If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Proper (ab)use of UPS
Hi,
I'm told from several sources/friends not to connect some appliances to the UPS, like printers, but not provide some explanations. So, what kind of appliances I couldn't connect to the UPS? Can I connect, say, my TV, DVDPlayer, stereo systems, etc. And why? TIA |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On 17 Jun 2005 02:40:09 GMT, Ricky Romaya
wrote: Hi, I'm told from several sources/friends not to connect some appliances to the UPS, like printers, but not provide some explanations. Some, like lasers that pre-heat a lamp, simply have very high peak current draw. Any device with high current potential should not be connected to (any UPS not capable of this event, the additive current of all devices it could possibly see). So, what kind of appliances I couldn't connect to the UPS? Can I connect, say, my TV, DVDPlayer, stereo systems, etc. And why? Depends on the UPS, IT'S current capability, for peak as well as sustained current. Kinda silly to connect things that don't NEED to stay up during an outtage, IMO, and if you have frequent outtages, completely draining the battery gets pretty expensive. If you don't know the average or peak current of a piece of gear, you're facing an uphill battle- will need do a lot of research. Offhand, a TV depends on size but may draw a couple amps, a DVD player, under 0.4A, a stereo can vary a lot depending on size, type, and loudness, crude guess would be an amp in typical light use, or a little less. A modern computer can drain a (typical consumer grade) UPS fairly quickly, most people would likely want it powering only manditory gear as long as possible (read: needed). Keep in mind that attaching UPS to everything in sight means replacing all those batteries every 3-5 years too, even if they're seldom used... shelf life still degrades their capacity. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
kony,
I totally agree with your post you're very good at anything I've seen you discuss so far! However, I just don't get why laser printers use up so much power, I always thought they were more efficient in every way than inkjets... And how long would it take an average laser (like a Samsung ML-1210) to pre-heat the lamp? And how much power does it take to do that? And once the lamp's warm, does the laser then use much more power than an inkjet? Once again, please answer these questions, because they really confuse me as to how much more efficient a laser printer is (and why?, and even more important question). Hope to hear from you soon, and keep up the good work kony!!! Cool_X kony wrote: On 17 Jun 2005 02:40:09 GMT, Ricky Romaya wrote: Hi, I'm told from several sources/friends not to connect some appliances to the UPS, like printers, but not provide some explanations. Some, like lasers that pre-heat a lamp, simply have very high peak current draw. Any device with high current potential should not be connected to (any UPS not capable of this event, the additive current of all devices it could possibly see). So, what kind of appliances I couldn't connect to the UPS? Can I connect, say, my TV, DVDPlayer, stereo systems, etc. And why? Depends on the UPS, IT'S current capability, for peak as well as sustained current. Kinda silly to connect things that don't NEED to stay up during an outtage, IMO, and if you have frequent outtages, completely draining the battery gets pretty expensive. If you don't know the average or peak current of a piece of gear, you're facing an uphill battle- will need do a lot of research. Offhand, a TV depends on size but may draw a couple amps, a DVD player, under 0.4A, a stereo can vary a lot depending on size, type, and loudness, crude guess would be an amp in typical light use, or a little less. A modern computer can drain a (typical consumer grade) UPS fairly quickly, most people would likely want it powering only manditory gear as long as possible (read: needed). Keep in mind that attaching UPS to everything in sight means replacing all those batteries every 3-5 years too, even if they're seldom used... shelf life still degrades their capacity. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:25:03 GMT, Cool_X
had a flock of green cheek conures squawk out: However, I just don't get why laser printers use up so much power, I always thought they were more efficient in every way than inkjets... In the standby mode, the fuser and other sections of the printer are turned off. The fuser needs a lot of current to heat up the rollers quickly and to maintain the temperature. -- |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ricky Romaya wrote:
Hi, I'm told from several sources/friends not to connect some appliances to the UPS, like printers, but not provide some explanations. So, what kind of appliances I couldn't connect to the UPS? Can I connect, say, my TV, DVDPlayer, stereo systems, etc. And why? TIA I always thought that the reason you wouldn't plug a printer into a UPS is that it doesn't need it. If the power goes off you will not lose anything or damage anything in the printer. Generally you want to plug in only computer equipment that needs a shutdown procedure or that really needs protection from spikes. Most UPS devices have plugs that will protect from spikes that are not on the battery. That would be good for the printer and most of your equipment. Generally I just have my computer, my monitor, and my network devices plugged into the battery. My Epson printer is supposed to be shutdown with a button and not by unplugging, but this is a procedure to preserve the ink from drying out. A few minutes shutdown with the power off does not affect it. Thanks, Clyde |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:25:03 GMT, Cool_X
wrote: kony, I totally agree with your post you're very good at anything I've seen you discuss so far! However, I just don't get why laser printers use up so much power, I always thought they were more efficient in every way than inkjets... No lasers in their sleep modes may use fairly low power but during printing use at least as much as inkjets- though it would depend on the particular printer, on average a laser is a larger printer. The other difference is that lasers often have a far more sophisticated onboard processor and memory, that in itself uses a (non-trivial) amount of power. All of this is still relatively minor compared to heated up the fuser, which may easily use 5A or more. Some people note the lights in their room dim when their laser heats the fuser. One of the more popular methods of fuser heating is a long thin halogen bulb rated for 500W or more- but again depends on the size of the printer, a larger printer with larger drum will need more heating but will typically curl pages less. And how long would it take an average laser (like a Samsung ML-1210) to pre-heat the lamp? I"d cal that a pretty low-end printer, not average for a laser, but perhaps typical budget consumer printer. Length of time isn't very long a few seconds but I don't have the ML-1210, I can't time it for you. A good clue is the "time to first page" spec for a printer, take that and subtract a small % of the time to end up with heating time. And how much power does it take to do that? And once the lamp's warm, does the laser then use much more power than an inkjet? The lamp has to be kept warm when it continues to print. Some, until they go into sleep mode, will periodically reheat the fuser over and over- though I believe newer lasers are better in this regard, conserving a little more power but I dont' have any comparison numbers, do not benchmark laser current draws and don't put mine on an UPS. Then again, the ones I use most are old as the hills, they just won't die so they get used for most text (IBM/Lexmark 4039 & HP Laserjet III, both with over 200,000 pages- lost track a few years back). It gets really cheap to run a laser if you just buy bulk toner and only need text, so you don't even have to be very picky about the toner unlike some newer cheap lasers, which IIRC, may need lower-temp toner (no proof, just a vague recollection of this). Once again, please answer these questions, because they really confuse me as to how much more efficient a laser printer is (and why?, and even more important question). They aren't more efficient power-wise. They're faster, and cheaper over the long haul, and you dont' have to fool with dry carts or clogged inkjets. I'd expect all of them to be too power hungry for a typical 1000VA or lower UPS combined with a modern system and CRT. If you dont' use a CRT monitor then you might be able to run a small laser on a larger UPS, but it's still not something I'd advise when it can be avoided. Many lasers do list their current requirements so if you have that need you can proceed from there sizing an ups for it. Large UPS get really expensive though, might be cheaper to just buy an inkjet if you anticipate regularly needing to print during power outtages. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
kony,
Thanks so much for your continued time spent helping me, you are a TRUE EXPERT. And on that note, how did you learn everything you're an expert on regarding computers? Master's degree in computer engineering??? I still have a few more questions: 1. About my Samsung ML1210, that was bought years ago brand new, so I definitely don't think it was a low-end printer then...At the time it was bought, it cost $321 CDN...Sorry that wasn't a question, just a clarification...(and BTW, I gave it as an example not b/c it was a current printer, but b/c its was the only one I ever owned - but I don't own it anymore...) 2. You said: "A good clue is the "time to first page" spec for a printer, take that and subtract a small % of the time to end up with heating time." I disagree with that b/c even after a few seconds after the lamp had completely warmed up (a first print job), the data going over USB to the printer took quite a few seconds before the printer actually started printing (the second print job, done a few seconds after the first). My point is that data transfer (here over USB, probably MUCH worse for parallel, although PLEASE let me know about THAT TOO) from the computer to the printer's buffer RAM takes quite a few seconds, which I don't think you took into consideration (And BTW, it wasn't an ancient system either - it was a Compaq Evo N600c laptop with a P3 1.2GHz and 256 MB PC 133 SDRAM, 30 GB HD (probably 5400 RPM)) 3. Sorry for a silly question, but I don't speak Usenet very well. Can you quickly tell me what IIRC meant (I think it's something to do with the first person's recollection). 4. You said: "They aren't more efficient power-wise. They're faster, and cheaper over the long haul, and you dont' have to fool with dry carts or clogged inkjets." Can you give me an average percentage for all lasers vs. similar inkjets as to how much more power a laser uses in comparison? 5. Continuing #4, does that percentage change when comparing low, middle, high, and professional lasers vs. similar inkjets (BTW, I'm trying my hardest to compare apples to apples like you) 6. If it does, than can you give me the average percentage for the class of printers (laser and inkjet - categories described in #5), for those categories (see brackets in this question #6)? The rest of your post I fully understand and agree with (BTW, I read an APC manual that said not to connect any laser to a UPS less than 1400 VA, but this was a manual for a big SmartUPS less than 1400VA (APC's professional UPSs) - just so you know the exact figure quoted by a reputable manufacturer IMO!) 7. BTW, in your opinion, who makes the best UPSs (consumer and business/professional). I haven't heard of any better OEM than APC...(who also resells through retail, as everyone should know) Thanks once again for all of your priceless advice and expertise (as well as accurately reading everything I post), and please let me know about these questions (once again). Cool_X kony wrote: On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:25:03 GMT, Cool_X wrote: kony, I totally agree with your post you're very good at anything I've seen you discuss so far! However, I just don't get why laser printers use up so much power, I always thought they were more efficient in every way than inkjets... No lasers in their sleep modes may use fairly low power but during printing use at least as much as inkjets- though it would depend on the particular printer, on average a laser is a larger printer. The other difference is that lasers often have a far more sophisticated onboard processor and memory, that in itself uses a (non-trivial) amount of power. All of this is still relatively minor compared to heated up the fuser, which may easily use 5A or more. Some people note the lights in their room dim when their laser heats the fuser. One of the more popular methods of fuser heating is a long thin halogen bulb rated for 500W or more- but again depends on the size of the printer, a larger printer with larger drum will need more heating but will typically curl pages less. And how long would it take an average laser (like a Samsung ML-1210) to pre-heat the lamp? I"d cal that a pretty low-end printer, not average for a laser, but perhaps typical budget consumer printer. Length of time isn't very long a few seconds but I don't have the ML-1210, I can't time it for you. A good clue is the "time to first page" spec for a printer, take that and subtract a small % of the time to end up with heating time. And how much power does it take to do that? And once the lamp's warm, does the laser then use much more power than an inkjet? The lamp has to be kept warm when it continues to print. Some, until they go into sleep mode, will periodically reheat the fuser over and over- though I believe newer lasers are better in this regard, conserving a little more power but I dont' have any comparison numbers, do not benchmark laser current draws and don't put mine on an UPS. Then again, the ones I use most are old as the hills, they just won't die so they get used for most text (IBM/Lexmark 4039 & HP Laserjet III, both with over 200,000 pages- lost track a few years back). It gets really cheap to run a laser if you just buy bulk toner and only need text, so you don't even have to be very picky about the toner unlike some newer cheap lasers, which IIRC, may need lower-temp toner (no proof, just a vague recollection of this). Once again, please answer these questions, because they really confuse me as to how much more efficient a laser printer is (and why?, and even more important question). They aren't more efficient power-wise. They're faster, and cheaper over the long haul, and you dont' have to fool with dry carts or clogged inkjets. I'd expect all of them to be too power hungry for a typical 1000VA or lower UPS combined with a modern system and CRT. If you dont' use a CRT monitor then you might be able to run a small laser on a larger UPS, but it's still not something I'd advise when it can be avoided. Many lasers do list their current requirements so if you have that need you can proceed from there sizing an ups for it. Large UPS get really expensive though, might be cheaper to just buy an inkjet if you anticipate regularly needing to print during power outtages. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:18:58 GMT, Cool_X
wrote: 1. About my Samsung ML1210, that was bought years ago brand new, so I definitely don't think it was a low-end printer then...At the time it was bought, it cost $321 CDN...Sorry that wasn't a question, just a clarification...(and BTW, I gave it as an example not b/c it was a current printer, but b/c its was the only one I ever owned - but I don't own it anymore...) I may've been thinking of the ML-1740, and it seems backwards that the lower model # is a better printer. 2. You said: "A good clue is the "time to first page" spec for a printer, take that and subtract a small % of the time to end up with heating time." I disagree with that b/c even after a few seconds after the lamp had completely warmed up (a first print job), the data going over USB to the printer took quite a few seconds before the printer actually started printing (the second print job, done a few seconds after the first). I can't help it if your printer is odd... typically the majority of the time is warm-up, and sending data to a laser shouldn't take long at all, for a page of text. If your spool settings are such that you try to send a lot of pages (if yours even allows it- large enough buffer for that). If you get a print job qued up and ready to go and then when you try to send it, the system can't connect to the printer (because it's off) then right after turning it on, that "time till first page" should be the majority of the warm-up period, very few seconds after that. That doesn't necessarily mean your system is done sending that first page, only that the printer was ready. My point is that data transfer (here over USB, probably MUCH worse for parallel No parallel is about the same as USB1, unless one uses SPP instead of EPP or ECP. Either way, data transfer rates are a minor amount of time unless you're sending raw data, which seems unlikely for typical jobs unless you'd reconfigured the driver to do that (if the driver even supports it). , although PLEASE let me know about THAT TOO) from the computer to the printer's buffer RAM takes quite a few seconds, No, for a page of text it's under a second. Depends on the job though, if you're trying to spool out a novel, then sure it'll take a little bit longer. which I don't think you took into consideration (And BTW, it wasn't an ancient system either - it was a Compaq Evo N600c laptop with a P3 1.2GHz and 256 MB PC 133 SDRAM, 30 GB HD (probably 5400 RPM)) Even on a old 486 system, the parallel port can send a few pages of text in a second. If your driver and/or windows and/or the printing applicaton (for example, Adobe Acrobat is sometimes dreadfully slow at printing) is a bottleneck, that's entirely separate from "laser printers" in general. 3. Sorry for a silly question, but I don't speak Usenet very well. Can you quickly tell me what IIRC meant (I think it's something to do with the first person's recollection). If I Remember Correctly 4. You said: "They aren't more efficient power-wise. They're faster, and cheaper over the long haul, and you dont' have to fool with dry carts or clogged inkjets." Can you give me an average percentage for all lasers vs. similar inkjets as to how much more power a laser uses in comparison? No I can't... haven't been lurking around all the printers at the store or anything. I can tell you that the typical inkjet uses less than 20W, while the warmup on a business class laser printer's drum is over 350W, usually over 450W. We can't really ignore the warmup current even though it's only for a short duration of the total printer "on-time" but the remainder of the time can depend on how well the printeris built. A big heavy-duty printer is going to likely have more powerful motors, more memory, and it's own mainboard with a RISC processor on it. Win(software)printers like most inkjets are little more than a buffer and a microcontroller or two plus 2 or 3 smaller motors. If I had to guess- and that guess might be quite wrong, I'd guess the typical laser's _average_ on-time power usage is 3X that of a similar (in this case, meaning light-duty, low-cost consumer grade) laser printer. Seek the manufacturer's spec sheets if you need compare two specific printers. 5. Continuing #4, does that percentage change when comparing low, middle, high, and professional lasers vs. similar inkjets (BTW, I'm trying my hardest to compare apples to apples like you) Yes... though I'd expect less difference in inkjets. Apples-to-apples is somewhat meaningless though, you'd have to consider two specific printers- and you can do that yourself. Bottom line is, don't put a laser on an UPS unless your UPS is rated to handle the peak current the laser's manufacturer specs. 6. If it does, than can you give me the average percentage for the class of printers (laser and inkjet - categories described in #5), for those categories (see brackets in this question #6)? I don't claim to be a laser printer expert. An average percentage is meaningless as you'd have to consider a specific printer than may vary a lot from any average. I gave a rough guess above. The rest of your post I fully understand and agree with (BTW, I read an APC manual that said not to connect any laser to a UPS less than 1400 VA, but this was a manual for a big SmartUPS less than 1400VA (APC's professional UPSs) - just so you know the exact figure quoted by a reputable manufacturer IMO!) Unless you NEED a laser printer running during an outage, just don't do it. The goal should not be seeing whether you can wear out the UPS battery in least time possible. That gets expensive and wasteful, unless it's really an emergency... in which case I'd suggest you get a cheap inkjet for such an occasion as even when you could run a laser on an UPS, you'd still get much longer runtime from the inkjet. Or, get a generator if it's that much of an issue. 7. BTW, in your opinion, who makes the best UPSs (consumer and business/professional). I haven't heard of any better OEM than APC...(who also resells through retail, as everyone should know) "Best" is sorta pointless IMO, determine the budget then if you're not in a rush, use that budget to buy the highest rated capacity unit when you see a good deal/sale on 'em. Sales make all the difference in what you get for the buck, an UPS is not new technology and for your concerns the main issue will be how much capacity you can get for the budget. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Reboot and select proper boot device" Message | MJB | Asus Motherboards | 3 | April 29th 05 08:11 PM |
Canon IP5000 cannot print proper blacks on kodak two sided soft gloss paper! | Steve | Printers | 7 | January 21st 05 02:29 AM |
P4C800E-D/L :"Reboot and Select proper boot device..." ?? | MartinF | Asus Motherboards | 3 | May 9th 04 11:54 AM |
Proper Cooling? | Dalboz | Homebuilt PC's | 9 | April 19th 04 07:31 AM |
HELP!! "Reboot and select proper boot device"is Driving Me NUTZ! | P Bakulic | Asus Motherboards | 9 | December 11th 03 03:55 PM |