MH and T5 or VHO or PC? - Page 3

reefcam · 02-07-2004, 12:37 AM

Thanks for the links... more useful info.

XburningempiresX · 02-07-2004, 01:53 AM

hehe oh my me! so many links .... so many opinions... thanks all. i did not think i was opening such a can of worms.. but it is very interesting and i am happy to read it.

i was thinking of 2 250w MH in the 10K or 14K range... the VHO, PC or T5 would probably strictly be Actintic to balance out the MH.

currently i am running 4 NO 40w bulbs 2 10K and 2 Actintic 03, however.. i am overdriving them with two 120w advance REL 4P32-SC 120w .94A 60H ballasts. from another thread here it suggested that doing this would drive NO bulbs @120w if 1 was used and 60w or so if 2 bulbs were used. When i had 1 ballast running 2 bulbs overdriven i could see a noticeable difference next to the old ballast at NO levels. i was thinking the same ballasts might be able to power T5 or VHO, but i dont think it would work. if anything one ballast might power 1 VHO bulb at 110w or 120w, but i am not sure.............. weeee this is fun

hehe thanks all i am learning a lot,
Steve

BuckWheat · 02-07-2004, 08:12 AM

Overdriving a bulb is like driving a Keia 80Mph around a 25mph curve. JMO

Reefcam, something isn't right, I would need more details on your equipment, ac voltage, ballast type and ratings. You can't beat OHM's Law. I'm glad you guys are learning, I hope so after all this lol!

AquaticCo · 02-07-2004, 10:20 AM

Wow, good links. And as we are all sharing links this is another good one
It's about Actinic Lighting in gereral

http://www.reefs.org/library/article..._lighting.html

Doug

reefcam · 02-07-2004, 12:12 PM

Buckwheat,

The ballast is the Ice Cap 660, so all I know is it is an electronic ballast. Doug may know more about the spec. AC volage is 115V.

AquaticCo · 02-07-2004, 01:26 PM

Is the ballast under a load? Do you have bulbs hooked up to it? If not try hooking up 4 to 6 bulbs to it and then check your amperage. Are you using an electronic or an analog meter?

Doug

BuckWheat · 02-07-2004, 07:18 PM

Yes, something doesn't seem right, are you checking your amperage inline or clamp? the 660 can handle 2,3,4,or 6 bulbs, I have one myself.
AquaticCo I agree with that ling on most of it, I do believe lots of it is visual but also helpful, if you have enough PAR from your MH, your corals are for the most part getting the light they need. With that being said though, VHO,PC or T5 is in my opinion also very important, asides what was mentioned, in that they bring in a sense of morning and evening light, I think like all living creatures that depend on light, they use this as their daily cycle. Even though I just have VHO's right now, & they do open & close, & the fish know about what time is bed time, I thing the combination with MH is actually better. JMO again.

AquaticCo · 02-07-2004, 08:38 PM

Buckwheat, I agree with you, there is something to say about dawn and dusk effects. I even have a moon light on my SPS tank which cycles on after all the other lights are out. . Man those are awsome....if you get the right kind. Out of all of this I would say the most important thing to remeber is that as long as your corals are getting the light they need the rest is just for your enjoyment.

IMO as well

Doug

reefcam · 02-08-2004, 12:00 PM

Can't remember the number for 2 x 160W (6 ft), but the number given was 4 x 110W (4ft) bulbs. Yes I did test them with the bulbs or there wouldn't be any reason to test the load. I had to measure all my equipment so I can load balance my load amongst the outlet.

BuckWheat · 02-08-2004, 04:35 PM

Your information to us is limited, It is hard to see why your getting such a low reading but the basic laws of electricity doesn't change, so either your meter isn't reading an accurate reading or your bulbs aren't burning the full wattage or some other information has been left out, there should be a reasonable explanation for your question. Try getting an InLine amperage reading!whatever your read if accureat, use OHM's Law and you will get the exact wattage being used.

ASH · 02-09-2004, 01:34 PM

From IceCap:
I wish I had the time to read all the links above but only skimmed a few. I would like to address the HO T-5's and why they're such a big deal. They aren't just a PC un-bent. It's a different lamp technology that has much slower depreciation rate, higher efficiency and because of its small diameter, easier to direct the light output to where you want it.

Using our VHO ballasts we can overdrive the T-5 HO lamps from 54-watts to ~85-watt per lamp with an increase in output of over 25%. (The 85-watt per lamp includes the energy the ballast consumes. To make it more an even comparison, the 54 watt # would be closer to 60-watts per lamp including a conventional ballast's consumption.)

The use of trying to equate wattage with light output is flawed but sometimes better than having nothing. At IceCap we use high frequency to excite the gases in the fluorescent lamp, causing them to collide with the lamp's phosphorous sides and glow. Our method avoids the usual need to pair a ballast with a lamp's filament and allows us to overdrive lamps and still get a longer lamp life (we don't wear-out the filament over time.) It's also more efficient.

The PC problems start with poor design, having 1/2 of the lamp heat the other 1/2 which is not desirable for fluorescent lamps. The twin tube design is also not conducive to directing light, as the lamp gets in its own way. Add to that the plastic end which is impossible to boot up with a true waterproof endcap and a problem area that allows salt-creep to enter.

I recommend using GE 6.5K 54-watt HO lamps with a mix of T-12 URI super actinics (until I see an equally impressive T-5 actinic) on the same IceCap VHO ballast. The ATI 'blue' lamps I've been testing do hold up much better than anticipated and in 6 months we'll test depreciation rates. Contrary to reports that you can't make a good T-5 actinic, I'd say you can but not with the same kick the 6.5K lamps deliver. I missed if it was stated that T-5's are worth the investment but only IF you use reflectors with them. Otherwise, don't use them.

Andy

BuckWheat · 02-09-2004, 02:07 PM

Thanks for that information, I agree trying to measure wattage in that sorts isn't accurate, & yes, most people don't include the ballast loss. Good to here that the T5 HO & actually better than the regular PC's! How do you compare them to the VHO's? WHat kind of PAR ratings do you get with these?

ASH · 02-09-2004, 02:34 PM

From IceCap:
I leave PAR ratings to independent researchers.
I would rate the GE HO T-5 6.5K lamps as brighter, longer lasting and easier to have their output directed than any VHO. They also provide maximum output in hotter ambient temperatures than other fluorescent lamps.
For choice of flavors, VHO still wins.
Andy

BuckWheat · 02-09-2004, 02:51 PM

Thanks for that information, maybe I'll replace my VHO's for some T5's later to save on space. You didn't say what mixture as in quantity & bulb length? I'm running three VHO URI's on a 660, 60" bulbs. How can I get more light from that set-up? Do they make a T5 HO with built in reflectors as the URI VHO's? I'm getting at , tight spaces and limits of the 660. I have a Flat reflector under the VHO's now, would I have to add more in order to get that higher performance in the T5? Thanks again Andy, glad your not only located at RC. I still haven't seen PAR ratings on any fluorescents, wonder why, when this is so very important to corals.

ASH · 02-12-2004, 03:49 PM

It depends on what lamps you're using. If the URI 60" lamps are all super actinics, anything you do will provide less actinic light. If they are all actinic whites or aqua suns, you would get a boost going to one 60" URI and a pair of T-5 54-watt 6.5K GE lamps. You would lose 2 ft of lamp but make up for it in brightness and penetration if you also used single lamp reflectors as the T-5 don't have internal ones (there's no room).

Regarding PAR ratings for different fluorescent applications, because the length and reflector options are limitless it would be difficult to do a valid, useful test. Output doesn't equal light delivered where you need it. If it did, we'd all be using PC lamps. Independent normal output fluorescent lamps rate the T-8 as superior in light output per watt. Still, when industrial warehouse applications upgrade to fluorescent to save money, they go with HO T-5's since the directed light per watt is the best and the lamps operate longer at peak output than any T-8 lamp.

Andy