I need help with a T-5 and MH LUX comparison

[Wiskey]

You are talking about VHO bulbs (T12) we are talking about T5 bulbs. Different story.

Sorry,
Whiskey

[three90s&125sump]

All my flourecent bulbs that I have ever used have been the URI bulbs because of the internal reflectors. Those are fantastic and the other bulbs don't even come close to comparing to them. How ever since imade my transition to MH I will never go back to VHO as my primary lighting source. MH are just soooo much brighter and (IMHO) the coloration of the corals are about 10X more intense.

It just does not make any sense to me that T-5 bulbs with the same phosphors in them and the same ballasts running them would out perform VHO bulbs. The only advantge to T-5s over VHOs would be the amount you can put in the same amount of available space but again watt for watt are we really gaining anything?

[Wiskey]

Yes. I'm going to take that picture.

Whiskey

[three90s&125sump]

Whiskey,

Another thing could be that your BB tank has exceptionally clean water. My system is DSB so, perhaps you get less diffusion from desolved and/or undesolved organics in the water column. I am also fighting with micro bubbles, they arent terrible bad but they are still present plus, I have engineer gobies that fling sand all over the place.

I am waiting (on my wife) to get a chiller. When I do so I will be lowering my lights down to approximatly 4 inches from the surface of the water. Which is where I will be taking my my readings from in the morning.

I am not going to sit here and say that MH are better than T-5s. All I am saying is according the physics I know it would be impossible for the T-5s to be brighter than VHOs and I know my MH are alot brighter than any VHO I have ever seen.

[Wiskey]

Watt for watt, T5 are brighter than VHO, I've never seen a VHO give the readings I am getting.

Whiskey

[Wiskey]

Ok, my bulbs have lost some output in the last 4 months, but it is still about 9,100 LUX with the bulbs 6 inches off the tank, I can get it much higher by lowering it, but I already said I would do the test with the bulbs 6 inches up.

This reading was taken with the meater about 2 inches up, sitting on a clam, my tank is BB so that 2 inches can simulate a sandbed.

That is 42.12 Lux per watt at tank bottom.

I did take a picture of the reading, but I have to boot Bertha to post it, give me a few moments.

Whiskey

[Wiskey]

Here is a picture of the hood, the bulbs are 6 inches of the top of the tank, about 6.75 off the water. The tank is 18 inches deep, the probe is about 2 inches off the tank's bottom to avoid the shadow created by the rocks.



This is a picture of the Meater reading, keep in mind that the meater is in the X10 setting, so add a 0 to the reading you see.


HTH,
Whiskey

[three90s&125sump]

What are the color temp of the bulbs? 1 actinic, 1 10K and 2 50/50?

You reading at 16 inches of depth with 6.75inches between the bulbs and the water. I will do the same for mine.

[Wiskey]

You will do beat me, but I am doing it with less than 1/4 the wattage If you want to play I will bust out my XM10K @ 250W (actual power usage no HQI ballast), I think it just might beat your 400W 14K.

The bulbs are one 6500K, + 2, 11,000K + one actinic+ (like blue plus, not true actinic)

Let me know what you get!
Whiskey

[three90s&125sump]

I am not trying to beat you Whiskey. I am just trying to figure out what the real deal is. I will be very upset if I am running all this wattage (and heat) and I don't get much more LUX than what you are getting running yur T-5s.

Do you have any VHOs to throw in there for a comparison?

[three90s&125sump]

Ok heres what I got....

With a single 400 watt 14K MH with the bulbs 7 inches off the water at a depth of 16 inches.... multiply X10.




You got 9210 lux / 216 watts = 42.64 LUX/Watt
I got 19400 lux / 400 watts = 48.5 LUX/Watt

I would like for you to bust out your 10K XM to see what you come up with. I am betting you get 50 or 51 LUX/watt being that it is a 10K bulb.

I would also like to see what the readings of my hood are on your tank.

Is the differance in LUX/watt significant? I don't think so. I think if you want maximum out put and shimmering effect and can afford the chiller and lights then get the MH if you don't and you can't then T-5s are a great alternative.

I also don't think it is possible to get nearly as many watts of T-5s under a hood as you can MHs. I could easily get 8-400 watters (or 8-1000 watters) under my hood but... WHY?

I have seen my tank in a new light and I can't wait untill I get my chiller so I can begin lowering my hoods. The color differance between being 14 inches from the water and being 7 inches from the water are huge. I would like to get it even closer than that to the water.

[90_berlin_joe]

So then an 8 bulb TEK T5-HO on a 90gal 24" deep running 4 10k, 2 true actinic and 2 pure actinic bulbs, would be sufficient lighting to support any coral/life as long as they are set to correct depth! fficeffice" />>>
>>
off subject, would mushrooms be running from a light like this being at mid-height with hood only 4in off the water?
>>

[Wiskey]

In a 90 I would get the 6*54 to keep SPS coral at least in the top half Berlin.

The thing is this, Why buy 400 W 14K's and have them 14 inches off the tank, when a 250W 14K, 7 inches off the tank gives you the same amount of light?

Furthermore why run 500W of light (2*250w) on a smaller 12 inch wide tank, when 216W T5's will give the same readings?

I think that all these different types of lighting come in handy, and it is up to the aquarist to figure out which is best. Like a 24*24*24 cube for example. You would need 8, 24" T5's, replacement bulb cost would be insane, but a single 250W Phoenix 14K would light that tank perfect.

19,000 LUX will bleach things, you will have a ruff time getting anything to be happy in that I think, but that also depends on how dirty the tank is,... More food means the coral needs more light.

I would seriously reconsider dropping your hood so you get more than 20,000 Lux, if nothing else go very, very slow, and if anything gets a little light raise it back up again.

Thanks for doing the reading though,
Whiskey

[three90s&125sump]

Thats 19K LUX at 16 inches and It was around 90K lux at the top of the tank. Hmmmm...

If I were to go that much light it would take me about 3 months to acclimate everything to that level.

[Wiskey]

Many things would not be able to acclimate,....

Whiskey