As far as I know, I have known that many collectors often say that modified sine wave inverters can damage magnetic ballasts due to the difference in waveform. Other collectors can explain further.

OK so the slight underdrive cause by running a 240v ballast at 230v or 220v shouldn't be a problem. But how bad would running a ballast on a modified sine wave be?

From my experience, I am fine underdriving lamps down to around 25% below their rated current at the most, but other collectors might disagree.

OK, will underdriving a bulb be a problem if it's a small amount? Also, would having a modified sine wave inverter affect anything with a magnetic or electronic ballast? Only asking because they are so much cheaper.

I have also ran some 110V 60Hz HX ballasts and 110V 60Hz preheat fluorescent choke ballasts on 120V 60Hz supplies and they seem to somewhat overdrive their intended lamps.

OK. I'll have to do some testing with my multimeter to see what the actual output voltage is. And I have seen that some cars that have outlets on the say they are 110v or 115v instead of 120v. So maybe it is just the company of the inverter referring to 240v as 220v or 230v.

If the ballast is a simple reactor ballast or leak transformer ballast, the lamp would probably be marginally underdriven, but within tolerable levels. In North America, some people often refer to 240V as “220V” and some people refer to 120V as “110V” as well.

I have one last question. There are some ballasts that only run on 240v, but most European inverters convert 12v DC to 220v/230v 50hz but not 240v. Would this effect the ballast in any significant way?

Thanks for the info. I guess with enough trial and error you can easily make a electronic fluorescent ballast.

This was called Gallopin' Gertie, which occurred near me. The bridge was constructed in a way so that the wind would cause it to flex. The bridge was only four months old when it collapsed. A dog was the only being that died. The lights are Westinghouse AD-10s.