What is T5VHO vs T5HO?
 

The UVL T5 bulbs are labeled as T5VHO.

http://www.uvlco.com/t5vho.htm

Aquatinics sells both T5HO fixtures and T5VHO fixtures so I assume that means there is a difference between T5HO and T5VHO. I bought the T5HO fixture. Does that mean I shouldn't use UVL bulbs? I don't see any UVL T5HO bulbs on their website.


EDIT:

Never mind. I just found my answer. :)

http://www.uvlco.com/index.htm

"Better yet, it is available in our NEW't5 V-HO lamp' format. The First of its kind, a "variable output" lamp which can work as either HO or VHO. Unique patented engineering allows it to last longer and run more consistent than the conventional T5 HO lamps on the market."

according to phillips, the T5 VHO has the same power output on the same ballast but you can increase the ballast and get a step up so the bulbs are rated as 54/83watts. but there main purpose was to maintain light output levels over extream tempatures.

Steve

Cool.

Its great lighting up the arches at the local mcdonalds, or highbay lighting in a warehouse... Does little good for this application, money better spent elsewhere... Like coral or fish ;)

Well I am not sure about that, I still have some more reading to do, but on initial review it looks like you might be able to use a higher output ballast to get 80ish watts out of your bulb instead of 54. that is a 33% increas in bulb output with no effect on bulb life. Also there are a couple aquatic lighting stores selling fixtures with these bulbs and a higher output ballast already.

Mabe this is what the high end T5 lights like giesmen, proflux ect are doing already to get the edge over the tec lights and such with out telling us. If so you could just upgrade the bulbs and ballast in a tec light and get high quality output.

also brings the question of active cooling into question, as these bulb and ballast combos were designed to operate in a wide enviorment, from very cold to very hot.. is it realy nessasary with this set up or is it just more stuff to break down causeing more after market sales for the companies.

and then thee is the bulb it's self, if you use a normal bulb in this fixture instead of the T5VHO bulb are you just overdriving them, if so you will most likely get a 10% increase instead of the 33, this is based off the overdriving tests I did with NO, PC, VHO, T10 and T8 bulbs when all is sed and done running twice the power into the bulb only gives you a 10 to 15% increase in output.

Steve

Wattage is a useless measurement for lighting, all it tells me is how much I’m going pay to light my tank, watts is what the utility company charges me on.... has no bearing or effect on how much light is produced. Lumens per watt, however tells you the efficacy of a lamp. I’ll use 4’ T5@28W, T5HO@54W and T8@32W for an example.

T8 at 32W gives 89.1 LPW (lumens per watt) @8,000 hours, so at 32x89.1 you get a total of 2851.2 lumens from 1 lamp. Rated life is 24,000 hours. Ambient operating temperature of 25 C.
T5 at 28W gives 96.3 LPW@8,000 hours, so at 28X96.3 you get a total of 2696.4 lumens from 1 lamp. Rated life of 20,000 hours. Ambient operating temperature of 35 C.

T5HO at 54W gives 86.1 LPW@8,000 hours, so at 54X86.1 you get 4649.4 lumens from 1 lamp. Again rated for 20,000 hours. Ambient operating temperature of 35 C.

The physical benefits of T5 over T8 is size of bulb, allowing us to fit more light in a smaller space... and operate at a much higher temperature for the given efficiacy.

4 T8s at 32W = 128W@12 hours a day = 1536 watts used per day, my utility company would charge me about $5.53 a month to run these bulbs.

4 T5s at 28W = 112W@12 hours a day = 1344 watts used per day, my utility company would charge me about $4.83 a month to run these bulbs.

4 T5HOs at 54W = 216W@12 hours a day = 2592 watts used per day, my utility company would charge me about $9.33 a month to run these bulbs.

If a T8 bulb is $15.00 and I buy 4 and change em out every year, it will have cost me $126.36 every year in power and replacement.

If a T5 bulb is $25.00 and I buy 4 and change em out every year, it will have cost me $157.96 every year in power and replacement. I’m paying about 20% more to get 5% less light output then a T8.

If a T5HO bulb is $30.00 and I buy 4 and change em out every year, it will have cost me $231.96 every year in power and replacement. I’m paying about 45% more to get about 40% more light output then a T8.

The benefits of T5HO over T5 is only about more light in the same space, but at a higher cost. Quick glance at the math above might even prove ill get more light for cheaper by running 5 T5s over 4 T5HO and give me the added benefit of having more color choices.

The benefits of T5 over T8 are realized when maintenance is done properly, ie changing closer to rated life atleast 2-4 years and NOT paying the over rediculious price we pay for bulbs, usually about 10X the cost of these bulbs in a commercial application. A T5’s efficacy is much higher, it produces much more light over its entire lifespan then a T8 will. By undercutting the lifespan, your actually not gaining a whole hell of alot.

T5VHO compounds the cost to benefit ratio, there isn’t nearly as much info for T5VHO at this point, and its a little early in IMO to be jumping on the bandwagon... could cost you more in the long run then that shiny new skimmer or that rare coral you saw at the LFS and for what? A little bit more light with alot more maintenance cost?

Getting into T5VHO will you give you a higher operating temperature and more light in the given space but even less lumens per watt then a T8 I’m sure....
T5VHO is great for warehouses and such that cram lots of bulbs into a very small space sometimes 30’ feet in the air, changing them is expensive, the less often it needs to be done the better, labour costs are cheaper, but equipment costs and cost to run goes way up. Over the course of a warehouse changing out hundreds of bulbs at a time, they will save some money for sure. We however running 2-6 lamps at a time, will never recoup the cost to benefit in buying that equipment. If you got money to burn and like saying you have the latest greatest in lighting technology... then buy it up, eat up all the hype, the aquarium companies are counting on that, and it works beautifully... no one can argue that.

I wrote this pretty quick, I’m sure there is errors, but the point remains, I’ve been doing commercial and industrial lighting for years... all I’m offering here is why I make the decisions I do.

I'm really curious as to how you can say T5's last 2+ years with no appreciable PAR loss when many have tested, all independently, I may add. And those tests say that after 10 month's, T5's can loose 40% or more of their PAR. My bulbs are a year old, 12 hrs a day on time. And I notice a diminish in light output. I can look at the lights when on now. No way I could look at them when they were new.

For starters, PAR (Photosynthetically active radiation) has nothing to do with "bulb output". PAR is a range of light, exists between 400 & 700 nanometers, light used by photo synthetic organisms... also about the range humans see. A PAR meter measures whats in that range, has NOTHING to do with brightness. LUX, a unit of measurement coming from Lumens, THAT is the measurement for brightness.

Don't confuse PAR with LUX, comparing apples to oranges. I do not use rebranded reef bulbs that cost an arm and a leg compared to the ones produced by major manufacturers (such as GE, Phillips etc) who at best guess from me produce thousands upon thousands of times the amount of bulbs the entire aquarium industry sells in total. They say there bulbs last x amount of hours, and I say of all the bulbs I have used from them have shown me on average about the same performance.

The only exception is Actinics, thats my current bain needing to buy those damn things.

I'd really like to see one of those "independant studies", maybe post a couple, Ive searched and searched before I posted and could not find a single lab quality or even remotely professionally developed research panel conducting any sort of study that would cause an entire lighting industry (worth billions) to hold its breath. Or are you referring to the "homebrewed" studies done in ones own living room with a cheap consumer purchased PAR meter used by someone who more then likely doesn't understand fully how to use it... no offense to anyone, explained to people who don't fully understand PAR? Trust me.... I don't fully understand how photons of different wavelengths create a visually perceptive difference in light. You also won't very many scientists who agree on how to measure PAR and how those devices react to artificial light opposed to natural (the sun).

Like I've said before, take it with a grain salt, trust the company who sold the bulbs and not the ones who research and designed them, makes no difference to me. I'm lucky in that I have access to a proper PAR, and LUX meter... and all the help and advice I need from some the worlds best industry reps when it comes to lighting.

On a side note, eyes are poor for judging PAR and LUX, eyes adjust long and short term to different wavelengths, do you remember the first time you looked at an Actinic bulb? Is it the same experience at looking a brand new years later? Taking the bulbs and cleaning them off along with the reflector as scheduled maintenance on the tank helps to, I do mine once a week with water changes.

Just for arguments sake, the PAR meter I have used is actually a spectroradiometer, not a consumer grade off the shelf 65.00 Milwaukee handheld unit.

UVL worked with Ice Cap on the bulbs. As far as I know they are the only ballasts that do the T5VHO thing.

I found some actual numbers a while ago that showed LUX output vs bulb temp measured at the cold end but I have lost the link. I had built my retrofit hood with some cooling fans and was taking the temp of the bulbs with an IR thermometer. IIRC without the fans I was was getting a little hot but it was costing me maybe 6% of output or something so I didn't run them often because of the noise. I think it's fair to say that the cooling has an impact but that some people overestimate the impact of it by quite a bit.