UV Sterilizer Question

[bpro32]

I have a 57w Aqua UV brand sterilizer that is plugged into my Apex and reading only 22w on the eb832. I validated electricity draw with a kill-a-watt as well. Is this normal? Shouldn't it be drawing much closer to 57w? The unit, ballast, and bulb all say 57w and the bulb is brand new, just received a few days ago.

I asked around locally and others with the same UV sterilizer are drawing 42-44w. Something seems off to me.

 

[Miller535]

I have a 57w Aqua UV brand sterilizer that is plugged into my Apex and reading only 22w on the eb832. I validated electricity draw with a kill-a-watt as well. Is this normal? Shouldn't it be drawing much closer to 57w? The unit, ballast, and bulb all say 57w and the bulb is brand new, just received a few days ago.

I asked around locally and others with the same UV sterilizer are drawing 42-44w. Something seems off to me.

That is not right. I would contact the manufacturer. I have a 55 watt (different brand), and I draw 65 watts on my EB832.

 

[bpro32]

That is not right. I would contact the manufacturer. I have a 55 watt (different brand), and I draw 65 watts on my EB832.

Thanks for the response. I did contact them about a week ago and they said they couldn't tell me what wattage it's supposed to draw. Not that it's a secret, but that they don't know. I found that to be incredibly strange.

 

[Miller535]

Thanks for the response. I did contact them about a week ago and they said they couldn't tell me what wattage it's supposed to draw. Not that it's a secret, but that they don't know. I found that to be incredibly strange.

I work as a Electronic Eng. Tech. I am not a Uv or a light specialist. So this is not my specialty. But the current draw should match the output of the bulb roughly. IMO. I would sat +/- 10% would maybe be acceptable. So in your case I would expect to see +/- 5 watts of the 57.

It's possible that even though they have marketed their power supply as 57 watts but that it's actually configured using less. But if that were the case then I would say calling it a 57 watt is pretty deceiving. An example of this is that many of the "black box" companies use 3 watt leds, and they'll count up the amount of leds and will label it as say 165 watts. When they are only actually driving the lights at 2 watts, and they are only actually a 108 watt light.


If it were me, being that it's only drawing 22 watts, and they do not even know their own product well enough to know it's current draw, I would probably try to return it. As you probably bought it as 57 watts for the size of your tank.

 

[bpro32]

I work as a Electronic Eng. Tech. I am not a Uv or a light specialist. So this is not my specialty. But the current draw should match the output of the bulb roughly. IMO. I would sat +/- 10% would maybe be acceptable. So in your case I would expect to see +/- 5 watts of the 57.

It's possible that even though they have marketed their power supply as 57 watts but that it's actually configured using less. But if that were the case then I would say calling it a 57 watt is pretty deceiving. An example of this is that many of the "black box" companies use 3 watt leds, and they'll count up the amount of leds and will label it as say 165 watts. When they are only actually driving the lights at 2 watts, and they are only actually a 108 watt light.


If it were me, being that it's only drawing 22 watts, and they do not even know their own product well enough to know it's current draw, I would probably try to return it. As you probably bought it as 57 watts for the size of your tank.

This aligns with what I was thinking. Unfortunately I bought this used and have had it for 2 years so there is no returning. I'll try to reach out to Aqua UV again to see if they have any troubleshooting ideas but I'm pretty disappointed with their customer support so far.

 

[tuesdayd]

Just so you have a larger sampling...mine has a draw of about 44 watts. Hmmmmm.

 

[Mastiffsrule]

Great, I guess I am buying a kiiathingy too. That is a significant difference. We calculate flow and contact time based on manufacturer rating. Underpowered and set with higher flow rates and it may not be doing what you thought it was.

I’m thinking class action law suit. It‘s the VW diesel thing all over again.

 

[bpro32]

Just so you have a larger sampling...mine has a draw of about 44 watts. Hmmmmm.

There were 3 or 4 people in my local group that are getting this result. Strangely enough, I was getting 28w with a knock off bulb so I'm at a complete loss here.

 

[tuesdayd]

That is a significant difference. We calculate flow and contact time based on manufacturer rating. Underpowered and set with higher flow rates and it may not be doing what you thought it was.

Yeah, that definitely changes things...a lot!

 

[Miller535]

There were 3 or 4 people in my local group that are getting this result. Strangely enough, I was getting 28w with a knock off bulb so I'm at a complete loss here.

Is your bulb old? If everyone else is getting around 44 (which is still not ok for 57 watt UV), it would explain why you are drawing less. As bulbs degrade they will draw less.

 

[bpro32]

Is your bulb old? If everyone else is getting around 44 (which is still not ok for 57 watt UV), it would explain why you are drawing less. As bulbs degrade they will draw less.

Nope. I checked the draw on the same day I bought a brand new bulb.

 

[Miller535]

Nope. I checked the draw on the same day I bought a brand new bulb.

I really don't know how to explain that then.

 

[bpro32]

I really don't know how to explain that then.

You and me both... I appreciate the effort! At this point I’m waiting for a written response from Aqua UV.

 

[Miller535]

You and me both... I appreciate the effort! At this point I’m waiting for a written response from Aqua UV.

I hope they get back to you and with something useful. My inclination is if you just bought a new bulb and it's still drawing such low current that it must be the ballast. But it really bothers me also that everyone is reporting 42-44 watts. Which is pretty close to 25% under it's rating. I personally run a lifeguard aquatics. Mine is a 55 watt, and according to my EB832 it draws 62-65 watts.

 

[KStatefan]

Thanks for the response. I did contact them about a week ago and they said they couldn't tell me what wattage it's supposed to draw. Not that it's a secret, but that they don't know. I found that to be incredibly strange.

How in the world can they not know what their equipment is.

 

[Miller535]

How in the world can they not know what their equipment is.

That's what I am saying. I have worked for various electronic companies in their test labs. When a product is designed the design engineer already has a calculation of how much overall current is going to be drawn. Then in the lab, someone actually measures it to see what it actually draws. This is pretty standard practice.

 

[bpro32]

I

How in the world can they not know what their equipment is.

I'm guessing it was just the person I spoke with on the phone that day. This is also why I reached out through email this time so that they hopefully take the time to route it to the correct person that knows the answer.

 

[tuesdayd]

I'm guessing it was just the person I spoke with on the phone that day. This is also why I reached out through email this time so that they hopefully take the time to route it to the correct person that knows the answer.

Did you hear back from them yet?

 

[bpro32]

Did you hear back from them yet?

Thanks for the follow up. The latest explanation is that the voltmeters are unable to accurately measure the current draw for their uv sterilizer. Personally, I think that's a bs answer and I'm not going to spend another dime on their products.

 

[Badilac]

Thanks for the follow up. The latest explanation is that the voltmeters are unable to accurately measure the current draw for their uv sterilizer. Personally, I think that's a crap answer and I'm not going to spend another dime on their products.

Yeah that's a crap answer! My Lifegard Pro-Max 90 watt UV draws 88watts per Apex