String multiple UV sterilizers together?

insane_reef_keeper;630162 wrote: Let the science battles begin.... This is way over my head.

That is the essence of the problem with UV claims, IMO. There is a lack of objective disciplined evaluation, and those that have been done often have too small of sample populations and/or too few replications to be statistically significant (eg-are meaningless).

In short, it's all just so many circus barkers selling snake oil. "This is good, that's not" is hardly a recipe for success, IMO. The only perceived guaranty is, to buy a unit so overrated as to assure results.

The bulbs do vary in output. Often a 'standard' UV efficiency of around 30% of total lamp wattage is assumed, when in fact it is not verified.

Neither have studies on fixed populations of the 'tank coodies' been conducted, across product lines, under standardized conditions.

Why?

Again,
The ones with the most resources and motivation, are the same ones selling them. Just like protein skimmers. These are the two pieces of hardware, besides the glass/tanks or the lights with the biggest price tag, and least reliable data. At least with tanks and lights it's now pretty simple. The tank does/does not leak, and the light does/does not produce sufficient PAR. Thankfully we now have PAR meters, at least!

Rant over!
 
ichthyoid;630174 wrote: that is the essence of the problem with uv claims, imo. There is a lack of objective disciplined evaluation, and those that have been done often have too small of sample populations and/or too few replications to be statistically significant (eg-are meaningless).

In short, it's all just so many circus barkers selling snake oil. "this is good, that's not" is hardly a recipe for success, imo. The only perceived guaranty is, to buy a unit so overrated as to assure results.

The bulbs do vary in output. Often a 'standard' uv efficiency of around 30% of total lamp wattage is assumed, when in fact it is not verified.

Neither have studies on fixed populations of the 'tank coodies' been conducted, across product lines, under standardized conditions.

Why?

Again,
the ones with the most resources and motivation, are the same ones selling them. Just like protein skimmers. These are the two pieces of hardware, besides the glass/tanks or the lights with the biggest price tag, and least reliable data. At least with tanks and lights it's now pretty simple. The tank does/does not leak, and the light does/does not produce sufficient par. Thankfully we now have par meters, at least!

Rant over!
nay sayer!!
 
Rbredding;630345 wrote: based on the "mew measuring unit /cm2 thing"
That is where I get confused is those ratings. Emperor gives the max flow based on 180,000 uw/cm2 and Aqua Uv gives the max flow based on 90,000 uw/cm2 which happens to twice what the Emperor requires . It seems that the equations are linear so that puts their output the same.
 
Rbredding;630345 wrote: based on the "mew measuring unit /cm2 thing"
That is where I get confused is those ratings. Emperor gives the max flow based on 180,000 uw/cm2 and Aqua Uv gives the max flow based on 90,000 uw/cm2 which happens to twice what the Emperor requires . It seems that the equations are linear so that puts their output the same.
 
correct...


but raj said that the issue with aqua uv is their ballasts dont last.. (so it's more a quality of product issue with them - not strength of radiance)
 
grouper therapy;630326 wrote: In what terms are the emperor stronger ? I think both use a low pressure bulb as well.

I'll do a quick rundown. There are a few things to consider:

Low pressure bulbs- there are a few types that are found in UV systems:
<ol>
<li>Soft glass lamp</li>
<li>standard output lamp</li>
<li>high output lamp</li>
<li>Amalgam lamp</li>
</ol>Hard quartz glass is superior (2-4). HO better than standard and Amalgam better than HO, etc.

Then there are coatings that are on the hard quarts bulbs:
<ol>
<li>VH-glass</li>
<li>L-glass</li>
</ol>L-glass is better since it produces on ozone and won't scale. VH-glass will cause scaling (the white scaling you often see on the sleeves; you won't see this on an Emperor UV).

Emperor glass also has an internal chemical coating which increases life span and efficiency.

Gotta run for now.
 
Skriz;630420 wrote: I'll do a quick rundown. There are a few things to consider:

Low pressure bulbs- there are a few types that are found in UV systems:
<ol>
<li>Soft glass lamp</li>
<li>standard output lamp</li>
<li>high output lamp</li>
<li>Amalgam lamp</li>
</ol>


Then there are coatings that are on the hard quarts bulbs:
<ol>
<li>VH-glass</li>
<li>L-glass</li>
</ol>
L-glass is better since it produces on ozone and won't scale. VH-glass will cause scaling (the white scaling you often see on the sleeves; you won't see this on an Emperor UV).


Gotta run for now.
The scaling makes perfect sense if that becomes an issue.:up:

Emperor glass also has an internal chemical coating which increases life span and efficiency. <span style="color: Red">how?</span>
Hard quartz glass is superior (2-4). HO better than standard and Amalgam better than HO, etc. <span style="color: Red">why?</span>
 
grouper therapy;630481 wrote: The scaling makes perfect sense if that becomes an issue.:up:

Emperor glass also has an internal chemical coating which increases life span and efficiency. <span style="color: Red">how?</span>
Hard quartz glass is superior (2-4). HO better than standard and Amalgam better than HO, etc. <span style="color: Red">why?</span>
Sounds like polyglycote:)
 
grouper therapy;630481 wrote: The scaling makes perfect sense if that becomes an issue.:up:...

There shouldn't be a question about if, rather when! Scaling will render the UV useless. And who wants to (and is really going to) clean their UV on a regular basis (vinegar bath)?
 
Skriz;630568 wrote: There shouldn't be a question about if, rather when! Scaling will render the UV useless. And who wants to (and is really going to) clean their UV on a regular basis (vinegar bath)?
OK when ?:) I have not experienced that yet after 4 years so that was what I meant but I'm sure it does and is an issue with some. If I can afford it I am difinetly going with the Emperor brand as I feel that they are well made and I like the one bulb, one ballast concept. Not sure about the aqua uv viper and their SL series so why risk it when the Emperor is a proven performer.
 
For all you tech/numbers guys, if I were to add another UV to the 40w I already have do you think it would be better to have them strung together or have them running independently off the manifold?
I would think it'd be better to string together but I'm just a newbie.
 
Seth The Wine Guy;644122 wrote: For all you tech/numbers guys, if I were to add another UV to the 40w I already have do you think it would be better to have them strung together or have them running independently off the manifold?
I would think it'd be better to string together but I'm just a newbie.

String them together so the water flows directly out or one and into the other.
 
LilRobb;629501 wrote: This thing just reaches its limit VERY quickly, based on the above a 1W UV light in a 1000gal tank should theoretically kill anything in the water in a long enough time.
Let me tell you, ain't gonna happen.

Right, it's like a tanning bed for ick. You get brown spots instead of white one. Little George Hamilton Ick parasites on you fish.
 
Back
Top