Lighting Website Updates
- Thread starter Sanjay
- Start date
- Status
Herbert T. Kornfeld
In Memoriam
I just was at the Christmas party for the Wisconsin Reefers Society this weekend, where a french reefer, and his Mrs. reeferette, attended. The Mrs. is a lighting engineer, and an ex-student of yours Sanjay...took two classes of yours on lighting engineering at Penn St. she said. We had an interesting discussion on all things lighting...as she has the unique dual background to solve many lighting/reef questions.
One thing we talked about was HQI vs. Electronic ballasts. She seems to be a huge fan of electronic. I told here of my perceptions of HQI maintaining the color of my 10,000K bulbs better than the icecaps (a while back, when changing out mmy Aqualine 10,000Ks, I noticed that in comparison to the new bulbs, the icecap seemed to have more of a color shift than the HQI...and usually HQIs, esp with bluer bulbs, are said to color shift faster than e-ballasts. She broke it down into what we could see with out eyes and what the actual output/ PAR would be. She said that on HQI, the PAR might start out higher, but will diminish that much faster and by replacement time have a much lower PAR, sometimes only 40% of starting, compared to an electronic ballast which will hold its PAR longer...and may color shift more, but keep the higher output longer. The HQI w/ 10,000K might look like it has shifted less according to our eyes, but its output is waaaaay less than an e-ballast.
She also confirmed a theory of mine. T5s are a superior lighting technology...less draw, more PAR per watt than anything by far...but for some reason, corals, esp SPS, just seem to favor the ability to focus themselves on the point-source intense lighting of HID lighting.
So sometimes PAR isnt everything...which I know will upset alot of people who say "PAR is all that matters, not spectrum or anything else". I always believed my corals alwaysgrew better under bluer light...but hey...
One thing we talked about was HQI vs. Electronic ballasts. She seems to be a huge fan of electronic. I told here of my perceptions of HQI maintaining the color of my 10,000K bulbs better than the icecaps (a while back, when changing out mmy Aqualine 10,000Ks, I noticed that in comparison to the new bulbs, the icecap seemed to have more of a color shift than the HQI...and usually HQIs, esp with bluer bulbs, are said to color shift faster than e-ballasts. She broke it down into what we could see with out eyes and what the actual output/ PAR would be. She said that on HQI, the PAR might start out higher, but will diminish that much faster and by replacement time have a much lower PAR, sometimes only 40% of starting, compared to an electronic ballast which will hold its PAR longer...and may color shift more, but keep the higher output longer. The HQI w/ 10,000K might look like it has shifted less according to our eyes, but its output is waaaaay less than an e-ballast.
She also confirmed a theory of mine. T5s are a superior lighting technology...less draw, more PAR per watt than anything by far...but for some reason, corals, esp SPS, just seem to favor the ability to focus themselves on the point-source intense lighting of HID lighting.
So sometimes PAR isnt everything...which I know will upset alot of people who say "PAR is all that matters, not spectrum or anything else". I always believed my corals alwaysgrew better under bluer light...but hey...
Sanjay
Premium Member
Do you happen to remember her name ?
I never trust my eyes when it comes to lighting. Human eyes are not designed to work with PAR, we just do not treat all photons equally.
I think its time to run some longterm tests on MH lamps and thier degradation with different ballasts. I have tried to start it 2 times and had to abort midway due to technical problems with the lamps I was using for the tests (ends broke off on the 150s.. and one lamp died when trying this out on 400W lamps). May be its time to try again. It is quite likely that the electronic ballasts prolong lamp life.... I have some random data that may point towards it.. but I am not yet ready to back it up strongly..since I have hunch that it may also involve lamp quality.
sanjay.
jrandreassen
New member
Hi Guy's...
These threads are intresting, would it be possible to point me to a FAQ or definitions page. For me as a fairly novice in the lighting ralm it would be good with a primer for jargon and definitions.
Thanks
JR
These threads are intresting, would it be possible to point me to a FAQ or definitions page. For me as a fairly novice in the lighting ralm it would be good with a primer for jargon and definitions.
Thanks
JR
Herbert T. Kornfeld
In Memoriam
Sanjay, her name is Julie...cant remember her last name right now, but she looks to be about 40 (maybe 35, maybe 45 tops). Ill get a last name for you.
Sanjay
Premium Member
Here is the 2nd installment of the tests of 175W lamps.
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/12/review
For those of you huge fans of 14K lamps.. make sure you check out the Iwasaki Aqua2.
sanjay.
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/12/review
For those of you huge fans of 14K lamps.. make sure you check out the Iwasaki Aqua2.
sanjay.
Sanjay
Premium Member
A lot of the terms are defined in the first article I wrote on lighitng.
http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/s/b/sbj4/aquarium/articles/MetalHalideLamps1.htm
sanjay.
B.PETERSEN
New member
For those of you huge fans of 14K lamps.. make sure you check out the Iwasaki Aqua2.
sanjay. [/B][/QUOTE]
Sanjay
Do you know if Iwasaki is going to come out with 250 and 400 watt versions of this bulb?
Thanks
Bryan
sanjay. [/B][/QUOTE]
Sanjay
Do you know if Iwasaki is going to come out with 250 and 400 watt versions of this bulb?
Thanks
Bryan
Sanjay
Premium Member
No idea, ask ICECAP.. they got me this lamp and htey have better connections with Iwasaki.
The par of this lamp rivals a lot of 250s, I would love to experiment and see if this lamp in a lumenarc or lumenmax would be enough to replace some 250s. But unfortunately I do not have a set up where I can do this easily.
sanjay.
The par of this lamp rivals a lot of 250s, I would love to experiment and see if this lamp in a lumenarc or lumenmax would be enough to replace some 250s. But unfortunately I do not have a set up where I can do this easily.
sanjay.
B.PETERSEN
New member
I know, I can't believe a 175 watt 14K has more par than most 250watter. I will try and contact IC.
Thanks for the info and all your hard work on all this lighting information.
Bryan
Thanks for the info and all your hard work on all this lighting information.
Bryan
dgasmd
New member
This is something I have been eagerly awaiting for 2+ years:lol: :lol: I think you ahve gone above and beyong in the testing of lamps, but the biggest question still remains for most of us: So how long should I run this lamp that I know puts out X PAR to begin with?
I guess in all reality, many more of us should have PAR meters to do this right given we spend so much in lights and other stuff:lol: I'll continue to patiently await for the tests. As a hint, I think you should start with the 400 watt SE lamps :lol:
Herbert T. Kornfeld
In Memoriam
Nah, 250watters are more common, and DE would be the most interesting...but we all know 400wattSEs would be top on your list dgasmd!
- Status
Similar threads
