150 watt DE MH lamps compared

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by electric130
the 10k's look greener and yellower than an Iwasaki!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ouch.
LOL :lol:
 
electric130 said:
i have a 175w version collecting dust in my garage if you want it.
If my freshwater plants ever recover from burning in saltyseaman's Osram 6000k's I'll let you know :D
 
Started burning in a new Coralvue 20K and a new XM 20K next to each other. They are both driven by M81's within the same AB aquastarlight fixture. Color and intensity look identical at the moment.

Looks like the box and sensor are stable so we might actually get this on the road with results this weekend. :)

Pics are going to be garbage until I get the Coolpix 4500 repaired :(

Hope New Years treated everyone well.
 
kmu said:
Will there be another thread with the result or they will be posted here?
Good question, do you folks have a preference?

I guess, results will either be in this thread or linked to make it easy to find.

I'll be talking to the mods in a few days or so about formatting, etc.
 
Well Im a new guy here .... and I just bought a Aquastarlight 2x150 .... guess i best pay attention here.

Just tagging along and showing appreciaiton for all the work and support.
 
traveller7: you can start a new thread with the results and pictures posted, and keep updating it with new bulb tests and ballasts, that way people will see the results faster and not get caught loosing valuable information in between the pages if the thread gets too long, which will probably get...

Just my $.02
 
kmu,

I agree, that either it is a new thread or an edit to post number one on this thread ;)

Depends on the mood of the moderators on the days I ask :)

Thanks for the input.
 
i would say a new thread that shows all the results and pics that is locked so that people can't post there and stuff gets lost in 40 pages of posts. then people can come to this thread or another thread to discuss results. make sense?
 
I beleive to do the right readings, it must be done with SpectaRaiomete and full lab equipment.
May be should read the energy under water.
What do you guys think.
 
I think that should be a general idea to the hobbiest to understand the light Lamp etc. and what spectrum their lighting is giving them.
Once the hobbiest understand what spectrum they are targeting. They can gear their light toward what they really want for the animals.
This way, the hobby can be more enjoyable for all.
 
is there any data on these lights as to "how" much light penetrates to "what" depth, there should be an easy equation, given slight variability due to particulates
 
Yu L LI said:
I think that should be a general idea to the hobbiest to understand the light Lamp etc. and what spectrum their lighting is giving them.
Once the hobbiest understand what spectrum they are targeting. They can gear their light toward what they really want for the animals.
This way, the hobby can be more enjoyable for all.
Very true, with the exception of substantial differences in the performance between ballasts and bulbs of similar spectrum. Not to mention the vast differences in reflector efficiency, etc.

In the best of all worlds you would have data to determine, spectrum, PAR, reflector coverage, reflector efficiency, ballast efficiency, and ballast/bulb interaction. This test is only 2 or 3 of those pieces. Spectrum has been tested by Sanjay Joshi in the past and I'll be offering the bulbs I own for testing as his time allows.

Hope that helps.
 
Thanks ;>)

Update: I have been taking measurements and playing with the burned in bulbs to confirm the process of bulb and ballast changes do not create deviations in measurement. It appears the new box bottom solved a previous problem with sensor alignment and stability. Looks like it is going to perform properly.
 
Back
Top