Been a long time sence we had a lighting fact thread

[StirCrazy]

Well I have some more test results. they are not from my tank but rather a person's tank that will remain un named (unless he wants to be knowen) anyways on with the Data.

Ushio 400 watt 10000K MH running on a M59 ballast
Left Bulb
12" = 402 PAR (7" air and 5" water)
27" = 146.49 PAR (7" air and 20" water)

Right Bulb
12" = 347 PAR (7" air and 5" water)
27" = 154 PAR (7" air and 20" water)

ballasts were changed to Son Agro ballasts
Left Bulb
12" = 555.21 PAR (7" air and 5" water)
27" = 316.1 PAR (7" air and 20" water)

Right Bulb
12" = 501 PAR (7" air and 5" water)
27" = couldent test at 27" this time because coral placement was shading the bottom.

as you can see there was a substantial increas in intensity and also the visual color was more white and more intense.

My plan is to take at least the 12" reading once a month and see how the intensity drops off over time.

Steve

[EmilyB]

http://jabot2000.homestead.com/files/emoticons/sleep.gif


oh...

just bumping your thread... :lol:

[Aquattro]

Wow!! I bet that un named person is really happy!!!

[ldzielak]

Anyone try the 20K yet?

[Aquattro]

Lee, if I can borrow a couple of Radiums, I'll test them with these new ballasts. Adam has one and Jeanna has two. I just need to trick one o fthem into bringing their bulbs here :D

[One_Divided]

brad, I'd be fully willing but you know how scetchy my bulb is with the chip..

Nice numbers you got going there..

[Aquattro]

Adam, you're bulb is kinda scary with all that rattling inside it. Probably not wise to cart t around too much. If you don't mind taking the risk, I'd like to see what it looks like with these ballasts.

[Delphinus]

Question, are the Son Agro ballasts indeed not a 430 watt ballast, is this not bad for the bulb to be overdriven in this manner?

Also ... aren't they a sodium ballast, I thought you need a striker or a starter in order for MH to work properly?

thanks

[Aquattro]

Tony, they are indeed a 430w HPS ballast. I am told that they do not overdrive the bulbs, but rather are the closest N. American ballast available for these bulbs. They do come with the ingnitor required for the Ushio 10k bulbs.
In all honesty, if my bulb life is shortened by month or two, I don't care.

[Delphinus]

I'm sorry -- does the ignitor come standard with this ballast (if you buy it anywhere, ie., hydroponics store), or do you have to buy the ballast somewhere special and they will give you the ignitor if you tell them it's for a MH bulb?

[Aquattro]

Tony, it comes with the ignitor as a package. Also, this is the same ballast used in the PFO 400w HQI box, so I know it works fine.

[Delphinus]

That I knew -- it's just that I thought the ignitor was something separate (ie., not standard), because the PFO HQI is described as "Son Agro ballast with ignitor" ... that is why I thought it might not be standard with the ballast.

Thanks for the info.

[StirCrazy]

PFO HQI is described as "Son Agro ballast with ignitor" ... that is why I thought it might not be standard with the ballast.

Thanks for the info.

read it again.. sounds a lot better for sales and to try justify a higher price eh :wink:

Steve

[reefburnaby]

Hi,

HPS ballasts slightly overdrive the Radiums and reduces their lifetime by a smidge. Electronic HQI ballasts are closer to the real spec.

Stircrazy,

Are these new bulbs or have they been running for a while ?

For comparison, my tank (90G) has 2 6500K T8s overdrive 2x and one VHO actinic (total power = ~160W and bulbs are 6 months old):

100-120 uE/(m^2*s) @ 24" - 6" air and 18" water
180-200 uE/(m^2*s) @ 19" - 6" air and 9" water

- Victor.

[Aquattro]

Victor, the left bulb is new, the right one is about 3 months old.

[StirCrazy]

Victor, redo your test at 12" from the bottom of the bulb to the top of the sensor, trying to compare anything else is useless as there are to many factors that affect it and even 1" difference can be a lot.. and his readings at 27" were about tripple what your readings at 24" , but what I would expect with your lighting is a very high short distance reading with a rapid fall off in intensity..

this is what my results were with overdriving. my daylight tubes put out more power than my PC's at 6" but at the bottom of my tank thye PC's were twice the level of the overdriven tubes. this is the big reason I decided not to overdrive, even though you an increase the power.. the intensity and potential for penatration isn't there.

I am trying to standerdize all my testing to 12" (thats between bottom of the bulb and the top of the sensor), I feel this is far enuf to get away from the over heating from the bulb and is a depth that is easaly obtainable in most tanks.

To me 3" is a useless measurment as well as 20ish " I just did thoes on Brads tank for a comparason of his bubs as they age.. I think his bulbs were fairly new.
the older one was 3 months I think.

Steve

[reefburnaby]

Hi,

Okay,

200-250 uE/(m^2*s) @ 12" - 6" air and 6" water

The numbers are really for information purposes since some reefers were interested in the numbers. The numbers vary because of my actinics -- they are mounted at the centre of the canopy and surrounded by two 6500K T8s. Since my PAR meter has less sensitivity with blue light, the PAR numbers have a double peak as I sweep my sensor from the front of the tank to the back of the tank.

Honestly, I didn't think my lamps would compare to a 2x 430W HQI. Keep in mind that although the lamps produce 1/3 of the Stircrazy's measured output, the lamps burn less than 1/3 of 860W. On the other hand, I am sure the specturm is much better on the HQI -- especially the blue bands.

- Victor.

[StirCrazy]

thanks Victor.. now I can see how they compare.. even though the numbers are not a real study and are for information, the reason I want to try keep some sort of standard is so people can make semi-realistic comparasons.. and see what they can expect.. I spent the last two years wadeing through conjectur and personal preference when trying to come up with info on lights and if I can make it easyer for some one else.. I will.

Steve

[StirCrazy]

Well I went to Adams today and did some measurments on his lights today.

His set up is the 400 watt Radium 20K and three 30 watt NO actinic bulbs

12" distance = 343.09 PAR
18.5" (bottom of tank) = 269.9 PAR

I think it was 4" of air and 8" of water (Adam can you conferm this? I need to know how far it was from the bottom of your bulb to the water)

Steve

[Delphinus]

Hmmm, so ... what I gather from this is that at 12" the 10000K bulb was better than the Radium even without the SonAgro ballast on the 10000K, and that is even taking into account the 10000K was further from the water surface??

But at further depth, the Radium seemed to "attenuate" (for lack of a better term) less than the 10000K, ie., the deeper into the tank, the better the Radium got over the 10000K?

??? :? ???

From what I understand, PAR = growth, but higher-K = coral colour, so I guess one neat experiment to try, would be take two frags of the same coral and see how they compare after a month, several months, one year, etc. ... ?

[StirCrazy]

But at further depth, the Radium seemed to "attenuate" (for lack of a better term) less than the 10000K, ie., the deeper into the tank, the better the Radium got over the 10000K?


No, the radium bottom measurment was at 18.5" the 10000K was at 27" I expect that the radium will be around 100 PAR at 27" this is why I am using 12" as the standard not a deeper one .. as you can't compare 27" in all tanks but 12" can be.. for PAR levels the 10000K is higher all around.. the difference is in what the owner wants.. do you like a overall "Blue" look or do you want a white look with blue highlights.. ect...

I am starting to develope my own theory on color of the corals and it seams to me it is more reliant on ALK than light (as long as the min lighting requirments are met) I have seen this in my own tank.. color increase dramaticly with no change in light but a large change in Alk, and I think Brad is starting to wonder the same things... I have always stated that I don't beleive that light is the major factor, just take a look at all the different types of lights on tanks that have wonderfull color.. there is no end to the combanation and seams to be no rhym or reason when it comes to looking at lights alone.. Hmm maby this is material for another thread / poll

Steve

[Aquattro]

, so I guess one neat experiment to try, would be take two frags of the same coral and see how they compare after a month, several months, one year, etc. ... ?

Tony, FYI, Adam and I do have halves of the same frag. I believe they are in similar positions relative to the light, so we can keep track of this experiment.

[Delphinus]

If you wouldn't mind, post your observations and pictures (if any), as time goes on. I would be very interested to see how things progress! Thanks

[StirCrazy]

Tony, FYI, Adam and I do have halves of the same frag. I believe they are in similar positions relative to the light, so we can keep track of this experiment.

which frag is that Brad, I just took a bunch of shots of Adams tank with the proper white ballance.. I could come set up for your tank and take one, then we have a even playing ground that will take out any artifical high lighting caused by the color of the lights.

Steve

[Aquattro]

Steve, the green tipped fuzzy guy....the one Adam thinks is a table :P

[StirCrazy]

well, I just got back from Brad's place whare I had the chance to test the 400 watt 20000K radiums on the san agro ballast.. there was some interesting results and ones I didn't expect personaly.

just for some background, the 400 watt Radium on Adams tank (run off of a normal PFO ballast had a PAR value of 343.09 @ 12"

first visualy, the bulbs looked a little more white running on the Son Agro ballast than on the regular PFO ballast

as for actual PAR Values on the new ballast the result was strange.. on the Son Agro ballast it had a PAR value of 356.202 @ 12"

yup almost no increase in PAR. the only explanation I can come up with for this is that maby by overdriving it a bit, it shifts the over all color spectrum up to make it a little more white. In doing this the blue is decreased a bit which drops the PAR levels, as blue is a large player in the PAR game.

just for a reference for people thinking of upgrading there lights, my Ushio 175 watt 10000K MH bulb puts out 262.14 PAR @ 12" so a 400 watt Radium would be a step up, but not as much as I would have expected.

anyways here are a couple comparason pics.. the first one is the Ushio on the left and the Radium on the right. the secon pic is all radium.

http://members.shaw.ca/islandaquatics/ushio_radium1.jpg

http://members.shaw.ca/islandaquatics/allradium.jpg

as a disclamer it doen't look that "Blue" in person, and I think this is why I have disliked all the pics of radium tanks so far, is that the amount of blue in them plays havoc with digital cameras ( I have to admidt that when I get used to the inital blue haze that there is in real life I actualy find the color pleasing.. so much in fact that I am debating on going this way myself).

The only way you are going to get a nice pic though, is to redo the heck out of it with a photo program or set the white ballance to cancle out the blue and show the true colors as I did on the pics of One_Divided's tank. The only problem with doing this is you do cancle the slight blue haze you would see in real life, but it does give you the "actual" colors of the corals.

so what other conclusing can be drawen from this? well I have a opinion that I will share.. for starters I do not belive going to a radium from another 400 watt bulb will give you better growth, nor do I believe that it will make your corals color up more, what I DO believe is that it is more asteticly pleasing while still providing enough light for good growth, what I also believe is that the large amount of actinic light in the bulb makes the colors stand out more and the corals that have Fluorescent properties it will make them glow a little more with the more intense light.. this would normaly not stand out in a 10000K set up unless you had intense actinic suplament that can over power the white of a 10000K.

anyways that is just my opinions that I have formed sofar and I will quite rambling now so you all can see the post :lol:

Steve

[Aquattro]

Ya, that's a fair amount bluer than it really is. FWIW, I'll be switching to this combo as soon as I can. It is the nicest looking light I've seen. It may not be for everyone, but for me, it's light changing time. Anyone wanna buy a 10k bulb? or 2? :D

[Canadian Man]

So I've got a question about par values.
So the 10000 bulbs put out 262.14 PAR at 12"
The radium puts out 343.09

Where does an Iwasaki sit in all this?

I guess I ask this cause when It comes time to change my bulbs, If I go to 10000 bulbs I would like to know the diffrence it's going to make on my tank compared to my Iwasaki setup.

Thanks

[Aquattro]

Jon, the 175 10k puts out 262, not the 400w

[StirCrazy]

So I've got a question about par values.
So the 10000 bulbs put out 262.14 PAR at 12"
The radium puts out 343.09

Where does an Iwasaki sit in all this?

I guess I ask this cause when It comes time to change my bulbs, If I go to 10000 bulbs I would like to know the diffrence it's going to make on my tank compared to my Iwasaki setup.

Thanks

that is a 175 watt 10K and a 400 watt radium, the 250 watt iwasaki will probably be around the same as the radium, but not having tested on I am not sure.

Steve

[Aquattro]

I suspect the 400w Iwasaki would blow away those numbers. The intesity of those bulbs is high!!

[Canadian Man]

Ok,
So on my tank currently I have 250w Iwasaki.
If I change my bulbs to 250w 10000k bulbs the par would be less?

Judging by the output of the 175w 10k bulb I would have to guess that the 250w versions output should be fairly high. But the Iwasaki would probably still be more?

[StirCrazy]

yes, if you are changing from 250 Iwasaki to 250 10000K, you are mostly doing so for looks.. the 10000K will still grow your corals so don't think that your growth will stop if you drop a little par. this also depends on what ballast you are driving your bulbs with.. if you use a MH ballast to drive the Iwasaki the PAR will be a little lower and if you use a M80 ballast to drive german 10000K the PAR will be higher.. so it could end up being that there would be a very minamal change in PAR after the fact

Steve

[Canadian Man]

Thanks Steve,
Yea that's kinda what I figured.
I am using just standard 250w PFO ballast's

[Aquattro]

Just an FYI. Darren ran 65k bulbs, tried 10k and loved it. A guy I know locally tried the same thing and hated it. His 10k is over my tank now. I think it's all a matter of what you like to look at. If you saw the growth I get with 10k, you'd be amazed. I wouldn't want any faster growth!!!

[Canadian Man]

You always hear so many diffrent opinions.
"Iwasaki best growth......10k good color"

I do like the color of my Iwasaki's with 4 t8 actinics OD 2X.
but I do like the color of 10k bulbs as well.

I suppose another example of a great 10k lit tank is MTDEW man's on RC.
2 10k bulbs, one single ended and one double ended and awsome growth and color on his tank.

reef_raf:
How often do you replace your bulbs?

[StirCrazy]

reef_raf:
How often do you replace your bulbs?

laitly every couple weeks.. and it looks like no end in sight :wink:


Steve

[One_Divided]

Wow those numbers are shocking! That tank is definately not that blue.. My tank is not even that blue.

"The only way you are going to get a nice pic though, is to redo the heck out of it with a photo program or set the white ballance to cancle out the blue and show the true colors as I did on the pics of One_Divided's tank."

Steve, I have a colour adjustment setting on my camera. I just take the blue down 2 notches and it looks identicle to the way the tank looks. I personally like that look the best.. I got some pics of brad's tank with the true colour. I'll post one later..

[Aquattro]

reef_raf:
How often do you replace your bulbs?

Theoretically, every 12 months. However, I never get that far. And now with Radiums, it looks like probably after 7-9 months on these ballasts!!

[StirCrazy]

Steve, I have a colour adjustment setting on my camera. I just take the blue down 2 notches and it looks identicle to the way the tank looks.

I am going to have to look and se if I have something like that also.. probably do just haven't found it.. can you find the actual name of the function for me Adam, the only problem I see is that you will also be decreasing the level of blue for stuf that is suposed to be blue.. but it might be so small it won't matter so hey.. might be the way to go..

Steve

[Shadetree]

Steve,

Not to be the pessimist but isn't there one variable that will skew all the results, water turbidity (Is that the right word?). Unless the water in the tank is approximately the same age, with the same amount of water changes, comparable skimming and equal carbon use, comparing different tanks is like comparing apples to oranges. The readings above the water will all be pretty accurate, or multiple setups on a single tank would be good, but the different tanks with different water quality would play with the numbers too much. Testing each system individually for long term drop off values is quite handy though. If carbon can "polish" the appearance of tank water to the naked eye, how much does that effect the light penetration?

Scott

[StirCrazy]

Steve,

Not to be the pessimist but isn't there one variable that will skew all the results, water turbidity (Is that the right word?). Unless the water in the tank is approximately the same age, with the same amount of water changes, comparable skimming and equal carbon use, comparing different tanks is like comparing apples to oranges. The readings above the water will all be pretty accurate, or multiple setups on a single tank would be good, but the different tanks with different water quality would play with the numbers too much. Testing each system individually for long term drop off values is quite handy though. If carbon can "polish" the appearance of tank water to the naked eye, how much does that effect the light penetration?

Scott

yes turbidity could skew results, I would guess that water that you can actualy see "organics/tannins/ect (would show up as a slight yellowing to the water) would only afect the readings by about 5% at the most.. and actualy solids floating in the water would be higher..

but having said that you can get a pretty close number in two different tanks if the other varables are simular.. I am not doing a sientific study, I am only comparing numbers to make it easyer for people to see the difference between bulbs in order to make a semi informed dission when buying lighting.

This was never intended to be a 10 million buck test, as I am not able or willing to start doing controled testing in lab like conditions
(nor can I aford it :wink: ) . I am going for aproimation which will be close for what I am doing, as for the most parts the difference in clarity of a well skimmed and maintained SPS tanks will be small. Weather I end up with a exact # or a number that could varry by 5 to 10% isn't a big deal as that will still be close enuf to make a informed choice, and to find the difference between bulbs.. Remember that brand new MH bulb vary by up to 10% in output from the factory

Steve

[Aquattro]

Scott, that is a good point. The differences between the bulbs tested over my tank I would think are fairly accurate, as my tank is pretty stable. Maybe we do need to measure turbidity with the PAR....

[One_Divided]

Steve, it is my wb+/-.. SO yeah, I guess it's just my white ballance. It has a meter:

Red---------I---------Blue

I just take it down 2-3 notches and it is prefect.. I find I don't lose blue where there should be blue.. I just sent brad a pic of his tank taken with those settings..

[StirCrazy]

ahh ok ya with white ballance you won't lose color.. you are just finding the right ballance.. so I have to find the right setting is all then... could be fun LOL

[One_Divided]

Yep I think as long as you adjust it manually and not with a sheet of paper.

Digital cameras have given radiums a bad name!

[StirCrazy]

naa sheet of paper is the best way but you can play with different color papaer for different effects hmmm gives me a idea....


Steve

[Aquattro]

.....hmmm gives me a idea....
Steve

Brad starts to worry...... :?

[stephane]

I have switch from 250 iwasaki to 400 radium on agro ballast 4 month ago and they are IMO the way to go for a show tank they have improve the color and still improve it each day at first I was tinking they were great but with time all the color shift from brown to solid puple,pink,blue....like crazy! The only coral that was looking more beautiful under the saki was a yellow plate so they are not great but amazing! for the grow I have not see any slower grow and I was with the saki for 2+ year the saki was only 6 month old when I have change for radium

I have try the m135 pulse start ballast and found it realy much more dim to my eye but no test have been done with PAR the color was looking similar but I could realy see shadow in the botom tank note that I have not try with a new bulb but only change the ballast on the old bulb. I have now turned back to the agro

I will keep people update for the bulb life but from now I have not see any noticable color shift or slower grow

Her is a good tread with different pic of collor change http://www.reefcentral.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=114897&highlight=radium

[StirCrazy]

I will keep people update for the bulb life but from now I have not see any noticable color shift or slower grow


Hey Stephane, in all likelyhood, noticing a shift in color will be very very hard.. unless it is by comparing photos as a gradual shift will fool you (its like a friend who loses weight.. if you see him every day you don't realy notice it but if you see him only once a month it jumps right out at ytou.) .. now if you get what Brad just went through thats a different story and it still doesent make any sence whatsoever :D

Personaly I am thinking of buying 1 radium bulb to put in the middle of my tank.. on each side I will run the AB's I think that would be a real nice color ballance personaly, but I have to get thoes M80 ballasts first.


Steve

[Doug]

I also think it will be hard to notice the loss of colour or par, in a bulb as it ages. The best test, seems to be a new bulb beside one of the older ones.

I run a lower "K" 400, in between my pair of Radiums.

[stephane]

your right on this but the best indicator is coral grow and color if they slow to grow and shift color I tink it will be more than time to change the bulb and then I will know I should have change the bulb two month early or someting like this

but from the difference compare to the m135 intensity I could tell you anyway I will be able to know at least when they will be there cause the differance was realy big

wath confuse me the most is your test compare a pulse start to the agro
to my eye it is a major difference and Sanjay test result are very different either? lightning is a realy comfusing part anyway :D

I suspect that bluwave ballast dont use regular m135 ballast cause the result I get was realy not good with a M135 I have never see those
bluwave so I can't coment on them the one I have try was a Venture m135 pulse start

how much cost that PAR meter do you have? it could be a nice toy to play with

[StirCrazy]

how much cost that PAR meter do you have? it could be a nice toy to play with

It is a nice toy to play with and we travel.. just buy the ticket and we will come test your tank :wink: seriously though they are close to 200.00 by the time you get it in to canada and pay all the fees, then you also need a multimeter that will measue acuratly in the mV range.. so I think I am close to 350.00 to 400.00 for what I have. (Hmm could have bought my M80 ballasts instead.... :roll: )

I think Adam's ballast was a regulat 400 watt PFO and not a pulse start..

Steve