T-5 lamps same output as Metal Halides!!!!!!!

[usafresq1]

This is neat, I posted this same info in Nano but figured I'd share it with everyone who hasn't been informed. Freshwater and Marine Aquarium october 2004 has a great lighting article where you use a T-5 lamp with a IceCap 660 ballast. The results were just as much output as a Metal Halide. Its pretty neat, even if it doesn't give out as much as a MH the article states you can keep SPS and clams with this setup. If you can't get the article and have questions the Author Sandy Cohen says you can email her at [email protected] or [email protected]

I think I'm going to give it a try after I ask her acouple questions.

~Kevin

 

[blastermqn]

Sorry, but you'll have a hard time convincing me that a couple T5 tubes put out as much PAR as a 6500K Metal Halide. Maybe 8 T5's vs a 175 watt 10k MH, and then just rating them on spectral efficiency. Still, some of the 10K + MH bulbs I'm seeing throw out a lot of narrow band spectra in wavelengths that often can't be utilized by anything other than nuisance algae, so they have a point.

I have nothing at all against T5's or VHOs. In fact my experience is they are actually more friendly towards softies, and easier to mix to get specific light balances vs having to resort to a 400MH that's been crippled by trying to get it to immitate a purple blacklight at 30 fathoms.

I have seen clams grow quite succesfully under tubes, but only if kept fairly close to the light source.

 

[usafresq1]

I use to run a 400watt MH with 65k bulb and so I'm kind of skeptical. Like I said I'm going to email her and see if she can provide more detailed info on it all. If nothing else it will help me b/c its cheaper bulb to replace and less crippling on the electrical bill. I'm not even doing corals. If you want I can scan the article and if I try it I'll keep a post running keeping all informed. It would still be neat to have the power of a MH without the increase in eletrical bill and the excessive heat.

 

[Unarce]

I'd also be interested in finding out how the measurement was taken. If taken at the same point and distance, how would you account for the difference in light distribution, where light is distributed throughout the length of the T5 tube, and an MH bulb would be concentrated in a 1" area? And then, arrive at an equivalent output.

 

[Anonymous]

Now, my belief was; the only advantage over metal halides that the flourescent tubes hold is their efficiency and, overdriving a tube like that, I gotta wonder if you aren't throwing all that away as well.

 

[Rikko]

AFAIK, metal halides are actually MORE efficient than fluorescents or anything else.. You really are getting more lumens/watt, it's just the extreme energy consumption that produces substantially more heat.

The thesis here is also poorly defined... Do the overdriven T5s put out "the same amount of light" or are they "just as bright" as halides? Most likely the first, though even then I wonder what their criteria are. Full spectrum T5s will put out a tremendous amount of light, albeit not dazzlingly bright. A 20000K MH will put out a lot of light, too, but not across the entire visible spectrum - so there is in fact "less light" coming out of it than from a full spectrum. Since the corals are more likely to utilize the blue end (in many cases, certainly not all), the "full" T5s might not be providing that much benefit.
So does this end up being a technical exercise or a practical application?

...wishing I had the article...

 

[ARFF fireman82]

I'll scan the article when I get home and email it to you or PM you the article.

~Kevin

 

[Rikko]

Great!

 

[Fatal Morgana]

There are Lies. There are Damn Lies. But there are Photospectrometers!

 

[Anonymous]

I usually just read FAMA for the ads! :wink:

 

[shr00m]

im just gonna come out and say it... if you believe a T5 is equal to a metal halide. Well.... you are smoking crack. the article is filled with lies... anyone who tells you different has had one too many puffs of the ol exhaust pipe.

 

[Anonymous]

I don't know much of anything else on the issue, but I can tell you that T5's will hold an acros colors quite well.

 

[Fastmarc]

So does PC's for that matter. It just depends on the set-up.

 

[Joew]

I approve of the above message. i have seen T-5's now and not to hip on them.


JoeW
_________________
BMW C1

 

[usafresq1]

Well I'm not sure how a three year project can be a total lie and the author welcomes all questions and criticism by placing her email addresses up. So I would say don't knock it till you try it or keep an open mind about it. I'm going to give it a try and see how it compares to a MH. Personally I hated having mine, the rate of evaporation sucked and the heat output sucked even more, not to mention the increase in the electricity bill.

 

[usafresq1]

I can't post the file b/c it is too big, if anyone wants it shoot me a PM for this screen name (not ARFF) and I'll email it to you. Its saved as a .pdf file so you'll need acrobat or equivlant

 

[skylsdale]

Although I won't necessarily agree that T5's and MH's put out the same intensity...people need to keep in mind that the thing that makes T5's put out so much light is a combination of the slim bulb design and an EXCELLENTLY designed reflector that punches a TON of light back down to the water, much more so than PC's or VHO's can with a reflector.

 

[usafresq1]

I admit I have my doubts so I wrote an email requesting more info and where she got her hardware from. This was several days ago, I'm still awaiting a reply. I may post it depending on the quality of the responce.

 

[Anonymous]

I usually just read FAMA for the ads!

Yup, those ads usually fill up one session of bathroom reading. The best thing is some of the ads look like the same ones from 20 years ago. God, it's unbelievable how many problems people have with a simple sandbed when you read Goeman's Sandmail section

 

[usafresq1]

So would you reccomend a better magazine with better info than FAMA?