Re: Fluorescent Inductor

US (or American in general) fluorescent control gear is somewhat more complicated than the gear commonly used in 220-250V countries, because the lower mains voltage in the US means you can't simply get away with a series ballast, as has been generally used elsewhere for 70 years. It tends to be based on a stepup transformer, ballast, and rapid start transformer, or a leakage reactance transformer which combines all 3 functions on one core. Our series ballasts have just two wires connected, and are much smaller and cheaper (and more reliable, notwithstanding this thread;-).

Electronic control gear took over here commercially 10+ years ago. In the domestic market, series ballasts are still common, although electronic control gear is now taking over that too. EU rules will force that eventually. Existing series ballast switchstart fittings will continue to be in service for decades though.

If it is a clunky old type you might consider swapping it for an electronic one. No flicker and higher efficiency. Tubes last longer too.

As said any 4' tube ballast is fine, just check that it'll physically fit in your fitting.

NT

Hi Andrew think I've seen that series inductor for fluorescent tube strip on some North American electric cooking stoves! These use the 230 volta available for 'heavy domestic appliances. So replacing a ballast in a 230 fixture will be even simpler?

Picking up on Dave Plowman's comment, you will find that you can get electronic systems off Ebay for around =A35. One of my electronic ones packed in and I got that advice on here, and found it absolutely correct. Simple wire in - diagram on box and the lights worked immediately.

Rob

I'm getting a magnetic ballast delivered on Tuesday for £8. Hopefully, it will fit! If it does, it's the simple solution.

There's quite a bit of hype about LED replacement tubes. They cost about £30 but you don't need a ballast, so I was quite tempted. As the lights are on quite a bit, one of these would pay for itself in around 3 years in saved electricity, plus saving the planet for future generations!

I've not heard of those, but I'd treat such claims with caution. Fluorescent lighting (properly done) is already pretty efficient. With a known life of components. LEDs aren't long lasting when you push the efficiency up.

I've seen a couple. They have a row of LEDs, so of course they can't afford to use the ones with efficiency near that of a fluorescent lamp, and they are a bilious blue-white colour in order to be able to quote a half-way reasonable light output. I assumed it was running with the ballast in the fitting - can't see any point in them if you have to change the fitting - might as will install a proper LED light, if that's what you wanted.

LEDs all face the same way, which might be useful if you would have been better of using a reflector or aperture tube in the first place, but not it you really wanted the widespread output of a tube. But really, I struggle to see the point.