A
Anonymous
Guest
By the way, that pic of my tank up there...32watt PC.
Don't get silly.
Don't get silly.
Protein Skimmer = no bio wheel?
- Thread starter Kerchakone
- Start date
watts per gallon is a very poor guage. you need to take into consideration the depth of the tank and what you will keep in it, as well as top or no top...and even kelvin. i believe, if you like a bluer look(15k or above), you might need to go with stronger bulbs, because they don't put out the kelvin that 12k or below put out(i'm talking about 2 bulbs of the same quality, just different color temperatures).
over a 12 gallon, 17" high tank? i'm just guessing here, but i think you can keep whatever you want in that tank.
i personally would get rid of the dual daylight and run a solid 10k, but i'm certainly no expert. i don't think it's ineffective light, but the 6700k is just a bit too yellow for my taste. hopefully the dual actinic will drown out the yellow. :wink:
i personally would get rid of the dual daylight and run a solid 10k, but i'm certainly no expert. i don't think it's ineffective light, but the 6700k is just a bit too yellow for my taste. hopefully the dual actinic will drown out the yellow. :wink:
Ef3s":30055inz said:
Depth, and distance from the light as just as important as the wattage and type of light. Remember, 150 watts of 10K DE MH is not the same as 150 watts of 20K DE MH, which is not the same as 150 watts of 10K mogul MH which is not the same as 150 watts of regular incandescent light, which isn't the same as 150 watts of PC light, etc, etc. Rendering watts per gallon even more inane and useless.
What is proper lighting? Do you know what the "proper" lighting is for Stylophora pistillata? What good would a light meter do you? I've never needed one in over 20 years.
Lumens per square foot is a better way to go, but again, depth plays an important role. Not only the depth of the tank, but what depth you're planning keeping a particular animal.
In direct answer to your question, use the massive amounts of empirical data out there and available to you, lots of people have kept these animals in all manner of setups.
If you're after a specific lumen reading at a specific depth in your tank, and for some reason you know exactly what you're after, then yes in theory a light meter is a great way to go.
Jim
JimM":2dkh7um7 said:
Remember, we're talking about a 12G Eclipse system. Watts per gallon is the recommended guide line used for lighting in most books for new reef keepers. Why? Despite its shortcomings, its simple. How many square feet are there in an Eclipse 12 system to calculate lumens per square feet with? There are all sorts of higher level calculations out there but for someone new as Kerchakone said they were, its best to KISS (Keep it simple stupid). That's a motto I try to live by. With that said, I agree the short height of the tank will allow less intense lighting to be sufficient as light intensity decreases significantly with increased height. Therefore, you should be able to have a thriving system on less expensive, cooler running lights. :idea:
I agree with Jim here. IMO, "watts per gallon" is really not a useful rule of thumb...
Say you have a coral sitting under a 150 watt lamp at a given distance from the surface of the water. If the coral is sitting in a 25 gallon tank you're at 6 WPG. If the coral is sitting in a 75 gallon tank WPG is only 2. Realistically, if the coral is sitting the same distance from the same lighting setup in the same depth of water, it's getting the same amount of light in either scenario...
Another issue with this guideline, as Jim already alluded to, is efficiency. Not all lighting systems are created equal. Some will put out a LOT more light per watt consumed than others, and depending on the quality of the reflectors being used, there's a tremendous variation in how much of that light is actually getting to the corals.
Say you have a coral sitting under a 150 watt lamp at a given distance from the surface of the water. If the coral is sitting in a 25 gallon tank you're at 6 WPG. If the coral is sitting in a 75 gallon tank WPG is only 2. Realistically, if the coral is sitting the same distance from the same lighting setup in the same depth of water, it's getting the same amount of light in either scenario...
Another issue with this guideline, as Jim already alluded to, is efficiency. Not all lighting systems are created equal. Some will put out a LOT more light per watt consumed than others, and depending on the quality of the reflectors being used, there's a tremendous variation in how much of that light is actually getting to the corals.
ChrisRD":3dox1gj0 said:
Okay so concerning efficiency, I own a brand new set of Current Orbit CF's (4 X 96) I bought about a year ago for the 72G Oceanic bow front I want to set up. Are T5's so much better than CF's that I would be better of selling my current Current setup? In addition, an employee at the LFS said T5 lamps last 12 to 18 months while CF's and MH's last only 6 months before they're spectrum changes. The irony is, I was told a year ago the advantage of CF's is that they last 12 months as advertised on those SunPaq boxes. You're a site administrator, is this hype to sell the latest hot item or what?
As with many things in this hobby, IMO, there's no simple answer due to the variables involved. Lamp life is very much dependent on the particular lamps in question, the ballasts they're being driven on, and how well they're being cooled. That's why you see highly variable answers to those types of questions.
IME, the majority of halide lamps run on the correct ballast will go a year before needing replacement, so that part of what you're being told is definitely inaccurate. Some will go significantly longer. I've run quality DE 10K lamps for 18 months on HQI ballasts with no issues at replacement time. Some have run the old Iwasaki 6500K lamps for 2+ years with no problems.
With fluorescents on good electronic ballasts that are driving the lamps to the correct spec, and assuming adequate ventilation/cooling of the lamps, the T-5s should outlast PC or VHO. Heat kills fluorescent lamps, and with their lower current/wattage draw, T-5s can run cooler than PC or VHO.
That said, some of the current T-5 claims are reminiscent of the days when PCs were first coming on the hobby scene. We were seeing similar claims of 18-24 month lamp life, etc. Time has shown realistic replacement intervals for PCs are much less. I think you'll see a similar trend with T-5s. T-5s were popular in Europe before they caught on here, and curiously, many European reefers change their T-5 lamps at yearly, or even earlier intervals...
As for upgrading, if you put a 6 lamp T-5 system over your tank with good reflectors, I'm sure you'd see a significant increase in light output (and you'd be using less wattage). You should get better lamp life as well, although not 3X as much... :wink:
That said, there's nothing wrong with PCs, and the lighting system you have should be fine for most things. If you're satisfied with it, I wouldn't spend the money to upgrade.
JMO & HTH
IME, the majority of halide lamps run on the correct ballast will go a year before needing replacement, so that part of what you're being told is definitely inaccurate. Some will go significantly longer. I've run quality DE 10K lamps for 18 months on HQI ballasts with no issues at replacement time. Some have run the old Iwasaki 6500K lamps for 2+ years with no problems.
With fluorescents on good electronic ballasts that are driving the lamps to the correct spec, and assuming adequate ventilation/cooling of the lamps, the T-5s should outlast PC or VHO. Heat kills fluorescent lamps, and with their lower current/wattage draw, T-5s can run cooler than PC or VHO.
That said, some of the current T-5 claims are reminiscent of the days when PCs were first coming on the hobby scene. We were seeing similar claims of 18-24 month lamp life, etc. Time has shown realistic replacement intervals for PCs are much less. I think you'll see a similar trend with T-5s. T-5s were popular in Europe before they caught on here, and curiously, many European reefers change their T-5 lamps at yearly, or even earlier intervals...
As for upgrading, if you put a 6 lamp T-5 system over your tank with good reflectors, I'm sure you'd see a significant increase in light output (and you'd be using less wattage). You should get better lamp life as well, although not 3X as much... :wink:
That said, there's nothing wrong with PCs, and the lighting system you have should be fine for most things. If you're satisfied with it, I wouldn't spend the money to upgrade.
JMO & HTH
Thanks for the response. I should have joined this forum years ago. I guess, I started second guessing the purchase of my current set up at the suggestion that I would spend the same money on replacement lamps in 18 months to two years as I have on the whole light fixture. I wish I had known when I was considering light selection that T5's were so efficient. I've even seen articles comparing them to metal halides concerning light penetration into the water. Back when I was looking for lights, I kept hearing T5 performance was more sensitive to increased temp than other lamps.
Anyway, thanks again.
Anyway, thanks again.
Sponsor Reefs
We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.
Click here to sponsor $10:
