Old bulbs = Algae problems?
 

My 250w Iwasakis are getting pretty old. Both are over a year old, and I think one is closer to 2+ years old. Would this have anything to do with my algae problems or no? Thanks in advance.

Perhaps not a completely certainty, but it's a reasonably safe bet. I have no experience with Iwasaki's that old, so take that into account when I speak -- I've also used 10000K bulbs for over 2 years without algae problems but I would expect that to be an exception rather than the rule. Other bulbs I have used in the past (used several different ones over 5+ years in the hobby!), I could tell you exactly when they had hit "six months plus a day" because the difference was that apparent. Changing out the old bulbs caused the blooms to wither within days. So yes, I'd call it a "solid possibility." (How's that for a non-wishy-washy reply?)

What kind of algae problems are you having? How big is your tank? Skimmer? How much LR? Alkalinity?

The reason I ask all these questions is when I was having algae problems it was suggested to change my bulbs. After spending the $200 on bulbs I saw decline in the algae growth and had to turn to other ideas.

Christy :)

Christy, I assume you mean you saw NO decline in algae growth?

PS. I didn't mean to suggest that old lighting was the only cause, just ONE potential cause. Definitely for "due diligence" all those other possibilities should be explored as well. However, that said, two years on a halide IS pushing it. Although I am as guilty as anyone for doing that, there's no doubt that after two years of solid use (espescially assuming something like a 10-12 hour daily photoperiod), it's not gonna hurt ANYthing (except maybe the wallet) to replace those bulbs. :cool:

Oops, yes. NO decline in algae growth. Jeez I think I had too many cups of coffee this am. :redface: :eek:

Yes, I totally agree with you Tony about maybe replacing the bulbs. But if there is a cheaper way to go first I'd try it. See first thing I did was spend $200 on bulbs, then when that didn't work I had no money left to try other things. Then I had to wait it out until I could get the money to try other approaches. It ended up being a combination of things (I was using natural seawater at the time that had phosphates in it, had a crappy skimmer and low alk). Changing these things did eventually get rid of the brown goo type algae but I didn't have any success with eliminating hair algae. If I had the patience after each and every algae attack I probably could have beaten it (or at least slapped it around a little) but I didn't. I moved, got my tax return and bought new rock :wink:


Christy :)

Thanks for the quick replies everyone. I know that lighting isn't the only thing contributing to my algae, but I'm just attacking all possibilities. I just bought a nice big RO unit, foxface, lawnmower blenny, dropped my lighting down to 7 hours a day, cranked up my skimmer, doing more water changes, pulling it manually, brought my alk up to 4.5meq/L. The only thing left I can think of is replacing my old bulbs. I don't want to give this algae a chance to win! Am I missing anything?

The tank is a 120gal with a 27gal sump.
Canreef skimmer on a Mag18.

Tank's been setup for less than a year so I'm not surprised about the algae outbreaks, but I still want to attack it as hard as I can.

Thanks all.

I found pretty much any time i have had a hair alge outbreak it's due to low alk. I think your on the right track bumping your alk up, should see a change in the next couple of weeks. Hope it gets better, i hate hair alge. :mad:

Clinton

How does your light look? if it has a yellow cast to it, it may be in need of replacement. If it still has a white/blue look to it, keep it, it is probably still kicking butt.

But like Christy says, don't replace the bulbs first, unless you make your own money.

The lighting is painfully yellow, even with 4x48" actinics on an Icecap 660. I guess I should replace them then. I bought the bulbs used so I've never actually seen fresh Iwasakis over my tank. Should they really appear white? I thought Iwasakis have a reputation for yellowish light. Would the yellow light contribute to algae more so than whitish light?

Thanks again.

Iwasaki's actually shift more toward the blue spectrum as they get older.
Do you run carbon in your tank? I find once my carbon get's old, I can notice my tank becoming more yellow. Once the carbon is replaced than the water is crystal clear.

ciao

I don't know a thing about the Iwasaki, the bulbs that I have came with my coralife unit and they appeared yellow to start then once they were burned in they are a real blue/white, ... My 400 watt MH is turning yellow though (for my orchids) and my tanks that are close to that are getting good algae growth.

I've got 250W iwasakis and they've always been a bit on the yellow side without actinics. I have 2 40W actinics and I really like the look they add to the yellow. I don't know if I would put VHO on mine though. I think that would make it too blue, but thats just my preference. I would think with that much actinic though, Mason, you should see them pretty white/blue. Mine have been running for just over a year now and I'm gonna try to push them to two and see how it goes. It would be interesting to test them and see how much they have gone downhill though. Most people replace them after a year but I've heard of people pusing them to two. Do you have the "R" bulbs?? The non-R ones are pretty yellow compared to the R ones.

Christy :)

Christy's got a good point about the non "R" bulbs. I had one and couldn't believe how yellow it is compared to the newer "R" bulbs. The 400s are quite a bit more yellow in appearance than the 250s.

Troy or Christy, any idea what the R means?

The "R" is for resistor. The Iwasaki company put these carbon resitors in the bulbs to make them burn whiter for reef keeping. I don't really have much more knowledge than that about them. Christy or Troy can probably elaborate on that one a bit.

Thanks Jack.

Actually, that's more than I knew. The only thing I new was that they were for the aquarium. BTW, I bought new bulbs this past weekend so I'll send you one of the old ones to compare.

Send one over this way Troy. I'm using the non "R" bulbs and I want to try it out :wink:

Interesting. I didn't know there were different Iwasaki bulbs. Where would I look for the "R" on the bulb?

Thanks everyone I will look for that when I'm in the market for new bulbs.

I'm pretty sure they don't sell the non-R ones anymore anyway.

Christy :)

I purchased 250w Iwasaki bulbs....horrid yellow...Jon has them now..Jon are they R bulbs? or non R bulbs? Who knows how to tell because they were likely in stock for who knows how long before I bought them?

Limiting current, or increasing current, dependent on the resistor, that R thingy, changes the wavelength? :confused:

Hi guys,

You can look at my tank to compare the two Iwaski bulbs. The yellow tang side is the new one with 'R'.

http://www.canreef.com/phpBB2/viewto...=4071&start=15

They are 250watt with 2 VHO actintic. The new one is around 15 months old and the old one is about 2 years. I read somewhere that Iwaski last longer than the other MH bulb without noticably shift in spectrum. (Something like 2 years if I remember correctly)

Hopefully, the old one will last till boxing day this year so I can get new one. :lol:


Bongy

Hey Deb, even the R bulb isn't crisp white like some of the higher K bulbs but it's waaaay less yellow than their older bulbs. Jack, PM me your address and I'll send you a bulb. I'll try to figure out which one is just a year old.

Maybe a little off-topic, but, the Iwasaki webpage says not to run their bulbs on "combination MH/MV ballasts." To my knowledge just about every ballast we can buy is a combination MH/MV! I.e., M57/H37, M58/H38, etc. etc. Even the EYE Electric (Iwasaki) ballasts appear to be both mercury vapour and metal halide!

The reason I am confused about this is, for a time, I ran a non-R and a R 250W side by side. I never really could perceive much of a difference. Unless I am colour blind (who knows maybe I am), I wonder if this means that I'm running the "R" version on a suboptimal ballast because my ballasts are for sure "250W MH or MV."

So what's up with that, any ideas? I've tried looking for a H38 ballast (err. or whatever a 250W MV is) that wasn't also a M58 (250W MH), and, well, not that I looked all that hard, but all I could find were these combo ballasts. Does "combination ballast" perhaps refer to something else?

I've got two H37 ballasts if that means anything.

Christy :)

Troy, thanks, I sent you a PM.

Christy, that means you have the optimal ballasts for Iwasaki.

Bongy, is it just me or does his tank look dimmer, but bluer, on the right side of the tank ("R" bulb) but the left side looks more intense and whiter (non "R" bulb)?

Tony, I'm really glad you posted that question. I specfically am running the MH/MV ballasts, M58/H37 ballasts. I know that Iwasaki says that you shouldn't run them but they run fine. I am using a pair of non-resistor Iwasaki bulbs and the colour is yellow like toilet pee water... :eek: but when I flick on my 2x110w VHO actinic it's very white.

I am interested in seeing how much whiter Troys "R" bulb will look over my tank. I'm not sure if I can get pictures but this can be a test... I have good eyes! :lol:

I posted awhile as to where I could get 250w H37 MV bare ballasts for my lights but I got no response.

Hi Jack,

I am looking at the tank now but I can't really tell. My eyes are really bad at sensing the difference. I can't even tell which side is bluer.

Maybe I should get my eyes check. :rolleyes:

Yes the bulbs I got from you were R bulbs.

Christy, where did you get your ballasts from and can you tell me a brand/model # at all? PM me if you prefer. Thanks..

Bongy, maybe I need my eyes checked too, but I too can only barely perceive a difference between the two sides and I'm not sure if I'm imagining it because the suggestion is there that the right hand is maybe slighlly bluer. Perception and psychology is a funny business. What's throwing me off is that right in the center at the top there is a bit of a spot above the congruence of the light rays that is a bit darker. This gives me the impression that there is a line dividing the two sides. So the two sides different enough that I can maybe perceive that there is some kind of difference, not they're not different enough that I can quantifiably identify what that difference is. I guess maybe Jack's right, the right hand side is slightly bluer. I think.

Jack, I spent at least 2 minutes searching the web for info when I was wondering about this. And it occured to me that most 250W ballasts we're using must be the MH/MV versions. I know that they're "fine enough" because that's what I run, and I'm not unhappy with the results. It's just that ... I never really noticed a huge difference between the R and the non-R, and I'm wondering if maybe I WOULD notice more of a difference if I had only the H37 ballasts. If I could find a H37 that wasn't also a M58 then I'd just buy it to try it and settle the question in my mind once and for all. Oh well... :smile:

Hey Tony,

I bought my lighting setup from a guy in Vancouver that advertised it in the buy and sell. He told me he got them shipped straight from Japan. Whatever that means. He had mucho dinero and was switching his lighting setup from 250W to 175W (which is why I thought he had too much money, as well as the "octopus" setup he had just bought with 4 probes, $2000).

Sorry I can't give you any more info than that. I wish I knew where he got them from too.

Christy :)

According to the Advance catalog, the following are H37 250 watt Mercury vapour ballasts

71A3502,71A3572,71A3592,71A35D2. the difference between the ballasts is whether they are single,tri or quad taps.

Thanks ... I'll look those up. :smile:

I called Commercial Lighting and the only thing they have available is a 71A35D2 which is a 250 watt quad tap core and coil H37 ballast. I didn't bother including it in my list. Unfortunately it sells for 95.00.

Tony, that's exactly the reason why I wanted the MV H37 ballasts. I want to run the 250 Iwasaki "crisp white/light blue" effect, like many people have posted on RC. The "EYE" ballast are H37's. I still have no problems with my combo ballast but curiosity has the best of me.

Bryan, what's single, tri, quad, etc tap mean. I don't know what tap means. Is this a newbie question :rolleyes:

I can answer that question for you!! :biggrin:

Quad tap means there are 4 available .. um .. "tap" configurations (tri tap is another commonly used ballast, then double and single-tap). What this means is there are 4 ways to power the ballast: 120 VAC, 240VAC, 377V and um .. I think 480 is the last choice.

Quad taps seem to be the most common AFAIK. I assume this is because they are the ones produced in the most volume maybe. Basically depending on the (industrial) application the line voltage may be one of several things and it depends on different things.

Basically for our use, we're really interested in the 120 tap only. I imagine one could run ballasts on a 220 circuit intended for stoves and dryers although I don't know if there'd be any real advantage, although I've often wondered about that.

PS. According the EYE Lighting website, even the EYE ballast is a combination halide/mercury ballast...
http://www.eyelighting.com/ballastmercury.html (notice the ANSI column has both M numbers and H numbers for each ballast)

Ah! I get it. Thanks Tony.

FWIW I believe it's 120v,208v,240v,277v. I wonder how they come up with 208 and 277 though.

Those voltages are of no concern to the normal person. They are three phase voltages, and is the voltage between two of the phases. Arrived at by multiplying the supply voltage by the square root of three. IOW 480 times root three, or 600 times root three.

Ah, suddenly all so clear :neutral:

Mason, we kind of strayed from your topic, but I think it could be your NO flourecents causing the algae. I had a bit of algae on my sandbed once and it dissapeared within a couple of days of changing my two really old 40w actinics.