Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: L.P. & Associates Xelamp ignition problem

This is topic L.P. & Associates Xelamp ignition problem in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=007143

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 04-26-2005, 03:13 AM:

We've got an L.P. Xelamp 4-7k lamphouse with an LTI 4500w lamp in it. Out of the blue the other day the ignitor would continue trying to strike the lamp even after the lamp struck.
That is, any time the switch on the back is set to "Auto" the ignitor is trying to strike the lamp, even once the lamp is running.
Manually striking works just fine.
I havn't been able to get the manual yet (computer's being evil) but I'm wondering if it's not the relay to the ignitor circuit?
Any suggestions?

[ Edited because original post was incorrect ]

[ 04-28-2005, 04:17 AM: Message edited by: Dominic Espinosa ]

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-26-2005, 04:09 AM:

quote: Dominic Espinosa
That is, any time the switch on the back is set to "Auto" the ignitor is trying to strike the lamp, even once the lamp is running.
Manually striking works just fine.

Wonder if the "start" relay in your automation board/console has stuck closed causing the continual ignition even after bulb has ignited... Since you can operate fine in the manual mode, which bypasses the wiring from the 'start' relay on the automation board.

If your automation has relays of the same size and kind, unplug them and swap them around inside the automation and see if this does the trick.

I was almost guessing on the relay on the ignition board is sticking closed causing the constant striking even after the bulb has ignited, where it should break open to collapse the AC input of the igniter after the bulb has ignited, but it now points to the automation start circuit in this case.

-Monte

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 04-26-2005, 04:35 AM:

aha! And it's not uncommon on TA-10's I'm guessing?

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 04-26-2005, 04:56 AM:

Sounds more like a bad autostrike ckt board to me.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-26-2005, 05:23 AM:

...and I agree with this what Phil had to say.

Yes, if you have another Super lamphouse at your theatre, do a swap between lamphouses of this autostrike board and see if it follows over to the other lamphouse. This is the easiest way to find out on what you have. I've heard that autostrike boards for Strong lamphouses have their quirks at times.

-Monte

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-26-2005, 07:43 AM:

Its ALWAYS the relay that fails on that board. This is but one thing that Strong has proven themselves to be so Weak! Strong decided to use only one pole of the double pole relay. Its quite easy to parallel both sets of contacts by jumpering them on the back of the board. If you do this the relay will more than likely never fail. I've done this to well over 100 of those boards. Also, its an odd relay that you are not likely to find at a local electronics supplier......

Mark

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 04-26-2005, 09:19 AM:

Dominic said "Strong Super Lume-X lamphouse with an LTI 4500w lamp in it"
I hope not the super lumex is rated for 2500 watt max

Also as factory wired the auto manual switch doesn't control the autoignitor PCB but the control to the contactor in the rectifier

Posted by Ken Layton (Member # 133) on 04-26-2005, 09:22 AM:

A 4500 watt bulb in a Super Lume-x? [Eek!]

I've done the jumpers on the igniter board several times myself. I also wonder why Strong never paralled that extra set of contacts on the relay. Of course they sell more igniter control boards this way though. [Roll Eyes]

I have found a few of these boards where the socket for the IC has gone bad and the IC has literally fallen out.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 04-26-2005, 09:42 AM:

I should clarify that the 110 to the ignitor is also th same as the feed to the recifier contactor ad the blower so I wonder how the system is wired if turning the switch off turns off the ignitor it should also turn off the fan as well

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-26-2005, 01:52 PM:

quote: Ken Layton
A 4500 watt bulb in a Super Lume-x?

...I was wondering about that one as well... - bet you can fry eggs on top of that lamphouse. Awful big bulb for a teeny lamphouse. ... and let alone getting the air around inside there to cool that monster since the lamphouse only has that side fan.

-Monte

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 04-26-2005, 02:24 PM:

I was waiting for the shock and disbelief about the lamp [Wink]

According to our chief the lamphouse was modified at some point to accomodate the larger lamp.
Indeed it gets hot as hell but it still survives. It's got a very powerful blower and a huge amount of air flow going out the stack.
Unfortunately, this is the only piece of Strong equipment in our theater. I'll have to start pulling stuff when I get in tomorrow and try to isolate the issue.
Since you guys mentioned the relay being an issue I'll check that first and keep you posted.
Thanks.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-26-2005, 08:32 PM:

If that lamp blows it will be more like "Shock and Awe" all over again.

Actually I hope that your tech took into consideration that he is blocking about `15% more light with that larger diameter bulb... especially if its an Osram. We all know that Osram will never give you any warranty claim on that unit [Big Grin]

.

As for the relay... You're more likely to find it a melted glob on the bottom of the lamphouse.

Mark

Mark

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 04-26-2005, 09:48 PM:

A bit off topic, but paralleling contacts on a relay to increase it's current handling is not good practice. The single contact should be rated for the full current. Usually, one set connects before the other, cooks, and then the cycle is repeated with the next set. Although I acknowledge that if the relay lasted even a short time longer with paralleling contacts, it's better than with only one set.

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 04-26-2005, 10:30 PM:

Dom, Dom, Dom... I thought you knew your equipment! [Razz]

Relax, guys... There is no Super Lume-X with a 4500W lamp in it .

The lamphouse in question is a 4-7K L.P. & Associates 'Xelamp'with an Irem rectifier.

-Aaron

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 04-27-2005, 12:04 AM:

Aaron, I sure hope you are referring to the same lamphouse! And he the hell hasn't been wasting our time running us around in circles cuz he doesn't know WTF he's talking about and really some dumbass that SHOULD have called a qualified tech in the 1st place?

(BTW: How's that for a run-on sentence?) [Razz]

Posted by Ken Layton (Member # 133) on 04-27-2005, 12:45 AM:

Hey Phil, I couldn't have said it better! LOL [Wink]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-27-2005, 08:07 AM:

quote: John Walsh
A bit off topic, but paralleling contacts on a relay to increase it's current handling is not good practice. The single contact should be rated for the full current. Usually, one set connects before the other, cooks, and then the cycle is repeated with the next set. Although I acknowledge that if the relay lasted even a short time longer with paralleling contacts, it's better than with only one set.

No argumenet on this from an engineering standpoint John! The fact that it does work and the relay never fails is not explainable. There are relays that I modified over 15 years ago that are still cranking along.

A better thing to do might be to add a snubber across the single set of contacts but since paralleling them works I've always just done that.

Mark

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 04-27-2005, 08:36 AM:

I usually put the two sets of contacts in serries so that effectively the contact break distance is greatest and fastst eliminating most of the arcing issues

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-27-2005, 06:15 PM:

Yea Phil, I gotta wonder why he is here....

quote: Aaron Sisemore
The lamphouse in question is a 4-7K L.P. & Associates 'Xelamp'with an Irem rectifier.

Of course it takes a 4kw lamp in one of those old LP's to equal a 2kw in a Super Lum-Ex! Perhaps thatas what he was thinking....?

Mark

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 04-27-2005, 09:13 PM:

Gordie, I agree with the series contact thingie in general... But as Mark said from experience, I would go that route...

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 04-28-2005, 04:15 AM:

Sorry guys, I'm a big dumbass. I'm really not even sure how I got to thinking it was a Strong. We don't have ANYTHING strong up in this booth! [uhoh]

Anyway, the problem is still the same. Anybody got contact information for L.P. Associates? I gave Aaron a call today (and got a good ribbing for it) but we couldn't come up with anything new.

Again, sorry for not having my facts straight.

Posted by Ken Layton (Member # 133) on 04-28-2005, 10:00 AM:

L.P. Associates phone is (323) 462-4714.

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 04-28-2005, 12:50 PM:

Thanks, Ken.