Lighting Question

[StirCrazy]

Originally posted by reefburnaby:
BTW WH7 with T8s...is overdriven by default (2x).

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Victor, how is 4 T8 bulbs on a WH 7 overdriven? I could see if you were only using 2 bulbs and doubling up on the wires, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't using one wire for bulbs is the normal NO configuration?

Andrew, the MH sugestion was based on the desire to have an Anemone I have read that article that feeding is more imortant than light, but the fact remains that it seams the most sucessfull people with Anemone all sugest the most important factor is the lighting.

Having said that, Tigger the other way to do it is like I am.. go with your NO bulbs on the workhorse 7, if you find they are not enuf then buy a couple 96 watt PC's ( if you go with two WH7's you could start off with 4 NO T8 daylight bulbs and 4 actinic if this isn't enuf then switch the 4 day light bulbs to the two 96 watt 6700K PC's. And then IF you decide you want to get the big light idems you could add MH bulbs one at a time as you can aford it.

what I am doing is simular as I am starting off with PC's and NO's then adding the MH when my tank is ready for creatures that require the high light.

[reefburnaby]

Hi,

T8s overdriven by default with WH7...suprised nobody ask why T8s don't show up on the list of lamps that are usually driven by WH7. If you really want NO, then WH5. Here's the scope....WH7 is design to drive 4 T12s roughly 430-500mA of lamp current. T8s are design to run with 230ish mA. So...you'll be pumping in a bit more current than usual. Effectively, the WH7 thinks it is driving a long T12 (8 foot).

So yah...PCs or T8s ? Well....kind of up to you. It is impossible to tell since it comes down to setup and light reflector design. As long as your tank doesn't look like Big Al's...where mushrooms bleach due to lack of light...you'll be fine.

- Victor.

[Tigger]

Is it true that NO (even over driven 2X) won't have enough intensity to provide enough Lummens at the bottom of the tank? Let me know if I understand the properly. If I overdrive the 4 NO lights 2X then it would be like having 8 NO's instead of 4 NO. But according to StirCrazy, 4 NO's are not even half as intense as 2 96W PCs. Assuming Stircrazy was not overdriving his lights, then even if I overdrive them (double the PAR, I think?), it will still not have a PAR Value as high as 2 96W PCs. Is this correct?

StirCrazy - are your T8's on a workhorse 7 Ballast?

Do others believe I should have no troubles keeping softies, LPS and Sea Anenomes (BTA or Seabae) with 2 96W 65000K PCs and 2 48" NO attinics? What do you think about using 4 48" 65000K NO (overdriven 2X) and 2 48" NO attinics? Would this be just as good? By the way my tank is about 20" high with about a 4 inch sandbed.

One more question: Does anybody know a good place to get end caps for PC lighting? Are they about the same price as the end caps for NO lighting?

[DJ88]

Is it true that NO (even over driven 2X) won't have enough intensity to provide enough Lummens at the bottom of the tank?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">True. But it depends on the depth of your tank. If it was a 12" deep tank I'd have no worries putting softies or mushrooms. maybe an LPS. NO anemone or SPS tho unless they were at or near the surface. NO's don't provide enough illumination for SPS or even some LPS to grow. Survive? Yes, barely IMO IME. Most corals and anemones need a lot of light. If they don't get it they will die.

Let me know if I understand the properly. If I overdrive the 4 NO lights 2X then it would be like having 8 NO's instead of 4 NO

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Not necessarily. It depends on how much current each wire is pushing into the lamp. If you take a 120W ballast and hook it all up into one lamp your output will go up. It all depends on the ballast. Even then it doesn't go up as a factor of x2, x3, x4.

But according to StirCrazy, 4 NO's are not even half as intense as 2 96W PCs. Assuming Stircrazy was not overdriving his lights, then even if I overdrive them (double the PAR, I think?), it will still not have a PAR Value as high as 2 96W PCs. Is this correct?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Before we can answer what you wil be able to keep it is more important to know how deep your tank is. As light decay is an exponential decay in water with NO, PC or VHO you lose 66% of the power coming out of the tube in the first few inches of the water. MH goes deeper as it is a point source with a much higher intensity.

I'd share the numbers I have but I have had some problems with my puter and can't access my NTFS drives right now.

IMO NO(even overdriven) will not be sufficient to light deeper than say 10 inches. If you want a creature that requires intense light.

If you are looking at an anemone(which I don't suggest with a coral tank as it WILL wander and sting anything it touches) don't go with a seabae. Difficult to keep. Get a Very healthy BTA. And by healthy get one that is a dark or medium brown color. White means bleached, bleached means near death as it no longer has its zooxanthellae. If you get a white anemone you will need to feed it. Daily. An anemone with its zoox doesn't need daily feedings. I had a saddleback that I rarely fed. And it grew and grew and grew. With proper lighting. LOTS of lighting.

[StirCrazy]

Originally posted by Tigger:
Is it true that NO (even over driven 2X) won't have enough intensity to provide enough Lummens at the bottom of the tank?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I never said you couldent have enuf intensity for shrooms and stuff at the bottom but the question was which would give you more.

Let me know if I understand the properly. If I overdrive the 4 NO lights 2X then it would be like having 8 NO's instead of 4 NO.[/QB]

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">no not realy.. the intensity of light is not a linier factor, so a two fold increase in power doesn't mean you will get a two fold increas in intensity. when I ran my original tests for overdriving I only had a lumen meter. I am planning on redoing the tests using a par meter also to get the #'s for the increase in usable light. I will do thease hopefully in about a week as I am flying back to alberta wensday for a funeral.

according to StirCrazy, 4 NO's are not even half as intense as 2 96W PCs. [/QB]

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">hmm not quite. what I was saying is that one NO is not as intense as 1 PC, by adding more bulbs you do not increas the intensity but rather the amount of light. so lets say your coverage will be better with 4 bulbs as aposed to 2 PC's but the PC's will still be more intense.

Assuming Stircrazy was not overdriving his lights, then even if I overdrive them (double the PAR, I think?), it will still not have a PAR Value as high as 2 96W PCs. Is this correct??[/QB]

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I have tested valuse at normal power and while overdriven for lumin output. as stated above I will do a PAR test to see how that increases with power increase.

StirCrazy - are your T8's on a workhorse 7 Ballast?[/QB]

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Mine are on a electronic T8 ballast, I am going to buy a workhorse 7 to run another set of PC's so I will compare this ballast to other electronic ones I have also.

One more question: Does anybody know a good place to get end caps for PC lighting? Are they about the same price as the end caps for NO lighting?[/QB]

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">J&L has the endcaps.. if my memory serves me right they were about 7.00 each..

Ok to give you a example of the different intensity levels of a NO bulb compared to a 96 watt PC.
1x on the NO tube resulted in 139.23 LUX @ 12"
2x on the NO tube resulted in 203.49 LUX @ 12"
3x on the NO tube resulted in 267.75 LUX @ 12"

a 96 watt PC resulted in 4391.10 LUX @ 12"

I am going to redo thease tests using a PAR meter but as you can see in light output it took 3 leads to get twice the power.. just hooking up 2 sets of leads doesen't mean you have twice the power.

I myself was going to run all overdriven bulbs onmy tank but I decided to rethink a few of my ideas and decided that I would only unes the overdriven bulbs for actinic. nothing wrong with using them for main lighting I think Victor is doing quite well from his reports, I just felt it limited me to much after I did my tests. if you are on a tight budget.. by all means go with the overdriven.. then when you can aford to spend more.. you can look at going to PC's if YOU decide you need them. the great thing about a WH7 is it will run both so only tubes need to be changed.

Steve

[Tigger]

Would VHO lighting be a better choice than PC lighting?

What kind of ballast do I need? Will a WH7 work?

[reefburnaby]

Hi,

I guess you have a choice Tigger. You can get a okay setup with some overdrive or PCs. Maybe the tubes will cost a bit with PCs, but it should work for your softies and LPS.

OR save up some cash and wait for some good used deals for a MH/MV/HQI setup. Sounds like you are in this hobby for the long haul, why not get a good setup and forget about having enough light.

Overdriving is good for those who want to get in to reefing with a minmal cost. Its like an Icecap, but half/quarter the price. PCs are good too, but at the current prices for PCS...why not get a MH instead.

- Victor.

[reefburnaby]

Hi,

VHOs are still popular because the the URI actinics. They are one of the best. Once you have one...you'll wonder why people are still use 03s. For the most part, VHOs are a pain and not very efficient. Expensive ballasts. VHO lifetime problems. Mind as well go with overdrive and use cheaper bulbs.

- Victor.

[DJ88]

URI actinics. They are one of the best. Once you have one...you'll wonder why people are still use 03s.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What are you basing this on Victor? Have you run the two of 'em yourself?

I have been running URI's for the last 6 months and will be going back to the 03's. Cheaper and are just as good. On an Icecap they are a slight bit dimmer than URI's and that is it. Such a negligable difference that the extra cost is not worth it. IMO IME.

[ 30 April 2002, 10:02: Message edited by: DJ88 ]

[reefburnaby]

Hi,

I have used the URI super-actinics before. I prefer them since they have more purple in colour rather than 03s. I guess it is a personal preference. Keep in mind that I use 6500K tubes and they tend to be a little bit yellower than Iwasaki MVs. Tubes tend to produce less purple than MVs/MHs. Maybe that's why I see a dramatic difference.

However, I have switch to regular 03s due to cost.

- Victor.