Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board  

Go Back   Canreef Aquatics Bulletin Board > General > Reef

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-05-2004, 03:23 PM
Son Of Skyline's Avatar
Son Of Skyline Son Of Skyline is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 639
Son Of Skyline is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Son Of Skyline Send a message via MSN to Son Of Skyline
Default Things to watch for when changing lighting?

I'm thinking of swapping my 400w Radiums back to 250w Iwasakis for awhile to see if I can increase growth rates. Is there anything to watch out for, or little things to do to prevent any unforseen problems? Should I decrease my photoperiod an hour or so to acclimate the corals back to the higher lighting? Or am I just being paranoid and have nothing to worry about or nothing I need to change?

Thanks in advance!
__________________
-Mason
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-05-2004, 04:06 PM
Namscam Namscam is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 261
Namscam is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Namscam Send a message via MSN to Namscam Send a message via Yahoo to Namscam
Default

I think you should decrease your photoperiod and add like one hour or so every week to accilimate your corals. Maybe start of at like 6 hours....I dont know if it is necessary to do this because you are decreasin intensity since this is mostly done when intensity is increased, but i would do it just as a precaution
__________________
Richie
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-05-2004, 04:08 PM
Aquattro's Avatar
Aquattro Aquattro is offline
Just a guy..
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 18,053
Aquattro is a jewel in the roughAquattro is a jewel in the roughAquattro is a jewel in the roughAquattro is a jewel in the rough
Default

Mason, going to Iwasakis from Radiums will likely require some adjustment. Either raise the lights and slowly lower them, or provide layered screening that you can remove slowly (over a week should be enough).
Your BTA will also likely object and hide for a little while, so watch out for unwanted migration into pumps, etc.
__________________
Brad
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-05-2004, 04:13 PM
Son Of Skyline's Avatar
Son Of Skyline Son Of Skyline is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 639
Son Of Skyline is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Son Of Skyline Send a message via MSN to Son Of Skyline
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by reef_raf
Mason, going to Iwasakis from Radiums will likely require some adjustment. Either raise the lights and slowly lower them, or provide layered screening that you can remove slowly (over a week should be enough).
Your BTA will also likely object and hide for a little while, so watch out for unwanted migration into pumps, etc.

Thanks Brad. Didn't realize the effect it might have on the btas. I'll watch out for them.

I can't move the bulbs up or down so I'll probably try to rig up some screening over the bulbs. Would simply reducing the photoperiod have the same effect?


Namscam, actually going to 250w Iwasakis from 400w Radiums in an increase in lighting. Although the Radiums use high wattage, they're actually not as bright as the 6500k Iwasaki
__________________
-Mason
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-05-2004, 04:19 PM
Aquattro's Avatar
Aquattro Aquattro is offline
Just a guy..
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 18,053
Aquattro is a jewel in the roughAquattro is a jewel in the roughAquattro is a jewel in the roughAquattro is a jewel in the rough
Default

Also, reducing the photoperiod may not be enough. If the intensity levels cause too much photosynthesis in the short period, too much O2 can be produced within the tissues and damage can occur. Enzymes normally control this, but if O2 production is greater than enzyme response, you lose tissue and or zooxanthallae. Rigging the timer to go on and off every hour with an increase in the on period is a better way. the layered screen thing is good also.
__________________
Brad
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-05-2004, 05:43 PM
Namscam Namscam is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 261
Namscam is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Namscam Send a message via MSN to Namscam Send a message via Yahoo to Namscam
Default

it may be brighter but i m talking about par value for intensity because dont 400w have higher par value than 250w
__________________
Richie
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-05-2004, 05:45 PM
Aquattro's Avatar
Aquattro Aquattro is offline
Just a guy..
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 18,053
Aquattro is a jewel in the roughAquattro is a jewel in the roughAquattro is a jewel in the roughAquattro is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Namscam
it may be brighter but i m talking about par value for intensity because dont 400w have higher par value than 250w
Sorry, you're wrong. A 250w Iwasaki has a lot more par than a 400w Radium.
__________________
Brad
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-05-2004, 05:51 PM
apepper apepper is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Qualicum
Posts: 78
apepper is on a distinguished road
Default

If you look at the PAR of a 250W Iwasaki vs a 250W Radium on Joe Burgers MH test site you will see that the Iwasaki has about twice the PAR of the Radium for most ballasts. So a 400W radium is probably close to the 250W Iwasaki assuming you will get about 1.6 times the output extrapolating from the 250 Radium to the 400W Radium. The Iwasaki may still be higher with most ballasts.

http://www.cnidarianreef.com/
__________________
Alex
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-05-2004, 05:57 PM
Aquattro's Avatar
Aquattro Aquattro is offline
Just a guy..
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 18,053
Aquattro is a jewel in the roughAquattro is a jewel in the roughAquattro is a jewel in the roughAquattro is a jewel in the rough
Default

Sorry, the 400w radium on the HQI ballast had about 500 PAR, based on my system. Steve can confirm, but it may be lower. A Iwasaki on a HQI ballast reads 969 PAR, almost double a 400w Radium on comparable ballast. Even on the std. PFO, it measures over 700 PAR, still way above a HQI driven Radium. That radium was also 2 weeks old at time of testing. After a couple of months, the PAR was likely closer to 300.
__________________
Brad
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-05-2004, 06:01 PM
Son Of Skyline's Avatar
Son Of Skyline Son Of Skyline is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 639
Son Of Skyline is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Son Of Skyline Send a message via MSN to Son Of Skyline
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by reef_raf
Sorry, the 400w radium on the HQI ballast had about 500 PAR, based on my system. Steve can confirm, but it may be lower. A Iwasaki on a HQI ballast reads 969 PAR, almost double a 400w Radium on comparable ballast. Even on the std. PFO, it measures over 700 PAR, still way above a HQI driven Radium. That radium was also 2 weeks old at time of testing. After a couple of months, the PAR was likely closer to 300.

Brad, are these numbers comparing the 250w Iwasaki vs the 400w Radium, or the 400w Iwasaki vs the 400w Radium?
__________________
-Mason
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.