What does the starter do with a replacement fluorescent tube.

[ericmark]

Kitchen had a 60W 5 foot thick tube seems not made any more so got a 24W LED replacement. It shows how to rewire however a replacement started is included with the tube, but does not really show where it should go or if even needed.

The tube works fine without the starter so what is it for? I hope it's just a link, but at £17.09 for a tube don't want to damage it. Actually found ballast (now completely disconnected) was 65W so no real wonder thin 58W tubes only lasted for 4 months. Tried everywhere for fat tube just could not get one. Crossing fingers an hope replacement lasts longer.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

How fat? T8? T12? T17 ?


I fail to see how an LED lamp could need either a ballast or a starter. I guess they must be designed so as to not be damaged if retrofitted into an existing luminaire, as there'd be a pretty small market for LED replacement tubes if people needed to fiddle with the internal wiring to use them.

Are you expecting 2-3 times the luminous efficacy from your LED tube vs the fluorescent?

 

[PBC_1966]

I would think the T12 tube as they were pretty much standard in domestic work at one time.

Some places still have stocks:

http://www.lampshoponline.com/t12-tubes/

 

[dannyboi2003]

I would guess the included starter is a blank (no connection between the pins) as if you leave the old starter installed without disconnecting the wires internally it will short out L/N when you power on the fitting.

 

[Spark123]

A starter doesn't short out L and N as such, there is a magnetic ballast in there so it basically causes a circuit from L, through the ballast, through the heaters (on each end of a standard tube) and then to N. The breaking of the starter contact causes the magnetism in the ballast to collapse and a high voltage spike to start a tube.
If an LED tube was installed in the scenario above I can't see it lasting very long.

The fittings I have come across for the LED strip lights have no guts in them.
For retro fit ones it probably depends on which way the wind was blowing when they were designed. I can see the advantage of having L&N at the same end from a safety POV.

 

[JohnW2]

I would guess the included starter is a blank (no connection between the pins) ...

So would I (to safeguard prying fingers!) - but if that were the case it would surely be labelled as such, not labelled to make it appear to be a real starter?

eric: what does it say ion this 'starter'?

Kind Regards, John

 

[333rocky333]

I thought they were empty, but now not sure

https://uk.search.yahoo.com/search;...++starter&fr2=sb-top-uk.search&fr=ytff1-yff32

 

[ericmark]

LUCEC Replacement Starter for LED Tube LSTR www.luceco.uk British BG General. It looks to have one single resistor inside.

Now I have looked on internet it would seem you can use the tube without removing ballast. But on the packet it showed

so it would seem pins in the blank end are just connected together. I connected both lives to the driver end and nothing to the other end and it seems to be working fine. It says:-

• 50% energy saving against fluorescent for similar lux levels
• Retrofit with most T8 luminaires (non-dimming)
• Shorted end, supplied with dummy replacement LED starter
• Composite/thermoplastic construction
• Integrated constant current driver
• Operating temperature environment: -20°C to 40°C
• Ignition time: under 0.5 sec
• Start up time (95%): under 0.5 sec
• Tubes are powered from one end (fitting rewiring may be required)

I have looked for a voltage range it says 220 ~ 230 Vac but wonder if the driver can run 150 ~ 230 volt so is able to get enough power even when fed through the ballast? However can't find any details.

• 
  

 

[JohnW2]

I have looked for a voltage range it says 220 ~ 230 Vac but wonder if the driver can run 150 ~ 230 volt so is able to get enough power even when fed through the ballast? However can't find any details.

Why would you want to do that? (just to avoid disconnecting the ballast?). Assuming it uses a switched mode driver, even if it worked with the ballast still in circuit, it would be drawing more current and wasting some (admittedly, not much!) of your expensively-purchased electricity in warming up the ballast a bit.

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

How does the light output compare with the fluorescent though Eric?

 

[ericmark]

It seems brighter, but it has replaced a failed fluorescent and they get dimmer over time so really hard to say. It was either new fitting or LED so for me LED seemed best option. The fluorescent tube comes in so many versions, with standard or HF ballast, with or with out built in reflector (LED version has flat edge which must face fitting) and different coatings. Considering 24 W rather than 60 W clearly a saving, but talking £3 to £20 so unlikely to save money.

Through the very small hole in the starter I can see what looks like a 22kΩ resistor. Meter readings however show over 200kΩ on resistance range but 0.5 and 0.1 on the diode check voltage test so not really sure what the device is?

 

[Spark123]

Although fairly bright the LED tubes I have come across only put light out in one direction so don't have a very good spread. They also dull with age.

 

[JohnW2]

Considering 24 W rather than 60 W clearly a saving, but talking £3 to £20 so unlikely to save money.

Indeed, unless the price of the LED tubes drops dramatically, it will take a long time to realise any cost advantage. Some advantage should arise eventually, both because of the lower power consumption and (hopefully) longer life, but one would be waiting quite a time to even break even.

Through the very small hole in the starter I can see what looks like a 22kΩ resistor. Meter readings however show over 200kΩ on resistance range but 0.5 and 0.1 on the diode check voltage test so not really sure what the device is?

If wired as per the first diagram you posted, it would obviously have to be something fairly close to a short circuit (at operating voltage/frequency), and I see no reason why it couldn't literally be a piece of wire! A resistor of 22kΩ (let alone >200 kΩ) between the starter terminals (at operating voltage/frequency) obviously would not work, since one would then be limited to a maximum of about 10mA in the circuit (aka 2.3 W, nearly all of which would be dissipated as heat in the resistor)!

So, as you say, goodness knows what is inside it! I suppose it could theoretically be a capacitor (although I'm not sure how one would reconcile that with your 'diode test' results), but it would have to be a fairly high value one - and, as above, I don't really see why it couldn't just be a piece of wire (unless they are trying to 'cancel' some of the reactance of the ballast with a capacitor). Sounds like a case for some 'destructive investigation'

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Actually found ballast (now completely disconnected) was 65W so no real wonder thin 58W tubes only lasted for 4 months.

I would doubt that the difference between 58W and 65W (appreciably less than the permitted range of supply voltage variation) would make any noticeable difference. In fact, most/all 'magnetic' ballasts I have seen in recent times are described as 58W/65W ... for example:

Kind Regards, John

 

[ericmark]

Actually found ballast (now completely disconnected) was 65W so no real wonder thin 58W tubes only lasted for 4 months.

I would doubt that the difference between 58W and 65W (appreciably less than the permitted range of supply voltage variation) would make any noticeable difference. In fact, most/all 'magnetic' ballasts I have seen in recent times are described as 58W/65W ... for example:

Kind Regards, John

All I can say is the thin 58W tubes did not last long. Problem is 4 months v 4 years is hard to show problem is really down to tube to ballast compatibility. This is even harder when the sample is one. Answer will be in 4 years time when I can say if the £17.09 for LED tube was worth it. At 100 lumen per watt the energy saving will not really pay for the change.

One has to consider the cost of borrowing the £17.09 to replace the tube compared with the £3 to buy a 58W fluorescent over the life of the tube. But also one has to consider the problems associated with replacing the tube. For me that was a 10 mile trip to Wickes only to be told they don't do thick tubes, I then tried other outlets ending up with electrofix which had the LED version in stock. (Screwfix to non plumbers or electricians) So I had to decide new fitting or LED tube.

To my mind swapping tubes and starters every 4 months is not really an option. So either swap the fitting or use LED. I would agree not easy and in my case it involved her in draws who was given the option of selecting a completely new fitting. Due to my disability the question was who would fit the new fitting?

So it was £17.09 for LED or what ever an electrician would charge for new fitting. OK that could be my son so no charge, but question then was when. So for me change to LED was the most cost effective option.

So for me it was best option. Clearly for others it may be not best option which was why I started the thread. Having to alter wiring may mean non electrical engineers may find this option a problem. Even I had to look twice at the diagrams and decide which method to adopt. I still have no idea what the replacement starter does. Maybe a fuse or maybe something completely different?

Hence the thread. Does anyone really know what the replacement starter does?