RE: UV Compact Fluorescent Bulb Canadian Source?

From: Michael Dowdall ^lt;>
Date: 12/22/05-07:05:06 AM Z
Message-id: <BAYC1-PASMTP036B99CD3AA8E262426F64FA300@CEZ.ICE>
Message-id: <001c01c606f8$5580fa90$0a02a8c0@nun3281gx3i82u>

Hi Mark

Here's a quote by Sandy King from an article he posted on Ed Buffalo's
site Unblinkingeye. I think he meant electronic where it says "Electric"
as all the ballasts are electric.

"Electric rather than magnetic ballast is to be preferred because it
gives a more constant output, runs cooler and generates about 10% more
lumens per watt."


-----Original Message-----
From: Mark MacKenzie []
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 6:07 AM
Subject: Re: UV Compact Fluorescent Bulb Canadian Source?

Hello Charles, thank you for the information. I had been planning to
use tubes and then the possibility of saving about 1/4 to 1/3 the
initial construction costs by using the compact fluorescents caught my

I will take your comments into serious consideration. Certainly there
is much more "experience" out there with the tube types.

What ballast type did you go with? There appears to be a recommendation

from people like Sandy King (APUG list?) to go with "magnetic" type
starters. I think a lighting engineer also recommended going to a
ballast type which had a much higher wattage factor.


Mark MacKenzie

ryberg wrote:

> There are two schools of thought on black light bulbs. Some
>list members insist there is little or no difference--for alt photo
>users--between BLB and BL tubes; others insist that the BLB tubes are
>slower than the BL tubes. As far as I know, all the screw-in black
>bulbs are BLB.


>Charles Portland OR
Received on Thu Dec 22 07:05:08 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 01/05/06-01:45:11 PM Z CST