The Reef Tank banner

1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
uber-stupid
Joined
·
4,781 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I need someone with A LOT of T-5s and a LUX meter to help me out.

I have dual 400 watt 14K MH. The bulb manufacturer is Reef Grow and the ballasts are (I beleive) pulse start from an unknown company. The fixture is a free hanging hood that is 14 inches away from the surface of the water.

Here is what I need:

1) a measurment as close to the bulb as possible

2) a measurment 1 inch below the surface of the water

3) a measurment 12 inches below the surface of the water

4) a measurment 24 inches below the surface of the water (or on the bottom of the tank which ever is shallowest).

5) post your lighting specification just as I did along with your measurments

Since the MH are point source and the T-5s are diffused, I will take 2 measurments from each depth, 1 measurment directly under the bulb and one measurment at the widest angle possible (prolly the edge of the tank). I will post each measurment and the average measurment.

We can then take the LUX and divide it by the wattage to see what we come up with.
 

·
uber-stupid
Joined
·
4,781 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Ok here is what I have.

I have dual 400 watt 14K MH. The bulb manufacturer is Reef Grow and the ballasts are (I beleive) pulse start from an unknown company. The fixture is a free hanging hood that is 14 inches away from the surface of the water.

I turned off the actinics for the test, let the MH warm up for about 5 mins and tested. I rounded the number off to the nearest 100. The number 4 measurment is at a depth of 21inches (bottom of the tank top of the sand).


1) 1 inch from bulb
A. 200,000+ (the meter only reads up to 200K)
B. 3,100
C. 101,550 (16K more than when they were new)
LUX per watt=254

2)1 inch below surface of water
A. 15,800
B. 9,200
C. 12,500
LUX per watt= 31

3)12 inches below surface of water
A. 10,900
B. 7,000
C. 8,950
LUX per watt=22

4)21 inches below surface of water
A. 8,100
B. 3,900
C. 6,000
LUX per watt= 15

I thought I would just through this in there for referance.

These are 125 watt 42inch untra-actinic PC bulbs manufactured by Reef Grow. Its not really a fair comparison for the PCs since they are actinic bulbs.

Test with just PCs:

1)8,200
LUX per watt=65

2)1,100
LUX per watt=8.8

3)850
LUX per watt=6.8

4)420
LUX per watt=3.3
 

·
uber-stupid
Joined
·
4,781 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
You get 46 LUX per watt with the T-5s?
 

·
uber-stupid
Joined
·
4,781 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
If that is the case then there is absolutly no comparison between the MH and the T-5s. MH companies should just stop making bulbs for aguarium use. I need to sell my MH fixtures and buy some T-5s.


I really need to find someone with T-5s and measure their LUX. I am not saying that I don't beleive you Whiskey but, I need to see this for myself.
 

·
Just some guy, you know?
Joined
·
22,737 Posts
Do you want me to post a picture of my reading? It's all about the reflectors and how you set it up mate.

If I put my 2*250W XM 10K's right on the surface I can get 20,000+ LUX on tank bottom, I shot for about 10,000 to 12,000 LUX on tank bottom with those though.

I am actually really surprised about how low your readings are.

Whiskey
 

·
uber-stupid
Joined
·
4,781 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
14K bulbs 14inches above the tank. I can't put them any closer with out seriously over heating the water.

In the morning I will lower my lights down to 4 inches from the surface of the water and take new readings to post.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,625 Posts
this may all be true... and that is fine, but... when i was only using T5's on my tank ALL of my corals turned into brown turds. with 7 days of going back to MH they all came back to their original beauty. T5's are ok for softies and supplimental lighting, but i will stick with MH any day for penetration, longevity, and simplicity.
 

·
Just some guy, you know?
Joined
·
22,737 Posts
Twitterbait said:
this may all be true... and that is fine, but... when i was only using T5's on my tank ALL of my corals turned into brown turds. with 7 days of going back to MH they all came back to their original beauty. T5's are ok for softies and supplimental lighting, but i will stick with MH any day for penetration, longevity, and simplicity.
Were you using a Tek fixture? OR were you using one of those ones with the single large reflector, because those are worthless.

Whiskey
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
May i ask what T5's you were using Twitterbait. I am using T5's now on my 90gal with softies and they are doing great like you said. However a dealer friend of mine (VAMP) is using them on his SPS and other hard growing coral and they are doing great. Also jimmysreef is using the T5's and doing just as well. Could it have been the lighting combo you were using? Many reasons why i am sure.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,625 Posts
Standard URI bulbs, same result using the 6' 160w bulbs and the 4' 110w bulbs. even with actinics the color stunk and i didn't get any polyp extension. growth was mediocre at best. used internal reflectors on the bulbs but i also had a reflector above them (in preparation for MH).
 

·
uber-stupid
Joined
·
4,781 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 · (Edited)
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?
 

·
uber-stupid
Joined
·
4,781 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
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.
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Top