1 / 20

High Performance Ceramic Metal Halide Recessed Lighting with Electronic Ballast

High Performance Ceramic Metal Halide Recessed Lighting with Electronic Ballast. Contents. Overview of electronically ballasted CMH benefits Performance Comparisons Accent Lighting PAR30CMH vs. 100W Halogen HIR General Downlighting 100W ED17 CMH Electronic vs. Magnetic

craig
Download Presentation

High Performance Ceramic Metal Halide Recessed Lighting with Electronic Ballast

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. High PerformanceCeramic Metal Halide Recessed Lightingwith Electronic Ballast

  2. Contents • Overview of electronically ballasted CMH benefits • Performance Comparisons • Accent Lighting • PAR30CMH vs. 100W Halogen HIR • General Downlighting • 100W ED17 CMH Electronic vs. Magnetic • 100W ED17 CMH vs. 2x42W CFL • 100W ED17 CMH vs. 2x32W U 2x2 Troffer

  3. CMH General Benefits Review • Outstanding Color • 80+ CRI in 3000K or 4100K • More punch and sparkle vs. fluorescent • 3X more energy efficient vs. halogen • 3-5X longer life vs. halogen

  4. CMH Electronic vs. Magnetic Ballast • Color advantages • Uniform Lamp-to-Lamp Color Temperature • Consistent color temperature and CRI regardless of variations of input voltage • Stable color over life Eliminates the traditional color shift problems associated with Metal Halide lamps

  5. CMH Electronic vs. Magnetic Ballast • Performance Advantages • 10-17% more energy efficient • 10%+ higher mean lumens Allows same light levels with fewer fixtures, or higher light levels with no increase in fixture or energy costs

  6. CMH Electronic vs. Magnetic Ballast • Operating Advantages • Quiet Operation • Sound “A” rated • Consistent lumen output regardless of variations in input voltage • 10% variation w/ magnetic causes up to 19% drop in lumens • Line Dip Tolerance • Lamps will not extinguish due to random voltage dips • Faster hot restrike and warm-up • No perceptible flicker

  7. CMH Electronic vs. Magnetic Ballast • Maintenance Advantages • 20% longer lamp life • End of life shut-down circuit Longer relamping cycles / lower lamp replacement costs Eliminates nuisance cycling and ballast damage No need to wait for lamps to cycle to identify replacements

  8. CMH Electronic vs. Magnetic Ballast • Installation Advantages • Approximately 2/3 less amperage draw • Allows ~3X more fixtures per 20-amp circuit • Lighter weight • From this to this Significantly reduces panel and branch circuit wiring costs Easier to handle and install

  9. Example 1: Accent Lighting39WPAR30CMH/FL25 vs. 100W PAR38HIR/FL25 • 56% energy savings • 44 watts vs. 100 watts • Less heat in store • 230% higher CBCP • 11,000 vs. 6,300 • 330% longer life • 10,000 hours vs. 3,000 Hours

  10. Example 1: Accent Lighting39WPAR30CMH/FL25 vs. 100W PAR38HIR/FL25 • Per Lamp Annual Operating Cost Savings (at 12 hours per day, 7-Days/week, $.08/KWH) • Energy Cost: $15.41 vs. $35.04 • Relamping Cost: $2.19 vs. $7.30 • Total per fixture energy savings: $24.74 • Replace multiple halogen lamps w/ single CMH…savings even more compelling • PLUS reduced HVAC equipment and operating costs • PLUS higher attainable footcandles/ luminance ratios for more dramatic displays

  11. Example 2: General Illumination100WCMHED17 Downlights Electronic vs. Magnetic • Mean Lumens: 7650 vs. 6800 • Life: 15,000 vs. 12,500 • Input Watts: 110 vs. 125 • # Fixtures/20-amp circuit: 15 vs. 6

  12. Example 2: General Illumination100WCMHED17 Downlights Electronic vs. Magnetic • 100’ x 100’ Space, 50 FC • # of fixtures: 90 vs. 100 • # 20-amp branch circuits: 6 vs. 17 • Total Watts: 9,900 vs. 12,500 • Watts/Sq. Ft.: .99 vs. 1.25

  13. Example 2: General Illumination100WCMHED17 Downlights Electronic vs. Magnetic • 100’ x 100’ Space, 50FC • Installed cost: $37,320 vs. $37,995 • Circuit wiring + Fixtures + Lamps + Installation labor • Annual operating costs: $5436 vs. $6933 • Energy + Lamp Replacement @ 12 hrs/day, 6 days/week • BOTTOM LINE • No initial cost penalty due to ability to use fewer fixtures & lower panel wiring costs • Meaningful 22% annual operating cost savings plus additional HVAC equipment/operating savings • Plus all of the benefits of electronically ballasted operation

  14. Example 3: General Illumination100WCMH Electronic ED17 vs. 2 x 42W CFL Downlights • Mean Lumens: 7650 vs. 5440 • Life: 15,000 vs. 10,000 • Input Watts: 110 vs. 94

  15. Example 3: General Illumination100WCMH Electronic ED17 vs. 2 x 42W CFL Downlights • 100’ x 100’ Space, 50 FC • # of fixtures: 90 vs. 132 • # 20-amp branch circuits: 6 vs. 6 • Total Watts: 9,900 vs. 12,408 • Watts/Sq. Ft.: .99 vs. 1.24

  16. Example 3: General Illumination100WCMH Electronic ED17 vs. 2 x 42W CFL Downlights • 100’ x 100’ Space, 50FC • Installation costs: $37,286 vs. $39,132 • Circuit wiring + Fixtures + Lamps + Installation labor • Annual operating costs: $5189 vs. $7105 • Energy + Lamp Replacement @ 12 hrs/day, 6 days/week • BOTTOM LINE • Initial cost savings due to ability to use fewer fixtures • Significant 27% annual operating cost savings plus additional HVAC equipment/operating savings • More punch and sparkle vs. CFL

  17. Example 4: General Illumination100WCMH Electronic ED17 Downlights vs. 2 x 32W U-lamp 9-Cell Parabolic Troffer • Mean Lumens: 7650 vs. 2755 • Life: 15,000 vs. 24,000 • Input Watts: 110 vs. 58

  18. Example 4: General Illumination100WCMH Electronic ED17 vs. 2 x 32W U-lamp 9-Cell Parabolic Troffer • 100’ x 100’ Space, 50 FC • # of fixtures: 90 vs. 182 • # 20-amp branch circuits: 6 vs. 6 • Total Watts: 9,900 vs. 10,556 • Watts/Sq. Ft.: .99 vs. 1.06

  19. Example 3: General Illumination100WCMH Electronic ED17 vs. 2 x 32W U-lamp 9-Cell Parabolic Troffer • 100’ x 100’ Space, 50FC • Installation costs: $37,286 vs. $39,704 • Circuit wiring + Fixtures + Lamps + Installation labor • Annual operating costs: $5189 vs. $5967 • Energy + Lamp Replacement @ 12 hrs/day, 6 days/week • BOTTOM LINE • Initial cost savings due to ability to use fewer fixtures • Significant 15% annual operating cost savings plus additional HVAC equipment/operating savings • More punch and sparkle vs. Fluorescents • Higher-end downlight appearance vs. troffers

  20. Better Lighting High PerformanceCeramic Arc Metal Halide Recessed Lightingwith Electronic Ballast Lower Costs

More Related