Re: Lumens per liter

[busko at stsci_edu (Ivo Busko)]

"Wayne Jones" <waj at mnsi_net> wrote:

<snip>
> Supposedly the 950 lamp is less efficient but I am not really buying this. I
> think Ivo's data has some problems because he used the nominal wattage of
> lamps to calculate lamp efficiencies. In some cases this makes some lamps
> appear to be significantly more efficient than others when it could be more
> a result of whether the reference ballast was electronic or conventional.
<snip>

Just to clarify, I used the nominal wattages because the comparison is
between light bulbs, not between lighting systems. Besides, that is the
only information manufacturers will publish. I understand that the nominal 
wattage corresponds to a ballast factor of 1.0, and that is how the
manufacturer's catalogs are built. Now if one wants to compare two light
bulbs operated by two different ballasts, the comparison must take the
ballast factors into account, as Wayne pointed out. Maybe I should 
emphasize this in my article...

- Ivo Busko
  Baltimore, MD

---

• Prev by Date: Re: How does one vacuum.
• Next by Date: How much light on one circuit?
• Prev by thread: Re: Lumens per liter
• Next by thread: Re: Lumens per liter
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread