FORWARD --> to part 4
<-- BACK to part 2
Back to Aquaria page
Go to main (top level) page.
Subject: Artificial lighting - part 3
Misc. archived Usenet posts
From: mwh@Eng.Sun.COM (Mark Hapner)
Subject: Re: [M] Metal Halide upgrade?
Date: 2 Feb 1995 00:34:13 GMT
Having used both the Venture 5500K (Corallife) and Iwasaki 6500K 250w
bulbs, I definitely prefer the Iwasaki bulbs; they are higher quality,
more compact; longer lasting; better quality light, etc. The cost is
equivalent.
You must change ballasts to go from 175w to 250w. The Iwasaki ballasts
are different than the Venture ballasts. You can get Iwasaki bulbs and
ballasts from a number of places. Some use the 6500K by themselves;
some add 9w compact actinics; I prefer combining them with a pair of
VHO bulbs - 1 actinic and 1 daylight.
-- Mark Hapner
From: cb77@ciao.cc.columbia.edu (Craig Bingman)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria,rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: VHO vs. MH????
Date: 4 Mar 1995 04:37:47 GMT
In article <3j6kat$ad8@gondor.sdsu.edu>,
George Wang wrote:
>Hello all, it's me again.
>
>judging from the replies to my last post... I think I will have to
>get a VHO or MH for my tank... but which one is better ?? VHO or MH???
>I have heard that MH is better, any ideas?
First, I'd appreciate it if you would invest in a key for your
keyboard. ;)
There are places for both. There is a thumbnail sketch of the cost
breakdown for VHO and metal halide in the rk faq. Caution, do your
own resarch and plug your own numbers into that calculation, it is an
example only.
Metal halide are a little tough to beat when you want immense quantities
of light. It takes a number of VHO bulbs to crank out the same lumens
or Einsteins as a 400 watt metal halide lamp.
I really don't know what type of tank you are setting up, didn't see
your previous post. If I had to add anything to the cost analysis in
the faq, it would be the 175 watt metal halide lamps/ballasts are at
the bottom of the efficacy curve for metal halide lamps/ballasts.
The ballast efficiencies AND the lumens/watt from bulbs of the same
color temperature increase monotonically with increasing output to
1 kilowatt lamps.
>oh .... also what size of bulb should I get?
If you are getting fluorescents, something long enough to reach from one
end fitting to the other. With metal halides, don't try to screw in
a medium bulb into a mogul base or vice versa.
>how much they cost?
5.5k color temp 175 watt metal halide bulbs will set you back ~$55 each.
The ballasts will be about the same. Normal output fluorescent bulbs are
all over the place in cost, depending on where you buy them and how
"special" they are. AX50s were about ten bucks a pop the last time I
priced them. Electronic ballasts will run... maybe $60 for a ballast
that will drive four 40 watt lamps, perhaps a bit more. VHO electronic
ballasts run around $150 for a ballast that will drive four 110 watt
bulbs. Even if you are setting up a freshwater aquarium, the rk faq is
worth a read for the lighting section.
>thanks in advance
>p.s. if you know a good place to get them please let me kw
Yeah, you will be needing some of those kw's if you set up a high light
aquarium.
From: cb77@ciao.cc.columbia.edu (Craig Bingman)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: Which MH bulb?
Date: 16 Mar 1995 16:38:01 GMT
In article <3k7ln5$mor@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
Mashugana wrote:
>It's time for me to replace my MH bulb, which is nearly
>one year old. I would like any opinions on which color
>temp. is best. I currently have a 5500k 175w (Hamilton),
>and wonder if the newer 6500k bulbs are better.
It is a Venture bulb. By reputation, the 6000K bulb is the best/
most reliable of that line (5500K, 6000K, 6500K Venture bulbs.)
Some people are more comfortable doing more frequent lamp changes
than once per year.
> The tank is doing well, although I am fighting
>persistent diatoms.
Check around and see if you can find any attractive sponges for your
aquarium. There is a really great blue sponge that comes from the
indopacific, and grows like a weed. Sponges can soak up a fair amount
of silicate, which is what is making your diatoms grow, and they are
a fair sight more attractive than alumina resins.
> I appreciate any advice. If the 6500k bulb is preferred,
>I am wondering what bulbs might work with my Hamilton
>power supply. Would the Coral life bulb work ok?
Yes, the 5500K, 6000K and 6500K bulbs made by Venture for use by
Coralife and Hamilton can all be run off the same ballast. They
all have mogul ends. The Iwasaki bulb is different, the small one
is 150 watts, and there are mixed reports on whether or not the small
one can be run (well) with a 175 watt ballast.
Craig
From: booth@lvld.hp.com (George Booth)
Subject: Re: Conventional vs. Electronic Ballasts, Which is best?
Date: 29 Mar 1995 23:45:56 GMT
Kristi Bittner (kristi@sc.hp.com) wrote:
> I've had one fish shop owner tell me that bulbs burned out a *lot*
> faster with the electronic ballasts (at least the $10 shop/Home Depot
> type of fixtures and ballasts).
I've also experienced this problem with cheap shop lights and Triton
bulbs. Consumer Reports, in a Dec. 1992 issue, mentioned that compact
fluorescent bulbs designed to replace incandescents had a much shorter
life with electronic versus magnetic ballasts.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
George Booth "Nothing in the world is more dangerous
booth@hplvec.lvld.hp.com than sincere ignorance and conscientious
Freshwater Plant Tank Technology stupidity" - Martin Luther King, Jr.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: cb77@ciao.cc.columbia.edu (Craig Bingman)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: yellow tint since MH upgrade!
Date: 5 Apr 1995 22:39:22 GMT
In article <3ltjnb$9qh@ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>,
John DeGroof wrote:
>I recently upgraded from 6 NO FL bulbs, 4 Power Glow and 2 Phillips
>Actinic, to 2 150w 6500K MH plus the two Phillips NO actinics. I think
>the water might have a slight yellow/green tint to it, since the purple
>(coraline) algae doesn't look so purple anymore, and my once bright
>greeen Sinularia now looks pale. Is this normal for MH? I though 6500K
>would be better than NO FL. Do I just need to add VHO actinics or what?
So you are talking about two separate issues here. One is the spectrum
of the metal halide lamps, the other issue is the (dis)coloration of your
water.
The 150 watt Iwasaki bulbs have always looked a little bit green to me.
Of the 175 watt metal halide bulbs, I *think* that the 6000 K venture
bulb looks the best... maybe even somewhat better than the 6500K
venture bulb. Unfortunately, the world is in the midst of a shortage
of the 6000K bulbs. It seems that they were not selling well, they
stopped making them for a bit, threw away their manufacture data on
that tube, and about that time they became popular in the reefkeeping
community, mainly because of the observations of Greg Schiemer and
Tony Vargas (north of NYC.) They started talking about the bulbs,
people started buying them, and they ran out of stock.
So, no, it isn't tremendously surprising that the Iwasaki bulb looks
a bit green to your eye.
You may want to balance it out a bit with some actinics.
People claim that you don't need to run supplemental blue with the
6k+ lamps, but I am not convinced of this. Maybe it is true with
the nominal "10K" and "20K" tubes just starting to come into the
country, but we don't have enough data about them to say much
at this point, aside from the fact that they are significantly more
blue than the other methal halide lamps available. Significant
questions about longevity of the color spectrum and the long-term
effects on the organisms remain.
Craig
From: cap@cmu.edu (Chris Paris)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q][R] Lighting
Date: 24 May 1995 03:54:04 GMT
In article <3ptu39$h1t@bogart.megatek.com> ajt@bogart.megatek.com (Antti Tirronen) writes:
> Well, it just happens that Iwasaki (sp?) makes 6500K 250W bulbs and they
> are cheaper than Coralife 175W 6500K ones to boot!
Not only are the Iwasaki bulbs cheaper (I haven't checked myself, but
am trusting Antti), but at least one person thinks they're nicer. From
hardware/Lighting/halide in the archive:
> From: mwh@dymaxion.Eng.Sun.COM (Mark Hapner)
> Date: 18 Apr 1994 19:24:50 GMT
> Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
> Subject: Re: Metal halide help
>
> The best metal halide bulbs IMHO are the ones made by Iwasaki (they
> come in 150, 250 and 400 watt versions); they are a special type of
> 6500K bulb and seem to be much better quality than Venture or
> Corallife. Since I've used both kinds I can speak from experience.
I have a fixture with one of the Iwasaki 6500K 250W bulbs. The best
price I know of for replacement bulbs is $66 from Ultraviolet
Resources Intl., though I haven't tried to take them up on that quote
yet. Does anyone know of a better price? Also, where is the best deal
on ballasts for this bulb? URI quoted me $89.50 for the ballast. I
haven't shopped around for those ballasts, but I'd hope there's a
cheaper source.
The bulb looks great over my empty tank. :-) (It does have water in
it, at least. The tank, not the bulb.)
--
Chris Paris Support censorship -- go to CMU
For information see http://www.cs.cmu.edu/Web/People/kcf/censor/
From: tse@ohm.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q][R] Lighting
Date: 24 May 1995 19:49:12 GMT
In article , Chris Paris wrote:
>In article <3ptu39$h1t@bogart.megatek.com> ajt@bogart.megatek.com (Antti Tirronen) writes:
>> Well, it just happens that Iwasaki (sp?) makes 6500K 250W bulbs and they
>> are cheaper than Coralife 175W 6500K ones to boot!
>
>Not only are the Iwasaki bulbs cheaper (I haven't checked myself, but
>am trusting Antti), but at least one person thinks they're nicer. From
>hardware/Lighting/halide in the archive:
>
>> From: mwh@dymaxion.Eng.Sun.COM (Mark Hapner)
>> Date: 18 Apr 1994 19:24:50 GMT
>> Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
>> Subject: Re: Metal halide help
>>
>> The best metal halide bulbs IMHO are the ones made by Iwasaki (they
>> come in 150, 250 and 400 watt versions); they are a special type of
>> 6500K bulb and seem to be much better quality than Venture or
>> Corallife. Since I've used both kinds I can speak from experience.
>
>I have a fixture with one of the Iwasaki 6500K 250W bulbs. The best
>price I know of for replacement bulbs is $66 from Ultraviolet
>Resources Intl., though I haven't tried to take them up on that quote
>yet. Does anyone know of a better price? Also, where is the best deal
>on ballasts for this bulb? URI quoted me $89.50 for the ballast. I
>haven't shopped around for those ballasts, but I'd hope there's a
>cheaper source.
>
>The bulb looks great over my empty tank. :-) (It does have water in
>it, at least. The tank, not the bulb.)
Having used the Iwasaki 150W, 250W, and CoraLife 175W 6500K bulbs,
the Iwasaki 250W is by far the ugliest, with the CoraLife being
the nicest. The Iwasaki 150W is not bad. They all turn ugly after
a few months, with the CoraLife staying blue the longest (based on
side by side test for 6 months).
-Anthony
>
>--
>Chris Paris Support censorship -- go to CMU
>For information see http://www.cs.cmu.edu/Web/People/kcf/censor/
From: ac554@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (David Whittaker)
Subject: Metal Halide efficiency/rated life
Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 09:43:42 GMT
Recently I followed up on a posting by Stephen Parry and ordered
a copy of "The Metal Halide Source Book - Catalog and Technical
Guide" from Venture Lighting International. It does contain a
wealth of information.
This guide mentions that although Universal lamps (the ones with
the /U designation such as the Coralife 5500K) can be burned in
any position, they sacrifice life expectancy by 25% and lumen
output by 25% when burned in the horizontal position as opposed
to the vertical, base up position. This may be of interest to
people who must decide between the shoe box type hood and the
hanging spotlights. The former holds the bulb horizontal to the
water surface. the latter has it perpendicular. There is also a
much greater chance of violent failure of the bulb in the horizontal
position. Maybe some of us are not getting the output and longevity
we deserve from Metal Halide.
Also referred to was the ubiquitous colour shift that occurs with
time in all metal halide lamps. This is 200K to 300K by the end of
their economic life and up to an additional 600K near the end of
their rated life. Each bulb type shifts uniquely, although the
authors do not elaborate.
For the MH175/U/5K (5200K) average life was 7500 hours, which means
that the economic (useful) life is 4500 hours (60% of 7500). CRI
is 75 and the mean lumen output is 9000. A year and a quarter at 51
lumens/watt. In the horizontal position, a year at 43 lumens/watt.
The 250 watt and especially the 400 watt bulbs were more efficient.
I ordered a 4300K MH bulb from TFP. How have people found it for
planted tanks compared to the Coralife 5500K?
Dave
--
From: rschuh@ix.netcom.com (Robert Schuh)
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria
Subject: Re: 6500k lamps ?
Date: 31 May 1995 07:42:40 GMT
In <3qgqk1$2uaq@usenetp1.news.prodigy.com> MJND11A@prodigy.com (Michael
Hohl) writes:
>
>I am planning to switch to 2 150 watt 6500k (C.E.W.) lamps for my 75g
>reef tank. Presently I use 3 F40 daylight (OSI) lamps with 3 03
>actinics (Philips). I would like to hear some opinions on this
proposed
>system. Should I also use 03 actinics with the MH's ?
>
>thanks
>Mike H.
>
The Ultralife 6500k bulbs are beautiful .You really do not need
actinics but they are nice for dawn and dusk effects. The Coral life
6500k bulbs are not as nice as the Ultra Life. Since you mentioned 150
watt you must be getting the Ultralife. There was a tank last year at
the S.W. Marine conference with a single 6500k bulb and it was the talk
of the show!!
rschuh@ix.netcom.com
From: sasala@itd.itd.nrl.navy.mil (Thomas M. Sasala)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: [M][L][Q] 5500K & 10,000K bulbs with norm
Date: 30 Jun 1995 19:39:02 GMT
In article <3t0ung$n52@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
Aquatictec wrote:
>I do not believe they make 10000K 250 watt bulbs
>
>10000K bulbs are all 175 watt and made by Venture for Coralife
>
>20000K bulbs come in 175 watt by Coralife and 250 and 400 watt versions by
>
>Radium or Osram.
>
>All the bulbs have mogul bases and will fit in standard mogul base sockets
>and use standard ballasts of the correct wattage
>
TFP is currently advertising 250W and 400W 10K and 20K bulbs. I have
heard bad things about the Corlife bulbs though. I guess the German bulbs
are better.
>
>
>Greg Smith
>Aquatic Technology
>aquatictec@aol.com
>aquatic-technology@actwin.com
>check our web pages at:
> http://www.actwin.com/aquatictec
>(216) 235 8263
From: cb77@konichiwa.cc.columbia.edu (Craig Bingman)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: [M] Blue Moon Reef bulb...info needed
Date: 4 Jul 1995 16:04:24 GMT
In article , wrote:
>In article <1995Jun24.235446@opal.tufts.edu>, etsang@opal.tufts.edu wrote:
>
>> What is the difference between a regular actinic bulb and a Blue Moon Reef
>> bulb? They look different from the eyes, but will the light-sensitive
>>inverts be benefit from the Blue Moon? Thanks for answering?
The blue moon tube is a broad spectrum blue lamp. The Actinic 03 has
fairly narrow emission, peaked at 420 nm. The Phillips 03 lamps produce
almost no UVA. URi 03's produce a significant amount of UVA. The
Blue Moon tube gives a broad peak, extending into the UVA. Some people
have found UVA to be helpful in promoting the expression of fluorescent
protein pigments in corals. There is a huge difference between the
Blue Moon lamp and the Phillips 03 in this regard. I had both running
on my hood for a time, on opposite sides. The side of the coral that
was more nearly normal to the blue moon tube was much more strongly
pigmented than the side facing the Phillips 03.
Craig
From: aomcm@asuvm.inre.asu.edu (Michael C. Moore)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: [M] Blue Moon Reef bulb...info needed
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 1995 11:24:37
Thanks for this info Craig. I am also experimenting with a blue moon tube
right now and have noticed that my blue mushrooms seem more strongly pigmented
after a few weeks than before. Your explanation may acount for this.
Unfortunately, to me the blue moon tube gives a more greenish cast to the tank
that does not seem as appealing to my eye as the blue of the actinic tube.
Michael C. Moore
Tempe, AZ
aomcm @ asuvm.inre.asu.edu
"If the road to excellence were not so difficult,
it would not be travelled by so few" Spinoza
From: Steve Ghera
Date: 12 Jul 95 07:42:30 EST
In article Mark Chapman,
CMIC42@comm.mot.com writes:
>In following the SW Marine conf discussion I have leared of the new
10000K
>bulbs and have a couple of questions:
>
>1) Where can you get them in the US?
I just bought a 10,000K 250W from Champion. I have not received it yet.
>2) Do they run off the same ballasts as are used for the 5500K bulbs?
I was told that they will work with the 5500K ballasts and sockets. No
adapters are necessary.
>3) I was planning to purchase a fixture with (3) 5500K 175W metal
halides
>and 2 6' Actinic fluorescence for my new 6' long 300 gallon reef tank I
am
>setting up.
>Would it be better to just purchase a fixture that has 3 175W 10000K
bulbs
>and not use the Actinics at all?
I have a 6' 135 and use 2 250W 5500K bulbs and 4 3' actinics. I have had
great success with stony (acropora, gargonian, hammer, cup coral) and
soft corals. Your lighting needs will be dictated by the animals you
wish to keep. I would recommend going with the MH + actinics. You could
always not turn lights on and see how things work.
>4) What is better about these bulbs vs the 5500's? Better CRI? Better
>match to the sun's spectral output?
10000K bulbs are supposed to replicate sun light that would be found at a
depth of about 6 feet under water. 5500K bulbs replicate sun light found
on the water's surface. I don't know yet which is better. If you have a
coral that is 2' deep in your tank with a 10000K bulb, it now see a
spectrum of light as if it were 8 feet under (big deal). However, I'm
guessing that more the 175W (or 250W in my case) go into cranking out
light in the blue spectrum instead of those towards the red. The corals
have to like that.
>5) Should you use a UV filter with the 10000K bulbs?
Like Lewis J. said, the outer glass envelope serves this purpose.
Steve Ghera
From: trickstr@accessnv.com (Rick Martin)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: [M][L][Q] 5500K & 10,000K bulbs with normal MH balasts
Date: 9 Jul 1995 21:24:52 GMT
In article <1995Jun29.152246.5351@inet.d48.lilly.com>,
Ghera_SJ@lilly.com says...
>
>I'm considering the purchase of the new 10,000K MH bulbs (250W).
>These would be replacing my 5,500K MH bulbs.
>
>Does anyone know if I have to change out my ballasts too?
I purchased a 20,000 400 w Osram bulb and used a standard 400 w ballast
no problems so far, I also have a Corallife 10,000 and 20,000 175w MH
>I spoke to a vendor and they said for the 10,000K and 20,000K
>bulbs that they sell, I do not. (I would for the German 6,500K
>bulbs that require mercury ballasts).
I havent heard that yet
>If anyone has done this, could you please answer these questions
>for me:
> - how do you like the color as compared to 5500K?
The 5500 look yellow compared to the 20, k it takes alittle getting
used to but now I prefer it
>
> - how did your corals like the color? What kind of
> corals?
I got a 400w first and added it to the 5500 175w I started at 5-6 hours
a day and I think I should have eased into it a little slower, I had
air bubbles in the flesh of the Trachyphyllia sp and also the
sinularia, I moved them to a lower spot and cut the hours back and
over 2 week period slowly increased until I reached 6 hrs. I then moved
the corals back to their original position(12" from water level). The
rest of the corals, acroporas mostly near the top never flinched from
the sudden increase in light. In all Id say they like the light more,
but Ive only had the lights 2 months now. I liked the color so much i
went ahead and got 10 and 20k for the 175w
> - how long do you think the bulbs last as
> compared to the 5500K bulbs?
I was told that Osram used a single type of phosphorus and that theyve
had no color shift in 3 years, but the lumens will decrease as with all
MH over time
>
> - did you have any problems doing the conversion?
>
>Thanks,
>Steve
Hope this helps you, I really like the color it puts out.
From: nej@bnr.co.uk (Nigel Jolley)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q] [M] [R] 10,000K MQI Bulbs
Date: 31 Jul 1995 09:11:07 GMT
: I've been emailed that the light I was looking at was specifically a
: 400 Watt, german 20K bulb (actually 4 over a tank 4-5 foot square), and
: that 175 Watt, 10 K bulbs are dimmer and blue'er. How much so, I don't
: know!
: Kristi
The 20k should be bluer than the 10k. Not having info on the relative
efficiencies of the bulbs brightness is difficult but the 20k should
be dimmer (to our eyes) than the 10k all things being equal.
nej@bnr.co.uk
From: hojo@nyc.pipeline.com (Howard Ashley)
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria
Subject: Cheap Just Got Cheaper
Date: 2 Aug 1995 19:43:51 -0400
I just got off the phone with someone at New Earth Garden Center. Listen up
my reef aquarist friends. Don't fork over $400 for a pendant MH system to
one of the aquarium hood makers. For $125 you can have the same wattage of
MH light over your tank with a better reflector. If you want more watts 250
or 400 or a remote ballast you'll have to part with $200 or $225. These
prices are half of what I see C*r*l*f* or H*m*lt*n selling their lights
for. I know some of you already know this but why keep it a secret. The
aquarium hobbyist is victimized financially by every kind of manufacturer
there is. I have a problem when the same exact item is retailed to two
different consumer groups for two different prices. It shouldn't be legal.
I haven't looked into this but I understand that actinics weren't invented
for us reef types but are used in the printing industry. I wonder what a
7100K 4' flourescent might retail for from a printing equipment supplier. I
intend to check it out.
--
Howard Ashley
Hojo@Pipeline.Com
"Friends don't let friends live without Internet"
From: Jeff Tertel
Subject: Re: [M] IceCap 660
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 19:04:49 GMT
Lewis Johnson wrote:
>
> Is it possible to wire the seperate bulbs run by an IceCap 660 to come on at
> different times, (e.g. wire each lead through a seperate timer),or do all of
> them have to come on at once?
>
> Does anyone have any experience with the IceCap Auto Program Timer Dimmer
> they would share?
>
>
I know in the 430 it is not possible, so I would doubt the the 660
would be able to be wired with individual timers.
I don't have any personal experience with the dimmer, but have been
told by 2 vendors that sell them, they have a high failure rate, and
do not recommend them in general.
Hope this helps.
jeff
From: sanford1@ix.netcom.com (gary sanford)
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria
Subject: Re: Cheap Just Got Cheaper
Date: 8 Aug 1995 01:29:32 GMT
In <3vp2jn$rbq@pipe4.nyc.pipeline.com> hojo@nyc.pipeline.com (Howard
Ashley) writes:
>
>I just got off the phone with someone at New Earth Garden Center.
Listen up
>my reef aquarist friends. Don't fork over $400 for a pendant MH system
to
>one of the aquarium hood makers. For $125 you can have the same wattage
of
>MH light over your tank with a better reflector. If you want more watts
250
>or 400 or a remote ballast you'll have to part with $200 or $225. These
>prices are half of what I see C*r*l*f* or H*m*lt*n selling their lights
>for. I know some of you already know this but why keep it a secret. The
>aquarium hobbyist is victimized financially by every kind of
manufacturer
>there is. I have a problem when the same exact item is retailed to two
>different consumer groups for two different prices. It shouldn't be
legal.
>
>
>I haven't looked into this but I understand that actinics weren't
invented
>for us reef types but are used in the printing industry. I wonder what
a
>7100K 4' flourescent might retail for from a printing equipment
supplier. I
>intend to check it out.
>
>
>--
>Howard Ashley
>Hojo@Pipeline.Com
>"Friends don't let friends live without Internet"
>
FWIW,my brother just installed a twin 150W 6500K metal
halide retro-fit kit from a well known supplier in a
hood.
When he got it,it didn't work.
So I went up to his place to trouble-shoot it.
Lo and behold,inside a very well made louvered metal
box were 2 Advance model # 71A3072 standard transfomer
metal halide ballasts.
Anyway,after checking voltages and such I found that
reversing the wires (phase) to the bulbs got them
going. Problem solved.
Now for the good part,the above-mentioned Advance ballasts
are rated for 175W (seems fine on a 150,I believe they are
Ultralux's made in Japan)and are available from Grainger
(nation-wide USA) as part # 1A025 for $54.90 in the '94
catalog.
Even includes the capacitor!
The whole wiring scheme is:
An on-off switch to the AC mains ,is then split to the input
of both ballasts.
3 wires (ones a ground) output from each ballast to each light.
Thats it!
The wiring schematic is even printed on the ballast itself.
Hope this helps.
Also here's an HID ballast cross reference.
Advance # 71A3072 crosses to:
Valmont(GE)# 15G4250, 15G4419W18
Jefferson # 845-1390-047, 845-1392-047
Sola # 79-40-39406
Universal # 1030-11R to 1030-91R
Good luck!
GS
--
"Without deviation from the norm,there can be no progress"
From: Don Ahee
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: 10,000K metal halide bulbs...
Date: 21 Aug 1995 16:30:09 GMT
dkuster@chameleon.wh.att.com (-DANIEL.M.KUSTER) wrote:
>
>
Dan Kuster
I haven't used the higher Kelvin bulbs but The folks on Compuserve
have reported on them alot; they are much bluer as you might expect.
They cause pigments in the corals to luminece, especially
Acropora sp. which often lose certain pigments. Many users report
the need to change their supplemental florecsents to daylights for
photoperiod phase-in/out and for viewing color temp.
They sound neat, but probably not the cure-all professed by your
vendor.
FWIW...Don
From: AXWN94A@prodigy.com (Laura Hargrave)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: 10,000K metal halide bulbs...
Date: 22 Aug 1995 01:29:23 GMT
>I guess my question is, are these 10,000K and 20,000K bulbs worth
>the expense? What are their expected lifespan? The guy at the pet
>store claimed that I was wasting money and energy supplementing
>5500K MH's with flourescent tubes that had to be replaced every
>6 months. He felt that I should just go with the newer, bluer,
>higher temp. MH bulbs.
I have been using the 10,000K for a few months now and have mixed
opinions about it. I use it on a 45gal hex reef containing only
mushrooms and open brain corals. I use no supplemental lighting, just a
175 watt MH pendant. When I first put the 10,000K in I couldn't believe
how blue it was. I is very blue, at first. Too blue in my opinion. It
just didn't look right. During the course of the next couple of months
it gradually began to warm in color until it reached it's current
intensity. It's been steady for awhile now. It's no longer too blue
and my corals are thriving under it with no need for supplemental
actinics. I have no idea what kind of lifespan to expect as this is the
first time I have tried this type of bulb. I can really see no reason
for you to go with this type of bulb unless you wish to get rid of your
VHO lighting and you are willing to put up with an ultra-blue aquarium
for awhile. I have 2 other, more traditional, reef set-ups including a
variety of different corals, but I have not tried this bulb on them so I
can't tell you what effects it might have on any corals other than the
ones I mentioned above. BTW, it did make my coraline take off in that
tank. That was a nice bonus. The very back sides of the tank are
practically half covered in it now. Basically, it's your call. I hope
I have been of some help.
Laura Hargrave
From: booth@lvld.hp.com (George Booth)
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: [M][R] Lifespan of MH bulbs
Date: 23 Aug 1995 18:46:33 GMT
-DANIEL.M.KUSTER (dkuster@chameleon.wh.att.com) wrote:
> What is the accepted lifespan of the Coralife 5500K, 175W
> metal halide bulbs? I've been replacing them every 6 months,
> because I thought they only lasted as long as flourescents,
> but a guy in the local pet shop said that MH's lasted between
> a year and 1.5 years, with no real diminish in light output.
The guy does not have a very well calibrated eye. Most MH bulbs lose 50%
of their intensity over a period of 12 months. I would replace them
every 12 months, alternating one every 6 months to avoid a lot of
intensity flucuation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
George Booth "Nothing in the world is more dangerous
booth@hplvec.lvld.hp.com than sincere ignorance and conscientious
Freshwater Plant Tank Technology stupidity" - Martin Luther King, Jr.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bryan_lukoni@mindlink.bc.ca (Bryan Lukoni)
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: 10,000K metal halide bulbs...
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 03:09:00 GMT
dkuster@chameleon.wh.att.com (-DANIEL.M.KUSTER) wrote:
>I guess my question is, are these 10,000K and 20,000K bulbs worth
>the expense? What are their expected lifespan? The guy at the pet
>store claimed that I was wasting money and energy supplementing
>5500K MH's with flourescent tubes that had to be replaced every
>6 months. He felt that I should just go with the newer, bluer,
>higher temp. MH bulbs.
>Comments?
I have 10K over my reef and I love the look of them. A lot of people
say they are too blue but I disagree. I find them a crisp white with
a tinge of blue. I still supplement the 10k with my regular 03's.
The 10K should last a lot longer than the old 5500K as the colour
shift to yellow would take that much longer. I have also read that
the 10K and the 20K will not colour shift appreciably due to the type
of halides that are used in the envelope. I suspect that the 10K
should last somewhere around 2 years.
-=Bryan=-
From: dbs@hprnd.rose.hp.com (Dave Sheehy)
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: 10,000K metal halide bulbs...
Followup-To: alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Date: 24 Aug 1995 17:18:45 GMT
-DANIEL.M.KUSTER (dkuster@chameleon.wh.att.com) wrote:
> I recently replaced the two 5500K MH bulbs over my 120 gal
> reef tank. When I was in the store, I saw new slimmer versions
> (made by Venture, I think) that had color temperatures of
> 10,000K and 20,000K! I didn't get them because (a) I wanted to
> check out the consensus here, (b) they cost twice what a regular
> 175W 5500K bulb costs, and (c) in addition to two MH bulbs, I have
> 4, 48" VHO's over my tank - two actinics and two actinic/days, so
> it would SEEM that I have the blue end of the spectrum covered.
> I guess my question is, are these 10,000K and 20,000K bulbs worth
> the expense?
They are too new for people to have enough experience with them to say
for certain. Preliminary results seem positive. I would say that these
bulbs are of the most value for those of us who are trying to keep the
brightly pigmented small polyp stony corals. If you are keeping soft
corals and the large polyp stonies the extra expense of these bulbs
may not be worthwhile.
> What are their expected lifespan?
The same as a regular MH which is a year to a year and a half.
> The guy at the pet
> store claimed that I was wasting money and energy supplementing
> 5500K MH's with flourescent tubes that had to be replaced every
> 6 months. He felt that I should just go with the newer, bluer,
> higher temp. MH bulbs.
The FSG is being premature in his praise. These bulbs have simply not
been around long enough to know for certain how good they are. Besides,
if you use the 20,000k bulbs you will still need to run some
supplemental white lighting for aesthetic reasons. One be caveat to
be aware of is that both these bulbs output significantly more UV than
the previous lower Kelvin rated bulbs. You can easily burn your corals
with these bulbs if you aren't careful to acclimate them properly.
Dave Sheehy
From: laurence@cco.caltech.edu (Dustin Laurence)
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: 10,000K metal halide bulbs...
Date: 25 Aug 1995 04:45:24 GMT
dbs@hprnd.rose.hp.com (Dave Sheehy) writes:
>...One be caveat to
>be aware of is that both these bulbs output significantly more UV than
>the previous lower Kelvin rated bulbs. You can easily burn your corals
>with these bulbs if you aren't careful to acclimate them properly.
It's a two-edged sword. They seem to help many corals retain their
colors because those colors seem to be UV protection pigments. So the
extra UV is good or bad depending on what you want.
Dustin
--
For my sanity's sake: I read all my mail, but simply can't reply to it
all anymore. I try to help everyone I can, but I can't help you with
the FAQ contents, since I didn't write it, nor freshwater questions,
nor if you haven't read the relevant sections of the FAQ.
From: ac554@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (David Whittaker)
Subject: Re: [M][R] Lifespan of MH bulbs
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 1995 11:53:53 GMT
Anthony Tse (tse@ohm.nrl.navy.mil) writes:
> In article <41kp7vINN79u@bhars12c.bnr.co.uk>,
> Nigel Jolley wrote:
>>It depends very much on the lamps for example I have data on some good
>>metal halides that show reduction in output to 60% and a 50% lamp
>>mortality after the "rated life" of 10,000 h (2 yrs 3 months
>>at 12 h per day). I also have data on good normal output fluorescent
>>lamps that show a reduction in output to 87% and a 50% lamp mortality
>>after their rate life of 12,000 hrs.
>
> There is one catch. The lumen maintenance curve of MH has a
> EXTREMELY fast drop off rate. Like after 6 months, MH will loose
> something like 50% of it's output, but it will pretty much stay
> that way until it burn out. The mean lumen output of a lamp (for MH,
> 60 - 70% is a typical mean lumen number for 175W) is what normal
> intelligent people use to figure out how many light bulbs one need, fish
> people use the initial lumen number for some unknown reasons.
>
> -Anthony
Not so sure about that. Initial lumens are measured after 100 hours
usage. During this time there is a large dropoff and then stability is
reached. The mean lumens (which one should use in calculations) is
typically 73% of the initial lumens according to what I've read in
the literature from Venture. At 6 months lumen output is about 80% of
initial output. And the curve that Venture publishes is pretty well
a straight line that attenuates with time.
Dave
--
From: cb77@ciao.cc.columbia.edu (Craig Bingman)
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: [M][R] Lifespan of MH bulbs
Date: 27 Aug 1995 15:40:30 GMT
In article ,
-DANIEL.M.KUSTER wrote:
>What is the accepted lifespan of the Coralife 5500K, 175W
>metal halide bulbs? I've been replacing them every 6 months,
>because I thought they only lasted as long as flourescents,
>but a guy in the local pet shop said that MH's lasted between
>a year and 1.5 years, with no real diminish in light output.
Nope. I'd say the MH lamps need to be replaced at 3-6 month intervals,
depending on how close you to the edge you want to live.
WRT flourescent lamps, the lifetime varies tremendously depending on
the phosphor. Actinic 03 phosphor tends to go south pretty fast.
Phillips BB lamps have a longer rated lifetime, AX50s go for a couple
of years without tremendous losses.
>Is this true? If so, I've been wasting a lot of money on
>MH bulbs!!
The guy is a yo-yo. You are doing it about right, in fact, you might
want to replace them a little more often than that.
Craig
From Aquatic Technology home page http://www.actwin.com/AquaticTech:
10000K simulates light in 5 to 10 feet of water
20000K simulates light in 12 to 20 feet of water
From: cb77@aloha.cc.columbia.edu (Craig Bingman)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria,sci.aquaria,alt.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q][G] Metal Halide current draq
Date: 29 Aug 1995 00:43:44 GMT
In article ,
Thomas M. Sasala wrote:
>
> Does anyone know how much current a 175 watt metal halide lamp
>draws? Not in theory, but in reality. I would like to compare this
>to a 110 VHO lamp (which I need data for as well :) ). Thanks.
The ballast loss is about 50 watts. So roughly 225 watts.
The disgusting thing is that the ballast loss for a 400 watt
metal halide lamp is about the same.
Craig "I shoulda bought bigger ballasts" Bingman
From: cb77@aloha.cc.columbia.edu (Craig Bingman)
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: 10,000K metal halide bulbs...
Date: 29 Aug 1995 00:30:53 GMT
In article <41fu9o$bjd@hpscit.sc.hp.com>,
Kristi Bittner wrote:
>One vendor that I talked to, claimed that there should really be *no*
>color shift... since a full spectrum bulb is made by mixing several
>different phospors (is that the right term in a MH bulb?), to get the
>whole range of frequencies. With the 10 & 20,000K bulbs, supposedly
>only one phosphor is needed to get the narrow frequency spectrum. The
>color shift comes when one phosphor degrades before another phosphor,
>causing a change in the mix of spectrums. Based on that, the new bulbs
>will still see a decline in intensity, of course, but no shift in
>spectrum.
Kristi--
That may be true of the "20k" lamps (I choke every time I have to type
that ludicrous color temp) which may contain mainly one type of metal
halide.
It will not be true of the 10k lamps. Obviously they have other metal
halides present, but a lot of the one that gives the blue color.
I have not seen SPDs for the Coralife lamps yet, but the Radium lamps
have a blue peak at 450 nm and little else. It isn't perfect... I'd
like something at 475-500 nm based on the absorption spectra of the
accessory pigment/protein complexes in dinoflagellates.
The metal halide lamps don't actually contain phosphors. They are filled
with ... metal halides (salts) which go into the vapor phase a lot
easier than most metals. Once in the arc, the metal halides decompose
into atomic metals and halogen, and the metal emits light according to
its atomic emission spectrum. Outside the arc, they recombine.
I believe that there is usually some Hg in the mix to kick up the
starting pressure and start the arc.
In fluorescent tubes, the phosphors stay on the outside of the lamp
and are excited (mainly) by the 253.7 nm emission line of the mercury vapor
in the tube.
Some people claim that the envelope changes over time, and the UV
transmissivity goes down, in which case people who are looking for
spectacular coral colors might be a bit surprised a few months down
the road.
If you don't want to spend a fortune on one of these lamps, but want
some more 450 nm light for your aquarium, the Phillips Special
Blue lamp has a peak at exactly the same place as the Radium lamps.
They have a substantially longer useful lifetime than actinic 03
lamps. They will probably be somewhat poorer in near UV than the
Radium metal halides.
Craig
From: laurence@cco.caltech.edu (Dustin Laurence)
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: [M][R] Lifespan of MH bulbs
Date: 30 Aug 1995 06:06:03 GMT
Bill Geese writes:
>Why may I ask are you replacing these bulbs so frequently?? MH bulbs are
>fine for 12mo. Must be nice to have an unlimited budget...can I buy your
>used bulbs??
I suspect I've used individual MH bulbs longer than most (3 years). I
think that if you are willing to accept the initial drop in intensity
and spectrum shift (extreme for "6500K" bulbs), you can run them
forever at 70% intensity or so and the degraded spectrum. Of course,
I also understand the failure mode on MH bulbs that are driven until
they die is a spectacular explosion, so you might want to think twice
about saving money this way!
Dustin
--
For my sanity's sake: I read all my mail, but simply can't reply to it
all anymore. I try to help everyone I can, but I can't help you with
the FAQ contents, since I didn't write it, nor freshwater questions,
nor if you haven't read the relevant sections of the FAQ.
From: cb77@ciao.cc.columbia.edu (Craig Bingman)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria,sci.aquaria,alt.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q][G] Metal Halide current draq
Date: 31 Aug 1995 23:43:04 GMT
In article ,
Thomas M. Sasala wrote:
>In article <41tns0$7fq@apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>,
>cb77@aloha.cc.columbia.edu (Craig Bingman) wrote:
>
>> In article ,
>> Thomas M. Sasala wrote:
>> >
>> > Does anyone know how much current a 175 watt metal halide lamp
>> >draws? Not in theory, but in reality. I would like to compare this
>> >to a 110 VHO lamp (which I need data for as well :) ). Thanks.
>>
>>
>> The ballast loss is about 50 watts. So roughly 225 watts.
>>
> Someone from sci.engr.lighting quoted about 25-35 watts loss. Is
>50 a worse case or more nominal than 35?
Tom---
Either the old Grainger catalog I looked at had a typo, or I have a
memory leak. (distinctly possible)
The ballast loss for a 175 watt F-can ballast is about 30 watts,
60 watts for a 400 watt ballast.
I always *thought* it should scale more or less directly with the
wattage of the ballast, so was perplexed by those older numbers.
Sorry if anyone junked their 175's...
What did Gilda Radner say? "Nevermind."
Craig
From: cb77@namaste.cc.columbia.edu (Craig Bingman)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria,alt.aquaria
Subject: Re: (M) What type of LIGHTING for my REEF?
Date: 5 Sep 1995 00:13:07 GMT
In article <427dij$ort@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>,
Mark L. Mantini wrote:
> I have a Oceanic 58gl Show tank dimensions 36"L x 18"W x 21"H.
>I am debating on how to light my tank. I dont' know if I should use MH
>or Flourecents (VHO's). What I am thinking about doing is this:
>
>
>1) 1 250 Watt MH Pendant with a 10,000 k bulb.
Yeah, if you go with a 250 watt lamp, you can pop a 6,500 K Iwasaki
lamp in if you find the $100+ 10k lamp too blue. (you would also
need to buy a mogul to medium adapter, which are fairly inexpensive.)
>2) Will a Pendant have enough broadcast over a three foot span. I here
> two feet per bulb.
There will be lower light zones off to the side. That is not necessarily
a bad thing, not all corals like to be a few inches under a 250 watt
metal halide lamp.
>3) Has anyone drawn any opinions on these 10,000 and 20,000 k bulbs?
I'm not sure they are all they are proposed to be. In particular, if
you want to look at the tank, you should not get a 20k lamp without
some pretty damned heavy duty supplemental light from either fluorescent
lamps or a second metal halide. The 20k (gag choke) lamps have one type
of metal halide. The main peak is at 450 nm. That much saturated blue
light without something else to balance it out will probably make you
moderately nauseated when you look at it too long. (This effect is noted
in some nurses who work in infant phototherapy rooms, where they have banks
and banks of Phillips special blue lamps blazing away. The rec for
queasy nurses is to add a little full spectrum light to the mix. The peak
emission for the Phillips special blue is 450 nm. The peak for the 20k
metal halide lamps is 450 nm.)
>4) With that kind of setup will heat be a problem?
Heat is going to be a potential problem with any lighting arrangement
sufficient to keep hard corals. If you have a pendant light, the easiest
thing to do is just aim a fan to blow across the surface of the water.
You will cool the water several degrees that way. You may well have
MORE of a heat problem with a more confined VHO fluorescent lamp
arrangment.
>5) Would a hood and VHO's be a better setup?
It would be kind of nice to know what you want to keep in the aquarium
before answering that question.
>6) I think a hood would give me better ilumination, but more heat.
It will retain more heat if you are not very careful to keep it ventilated,
yes.
What do you want to do with the tank?
From: cb77@konichiwa.cc.columbia.edu (Craig Bingman)
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: [M][R] Lifespan of MH bulbs
Date: 5 Sep 1995 23:21:17 GMT
In article ,
Bill Geese wrote:
>
>
>On 27 Aug 1995, Craig Bingman wrote:
>
>> In article ,
>> -DANIEL.M.KUSTER wrote:
>>
>> >What is the accepted lifespan of the Coralife 5500K, 175W
>> >metal halide bulbs? I've been replacing them every 6 months,
>> >because I thought they only lasted as long as flourescents,
>> >but a guy in the local pet shop said that MH's lasted between
>> >a year and 1.5 years, with no real diminish in light output.
>>
>> Nope. I'd say the MH lamps need to be replaced at 3-6 month intervals,
>> depending on how close you to the edge you want to live.
>>Why may I ask are you replacing these bulbs so frequently?? MH bulbs are
>fine for 12mo. Must be nice to have an unlimited budget...can I buy your
>used bulbs??
1. spectral changes in the visible/PAR region.
2. diminished output, the drop slows at 70% but certainly does not stop.
3. decreased UV output, due to changes in either the halide mix
or browning of the envelopes, probably the inner envelope is the
problem. It is in a high energy, high temperature situation.
Almost all glass will brown if you slam on it hard enough with
plasma, electrons, UV, x-rays, you name it. The UV is the first
to go, and the near UV emission of metal halide lamps are one of
the undocumented features that promote coral pigment formation.
This is one reason why I am profoundly skeptical of the long
life estimates I hear on the high color temperature lamps. I'm
sure they will burn that long. I'm not at all sure that they will
give the effects that people want for that long.
Past 6 months, they are dead as far as I am concerned. Sure, if you
want to buy them, make an offer and I'll send you what I have left.
You can run the lamps as long as you want, they will eventually fail
to strike or explode, probably the former (I've heard of very few
metal halide lamps exploding.) But if you are paying for power, and
most of us are, then the efficiency of the light source has to be
considered. I'm paying about 14 cents per kilowatt hour in the summer.
In addition to the cost of operating the lamp, I'm also paying for
an airconditioner to cool my apartment, and a dim, year old 175 watt
metal halide lamp puts exactly the same amount of heat into the
environment as a newer, brighter lamp does.
Running a 175 + 30 watt ballast loss lamp = 205 watts for 12 hours per
day at 14 cents per kilowatt hour comes to $127 over the course of a
year. If I wanted to get the same amount of light out of a highly
deprecated lamp, I'd have to step up to a 250 watt lamp, which
with ballast losses pulls something like 295 watts. That costs
$180 per year to run. 180-127=53, or just about the cost of an extra
175 watt lamp. This is completely neglecting the additional cooling
requirements, and totally neglecting the poorer UV output of older
lamps, and the spectral shifts in the visible region.
Personally, I'm comfortable with changing lamps on a 6 month max.
interval. If others are in different situations (substantially less
expensive power, no need for AC in the summer, don't really care what
color the corals are, and don't mind the spectral shifts in the lamps)
then yes, running them longer may be advantageous to you.
Craig
From: kslandry@io.com
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: Actinics are flickering; do they need a starter with a rapid start ballast?
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 16:46:13 -0500
>fluorescents seem to be dim and flickery. I did not put in a starter for
>the actinics because I used a rapid start ballast. Does anyone know if
>the coralife 20W 24" actininc bulbs require a starter.
Check the ballast. If it says 'energy efficient' or 'energy saver' get
one that doesn't. I've returned several ballasts for this reason. Once I
get a energy sucking unit they do just fine :) A couple of mine even say
'high power factor' which means ??? but they do work.
Kevin
---------
"We don't need all kinds to make the world go around, but we got 'em!"
From: raiar@inlink.com (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: Actinics are flickering on new light setup
Date: 12 Sep 1995 02:48:00 GMT
Hi Matthew
On the actinic, it sounds like the ballasts may not be up to par for the
length of wire from the ballast to the lamps.
Although I have nothing against rapid start ballasts, FWIW, I have found
that using starter type ballasts, with starters of course, that my bulbs
lasted much longer before their output started to drop to replacement
levels, why I don't know, just that they do.
A few of my aquariums still use the old 7 buck shoplight fixtures, they are
rapid start, and some work fine and some just don't put out the light. I
finally attributed it to current draw on the total circuit in a few cases
and just cheap ballasts on others.
Oh before I close, turn your fan around the other way, so the air blows into
the light unit. I know it sounds backwards, but your fan and lamps will
last longer and you won't get pin corrosion so fast.
Gary
From: cb77@sawasdee.cc.columbia.edu (Craig Bingman)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria,rec.aquaria,alt.aquaria
Subject: Re: [M] VHO Ballasts - what brand? electronic or not?
Date: 8 Oct 1995 15:01:40 GMT
In article <457ivu$t7l@s1.ganet.net>, kpr wrote:
>
>... Until recently I thought I wanted an
>electronic Icecap ballast. I was told that they (and other
>electronic ballasts) have a history of going bad very
>quickly...
They did, several years ago. The current generation are substantially
more robust. You need to be very careful when wiring them, as they do
have a reputation for not protecting themselves very well. But I know
of many people who are using them with very good, very stable results.
I don't have any information about the other brand of VHO ballast, the
SunSeeker (or whatever) that are starting to be advertized by places
like TFP. The price point might be OK if you just want to run 2 4'
lamps, but if you want to run 4 lamps, the Icecap is a substantially
better value.
Craig
From: patterso@spudboy.ads.com (Tim J. Patterson)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria,rec.aquaria,alt.aquaria
Subject: Re: [M] VHO Ballasts - what brand? electronic or not?
Date: 12 Oct 95 09:39:36
>
>I am planning to build a lighting canopy for my 100 gallon
>fish-only tank. I intend to have 3-48" VHO bulbs w/ fans
>to cool. My dilema is that I don't know what type of
>ballast to use. Until recently I thought I wanted an
>electronic Icecap ballast. I was told that they (and other
>electronic ballasts) have a history of going bad very
>quickly. I also know that TAR ballasts last forever but
>run very hot. Can anyone offer experience on the types and
>brands which may work for me? Also what kind of
>experiences have you had with Icecaps inparticular? Thanks.
>
This will probably be a very unpopular responce, but I like good old
fashioned Tar Ballasts. They are bullet proof and the heat thing isn't
a real problem as long as you keep the ballast away from the tank. Call
an electical supply place in your yellow pages. When I lived in S FL I
used to buy a dual VHO ballast for 2 48"-2 72" for about $35.00. Most
places sell them for over $100.00. Check it out!!!
There is the recurring cost of the energy lost in heating the tar
ballast but they can indeed be so much cheaper that recovering that
cost may take a while. That said, I have 2 Icecaps running 4 72"
tubes over my tank. They have proven reliable but do generate EMI &
have to be turned off when I am using my VCR to record from some of
the cable channels.
Tim
From: cmo1@panix.com (Mike Oliver)
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria
Subject: Re: Compact Fluorescents???
Date: 12 Oct 1995 14:52:45 -0400
In <45htqb$40g@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> frasej@ix.netcom.com (James Frase ) writes:
>Each light is 9w, but I'm told that they give out the equivalent of 50w
>each. Our corals love it and are big. Each set has one actinic blue
>bulb and one daylight. We also have one 4 foot, 40w bulb that comes on
>a couple of hours before, and stays on a couple of hours after the
>mini's. I definately think they are worth the price ($69 for the
>fixture and $17-$19 for each bulb).
You should probably look into mail order companies as I have seen prices
for these items at about half of what you list. The bulbs are $9-12 from
Champion Lighting, (1-800-673-7822), and I think TFP sells the fixtures
for about $45.
These compact fluorescent bulbs are definately great for reefs,
especially small tanks. If you are the DIY type, you can build a
fixture yourself for $10-20 using parts from a hardware store.
--
Mike Oliver cmo1@panix.com
Huntington, NY http://www.panix.com/~cmo1/
From: baird
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q][R] who sells MH ballast?
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 09:39:13 -0700
hamilton technology (800-447-9797) sells 175w mh
ballasts for $54. cheapest i've seen so far +
hamilton is a reputable company. i'm thinking of
purchacing a few myself. now i need to find an
inexpensive source for mogul bases.
baird howell
bbh@indirect.com
From: kerrym@world.std.com (Kerry M Miller)
Subject: Noted problems with 10,000K bulbs...
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 21:10:01 GMT
I was speaking with Hamilton Technology this morning
(trying to talk them into a free replacement for
a 20,000K bulb which burned out after 10 hours of use - they
were very accommodating), and it turns out that
they are starting to get alot of complaints about
spectrum shifts in 10,000K bulbs.
Apparently, just in the past few days they have
had several calls from customers complaining
that their 10,000K's went absolutely pink after
a month or two of use, and the complaint frequency
is increaseing as more people are using the
new bulbs.
They apparently haven't had any complaints on the
20,000K's.
BTW, those 20,000K's are *really* blue. I'm using
mine like an actinic for wakeup/sleep cycles.
-Kerry
From: frasej@ix.netcom.com (James Frase )
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria
Subject: Re: Compact Fluorescents???
Date: 18 Oct 1995 23:25:25 GMT
In <1995Oct16.182913.17306@sequent.com> patbob@sequent.com (Patrick White)
writes:
>
>In <45jo5t$q0a@panix.com> cmo1@panix.com (Mike Oliver) writes:
>>In <45htqb$40g@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> frasej@ix.netcom.com (James Frase )
writes:
>>>Each light is 9w, but I'm told that they give out the equivalent of 50w
>>>each. Our corals love it and are big. Each set has one actinic blue
>
> 50W of light as compared to incandescent I'd bet.
>
>>>bulb and one daylight. We also have one 4 foot, 40w bulb that comes on
>>>a couple of hours before, and stays on a couple of hours after the
>>>mini's. I definately think they are worth the price ($69 for the
>>>fixture and $17-$19 for each bulb).
>
> Is it just me, or does that seem spendy? The 9W CF tubes I have are
>just that.. 9 Watts of fluorescent light. They might be useful for spot
>lighting something in particular, but I just don't see using them instead of
>more common tube/ballast/endcap sizes.
> Can anyone tell me *why* these things seem to be considered better than
>ordinary fluorescent tube sizes and parts for providing general aquarium
>fluorescent lighting? I can understand it for tight areas, or spot
>illumination, but general illumination over a tank that has space for 4' 40W
>tubes?
>
>>These compact fluorescent bulbs are definately great for reefs,
>>especially small tanks. If you are the DIY type, you can build a
>>fixture yourself for $10-20 using parts from a hardware store.
>
> Same can be said for standard fluorescent tubes.. I have (4) 18" tubes
>over a 10 gallon tank.. it just seemed cheaper to get 15W of light for the same
>$20 tube investment (and I have a much larger range of choices for tubes/
>ballasts/suppliers).
>
>--
>Pat White (work: patbob@sequent.com, (503) 578-3463)
>Will people ever fear the comment "I'm from Microsoft and I'm here to
help"?
>hang 2 -- surf the 'net
I, too, used 4 48" bulbs before replacing 3 of them with the mini
lights. When I said the 9w bulbs gave off 50w of light, I suppose the
proper referral is to say that for their size, the 9w bulbs give off
the same amount of lumens as a 50w florescent bulb. So, I can put
significantly more light onto my tank in the same amount of space.
And, yes, they are somewhat pricey, however...They run cooler and don't
draw as much power as conventional florescent bulbs. They also tend to
have a longer life span.
If you are interested, I'll try to find the original writeup which
compared MH, VHO, normal florescent and Compact Florescent bulbs. It
showed that cf was a reasonable alternative to MH or VHO and definately
better than normal florescent bulbs.
From: tmz@interport.net (Todd Zebert)
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria
Subject: Re: Compact Fluorescents???
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 1995 15:58:16 GMT
frasej@ix.netcom.com (James Frase ) wrote:
>I, too, used 4 48" bulbs before replacing 3 of them with the mini
>lights. When I said the 9w bulbs gave off 50w of light, I suppose the
>proper referral is to say that for their size, the 9w bulbs give off
>the same amount of lumens as a 50w florescent bulb. So, I can put
Is this correct? I thought it was 9w CF = 50w INCANDESENT... but I
could be mistaken.
>significantly more light onto my tank in the same amount of space.
>And, yes, they are somewhat pricey, however...They run cooler and don't
>draw as much power as conventional florescent bulbs. They also tend to
>have a longer life span.
What is the projected life span?
>If you are interested, I'll try to find the original writeup which
>compared MH, VHO, normal florescent and Compact Florescent bulbs. It
>showed that cf was a reasonable alternative to MH or VHO and definately
>better than normal florescent bulbs.
Please find this. I am intested (for now) in boosted light in part of
my tank that has tight space requirements.
Thanks
Todd M. Zebert NY, NY tmz@interport.net
Welcome to my Vision: http://www.interport.net/~tmz/
"Knowledge becomes not content but talent, just as musical ability
denotes what you can do, not what you contain." - David Weinberger
"The Ecstatic Document" Wired 3.03
"I will not carve gods" - Bart Simpson
From: frasej@ix.netcom.com (James Frase )
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria
Subject: Re: Compact Fluorescents???
Date: 20 Oct 1995 17:57:32 GMT
In <465skg$a44@park.interport.net> tmz@interport.net (Todd Zebert)
writes:
>
>frasej@ix.netcom.com (James Frase ) wrote:
>
>
>
>>I, too, used 4 48" bulbs before replacing 3 of them with the mini
>>lights. When I said the 9w bulbs gave off 50w of light, I suppose
the
>>proper referral is to say that for their size, the 9w bulbs give off
>>the same amount of lumens as a 50w florescent bulb. So, I can put
>
>Is this correct? I thought it was 9w CF = 50w INCANDESENT... but I
>could be mistaken.
>
>>significantly more light onto my tank in the same amount of space.
>>And, yes, they are somewhat pricey, however...They run cooler and
don't
>>draw as much power as conventional florescent bulbs. They also tend
to
>>have a longer life span.
>
>What is the projected life span?
>
>>If you are interested, I'll try to find the original writeup which
>>compared MH, VHO, normal florescent and Compact Florescent bulbs. It
>>showed that cf was a reasonable alternative to MH or VHO and
definately
>>better than normal florescent bulbs.
>
>Please find this. I am intested (for now) in boosted light in part of
>my tank that has tight space requirements.
>
>Thanks
>
>
>Todd M. Zebert NY, NY tmz@interport.net
>Welcome to my Vision: http://www.interport.net/~tmz/
>"Knowledge becomes not content but talent, just as musical ability
> denotes what you can do, not what you contain." - David Weinberger
> "The Ecstatic Document" Wired 3.03
>"I will not carve gods" - Bart Simpson
>
Due to popular request...Here is the article on mini florescents...
COMPACT FLUORESCENT LIGHTING AND THE REEF AQUARIUM
Michael J. Kravit, AIA, NCARB
Recent innovations in lighting design have opened the doors of choice
for the reef aquarist when deciding on a methodology for lighting a
reef aquarium. There are some very important considerations that the
reef aquarist
must address with respect to luminous flux, luminous efficacy, heat
generation, lamp life, energy consumption, physical size and color
rendition. Luminous flux, refers to the flow of light from a lamp, and
is measured i
n units known as lumens. Luminous efficacy quantifies how many lumens
are produced per watt of energy consumed, and is extremely helpful in
evaluating the energy efficiency of lamps.1 Considering criteria such
as these
will allow the reef aquarist to make an informed determination
regarding the best type of lamp for the specified application.
Compact fluorescent lamps appeared on the market several years ago.
This lamp design allows for a high lumen lamp in a compact package.
These lamps are available in lengths ranging from 4 to 22 inches with
the greatest
variety available in the 4 to 6 inch length. Lighting manufacturers
use rare earth phosphors to create a variety of available color
temperatures resulting in colors so rich and natural in most instances
that it is hard t
o believe they are fluorescent in origin. Compact fluorescent lamps
have a life expectancy of 10 to 13 times longer than incandescent
lamps. The high efficiency of the compact fluorescent lamp allows for
the reduction o
f energy usage of up to 80 % over incandescent equivalents. 2
Obviously, it would not be appropriate to illuminate a reef aquarium
with incandescent lamps, but it is interesting to note the above as a
comparative illu
stration.
There have been various recommendations made for lighting intensity
over the years. Most recently however, the aquarist has come to
recognize a value of 2 to 5 watts per gallon as a starting point. This
recommendation
has been discussed by numerous authorities as a rule of thumb for reef
lighting.
3 The problem here, is that various lamp types produce differing
lumen levels at the same level of energy consumption (watts). When
evaluating a specific lamp type for use in the reef aquarium, it
therefore becomes ne
cessary to compare the lighting levels in lumens instead of watts. In
their recent book, The Reef Aquarium, Delbeek and Sprung discuss the
lighting levels found on various reefs throughout the world. Research
has shown
that illumination levels of up to 150,000 lux exist on reefs in the Red
Sea. Keeping this in mind, the reef aquarist can use the compact
fluorescent's up to date technology to his/her advantage. The improved
energy eff
iciency, color rendition and innovative packaging of the compact
fluorescent lamp can provide a source of illumination for the reef
aquarium that rivals the natural reef environment.
When comparing compact fluorescent lamps with STANDARD, HIGH OUTPUT
(HO) and VERY HIGH OUTPUT (VHO) fluorescent tubes, we find that by
virtue of their size, the number of lamps that can be placed within the
aquarium hood
will result in a significantly higher illumination level, while at
the same time reducing energy usage. In a typical 72x18x20 aquarium
the hood will allow for six Standard, HO or VHO lamps. The resulting
output for th
is arrangement, based upon six sixty inch 5000K lamps is 13,200 lumens
for the standard 40 watt tubes, 23,100 lumens for the 60 watt high
output (HO) tubes, and 52,200 lumens for the 135 watt very high output
(VHO) tubes
In comparison we can place twelve 28 watt quad compact fluorescent
lamps easily within the same hood. Each compact fluorescent quad lamp
exhibits approximately 9600 lumens, for a total illumination level of
115,200
lumens. More than twice the output of the VHO lamps. This illumination
level is attained through the consumption of only 336 watts. In
comparison, VHO lighting requires approximate 2,400 watts to achieve
this level o
f illumination.
Simplifying the issue, in order to provide compact fluorescent lighting
equivalent to six VHO lamps consuming 810 watt of energy (135 watts x 6
lamps) with a output of 52,200 lumens, the aquarist would need to
install 6
compact fluorescent quad lamps at 28 watts each for a total energy
consumption of 168 watts. The energy savings that result from
incorporating compact fluorescent lamps in the reef aquarium in this
illustration is 642
watts. The aquarist will realize a monetary savings on the monthly
electric bill, but more importantly, a reduction of 642 watts of
energy (heat) transferred into the aquarium! The expense of a
chiller may become a
thing of the past, especially due to recent suggestions that higher
water temperatures appear to be beneficial to inverts and fish in the
reef aquarium.
Cooling fans that blow into the aquarium hood in order to reduce heat
transfer to the water, may actually cool the fluorescent tube
surfaces resulting in a reduction of lumen output. 2 This phenomena
has been noted wi
thin office buildings where air supply grilles direct air across the
surface of the fluorescent tube. This action has been proven to be
responsible for a reduction in lumen output and complaints from the
building occupant
s. If at all possible, cooling fans should be arranged to exhaust the
canopy and provide air movement across the water without blowing across
fluorescent tubes.
Recently, at least one manufacturer has made available a 6100K compact
fluorescent lamp. Until now, compact fluorescent lamps were available
in color temperatures of 2700K, 3000K, 3500K, 4100K, 5000K. Also
available are
blue, red and green lamps. Although the 5000K lamps perform well in
the reef aquarium, the 6100K lamps will offer the reef aquarist the
opportunity to bring his illumination environment just that much closer
to the much
sought after "clear blue sky" scenario. Actually, a color
temperature of 6100K approximates an overcast sky. By incorporating
the compact fluorescent blue 03 actinic lamps, the reef aquarist can
reproduce those light
wavelengths that penetrate the reef and are so important to the
development and well being of our most sought after coral specimens.
Red compact fluorescent lamps can also be incorporated within the
aquarium lighting sys
tem which will allow for night viewing of what is most often refereed
to as the other reef aquarium.
Compact fluorescent reef lights and retrofit kits are available from
several sources. Installation is relatively uncomplicated and
external electronic ballast's and dimming devices complete the lighting
package. Compar
ed to Metal Halide lamps, compact fluorescent lamps are small,
efficient, and safe. Ultraviolet radiation is filtered through the
glass tube housing unlike metal halide lamps that require special
ultraviolet absorbing/fi
ltering lenses. The possibility of explosion and resulting injuries
are considerably less with compact fluorescent tubes then with metal
halide lamps due to significantly lower operating temperatures. There
are a myriad
of lamp wattage's, colors, and mounting base configurations available.
Compact fluorescent lamps can assist the reef aquarist in creating a
"natural reef" environment for his/her most sought after and prized
animals. A
fter all, the reef aquarist has a responsibility to provide the home
reef inhabitants an environment that is second to none, including the
"natural reef".
1 Product Selection Guide, Lithonia Lighting
2 General Electric
3 Thiel, The Marine and Invert Reef Aquarium
From: kerrym@world.std.com (Kerry M Miller)
Subject: Re: 10K MH Lamps?
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 17:33:03 GMT
Gary Zimmerman (gzimmerm@micron.net) wrote:
: So can anyone tell me why all the excitement over 10K and 20K
: MH lamps? How broad or narrow is their spectrum? If I switched
: from 5500 to 10K would I need to add yellow light?
: Just some questions as I consider getting rid of the yellow
: lamps in favor of a more pleasing 6500 or 10K.
Still experimental, but I have a setup with 2 175w 10KK and
1 175w 20KK. This setup has only been running for a little
over a month now, but the bulbs have shifted into the
intended spectrum (they are *very* blue for the first
couple of weeks). The 10KK's produce an excellent bright
white light, while the 20KK produces a much more bluish-white
spectrum (as you would expect). With the 20KK, I feel no
need for actinics, and probably would feel the same way
with just the 10KK's. As far as the health of the inverts,
only time will tell, of course. Since these things have
only been available for a few months, I don't think any real
objective body of knowledge has been accumulated yet...but
they sure make the tank look good!
-Kerry
From kslandry@io.com Mon Oct 30 18:28:59 1995
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 17:25:44 -0600
From: kslandry@io.com
To: pfohl@nucalf.physics.fsu.edu (JEFF PFOHL)
Subject: Re: [Q] OPEN TOP TANKS A GOOD IDEA?
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria,alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria
References: <470dr6$bo7@news.fsu.edu>
(A copy of this message has also been posted to the following newsgroups:
sci.aquaria, alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria)
->Does
->anyone have an open top set-up or have any comments for or against my
->idea?
->
My tank has been 'open' for over a year. 75 Reef with flourescents
suspended 7" over the tank. I've never had problems with the dust or
anything in the tank. I do, however, have 2 power heads for internal
circulation pointing towards the surface of the water so my surface
turbulance is rather high.
Kevin
-----
Q: What is the definition of a shame (as in "that's a shame")?
A: When a busload of lawyers goes off a cliff.
Q: What is the definition of a "crying shame"?
A: There was an empty seat.
From tej@cts.com Tue Oct 31 01:20:22 1995
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 95 06:17:30 0800
From: Rux
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Macintosh; I; 68K)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: pfohl@nucalf.physics.fsu.edu
Subject: open top
X-Url: news:470dr6$bo7@news.fsu.edu
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
hi jeff
the only problems having metal halides that are not pendants that i can think of are:
1. not having a canopy, you room is going to be very, very light. i had mh's for awhile and
didn't have my canopy completely enclosed, my house could've been used for filming it
was so bright.
2. with an open top, you don't have any thing between the lights and the water, you need to
worry about splash and of course uv. pendants have a lens between the light and the water
to block uv.
i dont claim to be an expert on lighting, but those are the things i would be concerned
about. i'd also like to thank you again for your conversion text, it really helped me set up
my new 75 gal reef.
ted
From: charleyb@gr.hp.com (Charley Bay (Contract))
Subject: Re: [Q] OPEN TOP TANKS A GOOD IDEA?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 22:14:16 GMT
JEFF PFOHL (pfohl@nucalf.physics.fsu.edu) wrote:
: [snip, MH lighting idea] Does
: anyone have an open top set-up or have any comments for or against my
: idea?
I have lots of open top tanks to allow more light to enter the
tanks. I like open tops much better, but still have to deal
with issues like:
1). Jumpers (plexi-glass fence around the top)
2). Evaporation (I'm in an arid climate, no solution but top-off)
BTW, I like open tops much better because of the greater amount
of light getting into the tank (no algae, crud, or scale building
up on the lid), and because it's another way to view the tank
(from above). The lights have to be high enough not to get
water or scale buildup on them, though.
--
--charley #include
charleyb@gr.hp.com -or- charley@agrostis.nrel.colostate.edu
From kslandry@io.com Tue Oct 31 12:28:09 1995
X-Sender: kslandry@mail.io.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 11:24:42 -0600
To: JEFF PFOHL
From: kslandry@io.com (K S Landry)
Subject: Re: [Q] OPEN TOP TANKS A GOOD IDEA?
At 9:02 AM 10/31/95, JEFF PFOHL wrote:>THANKS for the reply!! do you have
trouble with light leaking into the
>room? Some people have mentioned that the room is so bright due to
>light escaping that they can film movies in there.
>
>
Not really...I have it come on early and go off about 7pm so I'm at work
when it is on for the most part. I don't notice a problem with being real
bright, but I only have 4 std. flourescents with 2 being actinics. I do
notice that the spectrum of the actinics make things glow...tennis balls,
some magazine covers, etc. Kinda neat :)
I'll be getting a MH pendant that'll hang over the tank shortly and we'll
see if that is annoying or not.
Kevin
---------
Q: What is the definition of a shame (as in "that's a shame")?
A: When a busload of lawyers goes off a cliff.
Q: What is the definition of a "crying shame"?
A: There was an empty seat.
From: cbingman@netcom.com (Graig Bingman)
Subject: Re: Watt to gallon ratio?
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 07:35:34 GMT
In article <46lmc5$npn@valpo.hoosier.com>, wrote:
>Does anyone know if there is a ratio of how much wattage you need per gallon of water? This would be
>with regard to a mini reef.
There is no single answer to this question. It depends very much on what
you want to keep in your reef. If you want pretty live rock with
nice coralline algae and photosynthetic invertebrates that demand little
light, then 2-3 watts per gallon for "usual" tank sizes should be fine.
If you want SPS corals, then you need to think 5+ watts per gallon for
tanks in the <100 gallon range. For larger aquaria, you may be able
to do ok with a slightly lower ratio. I have ~10 watts per gallon for
my 20 gallon tank. It is bright. ;)
Craig
From: cbingman@netcom.com (Graig Bingman)
Subject: Re: [Q] OPEN TOP TANKS A GOOD IDEA?
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 07:52:15 GMT
In article <470dr6$bo7@news.fsu.edu>,
JEFF PFOHL wrote:
>
>I've been thinking of getting rid of my VHO set-up and going MH...
>TOP VIEW
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> | open water |
> | |
> ------------------------------------------------------
> | lights here |
> | |
> ------------------------------------------------------
> | open water |
-----------------------------------------------------
Jeff,
Most of my friends use Coralife/Energy Savers luminaires, which look more or
less like this from the top. It is fine. You have to worry about fish
leaping out (an eggcrate barrier over exposed water works well to prevent
this: idea courtesy of Greg Schiemer.) You will have more evaporation,
which in my opinion is a good thing, where there is evaporation there is
also gas exchange, and most reef aquaria are starved for gas exchange unless
you have one hell of a skimmer on the system.
You should also make sure the lights don't get hit with Big splatters of
water. The outer envelope of the metal halide lamp could rupture, and
a Lot of UV excapes from the lamps when the outer leaded borosilicate
envelope is gone. Probably enough to kill all the photosynthetic
organisms in the aquarium (story of algae death after a metal
halide envelope rupture courtesy of Frank Greco, NYA.)
Craig
From guthrie%aa1@ann-arbor.applicon.com Tue Oct 31 16:50:10 1995
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 16:40:49 -0500
From: guthrie%aa1@ann-arbor.applicon.com
To: "pfohl@nucalf.physics.fsu.edu"@ann-arbor.applicon.com
Subject: Open top tanks
Certainly I get a lot of dust on my hood; I have to clean it off and I'm glad
it isn't getting into my tank. On the other hand, I know a couple of people
who have open top tanks. A local store has a large wood-and-fiberglass tank
that is open at the top; in fact, looking down thru the water surface is the
only way you can see in. Furthermore, a large coral farming establishment
near here uses open topped basins in a greenhouse-like structure to grow
corals, and the environment there is very dusty. So I'd say go for it. About
the only thing I'd worry about is small kids and drunken teenagers; around them
a cover would probably be a must, to keep out miscellanous flying objects!
- Kevin
From duck@ix.netcom.com Tue Oct 31 23:21:32 1995
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 20:18:13 -0800
From: duck@ix.netcom.com (Douglas Wilson )
Subject: Re: [Q] OPEN TOP TANKS A GOOD IDEA?
To: pfohl@nucalf.physics.fsu.edu (JEFF PFOHL)
You wrote:
>
>
>I've been thinking of getting rid of my VHO set-up and going MH. (75
>gal Berlin reef) However I cannot realistically build a new hood to
>house the MH. BUT I can remove the top to my current hood and suspend
>some MH lights over the tank using one of the store bought MH
>retrofit systems. While this set-up will provide me with the MH
>shimmer, the proper light to move to SPS corals and keep the tank cool
>with the open top set-up it leaves about 6-8" of the water exposed. My
>concern is debris (dust, and whatever comes out of the heaating and AC
>vents I suppose) from the surroundings getting into the tank. Does
>anyone have an open top set-up or have any comments for or against my
>idea?
Couldn't you just use a piece of glass or acrylic to cover top. It
would allow the light to pass through, keep dust out, and even cut down
on UV. Just a thought....never tried it. You could even get fancy ad
build in a fan with a flitered inlet. Good luck.
>An ASCII to help visualize my idea (perhaps this helps perhaps not)
>
>TOP VIEW
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> | open water |
> | |
> ------------------------------------------------------
> | lights here |
> | |
> ------------------------------------------------------
> | open water |
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>THANKS!
>
>--
>
>
> JEFF PFOHL
>***** NEW EMAIL***** E-MAIL: PFOHL@NUCALF.PHYSICS.FSU.EDU
**** NEW *****
> PHONE : (904) 644-1598 work
> (904) 224-0707 home
> (904) 644-9848 fax
> http://nucalf.physics.fsu.edu/pfohl
>
>
>"I will shoulder more than my share of the task, whatever it may be.
>100% and then some!"
>
>
>
From: Bob Broucek
Subject: Re: [Q] OPEN TOP TANKS A GOOD IDEA?
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 1995 09:25:37 -0600
Jeff,
I ran my 75 gallon REEF like that with VHO for about a year and did not
notice any significant problems with debris entering my tank, although,
I have a surface skimmer box in the tank and that could have
mechanically remove any sign of dust, etc.. I then changed to a metal
halide configuration that is built by Hamilton, which left about 3" on
either side of the fixture open on top of the tank. I did notice with
metal halide lighting that the glare on the surface reflecting out was
not very pleasing when I stood up to look at the tank creatures.
Anyway, I built a enclosure out of oak where the halide fixture would
sit about 6" from the surface. The entire top of the tank is enclosed
by this fixture (except for feeding ports in the back) and I still have
the top of the tank running without a glass top. When I put the glass
top on the tank it took away from the halide ripple effect that I
enjoyed. Either way, I have not had any problems with using an open top
configuration in the past 2 years.
Happy Reef Keeping ! --- Bob Broucek ---
From gmoradia@acs.ucalgary.ca Wed Nov 1 12:25:21 1995
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 1995 10:23:07 -0700
From: gmoradia@acs.ucalgary.ca
To: pfohl@nucalf.physics.fsu.edu (JEFF PFOHL)
Subject: Re: [Q] OPEN TOP TANKS A GOOD IDEA?
In article <470dr6$bo7@news.fsu.edu> you wrote:
: I've been thinking of getting rid of my VHO set-up and going MH. (75
: gal Berlin reef) However I cannot realistically build a new hood to
: house the MH. BUT I can remove the top to my current hood and suspend
: some MH lights over the tank using one of the store bought MH
: retrofit systems. While this set-up will provide me with the MH
: shimmer, the proper light to move to SPS corals and keep the tank cool
: with the open top set-up it leaves about 6-8" of the water exposed. My
: concern is debris (dust, and whatever comes out of the heaating and AC
: vents I suppose) from the surroundings getting into the tank. Does
: anyone have an open top set-up or have any comments for or against my
: idea?
: An ASCII to help visualize my idea (perhaps this helps perhaps not)
: TOP VIEW
: ------------------------------------------------------
: | open water |
: | |
: ------------------------------------------------------
: | lights here |
: | |
: ------------------------------------------------------
: | open water |
: ------------------------------------------------------
: THANKS!
: --
: JEFF PFOHL
: ***** NEW EMAIL***** E-MAIL: PFOHL@NUCALF.PHYSICS.FSU.EDU **** NEW *****
: PHONE : (904) 644-1598 work
: (904) 224-0707 home
: (904) 644-9848 fax
: http://nucalf.physics.fsu.edu/pfohl
: "I will shoulder more than my share of the task, whatever it may be.
: 100% and then some!"
Hi Jeff
I would not be a very good idea to let the top of your tank stay open
like that. First of all yor fish may jump out, some fish do that like
cleaner rase. Another problem is that if there are any smokers around
you will have some problems, I did. Smoke or smells from food could also
effect your tanks chem. and you don,t want to do that. The best thing to
do is just have a glass top on your tank and that is usually the best idea,
or you can put four or how ever many peaces of sliding glasses on the top
of your tank. You will have to clean it every week but I think it is
worth the troble.
good luck
Gary
From: hagemepp@esu.edu (Pete Hagemeyer)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria,alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q] OPEN TOP TANKS A GOOD IDEA?
Date: 2 Nov 1995 12:21:33 GMT
If you are worried about dust and other suspended debris you might
consider building a device much like the sneeze guards on salad bars!
That way it could be open, and yet the area above would be diverting all
the airborne dirt. See picture below..... You could build it out of
Plexiglass and use the suspended light to hold it up. Might not look
awesome but it will keep the dirt out. Good luck.
^ <--- air guard
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
_________
| OOOO | <-------- lights (whatever kind you wish)
| | <-------- open top tank
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|_________________|
kslandry@io.com wrote:
: ->Does
: ->anyone have an open top set-up or have any comments for or against my
: ->idea?
: ->
: My tank has been 'open' for over a year. 75 Reef with flourescents
: suspended 7" over the tank. I've never had problems with the dust or
: anything in the tank. I do, however, have 2 power heads for internal
: circulation pointing towards the surface of the water so my surface
: turbulance is rather high.
: Kevin
: -----
: Q: What is the definition of a shame (as in "that's a shame")?
: A: When a busload of lawyers goes off a cliff.
: Q: What is the definition of a "crying shame"?
: A: There was an empty seat.
--
-- Pete Hagemeyer --
hagemepp@esu.edu
http://www.esu.edu/~hagemepp
From: hammond@access1.digex.net (Gregory Hammond)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: Phase cancellation in flourescents.
Date: 8 Nov 1995 19:11:11 GMT
acarron@macalstr.edu wrote:
: Forgive me - I don't kno quite as much about electricty as I would like.
: My question/thought is this. If one were to divide flourescent
: fixtures on to two seperate current phases, would not the strobe effect
: be canceled. While one fixture was "on" the other would be "off" and they
: would switch 120 times per second. That would in effect provide a steady
: source of light without strobing. yes/no?
: anthony
:
It depends on your point of view - but technically, no. Fluorescent
bulbs don't completely flick ON then OFF 60 times per second with AC
phase, but rather "slowly" (60 Hz is, after all, slow) go from full
output to about 2/3 output while the energy in the tube is decreasing
between voltage peaks. The problem with putting two fluorescents side by
side with one 90 degrees out of phase with the other, is that they would
still flicker "together" - but with 1/2 of the brightness drop. Think of
it this way - as one bulb is getting darker, one is getting brighter -
and the point where one is 1/2 bright, and one is 1/2 dark - you have the
"total output" of one bulb that is half lit for that point in time.
Getting an electronic ballast, or augmenting the standard ballast with a
high current high voltage and high capacity capacitor is the only way to
really get rid of the flickering.
Greg Hammond
From: aomcm@asuvm.inre.asu.edu (Michael C. Moore)
Newsgroups: sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: Vitalite, Aquatinic, Ultralume, Chroma 75, etc?
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 95 00:42:33 GMT
In article <48adra$di0@atlas.uniserve.com>,
Bill Oord wrote:
>Hey Reefers:
>
>I would like your opinion on various types of regular fluorescent lighting.
I have had good luck using the Aurora 50/50 with a Blue Moon actinic type
light. Since these are NO fluorescents, I only grow moderate light requiring
organisms (mushrooms, green star polyps, yellow polyps, zooanthids, etc.).
However, the aurora seems to be a very bright light with good color and I
recommend you look into it too. It is much brighter than the Tritons I use in
my fish only tanks, but I like the color of the tritons a little better. With
NO fluorescents you should definitely use an actinic. I have had good luck
with hamilton and coralife. I am experimenting with the blue moom lamp now
and maybe the corals UV pigments (blue mushrooms especially) have gotten
brighter. This lamp supposedly emits a little more UV than standard actinic.
I would also be curious to hear anyone using the aquatinic and how they like
it. Is is really any different from a normal 50/50 bulb?
Michael C. Moore
Tempe, AZ
aomcm @ asuvm.inre.asu.edu
"If the road to excellence were not so difficult,
it would not be travelled by so few" Spinoza
From: kslandry@io.com
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria,alt.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q] Need help with flourescent problem
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 23:03:02 -0600
Is the ballast a 'energy-saver'?
I've had a difficult time with 'energy savers' not powering my aquarium
lighting before. I've found if I use a std. ballast (not one marked
energy-saver in any way) I've had better success.
Kevin
-----Aquarium World Market -->
http://www.io.com/~kslandry/Aquarium_World_Market.html
-----Humor -->
ooo The word "Queue" is the only word in the English language that is
pronounced the same way when the last four letters are removed.
Yoyodyne Newsletter #19 (http://www.yoyo.com/)
From: daleman@ccrs.emr.ca (Paul Daleman)
Subject: Re: [Q] Need help with flourescent problem
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 21:12:54 GMT
In article ,
sasala@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Thomas M. Sasala) wrote:
> The ballast is grounded but is the reflector? I think some rapid start
>ballasts use the reflector for a temporary current sink during start up.
>This is why they don't work on GFI circuits.
I would second this opinion. I have seen a few ballasts that say right on
them that the lamps must be mounted within 2 inches of a grounded reflector.
Paul Daleman Canada Centre for Remote Sensing Ottawa, Ont. CANADA
Email: daleman@ccrs.emr.ca Phone: (613)998-9060 Fax: (613)993-5022
From: wap@inforamp.net (Wayne A. Powell)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria,alt.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q] Need help with flourescent problem
Date: 20 Nov 1995 23:56:26 GMT
In article ,
sasala@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Thomas M. Sasala) wrote:
> In article , wap@inforamp.net
> (Wayne A. Powell) wrote:
>
> > I have just finished a DIY flourescent light hood for my 10gal micro-reef
> > (was using a portable shop light in the interim). And I am having a
> > problem.
> The ballast is grounded but is the reflector? I think some rapid start
> ballasts use the reflector for a temporary current sink during start up. This
> is why they don't work on GFI circuits.
>
Ah, we may be on to something, it probably is a grounding problem because
when I ground the lights with my fingers they come on (otherwise they just
glow dimmly at each end. If one pair is on, the other pair will sometimes
come on (and sometimes not). I did ground the reflector temporarily to
see if this would help, and it did not seem to. However, I AM using a GFI
in the circuit (although I thought I bypassed the flourescents, but I'll
have to check the wiring again as I built the main wiring over 6 months
ago and didn't draw up a schematic (so much for aspirations of a
photographic memory). Perhaps this is the problem.
Also, I was told that it may be because the wiring to the lights is
extended beyond what was supplied with the ballasts. It is greatly
extended, over two to three feet in total.
Any other lighting gurus out there who might help me pin point the trouble
before I tear out the wiring (and my hair!).
Thanks to all who have responded so far! I am getting closer to an
answer, I can feel it!
--==============================================================--
\|/ Wayne A. Powell AeroWood HyperMedia Publishing
wAp!
/|\ ~~~ "Home of ZiP! The Zaurus Info Page" ~~~
From: wap@inforamp.net (Wayne A. Powell)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria,alt.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q] Need help with flourescent problem
Date: 21 Nov 1995 23:06:44 GMT
In article , daleman@ccrs.emr.ca (Paul Daleman) wrote:
> In article ,
> sasala@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Thomas M. Sasala) wrote:
>
> > The ballast is grounded but is the reflector? I think some rapid start
> >ballasts use the reflector for a temporary current sink during start up.
> >This is why they don't work on GFI circuits.
>
> I would second this opinion. I have seen a few ballasts that say right on
> them that the lamps must be mounted within 2 inches of a grounded reflector.
>
The reflector is grounded, no rapid start, still have to stroke the bulbs
to get them to light (getting to be a bit of an obscene morning ritual
;-).
I took the GFI out of the circuit to test that and it also made no difference.
So I am left with the fact that the lead wires from the ballasts to the
lamps are too long. They have, in fact been extended two-three feet.
DAMN (!$@%#@^) unless there are any other logical conclusions I am missing
it means I am going to have to test shortening the wires and putting the
ballasts above the lamps this weekend. If it works, then I have the
unfortunate task of having to extend my hood enclosure upwards an
additional three inches to cover the ballasts!!!! (Just pissed off about
the work involved). It would help reduce my tank heating problem because
it will give me enough room to mount an exhaust fan in the hood.
Anyone know what kinds of ballasts can be mounted 2-3 feet or more away
from the light fixtures and still acheive a rapid start? Should I have
used common ballasts and installed a starter capacitor can? Or can a
starter be added to rapid start ballasts or is this redundant (and/or
dangerous)?
Thanks in advance.
--==============================================================--
\|/ Wayne A. Powell AeroWood HyperMedia Publishing
wAp!
/|\ ~~~ "Home of ZiP! The Zaurus Info Page" ~~~
From: kristi@sc.hp.com (Kristi Bittner)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: saltwater lighting
Date: 20 Nov 1995 20:16:49 GMT
Christian Vye (cvye@uriacc.uri.edu) wrote:
: In article <48do7v$pke@hpscit.sc.hp.com>
: kristi@sc.hp.com (Kristi Bittner) writes:
: > : hqi lighting is the best for saltwater aquairia
: >
: > I believe I disagree. Isn't hqi what is known in the US as "halogen"
: > lights? They are seldom used for SW aquaria - they generate too much
: > heat, and the light is very yellow red.
: Sorry, Kristi, but I'll have to disagree with your disagreement! HQI
: lights are the European kind of Metal Halide (MH) lights sold by Dupla
: and Osram which have been recommended by the likes of Thiel and
: Nielsen. They are different from the Venture/Coralife bulbs and are
: sometimes called Power Stars. They need UV shielding, but have good
: spectral qualities for corals - around 5000K, I believe.
Ok, then I believe I'll stop disagreeing!! :-)
It appears that the "real" answer is that we are describing several
different beasts. HQI is apparently NOT what we (in the USA) call
"halogen" lights. Our halogen lights are not best suited for corals. In
the US, go with MH (metal halides). In Europe, go with HQI! I had seen
european authors continue to promote the HQI lights, and wondered how
that could be... I didn't think that there might be a third lighting
technology! (What, there's something useful, that we don't have
available in the US?!?!? No, could not be! :-))
So what are the typical costs for a HQI system? For what amount of
light? Should we import these?
Thanks for the correction!
Kristi Bittner
From: sasala@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Thomas M. Sasala)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria,alt.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q] Need help with flourescent problem
Date: 28 Nov 1995 12:31:19 GMT
From: Bob Gray
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria,alt.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Re: [Q] Need help with flourescent problem
G. Tong wrote:
> Rapid start ballasts keep a small current running through the lamps
> continually so they're warm enough to start rapidly.
You must be talking about the ballast with a built-in nuclear power
source ;-) because when you turn off the switch the ballast can't
supply even a "tiny current."
FWIW, all US made fluorescent tubes with two-prong contacts on each end
are of one design and will work in and are made for use in both pre-heat
ballast and rapid (instant) ballast fixtures. Between those two prongs
is a metal filament which when heated gives off electrons which in turn
will create a path for a glow discharge arc between the ends of the
tube. The starter "fuse" used with pre-heat ballasts has a bi-metal
switch that opens the filament circuit and allows the current to be
diverted through the tube. You'll notice that the tube will continue to
emit light even if the starter is removed once the process begins. The
rapid start ballast performs this function electronically via the
resistance-capacitance-reluctance of the circuit. For this reason, if
one changes the length of the wires, the resistance may move the cross-
over point such that the discharge never begins. Rubbing your hand on
the tube doesn't "ground" the glass tube. Rather, it capacitively
couples your body to the circuit. This allows a finite flow of
electrons down the tube which may help to initiate the discharge.
Sometimes the tube can be lit by switching the circuit on and off. This
action by random coincidence may "re-balance" the ballast circuit-- not
a very reliable arrangement.
The original poster should be sure that the connections are mechanically
and electrically sound-- either tight wire nuts or proper solder joints.
Any resistance increase by poor contact would swamp that caused by a
couple feet increase in conductor length.
--
Walking under light after light in the night in the streets in the suburbs...
sounds reach my ears as yawning lawns settle for sleep.
In the glow of a lamppost alive with the dance of the glass-tapping beetles and
moths, I see the number...
As I uncurl the page that I tore from the telephone book, I'm growing number.
Not a moment for a second look; I'm growing number.
"The Affordable Floors"
_walk into the night_
From: raiar@inlink.com (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria,alt.aquaria,sci.aquaria
Subject: Re: Finding Water Proof Endcaps?
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 16:17:16 GMT
sasala@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Thomas M. Sasala) wrote:
>In article <49cvtm$4lr@news1.inlink.com>, raiar@inlink.com (Gary V.
>Deutschmann, Sr.) wrote:
>> Hi Greg
>> I found a little trick that works great and you don't need to buy the
>> endcaps.
>> I use little pushpin connectors over the pins on the flourescent tube
>> and holding the wire up along the tube, I dip the end of the tube into
>> some stuff called Plasti-Dip-Your-Grip from the hardware store, pull
>> the wires at the angle I want them and let the stuff dry.
>> It not only insulates the electric, but makes them really waterproof
>> and no saltcreep gets to the pins as happens with slip-ons.
>>
> And how do you replace the lamps?
I take an exacto knife and trim the rubber coating from around the
push pins, stick the push-pins on the new lamp, dip in the coating and
I'm all set for another year!
Gary
>--
>Walking under light after light in the night in the streets in the suburbs...
> sounds reach my ears as yawning lawns settle for sleep.
>In the glow of a lamppost alive with the dance of the glass-tapping beetles and
>moths, I see the number...
>As I uncurl the page that I tore from the telephone book, I'm growing number.
>Not a moment for a second look; I'm growing number.
> "The Affordable Floors"
> _walk into the night_
NEW! from 'Reef And Invert Aquarium Resources'
The 'DI & TWP CYLINDER RECHARGING KIT'
See 'alt.aquaria.marketplace' for details!
or e-mail to raiar@inlink.com
From: sasala@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Thomas M. Sasala)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: Flourescent light Was:[Q][M] Common Mushroom Coral problem.
Date: 28 Nov 1995 12:13:10 GMT
In article , wap@inforamp.net
(Wayne A. Powell) wrote:
> My intention here was to suggest changes in lighting during the middle of
> the day cycle, as if a cloud is passing over the tank occasionally. Of
> course dimming would be the best solution, turning on and off flourescents
> may be a bit harsh. I already have each pair of flourescents on two
> timers, but even this is not very gradual. I suppose that I could
> consider adding two more single flourescent ballasts, so that I could have
> four timers ... one light, then two then four, perhaps shutting down one
> or two or three during the day a couple of times for a half hour or so to
> approximate passing clouds. This approach would certainly be hard on the
> bulbs, reducing their life and be less efficient in terms of energy usage.
>
Do you really think it will be hard on the bulbs? Most people
use FL lamps for their rated lifetime (>5 years at times), where are in
aquaria we only use them for about a year or less for some. I think it
won't matter one way or another.
--
Walking under light after light in the night in the streets in the suburbs...
sounds reach my ears as yawning lawns settle for sleep.
In the glow of a lamppost alive with the dance of the glass-tapping beetles and
moths, I see the number...
As I uncurl the page that I tore from the telephone book, I'm growing number.
Not a moment for a second look; I'm growing number.
"The Affordable Floors"
_walk into the night_
From: radharc@karkis.canit.se (Mike Noreen)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q][R]Metal-Halide v. Mercury-Vapor
Date: 29 Nov 95 21:06:53 CET
Thusly slimyfrg@crl.com spake unto All:
s> Mercury Vapor lamps as well as Sodium Vapor lamps (typical 'parking lot'
s> lamps) are not used because the blue end of the spectrum is rather weak.
I'd, again, like to point out that there are two types of Mercury Vapor.
There IS one which is bluish-white, and I HAVE used it for several years in
a reef tank. My particular lights were two 85W OSRAM HQL-R De Luxe in a
150l (roughly 40G) tank.
THere is also another type of MV lights, which is much more yellow. I got
that type of lights once accidentally when I replaced bulbs. This type
had yellowish light, similar to incandescent, while my HQL-Rs are
bluish-white, more so than any metal halide I've seen.
I should add: While my tank was a reef tank, I never kept REALLY light
hungry species - I kept mushrooms, a huge carpet, Trachyphyllia, Zooanthus
gracilis, 'green Anthelia', and Palythoa, all of which lived happily for
atleast a year (the Trahyphyllia and carpet are still alive, seven years on).
HOWEVER I did have a lot of macro algal growth in the tank, but whether it
was because I used biological filtration or the light I do not know.
s> Marco Carra
MVH: Mike Noreen Internet: radharc@karkis.canit.se
FIDONet: 2:201/411.14
From: kerrym@world.std.com (Kerry M Miller)
Subject: Re: [Q][R]Metal-Halide v. Mercury-Vapor
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 01:00:16 GMT
Kevin Pompei (kpompei@xmission.com) wrote:
: Why is it that Mercury-Vapor lamps do not seem to be used in reef
: aquaria? I realize that MH has a higher lux rating, but given the
: dramatic cost difference I would think that many people would find MV a
: useable alternative. Is there a particular reason that MV doesn't work
: well for reefs?
Wrong spectrum, except for growing algae.
-Kerry
From: Chris Paris
Newsgroups: alt.aquaria,rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q] Aquarium Lighting - Power Compacts
Date: 05 Dec 1995 16:39:17 -0500
In article <49vf3d$krq@ixnews8.ix.netcom.com>, bobvaill@ix.netcom.com(Robert Vaillancourt ) writes:
> [anyone have experience with Power Compacts]
I don't have experience, but I've talked about them with someone who's
done lux measurements on them. Seems they're marginally more efficient
than VHO, and marginally less efficient than metal halide. That is,
they produce slightly less heat per watt than VHO, and slightly more
heat per watt than MH. The store's claim that they're 3-4 times
brighter than VHO is nonsense, if you're comparing two bulbs of equal
wattage.
--
Chris Paris Support censorship -- go to CMU
For information see http://www.cs.cmu.edu/Web/People/kcf/censor/
From: qx01702@inet.d48.lilly.com (Jason Mizuno)
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria
Subject: Re: [Q] Aquarium Lighting - Power Compacts
Date: 6 Dec 95 19:07:29 EST
In article <4a4tki$rs@hpscit.sc.hp.com>, kristi@sc.hp.com (Kristi Bittner) writes:
> Robert Vaillancourt (bobvaill@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
> : After a recent visit to my favorite fish store, they were trying to
> : sell me a $400 Lighting retrofit called a Power Compact. They explained
> : that they were 3 if not 4 times brighter as well as cheaper to run than
> : VHO's and did a much better job for inverts, live rock and fish. As you
[snip]
> On whether they are brighter and cheaper than VHO's, I don't know - I
> had not heard that before. Ask to see the specs or data sheets. Most
> bulbs come with a lumens rating (that indicates the amount of light).
[snip]
>
> When I say they are new, I'm talking about the bulbs that are 36" long
> or longer. There are some mini-might type, little U shape lights that
> are 9 watts, 13 watts, and a quad utube that's 28 watts. These have
> been around longer - I've got some of these - and they are fine, but
> NOT way better than VHO, or normal flourescents.
I've gone up to Custom Sea Life, which I believe is the place
that advertises these in FAMA. They happen to be located here in
San Diego, where I'm at, a while ago I went up there to get some
info.
Please Note: I am not in any way affiliated with Custom Sea
Life, and what info I have is based on talking to them and what
they have in their pamphlets!
The Power Compacts that are 36" (actually 34.12") are 96 watt,
and for the "daylight" bulb which lists as 5000K, is 8600 lumen,
witha CRI of 90. The "Ultra Daylight" is 6700K, 8100 lumen, 88
CRI. The "blue" is 7100K, 2500 lumen, and no CRI is listed.
This is just the bulb info, not the whole hood setups.
I have the prices and such for the hoods and retrofit kits, but
the list is a bit long to type in, so if you're interested, let
me know.
Jason
Mizuno@Lilly.com
**********************************************************************
* Jason Mizuno * These are MY opinions. * Hybritech Inc. *
* Mizuno@Lilly.com * 'Nuff said. * San Diego, CA *
**********************************************************************
* ...They do strange and terrible things to water there... *
* ...Being drunk is only the beginning of its troubles... *
**********************************************************************
FORWARD --> to part 4
<-- BACK to part 2
Back to ptimlin:aquaria
Go to main (top level) page.
Last modified: June 17, 1998