the chamber and gets disinfected by the UV on its way through. The fact that he says he had to start digging, just to replace a couple of germidicadal lamps, sounds a little suspicious to me. Thanks, Rich
From: Mike Monett on 5 Jul 2006 22:41
Rich Grise <richgrise(a)example.net> wrote: > On Wed, 05 Jul 2006 20:44:47 -0400, Mike Monett wrote: >> Sergey Kubushin <ksi(a)koi8.net> wrote: >> >>> However I'm seriously considering building my own ozonator with >>> those lamps. They seem to be available and they are relatively >>> cheap. >> >> I was under the impression UV couldn't make a very strong ozone >> concentration, and you needed corona discharge to reach 3% or more. >> Is there a special reason you want to use lamps besides cost and >> availability? > I can't imagine how lamps can make ozone in liquid water, no matter > what the wavelength, or transparency of the envelope. Maybe it's just > germicidal lamps and the water goes through the chamber and gets > disinfected by the UV on its way through. > The fact that he says he had to start digging, just to replace a > couple of germidicadal lamps, sounds a little suspicious to me. > > Thanks, > Rich You are right, UV germicidal lamps are used to treat the water directly. Unfortunately, the combination of low power and short contact time means they are often not very effective. I have seen the cartridges you have to replace periodically jammed full of bacteria. Apparently they were sunbathing in the light:) However, Sergey's application appears to be different. According to this url, air is passed over the bulb then the ozone is injected into the water: http://www.appliedozone.com/pz_series.html However, I was under the impression that UV was not a very efficient method of making ozone, especially considering it has to make enough to treat an entire pool. Regards, Mike Monett |