Fun with the PAR meter - T5, Metal Halide and PC numbers
- Thread starter sammy33
- Start date
- Messages
- 239
- Reaction score
- 0
i think it would be really interesting to see vhos or no florecents with individual reflectors and see how they compare.
A major components to the effectiveness of the T5s and the individual reflectors is directly attributable to the size of the bulb. The larger T12 bulbs end up blocking a much larger percentage of the reflected light. The trick would be to design a reflector that would reflect the light around the bulb. There are some NO (normal output) T5 and T6 bulbs available however, unless overdriven, they do not put out the PAR of the T5 HO (high output) bulbs and they are somewhat limited as far as color combinations are concerned. If not already available, there will be some HO and VHO (very high output) T5 and T6 bulbs coming soon. The early testing on the VHO T5 seems to indicate that they are not as efficient as the HO versions. The T6 bulbs are promising because they will fit into the normal T12/T8 endcaps for those that already have a VHO setup.
- Messages
- 156
- Reaction score
- 0
Sammy, do you still have the meter? I would love to see what my lighting is doing! I am so close to you...
MHs drain more juice, don't last as long and usually require active cooling of the tank. The main reason people get them are they are proven, tend to punch more light down into the tank and shimmer in the tank. My opinion is if you don't care about shimmer go with T5s... they are less fuss and cheaper in the long run.
T5 bulbs last between 12-18 months. MH bulbs last beteen 6-12 months. Both of those numbers are generalities and vary greatly based on ballast, personal preference and bulb. My personal plan is 9 months on my MH and 14 months on my T5s. This should keep my bulbs from shifting spectrum too far and with this schedule I won't have both T5 and MH light bill come due at the same time unless I want to preorder to keep costs down.
The bulbs are all Geissemann with 2 of the 36" lamps in each row. This covers the 72" span very nicely. From front to back:
Actinic + (460nm)
Midday (6,000K)
Aquablue (11,000K)
Pure Actinic (420nm)
I have the Ice Cap Reflectors on the Actinic lamps and the TEK reflectors on the daylight lamps in the middle. The ballasts are Universal T5 2 lamp ballast and run the lamps at the spec wattage.
PM me. I will bring the PAR meter over and do one of these tests.
I would actually like to get a bunch more test like this one. I would like to test actual aquarium conditions and get values that we can use for decision making.
Who else in Lawrenceville/Gwinnett area would like to volunteer their aquarium for testing?
good luck with that testing sammy, I tried to get something similar going and no real effort was put in from people. Seeing you have one of those meters tho I'm sure you can get a better result, wish I was closer I'ld offer my tank for testing.
- Messages
- 1,998
- Reaction score
- 0
well im not promising anything but later on in the future when i get my make big tank going you can test mine =)
The expression Photosynthetically Active Radiation, often abbreviated PAR (sometimes shown as Photosynthetic Photon Flux (PPF)), designates the spectral range of solar light from 400 to 700 nanometers that is useful in the process of photosynthesis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthetically_active_radiation">From Wikipedia</a>
Direct sunglight has a PAR of around 1200 to 2000 with the lower values encountered in the winter months and much higher in the summer. Today at 1:30pm the PAR in direct sun was 1640.
[B]So what PAR should I have in my tank to keep certain corals?[/B]
The only reference that I know of that comes close to quantifying these values is Julian Sprungs [I]Corals Reference Guide</em>. Sprung gives us a relative lighting value for corals based on a scale of 1 - 10.
In [IMG]http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/1/lines/view">Adam Blundell's Lighting Article </a>he proposes using these values as PAR by multiplying by 100. Here are some examples:
[B]Green Star Polyp [I](Pachyclavularia)</em>[/B]
Lighting
(Sprung value) 3-9
(PAR minimum) 300
(PAR average) 600
[B]Frogspawn [I](Euphyllia)</em>[/B]
Lighting
(Sprung value) 3-8
(PAR Minimum) 300
(PAR average) 550
[B]Acropora [I](Acropora)</em>[/B]
Lighting
(Sprung value) 4-10
(PAR Minimum) 400
(PAR average) 700
So looking at my PAR values from my tank I see that I will probably have a hard time with any acropora that are not right at the top of the tank. Hmm?
I think that I will need to boost my PAR a bit however to really get things thriving. :doh:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthetically_active_radiation">From Wikipedia</a>
Direct sunglight has a PAR of around 1200 to 2000 with the lower values encountered in the winter months and much higher in the summer. Today at 1:30pm the PAR in direct sun was 1640.
[B]So what PAR should I have in my tank to keep certain corals?[/B]
The only reference that I know of that comes close to quantifying these values is Julian Sprungs [I]Corals Reference Guide</em>. Sprung gives us a relative lighting value for corals based on a scale of 1 - 10.
In [IMG]http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/1/lines/view">Adam Blundell's Lighting Article </a>he proposes using these values as PAR by multiplying by 100. Here are some examples:
[B]Green Star Polyp [I](Pachyclavularia)</em>[/B]
Lighting
(Sprung value) 3-9
(PAR minimum) 300
(PAR average) 600
[B]Frogspawn [I](Euphyllia)</em>[/B]
Lighting
(Sprung value) 3-8
(PAR Minimum) 300
(PAR average) 550
[B]Acropora [I](Acropora)</em>[/B]
Lighting
(Sprung value) 4-10
(PAR Minimum) 400
(PAR average) 700
So looking at my PAR values from my tank I see that I will probably have a hard time with any acropora that are not right at the top of the tank. Hmm?
I think that I will need to boost my PAR a bit however to really get things thriving. :doh:
- Messages
- 1,998
- Reaction score
- 0
do i hear the word upgrade lol
We really need to get that going. I still want to test my tank. Where's that darn ARC meter? Can I borrow it Tony?
