PDA

View Full Version : 12000k xenon car lights


dabandit
11-22-2008, 10:46 PM
Has anyone ever actually tried growing sps with these?,perhaps with a uv glass filter. I've researched countless threads but never found anyone who has actually tried. I even found a dimable set to help deal with intensity issues. Any thoughts or experiences would be greatlly apreciated.

i have crabs
11-22-2008, 11:17 PM
find someone with a par meter to check them out mabey

dabandit
11-23-2008, 12:21 AM
Anyone out there with a meter and a car that has H.I.D lights 10000k or higher lol? There are ALOT of people online looking for an answer to this question.

Black Phantom
11-23-2008, 12:22 AM
Very cool idea. I'm interested to see how this turns out. 12 volt fish lights:lol:

dabandit
11-23-2008, 01:53 AM
Upon research I've found 20w of xenon equates to about 120 lumens par with cp and t5. I've found a 110v 5 bulb model 70w per bulb about 1500 lumen available 6000k-18000k now I'm off to see how many lumen a 125w mh produces lol

i have crabs
11-23-2008, 01:55 AM
lumens and par are not quite the same for corals

spreerider
11-23-2008, 01:57 AM
i dont know why you would want 12V lights, you would lose efficiency as the power supply would lose efficiency as well as the efficiency of the lights and you would need larger wire guage as lower voltage draws more current for given watts.

dabandit
11-23-2008, 01:58 AM
Ok here we go a 200w hm puts out 20000-30000 lumen,a 25w t5 produces 2000-3000 lumen not looking so good for xenon hdi but i'll keep checking

dabandit
11-23-2008, 02:07 AM
In case you missed it I found a 110v model not 12v i've found a house variety for 60$ 5 bulb unit,emailed manufacturer who says bulbs available in the kelvin range im after though they cost extra. The reason im pursuing the xenon h.i.d is its suitability for a nano reef because;less heat,less size,1/3cost to buy and cheaper to run than halide and the car variety are water proof. Seems too good to be true so.......

Im watching a post here where a fella plans to use the car variety on a 5.5g nano.....but he's taking forever to update lol

ElGuappo
11-23-2008, 02:12 AM
he is taking forever to update! i have been waiting to see how that light works aswell.

mike31154
11-23-2008, 02:18 AM
Lighting efficiency has a lot more to do with what goes on inside the actual bulb. LEDs are low voltage DC devices too and they are more efficient at producing light than fluorescent fixtures, MH or bulbs with filaments. Not sure of the principle behind xenon, sounds like a gas type deal like neon or fluorescent. I do know xenon arc bulbs are used in high intensity searchlights for aircraft and they can burn a hole through concrete if left shining in one spot for any length of time. Most bulbs still produce more heat than light with the current they use. That's where LEDs are a little ahead of the game. I suspect that if xenon was a viable technology for aquarium lighting, some intrepid engineer/company would have designed a fixture by now.

dabandit
11-23-2008, 02:37 AM
Lol,they do have xenon lights for fishkeeping. Xenon is used in both halide and sodium lights in fact halides and sodiums are h.i.d lights. Im no expert in lighting hence this thread but the physics are the same,the kelvin rating is the same even the quartz sheild is the same. The xenon h.i.d however is available in as low as 20w making it ideal for a nano. In fact the bio orb uses a xenon bulb for growing but it is in the 6000k range

mike31154
11-23-2008, 02:43 AM
Neato. So the question still is why hasn't some marketing genius come up with a low voltage xenon solution for the nano market? Not enough sales potential maybe?

dabandit
11-23-2008, 03:26 AM
Ok my bad a 35w xenon car bulb produces 4200 lumen I know theres other factors at work such as wavelength,but as far as i know a lumen is a measure of visible light which would make a 1''35w xenon about as visblly bright as a equally watted t5...........and my search continues

sphelps
11-23-2008, 03:29 AM
I'll through a little info here from what I know. First off HID stands for High Intensity Discharge and refers to metal halides, halogens, mercury vapor, high pressure sodium and so on. The lights you're referring to are very similar to metal halides but use a slightly different gas.

The main problem with this type of lighting is the spectrum, the lumen output means nothing when it comes to corals. The blue color or higher K rating of the bulbs are created from a coating on the bulb, so the true spectrum isn't where you want it. You'll get better color and efficiency from other types of lighting.

In addition I believe metal halides are a cheaper solution and you won't have much luck finding a good reflector for those bulbs. They have their application but I don't think it's in the aquarium.

dabandit
11-23-2008, 04:08 AM
Ok im confused an xenon bulb is identical to mh but uses slightlly different gasses in the process I know that, but the k rating is a measure of color given off how does the means in which we arive to the k rating change its effectiveness? 10000k is 10000k is it not? upon further research i've found an xenon produces the proper wavelength at 430-470nm So weve got; 10000k+ and 430-470nm what more is left? intensity which is measured in lumen is it not?
Please I'm not arguing here,just food for thought,what do you think?

Reefhawk1
11-23-2008, 04:25 AM
I have aftermarket HID lighting in my car and truck. One set is 4300k and the other is 6000k. Both sets of bulbs are clear in appearance. But the 6000k has a blue tinge and the 4300k is bright white. I will have to do some research on how they get the light spectrum to change without changing the UV shield color.

dabandit
11-24-2008, 07:30 PM
For all you pecemists out there,the black sheep project here on canreef is powering a 5.5g with the car variety xenon. The sps he's keeping have beautiful polyp extension his is a new setup so time will tell,but to my eyes anyway it appears to be working very well. Thanks for everyones input

BlueAbyss
11-24-2008, 08:39 PM
I've done some research on the application of LEDs to aquariums, and this is what I've drawn from my reading related to light in general.

Lumens is a measurement of visible light intensity, meaning it takes into account wavelengths across the entire visible spectrum. This is useful when talking about task and home lighting applications... HOWEVER, PAR or Photosynthetically Active Radiation (related to PUR or Photosynthetically Useful Radiation) is the value that is important here, because this equates to how much of the total light output will actually excite chloroplasts in plants (including symbiotic algae).

So, what we need to know here is how much of the total 4200 lumens that a 30w xenon bulb (*edit* it was pointed out that a xenon bulb is the same as a MH but with xenon, rather than argon, as the starting gas [Thanks dabandit :biggrin:]). This will show us just how useful these lights are in reefkeeping.

I'm not sure if K ratings equate to nanometers, as all discharge-type lighting systems including LED and arc lamps produce 'peaky' light that when analyzed by a spectrometer will show the true wavelengths of light produced. I think that Kelvin is an overall measurement of colour temperature as humans see it, rather than a function of the actual radiant energy produced by a given light source. That being said, a higher K will mean that the general wavelengths of light produced are further into the blue end of the visible light spectrum.

I think that this could be viable, since you would have a hard time finding any manufacturer of 30w MH lighting systems. However, when you start talking about a unit with 150w of xenon lighting (5 bulbs), what's the point? I should think that it would make more sense to go with a readily available and probably less expensive MH setup, where at least you can get some sort of information about those all important PAR values that can help you make good lighting choices.

BlueAbyss
11-24-2008, 08:42 PM
For all you pecemists out there,the black sheep project here on canreef is powering a 5.5g with the car variety xenon. The sps he's keeping have beautiful polyp extension his is a new setup so time will tell,but to my eyes anyway it appears to be working very well. Thanks for everyones input

I'm hoping it does work out well, this could be an excellent application for these lights. Again, I've looked around and even 70w MH lighting systems seem to be almost impossible to find, and I think 70w over a 5.5 would be too much.

mark
11-24-2008, 09:05 PM
asked similiar in this thread (http://216.187.96.54/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=46363)

Here was a reply fr hillbillyreefer who tried them:

They are a PITA on a tank. I've got 4 on my 33 gal. You'll need a 10 amp powersupply for each bulb. You'll need to figure out some sort of reflector. The ballasts get really hot and burn out quickly. I think they would be better in a car as the airflow would keep them cool. Not sure how long the lamps themselves last as the ballasts all fried before the bulbs. The light is decent and the bulbs are available in various K ratings. I never did take pics of them when they were running, it's too late now.

Save your money and buy a MH, way less hassle and better life span, in my experience.

dabandit
11-24-2008, 09:55 PM
Ok I feel these are getting a bad rap so lets go over the pro's and con's;ok people claim too much heat in ballast my guess is their calculations were wrong and the unit isnt being powered right(capactors and resistors) if not put a cpu fan on it,next they claim wrong spectrum...wrong they are allmost identical in every way,next they say they cost too much well...for a nano only 1 bulb is required...motorcycle units cost 89$and bulbs start at 9$ or you could split a car package worth 120$ with a fellow nano reefer the only other equip required is power source which go for 30$+ So then they say what about a reflector or hooking up supply....well if you cant figure that one out you shouldnt be doing diy lighting in the first place. From the research I've done I've found;they are cheaper to buy,run and replace bulbs ,the bulb produces less heat and is smaller and has equal par ratings.

In short if you have a nano 14g- and understand electronics I think it's a great technology that will only get better as more people use it,but I agree if you have a tank over 14g mh is the far better solution........but hey thats just one mans opinion

sphelps
11-24-2008, 11:49 PM
next they claim wrong spectrum...wrong they are allmost identical in every way
Not sure where you got that from. The key to any lighting is the bulb. Have you noticed that bulbs for the hobby are more expensive than similar bulbs used for other applications? Even the cheap ebay bulbs aren't much good. I doubt those bulbs will provide the required spectrum over time, at least not in an efficient way.

So you can get a 30W unit for $90 which only included the bulb and ballast and you need to run some inefficient power supply, what about a reflector? Oh right they don't make one. Also you can get a 70W MH bulb and ballast for under a $100 if you know where to look, that way you get more than twice the output and a proven spectrum. Did you know my SPS corals get great polyp extension when the lights are off?

I just don't see any reason in pursuing this, sure if you want a 5.5g but not much of a market there and anything bigger would benefit more from a 70W light.

You're going to have to hook up a PAR meter and measure these lights before you can make any claims.

dabandit
11-25-2008, 03:10 AM
Are you even reading what I'm typing? I mean really......the info i got was from much research online on one site they showed the par values which is why I mentioned the par value in my previous statement. Go online and look your self at the values;par is higher than mh 70w,10000k+ and wavelength is 430-470nm at 10000k now go check your mh specs,the only place it lacks is in the lumen department which aparently does'nt mean much to corals. There you have it...data....facts..... please show me something to prove otherwise because all I've heard so far is conjecture or one persons failed experience due to faulty wiring PLEASE someone direct me to data that says this cant work,otherwise open your minds!!lol

sphelps
11-25-2008, 03:44 AM
the info i got was from much research online on one site they showed the par values which is why I mentioned the par value in my previous statement
Link?

dabandit
11-25-2008, 04:01 AM
Here under ''what is xenon" youll find an article explaining how the xenon uses metal salts (mh) also how it achieves its kelvin rating through burn temp like an mh the xenon with the coatings are 12000k and higher ,the 10000k is entirelly burn temp.

I'll find you those stats may take a while though,sad how you think im lying to you....oh well http://www.delonixradar.com.au/products/hid/xenon.html

fencer
11-25-2008, 04:07 AM
You get 404 error on the link....

dabandit
11-25-2008, 04:34 AM
Heres everything and anything you wanted to know about xenon,here youll find a graph comparing xenon to other lights including the sacred "cree" l.e.d
they explain how xenon is a micro mh that uses different gases for firing.
Check the graph and the paragraph next to it good food for thoughtwww.xevision.com/hid_products.html

dabandit
11-25-2008, 04:38 AM
Did I mention that last link sells parabolic reflectors for them lol

BlueAbyss
11-25-2008, 09:06 AM
Just a note, Cree claims efficiencies of around 100 lumens per watt also, depending on chip temperature. http://www.cree.com/products/xlamp7090_xre.asp This is only one of Cree's LED chip products, and there are many other great white LEDs by companies such as Osram (Sylvania) and Lumileds (Phillips).

I'd be curious to see the PAR value of Cree's cool white LED products. I like LEDs for the fact that they are solid state ie: less prone to breakage, and they are rated to last 50 000 hours, though the actual useful life will be less for our purposes. A big detractor from xenon bulbs is the rated 3000 hour life, which is less than both MH and fluorescent... wow, hope the bulbs are cheap!

I'm glad that forums like this exist so that open discussion can make us think of new ideas. If xenon can produce higher PAR values, perhaps we will see the advent of 150w xenon metal halides in the future... though I doubt that the aquarium / horticulture segment of the total metal halide lighting market around the world would be enough for manufacturers to start producing larger xenon bulbs. If indeed the lumen output of these bulbs is lower than our traditional metal halides, I can't see these lights making it as a replacement as they are not fit for the traditional use of HID lighting (task and area lighting) even if the light is superior in terms of plant growth.

I still maintain that this (xenon) is probably the BEST way to light a pico to small nano (less than 10g), at least if you want SPS or other intense light requiring organisms and don't mind changing a bulb more often than usual. I suppose you could use PC, but then you don't get those glitter lines that I so love with MH lit tanks.

sphelps
11-25-2008, 01:14 PM
please show me something to prove otherwise

sad how you think im lying to you....oh well
Just asked for a link, I never said you're lying but you haven't showed us anything yet except a description of HID lighting. How about a link to those par values you found??

dabandit
11-25-2008, 07:49 PM
I cant find the par value site yet :( the last link was just to show that a xenon is infact a mh using same burn temp and metal salts,also that last site was mentioning how a xenon produces light more efficientlly than an led by 3% I think it was. That was to put to bed the notion that xenon is less efficient than a traditional mh. I'm sorry I'm in the middle of a move and dont have much more time for research but im sure if you look you can find the par value site....or you could just take my word for it lol The results were this watt for watt the xenon hid has a slightly higher par value than a traditional mh.

My personal thoughts remain that with a little tweaking this technology is perfect for a nano reef 14gal and under where a 70w halide isnt practical. Xenon hid will never replace mh 70w+ because its the same technology just different firing gases that arent needed in a bigger bulb.

I enjoy debates like this,I hope no one takes me negatively just bothers me when people dismiss something without either trying or researching it first.

The fella here powering his 5.5 is happy with the light he claims no heat issues and looking at the pic his tank is glowing something fierce,his corals look happy and have good p.e. As for the comment that your corals have p.e even in the dark...well duh but try keeping them in the dark for a week
or two (the time he's been running this light) and see what happens lol

Whatigot
11-25-2008, 07:52 PM
I'm sure there were skeptics when MH and T5's were first considered for aquarium use as well.

dabandit
11-25-2008, 08:02 PM
Heres a thought for a reflector being as its a headlight........car salvage yard lol If your thinking maybe voltage is a concern being at the moment they are just car parts,check out the wiring on these l.e.d pico setups people ar loving;buck pucks and tigers and bears oh my lol

sphelps
11-25-2008, 08:17 PM
I cant find the par value site yet :(
Well keep looking cause that's what we or at least what I would be most interested in seeing. I already knew Xenon lights used the same technology as MH. You should be able to find the site in your browser history. It seems a little strange to me that you found the very thing that makes or breaks the use of this lighting and now "you can't find it" :confused:

I'm sure there were skeptics when MH and T5's were first considered for aquarium use as well.
Perhaps but it's easier not to be skeptical when bulbs are produced for the sole purpose of use in the aquarium hobby.

dabandit
11-25-2008, 08:29 PM
Arent you friendlly.I've spent a week researching this....think about it b efore you go accusing me of being a liar AGAIN Par value is the percentage of light that reaches the target after disspation via heat and such is it not? Now take a mh bulb and compare how far the light goes to a headlight on a car better yet look directlly into each because your begining to annoy me :)
Through my research I've found what I wanted to know and believe I've provide enough proof that this is a viable technology,if thats not good enough for you thats not my problem try google,then come apologise when your done

dabandit
11-25-2008, 08:53 PM
Dont forget im talking watt for watt 2x 35w xenon vs 1x70w halide I would only use 1 but I dont think you get 10000k less than 70w with halide.

Anyway im done for today good luck with your search,arent you staff im sure you have acess to a par lux candlewatt thing a ma jobby

hillbillyreefer
11-25-2008, 09:12 PM
Here's a link on nano-reef. The setup looks good on the tank. There is lots of debate on powersupplies etc.

http://www.nano-reef.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=140575&hl=xenon

IIRC they do put out 4000 + lm, but I'm not going to do the research again.

Now you guys have me wanting to get mine running again. Maybe I'll look into that tonight. More SPS in the tank now and it could use more light. I do like the looks of the xenon.

sphelps
11-25-2008, 09:46 PM
Arent you friendlly.I've spent a week researching this....think about it b efore you go accusing me of being a liar AGAIN Par value is the percentage of light that reaches the target after disspation via heat and such is it not? Now take a mh bulb and compare how far the light goes to a headlight on a car better yet look directlly into each because your begining to annoy me :)
Through my research I've found what I wanted to know and believe I've provide enough proof that this is a viable technology,if thats not good enough for you thats not my problem try google,then come apologise when your done
Yeah I admit I'm the rude one for asking for a simple link to help clarify your blunt statements. PAR, as already stated, is the Photosynthetically Active Radiation which is pretty self explanatory and the beam created by a headlight is a result from the reflector not the bulb.
Just because something makes sense in your head doesn't make it fact and just stating you've done research doesn't give credibility, the most important part of any research project are the references.

dabandit
11-26-2008, 05:41 AM
Hey hillbilly a guy who's ACTUALLY tried lol,I found a site that claims the 55w version runs the ballast way too hot and 35w is the only way to go,could this be the source of your ballast issues maybe?

Sphelps,thanks for the reminder I wasnt too sure about that,sorry i'm not able to produce links to every site I've visited in the past week,I didnt realise there would be a quiz.....I can see theres no getting through to you so I give up just cant get over you implying im a liar,I dont think I've done anything to warrant that behavior,anyway have a nice life:)

Everyone else I hope you learned something,thanks for tuning into my thread

dabandit
11-26-2008, 05:43 AM
It seems a little strange to me that you found the very thing that makes or breaks the use of this lighting and now "you can't find it" :confused


Are you saying this isnt being rude? get bent

superduperwesman
11-26-2008, 06:11 AM
Are you even reading what I'm typing? I mean really......the info i got was from much research online on one site they showed the par values which is why I mentioned the par value in my previous statement. Go online and look your self at the values;par is higher than mh 70w,10000k+ and wavelength is 430-470nm at 10000k now go check your mh specs,the only place it lacks is in the lumen department which aparently does'nt mean much to corals. There you have it...data....facts..... please show me something to prove otherwise because all I've heard so far is conjecture or one persons failed experience due to faulty wiring PLEASE someone direct me to data that says this cant work,otherwise open your minds!!lol

Actually it's just hearsay


just bothers me when people dismiss something without either trying or researching it first.

I think that's why we're trying to get a link for the PAR ratings that you claim... so we can research such information ourselves


The fella here powering his 5.5 is happy with the light he claims no heat issues and looking at the pic his tank is glowing something fierce,his corals look happy and have good p.e. As for the comment that your corals have p.e even in the dark...well duh but try keeping them in the dark for a week or two (the time he's been running this light) and see what happens lol

The light may continue to work great for him, and I hope it does... but generally I don't like to base success on 1 to 2 weeks

Are'nt you friendly. I've spent a week researching this....think about it before you go accusing me of being a liar AGAIN Par value is the percentage of light that reaches the target after dissipation via heat and such is it not? Now take a mh bulb and compare how far the light goes to a headlight on a car better yet look directly into each because your beginning to annoy me :)

ahah I love it when people point out something like it's a problem and then do exactly the same thing ahah.

For the record I'm pointing out the problem of hypocrisy (which I try to refrain from), not a lack of kindness (which I wouldn't claim to always be or I'd be presently following suit on the hypocrisy). Can't always be friendly, sometimes we have to be cruel to be kind

Through my research I've found what I wanted to know and believe I've provide enough proof that this is a viable technology,if thats not good enough for you thats not my problem try google

Congrats I hope the light works for you, but in the mean time while you continue in your attempt to persuade everyone else as to how great the light will work, the fact that you're self satisfied isn't enough, so unfortunately it is still your problem.

Now hearsay = facts = proof??

then come apologize when your done

Pride always comes before the fall and unfortunately it is generally easier to truly prove something wrong before proving it right so you might have a little work ahead of you... unless self satisfaction is enough?? But that's never any fun because it's too easy to convince yourself... I mean even crazy people don't think they're crazy :)

Finally, it could work great??? I don't have enough information to decide yet...?

dabandit
11-26-2008, 06:35 AM
Im new to forums and am trying my best to respond to every comment im sorry I havent met your burden of proof and I dont have time to meet everyones satisfaction. Im not trying to convince anyone,merely to educate myself and who ever wants to tune in. To you its mere heresay but I've seen it with my own eyes and thats good enough for me so Im going to leave it at that. Take my word for it if you want or check yourself

And I dont expect you to base anything on a week but its all theres been at the moment and its a good start. You may not believe me but I've seen k ratings,nm ratings,lumen ratings and par value combined with a sucessfull trial by 2 people who claimed the light emited was usefull thats enough for me. If you feel the need to disprove me thats your perogative not mine but I welcome it.

Cheers

Sebae again
11-26-2008, 06:47 AM
For HID aquarium lighting. Info in downloadable manual
http://www.aquaticlife.com/hid/index.html

superduperwesman
11-26-2008, 07:02 AM
Im new to forums and am trying my best to respond to every comment im sorry I havent met your burden of proof and I dont have time to meet everyones satisfaction. Im not trying to convince anyone,merely to educate myself and who ever wants to tune in. To you its mere heresay but I've seen it with my own eyes and thats good enough for me so Im going to leave it at that. Take my word for it if you want or check yourself

And I dont expect you to base anything on a week but its all theres been at the moment and its a good start. You may not believe me but I've seen k ratings,nm ratings,lumen ratings and par value combined with a sucessfull trial by 2 people who claimed the light emited was usefull thats enough for me. If you feel the need to disprove me thats your perogative not mine but I welcome it.

Cheers

All I know is that I've been wrong on lots of occasions... which is why I'm hesitant to be fully convince... that doesn't mean that I think you a liar just that you, like any other person, myself first and for most, could possibly be wrong or misinterpreting or misunderstanding something which is why we're hoping to see what you've seen. After all seeing is believing :) and challenging you is how we hope to get that site or make you see?? In either case we'll all be better off but reinforcing what we already knew or by learning something new and quite posibly by being wrong.

Like I said I don't know enough yet to know what I believe but that doesn't mean that I think your a liar.

StirCrazy
11-26-2008, 01:41 PM
Ok, personally I think Xenon HID are a waist of time and I'll tell you why.

HID cover all high intensity discharge lights so we have halogen, Xenon, HPS, MH for some of the common ones.

the order I listed are pretty much the order of intensity also.

Halogen only put out about 30% of the power as light, the rest as heat. Xenon is a little better probably about 50-50. HPS is better yet and Mh is even better.

Comparing Xenon against T5 is a waist, it will not have the PAR output but it may be brighter, but the point is it is a different type of lighting. compare apples with apples, look at a 70 watt MH setup..

the reason you can't find any PAR values is why would some one spend the extra money to create a car light bulb that will grow plants good. the amount of PAR light available is small and incidental as they are mostly blending for color not designing the bulb light output for plant growth.

I do agree they will have enough for maybe a nano tank, but for the price compared to a 70 watt MH I don't think it is worth it for the hassles.

Steve

sphelps
11-26-2008, 02:04 PM
So let me get this straight...

...par is higher than mh 70w,10000k+ and wavelength is 430-470nm...
...xenon produces light more efficientlly than an led...
So basically you can make ridiculous claims with no evidence to support them and everyone should just believe you because you're new to forums
please show me something to prove otherwise
And if someone doesn't buy what you're saying, for good reason, they need to prove to you otherwise.

But if someone asks you for the same you say...
get bent

Oh I get it now, everything is so clear. Good luck inventing the square wheel!

Whatigot
11-26-2008, 03:14 PM
Well keep looking cause that's what we or at least what I would be most interested in seeing. I already knew Xenon lights used the same technology as MH. You should be able to find the site in your browser history. It seems a little strange to me that you found the very thing that makes or breaks the use of this lighting and now "you can't find it" :confused:


Perhaps but it's easier not to be skeptical when bulbs are produced for the sole purpose of use in the aquarium hobby.

you seriously think that t5's and MH were originally built for aquarium use?
sorry to say, but these lighting systems were not invented with this purpose in mind, it took someone who loved the hobby to give it a shot and grow from there.

come on....

sphelps
11-26-2008, 03:48 PM
you seriously think that t5's and MH were originally built for aquarium use?
sorry to say, but these lighting systems were not invented with this purpose in mind, it took someone who loved the hobby to give it a shot and grow from there.

come on....
Never said that, I just said they make T5 and MH bulbs for aquariums, they don't make Xenon bulbs for aquariums and why would they when you can get a MH bulb already?

Whatigot
11-26-2008, 04:16 PM
and my comment before hand was that there were skeptics when MH and t5 were first brought into the hobby, your rebuttle was that you can afford the be more confident in those technologies because they are specifically made for aquarium use.

I don't get what you were trying to say?

What does confidence in a tech matter when it's already established?...lol
This is obviously something new and not comparable to your confidence level in already proven stuff.

My point was just that you can be cynical all you want but people were cynical about the techs that we consider common place now when they were first introduced into the hobby, like MH and t5.

sphelps
11-26-2008, 04:38 PM
All I'm saying is that Xenon bulbs are not made for aquariums and probably never will be as there is no demand. Would you use a street or industrial MH bulb for your aquarium?

No point reinventing the wheel, they already make 70W halides for aquariums and I just don't see the need for anything smaller. So unless xenon bulbs can be proven more efficient than halides in terms of PAR what's the point in pursuing them? Maybe for fun, sure. Nothing wrong with that but don't make false/unproven claims misleading people into a bad purchase.

Whatigot
11-26-2008, 05:28 PM
I think dandits whole point is to have more lighting options for a nano tank isn't it?

seems pretty clear to me and a good idea too IMHO.


There are t5's, compacts, mh, LED, vho, fluorescent, you're telling me that there isn't a point in reinventing the wheel?

seems like a lot of co's have made some major dough doing just that to me.

sphelps
11-26-2008, 06:02 PM
There are t5's, compacts, mh, LED, vho, fluorescent, you're telling me that there isn't a point in reinventing the wheel?

Not unless Xenon lighting is more efficient than MH which is yet to be proven and is extremely doubtful since they are essentially the same thing. If xenon gas was better they would already use it for other applications, this isn't new technology. I would suspect the main reason these are used in the automotive industry is related to firing capabilities over efficiency, xenon gas is often used in strobe lights and flashes for this reason.

70W halides would work great for a nano, maybe not a 5.5 or smaller but how many people are interested in that? Not much demand. A 70W halide has to be the least commonly used halide which is why they are hard to find and have a limited bulb selection, a 35W would be even worse and would be a poor investment by any company.

You can pursue this as much as you want and we're all entitled to our opinions but Xenon lighting is unproven technology for aquarium applications and stating otherwise is wrong.

Whatigot
11-26-2008, 06:32 PM
who was stating otherwise?
some people on this thread were WONDERING at the possibilities but I don't see anyone here saying that it's definite.

My point, again was only that skepticism of anything is the greatest in it's infancy and you may not be aware of this but there are entire communities online to people dedicated to nano tanks.

Where do you get the info that not many people are interested in 5.5 and under?
since you're so adamant about having a basis to prove stated facts?

I have a 5.5 gallon and I could name a number of others on Canreef, let alone nanoreefs or reef central that do as well..

Stating that not many people are interested in 5.5 and under is wrong and in your case, hypocritical.

If a 35w xenon bulb was proven to work for nanos, the argument could easily be that a company could slightly tweak their design and open up their business to a whole new market....sounds like a great business move to me

sphelps
11-26-2008, 06:45 PM
who was stating otherwise?
some people on this thread were WONDERING at the possibilities but I don't see anyone here saying that it's definite.
It been stated in this thread and I quoted above, statements where made regarding higher efficiency and higher par ratings than other bulbs. These were also stated and claimed as fact not opinion and no evidence supports the claims.

My point, again was only that skepticism of anything is the greatest in it's infancy and you may not be aware of this but there are entire communities online to people dedicated to nano tanks.

Where do you get the info that not many people are interested in 5.5 and under?
since you're so adamant about having a basis to prove stated facts?

What percentage of people in the saltwater hobby do you think have a 5.5g tank or smaller? 5% maybe, and that's probably generous. Now what percentage of that 5% would actually spend upwards of $200 on a light fixture? Maybe 25% of the original 5% which means your total market is only 1.25% of people in the hobby. Oh yeah that's a great business move, it would take 100 years to pay for the R&D.

dabandit
11-26-2008, 07:09 PM
How many more times are you going to call me a liar? The FACTS do exist I've seen them. A xenon H.I.D is a metal halide H.I.D allmost identical technology why is it hard to beleive their out puts would be very similar?

Whatigot
11-26-2008, 07:46 PM
It been stated in this thread and I quoted above, statements where made regarding higher efficiency and higher par ratings than other bulbs. These were also stated and claimed as fact not opinion and no evidence supports the claims.


What percentage of people in the saltwater hobby do you think have a 5.5g tank or smaller? 5% maybe, and that's probably generous. Now what percentage of that 5% would actually spend upwards of $200 on a light fixture? Maybe 25% of the original 5% which means your total market is only 1.25% of people in the hobby. Oh yeah that's a great business move, it would take 100 years to pay for the R&D.

again, you're going out on a limb here and assuming a lot which I thought from your previous posts was contradictory to your nature but now I see it's merely selective depending on if it's you who wants to make a point or someone else.

I like how you can state hearsay as fact, but if anyone else alludes to doing that, you're all over them.

show me the stats man and you have some ground to stand on, if you can't you're in the same boat you put dabandit into by your own words.

Whatigot
11-26-2008, 07:47 PM
It been stated in this thread and I quoted above, statements where made regarding higher efficiency and higher par ratings than other bulbs. These were also stated and claimed as fact not opinion and no evidence supports the claims.



see?

:lol:

Snaz
11-26-2008, 07:50 PM
How many more times are you going to call me a liar? The FACTS do exist I've seen them. A xenon H.I.D is a metal halide H.I.D allmost identical technology why is it hard to beleive their out puts would be very similar?

You may have read something that you take as factual but unless we can ALSO read it, it will not be factual to us.

Definition of FACT: a statement or assertion of verified information about something that is the case or has happened.

Show me the information and let me judge the "facts". Thank you.

Jason McK
11-26-2008, 07:57 PM
find someone with a par meter to check them out mabey

The Second post in this thread is the most valuable. I can't see any other information in this thread that is factual.

Just chill your talking about annoying car headlights as lights for a SPS aquarium, it's not the end of the world.

sphelps
11-26-2008, 08:14 PM
see?

:lol:
Nope sorry I don't see??

Regardless I was asking questions not stating facts and my numbers used where examples, apply what you think the numbers are and you'll still see the same results. The point was you weren't looking at it from a marketing point of view.

But seriously what percentages do you think are accurate?

Whatigot
11-26-2008, 08:37 PM
What percentage of people in the saltwater hobby do you think have a 5.5g tank or smaller? 5% maybe, and that's probably generous. Now what percentage of that 5% would actually spend upwards of $200 on a light fixture? Maybe 25% of the original 5% which means your total market is only 1.25% of people in the hobby. Oh yeah that's a great business move, it would take 100 years to pay for the R&D.


sounds like someone stating facts and not asking questions.
Look at all of those unsubstantiated numbers you threw up there to try and make your point...lol

Give it up, eat your cake or have it, don't try and do both.

mark
11-26-2008, 08:57 PM
little surprised with the childish attitudes of some in this thread

The-new-guy
11-26-2008, 08:57 PM
here (http://ncr101.montana.edu/Light1994Conf/5_9_Kofferlein/Kofferlein%20text.htm) is an article I found on the use of xenon lighting being used for plant growth.

There was way to much technical mumbo jumbo for me to read the entire thing.


There is no right or wrong just what works :mrgreen:

peace out!!

ps. my dad can beat up your dad. LOL

Whatigot
11-26-2008, 09:22 PM
little surprised with the childish attitudes of some in this thread

really mature of you to point that out.
Thank you for the info.

Was under the impression this forum was for everyone, childish included?

That article is a doozy, a serious read for sure but they definitely seem to have addressed the issue of xenon as a substitute for plant required solar spectrum but they seem kinda wishy washy in their conclusion.

seems like SPhelps could probably shed some layman light on it....
?

I'm definitely telling my dad.

superduperwesman
11-26-2008, 09:51 PM
ps. my dad can beat up your dad. LOL

ahah ahahah

superduperwesman
11-26-2008, 09:53 PM
some people on this thread were WONDERING at the possibilities but I don't see anyone here saying that it's definite.

How many more times are you going to call me a liar? The FACTS do exist I've seen them.


I'm confused...? Are you guys on the same team or different ones??

sphelps
11-26-2008, 10:23 PM
What percentage of people in the saltwater hobby do you think have a 5.5g tank or smaller? 5% maybe, and that's probably generous. Now what percentage of that 5% would actually spend upwards of $200 on a light fixture? Maybe 25% of the original 5% which means your total market is only 1.25% of people in the hobby. Oh yeah that's a great business move, it would take 100 years to pay for the R&D.

sounds like someone stating facts and not asking questions.
Look at all of those unsubstantiated numbers you threw up there to try and make your point...lol

Give it up, eat your cake or have it, don't try and do both.
I still don't get it. Those look like question marks to me and all those "maybes" seem to suggest examples not factual numbers. Are you arguing just for the the sake of arguing or what? And for the second time what numbers do you feel would be more accurate??

And if I buy the whole cake I can eat half and keep the rest.

Pescador
11-26-2008, 10:57 PM
I'm trying to digest that article on Xenon bulbs.
The ones they tested were long-arc bulbs which according to Wikipedia are "frequently used to simulate sunlight". The bulbs they used were 4500w and 10,000w.

Headlights are short-arc and more from Wikipedia Xenon short-arc lamps are low-voltage, high-current, DC devices with a negative temperature coefficient. They require a high voltage pulse in the 50 kV range to start the lamp, and require extremely well regulated dc as the power source. They are also inherently unstable, prone to phenomena such as plasma oscillation and thermal runaway. Because of these characteristics, xenon short-arc lamps require a sophisticated power supply to achieve stable, long-life operation.

sphelps
11-26-2008, 11:01 PM
From the article posted by The New Guy (http://ncr101.montana.edu/Light1994Conf/5_9_Kofferlein/Kofferlein%20text.htm)


Intro

While most discharge lamps e.g. mercury, sodium, or metal halide lamps emit a more or less pronounced line spectrum, the radiation output of xenon is dominated by a smooth continuum

the continuum is centered around the green spectral range (550 nm)

The present development mainly favours other lamp types, like metal halide lamps and fluorescent lamps for commercial lighting purposes


Results

The radiation penetrating the quartz envelope of a xenon lamp shows an almost flat part with little line structure in the visible range and a pronounced line structure in the IR spectrum
The heat resulting from excess IR absorption by biological tissues will lead to rapid destruction. Excess short-wave UV radiation will also be deleterious to living systems.
Xenon lighting, therefore, requires specially tailored filters which, protect living systems from these spectral irradiances.

xenon lamps should be ideally driven by direct current. This mode, however, results in a reduced lifetime as compared to AC driven xenon lamps.

Metal halide lamps have with regard to the luminous efficiency an advantage of a factor 4 as compared to long arc xenon lamps. This also holds approximately for the PAR region. The main reason is the strong excess IR of xenon radiation.
However, it must be considered that metal halide lighting requires several additional measures, These additional measures reduce the advantage to a factor 2 to 3.

As the IR output of metal halide lamps is much lower, an effective heat control can be achieved by economic glass or water filters. Xenon lamps require more sophisticated and expensive systems of optical filters and cooling techniques to remove the strong excess IR energy.

Despite the relatively low lighting efficiency xenon arcs reach highest artificial luminance concentrated to a single lamp and compare in this respect best with sunlight. Therefore, xenon lamps are unique, for instance, as a light source of projectors and monochromator systems. Furthermore, xenon lamps do practically not need a warming-up time but the full illuminance is available immediately.

The advantage of metal halide lamps is their economical adaptability to biological applications, while xenon lamps provide an almost constant smooth spectral output close to sunlight over a wide range of power.


Conclusion

Therefore , despite considerable competition by other lighting techniques, xenon lamps provide a very useful tool for special purposes. In plant lighting however, they seem to play a less important role as other lamp and lighting developments can meet these particular requirements at lower costs.

dabandit
11-26-2008, 11:39 PM
How does a 70w mh cost less than a 35w xenon I wonder? Anyway Im not talking about replacing a product morso filling a gap where no product exist. As for the greenish nm ratings disscused thats not for the 10000k xenon.
Come out with a mh bulb less than70w at 10000k I'll agree mh is better but at the moment there is nothing for a nano reefer to keep sps under 7ow just complicated and also unproven l.e.d system which is insanelly expensive. Seems to me that article said it was possible with a filter also the final par value of mh to xenon was pretty close did it not? Just speculation on your part now anyway lets see some numbers...and links...and a blood sample lol

dabandit
11-26-2008, 11:41 PM
I'm confused...? Are you guys on the same team or different ones??

That comment was directed at phelps,check again youll see what I mean

sphelps
11-27-2008, 12:53 AM
How does a 70w mh cost less than a 35w xenon I wonder?
Ballast (http://cgi.ebay.ca/NEW-Advance-IMH-70-D-BLS-Electronic-Ballast-E-VISION_W0QQitemZ260316136904QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_ DefaultDomain_0?_trksid=p3286.m20.l1116)
Bulb (http://cgi.ebay.ca/70W-70-watt-14K-HQI-DE-Metal-Halide-Bulb-Lamp-Reef_W0QQitemZ350126485586QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_De faultDomain_0?hash=item350126485586&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1215|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A13 18)
A halogen spotlight fixture (http://cgi.ebay.ca/Regent-Floodlight-300-watt-Quartz-Halogen-Outdoor-New_W0QQitemZ290271436329QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_Def aultDomain_0?hash=item290271436329&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A2|39%3A1|240%3A1318) works great as a DIY pendant, bulb fits into the same sockets.
No power source needed, all in all cheaper than a 35W DC Xenon (just bulb and ballast).

Anyway Im not talking about replacing a product morso filling a gap where no product exist. As for the greenish nm ratings disscused thats not for the 10000k xenon.
So out of curiosity how do they make 10K Xenon? Is it a filter they place on the bulb to filter the spectrum to 10K? Otherwise they would have to add different noble gasses to illuminate a higher spectrum. Any ideas?

Come out with a mh bulb less than70w at 10000k I'll agree mh is better but at the moment there is nothing for a nano reefer to keep sps under 7ow just complicated and also unproven l.e.d system which is insanelly expensive.
I still think a 20K 70W halide would work great on a nano, even a 5.5gal, you could always hang it a little higher and run a small fan for heat if needed. But that's just me I guess. Does anyone have a link to an SPS 5.5gal? Sounds difficult, the lighting would be the easy part.

Seems to me that article said it was possible with a filter also the final par value of mh to xenon was pretty close did it not?
You have to show me that cause I didn't get that from it.
Metal halide lamps have with regard to the luminous efficiency an advantage of a factor 4 as compared to long arc xenon lamps (Table 2). This also holds approximately for the PAR region.

Just speculation on your part now anyway lets see some numbers...and links...and a blood sample lol
I'm not sure how got speculation. All did was quote some of what I though were the key parts of the article. And I gave a link to it and it was originally posted by The New Guy (BTW Thanks TNG) and why would you want a blood sample?

Actually my biggest concern from that article is the IR radiation, what filter would you use to deal with that?

dabandit
11-27-2008, 02:32 AM
1. I assume they get the different k ratings the exact same way as they would with mh being as its the same technology but thats a guess
2.What to use as a filter im not sure,time will tell if one is even needed
3.It was a joke im trying to take the negativity out of this
4.The article said the mh needed extra measures which reduced its advantage to two also it said close to par value,sounds like the par would be close to me or am I reading this wrong?.I did claim the test I saw was close did I not?
5. What are you talking about with the halogen,running a mh bulb? efficientlly?

dabandit
11-27-2008, 02:40 AM
sry didnt catch the links about the halogen,I mean how is it more efficient to run a 70w over a 35w?

sphelps
11-27-2008, 02:53 AM
how is it more efficient to run a 70w over a 35w?
Not sure I follow, is that something I said or someone else?

Efficiency can be interpolated many different ways but in the hobby I believe we tend to use PAR compared to actual measured power used. So a 10K would be more efficient than a 20K of the same wattage. So a 70W MH could be more efficient than a 35W Xenon or different lighting source, but it all depends on the PAR rating for Xenon and of course bulbs and ballasts used.

superduperwesman
11-27-2008, 05:16 AM
That comment was directed at phelps,check again youll see what I mean

ahah I don't need to check again to know who the comment was directed at... maybe if you check again you'll see what my point actually was

dabandit
11-27-2008, 05:26 AM
Superduper,I dont follow ,those two comments you highlighted are unrelated. I think were all on the same side? didnt realise there were sides,just a group of people trying to find answers,though some perhaps myself included could be a little more polite about how they go about doing it.

superduperwesman
11-27-2008, 05:36 AM
Superduper,I dont follow ,those two comments you highlighted are unrelated. I think were all on the same side? didnt realise there were sides,just a group of people trying to find answers,though some perhaps myself included could be a little more polite about how they go about doing it.

No worries... I just find other things interesting while people are trying to find those answers

Whatigot
11-27-2008, 02:06 PM
Whoah...
I got moderated on for "personal attacks" relating to this thread.

I just wanted to put a final post up on this thread to apologize to anyone who felt hurt by my words here.

Sorry.

dabandit
11-27-2008, 08:02 PM
Three of us got moderated. Pretty sure I'm the only one who felt offended yet I was also told to stop the personal attacks lol No worries partner you didnt offend me.