WARNING! Digital/ Electronic ballasts can get you busted! The A.M. radio test!

RM3 said:

You shouldn't laugh, tis a real issue ,,,

http://www.csindy.com/coloradosprings/marijuana-grow-lights-cause-problems-for-ham-radio-operators/Content?oid=2893921

Click to expand...

You do realize any device can cause interference to a ham radio including but not limited to, televisions, smoke alarms, garage door openers, motion sensors/detecting lights, Computers, Computer speakers, the list goes on and on.....pretty much anything that is electronic..... so according to your paranoid theory we should just get rid of all electronics because it can interfere with ham radio....so stupid....go read the bottom of your garage door open it even says this device may cause inference...

Yodaweed said:

You do realize any device can cause interference to a ham radio including but not limited to, televisions, smoke alarms, garage door openers, motion sensors/detecting lights, Computers, Computer speakers, the list goes on and on.....pretty much anything that is electronic..... so according to your paranoid theory we should just get rid of all electronics because it can interfere with ham radio....so stupid....go read the bottom of your garage door open it even says this device may cause inference...

Click to expand...

I'm not paranoid at all, I live in a legal state. I'm also an Electronics tech (40 years) and know all about the FCC and Ham Operators, if they complain the FCC will listen and then there is the Ham guy that found the ballast with a portable RF receiver and could tell when they went on and off, If he can do it so can Leo which could be a major concern for growers in illegal states

You don't know what you are talking about, I am sorry but you just don't . Anything that sends signals through the air can interfere with those radios, like a wireless router(place next to cell or microwave , when microwave or cell goes on you will lose your internet connection), a cell phone( turn music on your computer speakers, put your cell next to it and call it you will hear radio interference in the music) , your garage door opener(place radar detector next to it then press garage open, your radar detector goes off) , even a television. Go turn on a radar detector and drive around your neighborhood it will go off like mad because of peoples garage door openers. ANY ballast will cause radio waves PERIOD. If you don't believe me take your ass to radio shack and buy a RF detector and put it near your microwave/garage door opener/ wireless router / cell phone / on and on and it will go off. If you put one of those devices near exposed wires it will cause a problem. When I went to college for computer engineering one of the things they told us is when running RJ45 don't run it above fluorescent lighting because of the RF interference It will cause packet lose. And also one of the main reasons they make shielded RJ45. Another final point, street lights are 1500w HPS in most areas using your theory every area would have no ability to send radio waves because of interference. That person either had a faulty ballast, or put it way too close to exposed wires.

1. The FCC would be the authority that you answer to after telling your cable guy to fuck off.. Why would you tell the cable guy to fuck off? He is just doing his job.. I'm not worried about a fucking cable guy,,, I'm worried about LEO and thieves,,,

RM3 knows electronics, btw.. He is not just some random dude talking out of his ass.. Riddle was working on electronics when you were still living in your Pops balls, son.

Here is a piece from that article you prbly did not take the time to read..

"The level of conducted emissions from this [Lumatek LK1000 grow light] is so high that, as a practical matter, one RF ballast operated in a residential environment would create preclusive interference to Amateur radio HF communications throughout entire neighborhoods," wrote general counsel Christopher Imlay to acting chief of the FCC Spectrum Enforcement Division John Poutasse in the hopes the agency would halt sales.

And another section of it..

The Fort Collins Coloradoan talked to local radio operator Tom Thompson for a June 5 article. Thompson used a portable system to determine the source of some interference, eventually finding it at a residential grow.

"If I can track this down, anybody can track this down," Thompson told the daily paper. "If I listen long enough, I can tell when they turn the lights off ... You can tell exactly when the harvest is."



Why are you so passionately opposing the honest experience that I am sharing with members who might find the iinformation useful? oh, i get it,,

UK based could this be a problem here.......just bought a digital dimmable ballast.....no cable in the area just fibre optic broadband most TV are sky satellite so could I expect this to effect me

if I'm not mistaking, unless they recently switched . Street lights run on magnetic ballasts.

In 1988 and 1992, two significant laws were passed that banned the manufacture and distribution of magnetic ballasts and certain fluorescent lamps that had for many years served as a workhorse for commercial lighting applications.

The laws were passed because technology made new energy-efficient choices readily available and because a reduction in national energy consumption was perceived as in the public interest, both for the conservation of fossil fuels and to reduce air pollution.

Federal Ballast Energy Law

The Federal Ballast Energy Law (Public Law 100-357) was enacted in 1988 as part of the National Appliance Energy Conservation Amendments (NAECA '8.

The law set minimum ballast efficacy standards for four major fluorescent lamp types that represented some 85% of all installed fluorescent ballasts.

As of 1991, ballasts submitted for testing by the U.S. Department of Energy and complying with NAECA '88 provisions carry an 'E' symbol on their labels. Ballasts exempt from NAECA included dimming ballasts and ballasts used in areas where ambient temperatures reach 0°F or lower.

The new "standard" magnetic ballast is what is called a premium magnetic ballast, which increases efficiency to meet NAECA requirements. Other options include cathode cut-out ("hybrid") ballasts and electronic ballasts.

National Energy Policy Act

In 1992, President Bush signed the National Energy Policy Act, comprehensive energy legislation that initiated deregulation of the electric utility industry, banned the manufacture and distribution of several major fluorescent lamp types, and set minimum efficacy standards for a variety of PAR and R incandescent lamps.

Major fluorescent lamps that are no longer manufactured, with available alternatives, are shown in the table below.

Major Fluorescent Lamp Types Affected by EPACT '92

No Longer Manufactured


Available Alternatives

40W F40T12 (CW and WW)


40W and 34W triphosphor F40T12 lamps (69+ CRI)

34W halophosphor F40T12/ES CW or WW lamps

F40T10 lamps

F32T8 lamps (requiring a compatible ballast)

75W F96T12 (CW and WW)


75W and 60W triphosphor F96T12 (69+ CRI)

60W halophosphor F96T12 CW or WW

F96T8 lamps (requiring a compatible ballast)

110W F96T12/HO (CW and WW)


110W and 95W triphosphor F96T12/HO (69+ CRI)

95W halophosphor F96T12/HO CW or WW

F96T8/HO lamps (requiring a compatible ballast)

EPACT '92 also set minimum efficacy standards for incandescent PAR and R lamps. These standards are shown in the table below.


Minimum Efficacy Standards for Incandescent PAR and R Lamps

Nominal Lamp Input Wattage (W)


Minimum Average Lamp Efficacy (Lumens per Watt)

40-50 W


10.5 LPW

51-66 W


11.0 LPW

67-85 W


12.5 LPW

86-115 W


14.0 LPW

116-155 W


14.5 LPW

156-205 W


15.0 LPW

Federal Fluorescent Ballast Rulemaking 2000 & EPAct 2005 Legislation

In 2000, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published performance standards for T12 fluorescent ballasts operating full wattage fluorescent lamps. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005) updated the 2000 Rulemaking standards by adding performance standards for ballasts operating reduced wattage T12 fluorescent lamps.

The ballasts affected by the rulemaking and EPAct 2005 are those that operate

• T12 4-ft. linear and 2-ft. U-shaped, medium bi-pin based, rapid start lamps
  
  
• T12 8-ft. linear single-pin based, instant start lamps
  
  
• T12 8-ft. recessed double contact (RDC) based, rapid start HO lamps
  

The effect of the performance standards is to eliminate many of today’s widely used magnetic ballasts in favor of more energy efficient, electronic ballasts.

Federal Fluorescent Ballast Rulemaking 2011
On November 14, 2011, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published new standards for fluorescent ballasts to be effective November 14, 2014. These new standards cover T12 ballasts as well as sign, residential “only”, T8 and T5 ballasts. Previous standards covered only T12 ballasts.

These rules cover ballasts that operate

• At nominal input voltages at or between 120V and 277V
  
  
• At input frequency of 60 Hz to the ballasts
  
  
• Designated miniature bi-pin (T5), medium bi-pin, single pin and RDC (T8-T12) based fluorescent lamp types
  

Many OSRAM SYLVANIA high efficiency ballasts meet the new standards. For more information, please contact your OSRAM SYLVANIA sales professional.

http://assets.sylvania.com/assets/Documents/Prod.0bbbbb5d-fb92-4ebe-830f-621b9a13306b.pdf

http://members.questline.com/Article.aspx?articleID=19973&accountID=177&nl=13877

God post and good info thank you

another reason to switch to LED or CFL, even though a lot of people out there claim it is garbage I have been more than happy keeping myself supplied with lower wattage and using more training.

CFL is garbage.

churchhaze said:

CFL is garbage.

Click to expand...

Lol
Flouro owned small hid imho.
No such thing as a bad bow.
Just bad Indian.
Uggg.

Heard a friend talk of fcc showing up about the Pirate radio station they detected from his sulphur plasma lamps em leaks.
This shit is really real watch out... .

You would think people would be a little concerned about their health too if they are running these things in their house and just tossing radio waves out like a crazy whore giving free blowjobs on third.

What about new quantum they say they are the only ballast that is in full compliance with part 18 FCC regulations look on amazon at quantum ballast

Bushmaster2592 said:

What about new quantum they say they are the only ballast that is in full compliance with part 18 FCC regulations look on amazon at quantum ballast

Click to expand...

I have a 600w quantum ballast and it makes a strange humming sound , sounds like a high pitched frequency or something...

Thanks for the info I am going to just get the mag. Can you still get good yield and density with mag ballast

Any EU growers have experience with Maxibright or Lumii 600w ballasts?

So am i late to the party in posting this link?

http://www.w0qe.com/RF_Interference/grow_light_electronic_ballasts.html

It is diy filter for rf noise....has anybody tried it?

While it seems to work on one ballast will it be enough to work with several if all are fitted with the filters? Or is their a cumulative effect at work here?

Still.. I do the AM test with 6 Digi's and 2 speed adjustors on (my friends grow) and it sounds like an AM heart attack.. I do the AM test with no speed adjustors and all Mag (my grow) and I don't hear a single thing.

Just sayin'

I did the test from down the street.. turning the grow on and off.. i could hear it clear as day from my car.