UPCOMING: Events

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: Lighting ?'s

  1. #21

    Default

    BTW, I guess I should add this footnote, when I win the Mega millions and can afford the 15,000 gallong reef tank, I will use metal halides just for the convenience of fewer reflectors to clean

    Step lively lads and reef the sails before the reef prevails! Or, tack to port and pass the ale!

  2. #22
    Join Date
    06-07-2003
    Location
    NW / leon valley
    Posts
    851

    Default

    WOW THAT WAS AN EYE OPENER. yes do send more post. very interesting. one thing i'm fighting right now is heat. i had to buy a window unit just to keep that room a little cooler, and i mean a little. T5 hmmmm
    350 gal. 7\'x36\'\'x25\'\'tall, , 3-400w.mh-10k, 2-6\' vho actinic, 175gal.sump, 6ft. 100gal zenia fuge,calcium reactor, kalk reactor and a carbon reactor. 7\' turbofloter 5000 skimmer.

  3. #23

    Default

    That was a very detailed way to say "I like my T-5's"! :o :lol:
    Interesting discussion, but, what about the penetration and effective PUR to the depth of the 46BF by the different K temps with the T-5's? How far from the water are your T-5's? How deep is your Pink Birdsnest? Do you use carbon to keep the water crystal clear?
    Larry
    INSTAR
    CEO, Biologist
    "Heck, the water is clear, must be good"

  4. #24

    Default its all about photon density

    I absolutely use carbon to keep my system clear. I run carbon approximately one week out of the month and my T5s are approximately 5 inches from the water. My birdsnest is about 4 inches below the water. My crocea is sitting on the bottom, approx. 28 inches below the lights.

    I was not trying to get fancy in my support of T5, I was just trying to show a relationship between MH and T5 devices. Both are viable technologies, but there has been a lot of what I like to call "metal halide superiority complex". i.e "My BMW gets you to the store much more effectively than your Chevy becauses its a BMW". The marine aquarium world is so ripe with 'junk science', esecially about lighting, I thought I would throw out some hard data about light rather than allow the metal halide fallacies to persist. If you look at the science of lighting, nowhere will you find a measurable parameter called "punch". It is just a word used to try a justify that metal halide is superior and it has no basis in fact. I will admit that the area directly beneath the arc tube of a metal halide has more photon density, but areas at the top of the tank to the side of the tube have less.

    Photometric charts - Metal halides 'punch' but not over the entire tank

  5. #25

    Default

    BTW, the distances for the photometric charts above are 24 inches from the arc tube

Similar Threads

  1. Lighting
    By KyleV in forum General Reefkeeping Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Tue, 5th Jun 2007, 02:33 PM
  2. LED lighting
    By Willow in forum General Reefkeeping Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Wed, 25th Oct 2006, 06:12 PM
  3. Lighting
    By truck0000 in forum General Reefkeeping Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: Sat, 24th Sep 2005, 01:42 PM
  4. pc lighting
    By kjswift in forum General Reefkeeping Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Sat, 26th Jun 2004, 06:05 PM
  5. Everything about lighting
    By JimD in forum General Reefkeeping Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Sun, 13th Jun 2004, 09:28 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •