armygreen11
Member
See my last post....
Lighting Website Updates
- Thread starter Sanjay
- Start date
- Status
H20Sidhe
New member
I like that guess - except that when I look at the performance data on his website, for 400w he used 4 types of ballasts, and for electronic ballasts alone, he tested 5 different brands, and for the Blueline ballast alone he tested 25 individual bulbs. This would have generated mora than 52 data points for 400w combinations.
Sanjay
Premium Member
Sherie
Lampsnow is now Hellolights. The ARO ballast is most likely the same one.
The horisontal axis in this case is meaningless. In fact if you want to know what it is - it's the id # assigned to the lamp#ballast# combo in that category. The data shows all the lamp ballast combos that I had tested until that point, so all the PPFD readings are at 18". The main reason behind that plot was to show that there are wide ranges withing a lamp category, and often considerable overlap in PPFD among lamps of different wattages.
I usually tell peple that if you choose a lamp with a PPFD of 100 (unshielded) or 80 (shielded) and have a good reflector system you will be fine with SPS and clams in a 24" deep tank. Again this is just a good rule of thumb.
sanjay.
armygreen11
Member
Guess I was right then.
TheMoneyPit
Premium Member
Sanjay,
What bulbs do you use on your tank? What bulbs do you recommend? I have a sps tank with 400 watt metal halides and I'm using Lumenarc III reflectors and prefer 10Ks. Thanks for your help and I apologize if this question has been asked and answered already. I admit I only skimmed through the thread.
What bulbs do you use on your tank? What bulbs do you recommend? I have a sps tank with 400 watt metal halides and I'm using Lumenarc III reflectors and prefer 10Ks. Thanks for your help and I apologize if this question has been asked and answered already. I admit I only skimmed through the thread.
Sanjay
Premium Member
I personally look for value ( Performance - cost). So I have used the EVC lamps on the Penn State tank and recently put in XM 10ks. You also have to remember that I am often experimenting with lamps - I ran the 4 EVC for over a year, and collected data on them by testing every few months. Am doing the same with the XMs.
I liked the look of the tank with the EVC as well as the XM
sanjay.
Sanjay
Premium Member
The whole idea of putting all the data I have on the web was so that I would not have to answer these questions.. you should be able to answer them yourself.
As for white, you will have to define white
I see posts here all the time that call XM's yellow...I have no idea what the aquamedic pendent is using these days.
sanjay.
hahnmeister
In Memoriam
BTW, I am trying to look into EVC ballasts...are they a sub of sylvania? Any other thoughts or observations beyond the hard data? I like their bulbs...their 20,000K in particular, and was wondering more...
Also, any plans to test this 'crystal star' 20,000K? Looks like a butt-load of blue...
http://www.jlaquatics.com/phpstore/store_pages/details/bulbs.php?product_ID=lb-h4020q
Also, any plans to test this 'crystal star' 20,000K? Looks like a butt-load of blue...
http://www.jlaquatics.com/phpstore/store_pages/details/bulbs.php?product_ID=lb-h4020q
armygreen11
Member
I'm very interested in seeing these numbers. Are you ever going to post it on your site? I just bought an EVC 400W 10K to hang over my new 30x30 square tank with a luminarc III and an icecap ballast.
TheMoneyPit
Premium Member
Sanjay,
Thanks for information.
Jim
Thanks for information.
Jim
Sanjay
Premium Member
I doubt that EVC is a subsidiary of Sylvania. My guess is that these lamps are imports from China... but you can verify that by asking Vince from Ocean Encounters since he brings them in.
There are a lot of new bulbs comming on the market... most of them tend to be private labels comming from just a few sources. My guess is that these are going to be very similar to some existing lamps, just have a different name.
I really do not have the time, energy or inclination to test every private label lamp. Now, if Iwasaki, BLV, Ushio or some other respected brand name puts out a new lamp.... that is a different story. Or if its a lamp that is generating a lot of buzz.. then I do not mind testing them.
I still have a backlog of lamps to test, and have not had the time to finish them. And now with spending time getting ready for my new tank, testing time is getting even more scarce.
sanjay.
Sanjay
Premium Member
So are a lot of other people
I presented this data at the San Jose talk that I gave a few weeks ago. For now, this data will only show up in talks that I give (I have to give the people that invite me to give talks something new that they have not seen on the web). I am going to wait until I get some data on a couple of different bulbs before it gets sent out to some aquarium magazine.Just a sneak preview.... for te EVC lamps that I did a long term test on.. the PPFD values were just as high (or in some cases higher) after 13 months of use... but there were significant changes in spectrum. So at this point I would still recommend changing these lamps out after a year or so.
sanjay.
armygreen11
Member
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7021408#post7021408 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Sanjay
So are a lot of other people
How did I know you were going to say that...
I totally understand though. I'll just sit here eagerly anticipating your published work. If it isn't too much to ask, what ballast were you using during your testing, and what was your photoperiod? PM me if I'm asking too much for public knowledge. I won't tell.
hahnmeister
In Memoriam
Sanjay,
Do you have any insight into how the EVC 250watt ballasts seem to score so high in PAR compared to IC? At first it seemed that they must run a higher wattage (which might mean faster burnout like with HQI), but then, after closer look, it seems that the bulbs running on EVC ballasts have unusually high scores in the 400-500nm spectrums, and not so much across the rest (like with HQI). Could this be a sign of EVC using an even higher frequency than, say, IC? Usually with ballasts, the boost is across the whole spectrum, but this EVC seems to boost just bluer ones. Ad to that, there is a bulb or two where the EVC even outperforms the HQI ballasts on. What gives?
Do you have any insight into how the EVC 250watt ballasts seem to score so high in PAR compared to IC? At first it seemed that they must run a higher wattage (which might mean faster burnout like with HQI), but then, after closer look, it seems that the bulbs running on EVC ballasts have unusually high scores in the 400-500nm spectrums, and not so much across the rest (like with HQI). Could this be a sign of EVC using an even higher frequency than, say, IC? Usually with ballasts, the boost is across the whole spectrum, but this EVC seems to boost just bluer ones. Ad to that, there is a bulb or two where the EVC even outperforms the HQI ballasts on. What gives?
Sanjay
Premium Member
I do not really know how the electronic ballsts work inside, and what the differences may be. I have been trying to get in touch with someone who designs MH ballasts but have not connected with anyone yet. It may be a matter of tunning... differences in components.. differences in design... ?
sanjay.
sanjay.
hahnmeister
In Memoriam
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=7080658#post7080658
I wanted to repost this post from PaulErik here, from ahc lighting. He gives an interesting breakdown of SE vs DE...
"Pulse start and Double-Ended (DE) 250-watt lamps are designed better than most Single-Ended (SE) MH lamps used for aquarium lighting in North America.
European spec SE, pulse start SE and double-ended MH lamps typically have the longest useful lamp life. The inner bulbs (arc tubes) are normally filled with higher atmospheric pressure. This decreases the rate of spattering during ignition/starting and blacking of the arc tube overtime. These lamps require a ballast that is equipped with an ignitor. The higher gas pressure requires a higher ignition voltage to start them reliably.
Probe start SE lamps are known for rapid light output loss overtime. The starting method causes a lot of spattering during ignition. These lamps must have a low fill pressure to start reliably. Probe start lamps are old technology and will be phased out in the coming years in the commercial lighting field.
HQI ballasts will decrease lamp life when used with lamps not designed for them. A prefect example is the Radium 400-watt lamp. This is a European lamp but is not designed to typical specs. It is actually designed for a standard pulse start / low current ballast. Using the HQI reduces service life significantly. This is not true for the 250-watt version. The 250-watt Radium lamp is designed for a HQI ballast (ANSI M80).
HQI 250-watt ballasts are built to an ANSI M80 specification. All DE 250-watt lamps are built to this spec and only a few SE lamps are built to this spec. The M80 spec is considered a world specification.
Currently the HQI 400-watt ballasts in North America are 430-watt HPS ballasts. These are not the best choice but operate European spec 400-watt lamps (AB/BLV/Ushio 10,000K and BLV 14,000K) closer to spec than other ballasts available in North America.
I was asked to help design an improved North American 400-watt HQI ballast when 400-watt DE lamps were coming out. Unlike the current 400-watt HQI which is a Constant Wattage Autotransformer which uses a capacitor for lamp regulation it is a single core ballast with two coils (HX ââ"šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ High Reactance Autotransformer) and the capacitor is used only for power factor correction. The first coil converts the voltage to 220 and uses a second coil on the same core to limit current to European specs. This is the same way a North American ANSI M80 ballast is designed. They had a few prototypes made but they havenââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢t been released due to a low number of lamps made to this spec.
A ballast limits current to a lamp. A HQI will overdrive probe start SE lamps (most SE lamps available in North America) and other low current spec lamps with more current than they are designed for. This causes the lamp to operate at a higher temperature. The temperature increase will also increase internal operating pressure. Quartz glass softness at higher temperatures. This allows salts and metals to leach out the arc tube and also increases the rated of impurities to leach inside.
This can be seen with some lamps. The getter inside the outer bulb becomes exhausted quicker. With some lamps the getter will change color. The getter is placed between the outer and inner bulb. The getters job is to remove impurities / mainly hydrogen that will alter lamp performance.
For optimal service life lamps should be used with the ballast the lamp was designed for. Using anything else will alter performance and these other combinations are not usually tested by the lamp manufacturers so the long term performance is unknown.
When looking at tests where the wattage was measured from the input does not mean the lamp is actually being driven at that wattage. Another thing is lamps are listed by the ballast wattage (the nominal lamp wattage the ballast is designed to operate). For example look at the Radium 20,000K (Blue) lamp wattage ratings:
150-watt lamp is actually rated at 160-watts
250-watt lamp is actually rated at 270-watts
400-watt lamp is actually rated at 360-watts
The rated wattage is what wattage the ballast outputs to the lamp (when used on the designed ballast).
Note: Most manufacturers rate universal operating SE MH lamps in the vertical position. Operating them horizontally causes the arc to bow upwards and increases electrical demand. This will also change the color temperature and usually decreases light output and life. DE lamps are only rated for horizontal use and optimized for horizontal operation.
Using a ballast that under drives lamps is also not recommended by lamp manufacturers. Metal halide lamps are complex lamps. They are designed to operate within certain specifications. When a lamp is under driven the arc tube never reaches the optimal operating temperature and internal pressure. This causes some of the halides to not completely vaporize. The none vaporized halides can react with the arc tube wall altering lamp performance greatly. The decrease in operating temp/pressure can also increase the wear on the electrodes. The getter is also designed to function properly at a certain temperature.
If you look at the manufacturers specs to most of the electronic ballasts imported today you will clearly see these ballasts are not really designed to operate all types of MH lamps which people are lead to believe. These ballasts are generally designed to operate pulse start and/or probe start MH lamps. These ballasts will operate a 250-watt DE (ANSI M80) lamp like a standard pulse start (ANSI M138/M153) ballast would. In my opinion the electronic ballasts are a great alterative to probe start and pulse start magnetic ballasts."
So it seems that the bottom line is that DE should be on HQI/HQI equivalent e-ballast, and that SE should be in e-ballast, or you will end up with diminished bulb life/spectral shifting. This supports a few pages or so ago where I posted that a lighting engineer (former pupil of Sanjay at Penn) stated that running HQI might seem good, but diminishes PAR by 60% within the year. She must have been talking about SE bulbs only, which makes sense since that is what she runs on her reef (She is against DE because something about the sockets easily arcing and welding the bulb in place...???...then again, SE has a rather violent end-of-life response). This also matches with my experience where my 10,000Ks seemed to color shift more when running on Icecaps than regular HQI when comparing to ones I had just put in. The e-ballast would in that case be worse for the DE bulbs than HQI. Hmmm.
Sanjay, I was talking with my doctor buddy Al (ReeferAl here). He mentioned that he sent you various bulbs for long term bulb spectrum and PAR testing. I hope you plan on comparing the DE & SE on HQI & e-ballasts and mix&match to get some results that many a reefer has wondered over the years. So many mysteries revolve around these combinations of bulbs and ballasts regarding long term wear... I cant wait for concrete evidence!!!
I wanted to repost this post from PaulErik here, from ahc lighting. He gives an interesting breakdown of SE vs DE...
"Pulse start and Double-Ended (DE) 250-watt lamps are designed better than most Single-Ended (SE) MH lamps used for aquarium lighting in North America.
European spec SE, pulse start SE and double-ended MH lamps typically have the longest useful lamp life. The inner bulbs (arc tubes) are normally filled with higher atmospheric pressure. This decreases the rate of spattering during ignition/starting and blacking of the arc tube overtime. These lamps require a ballast that is equipped with an ignitor. The higher gas pressure requires a higher ignition voltage to start them reliably.
Probe start SE lamps are known for rapid light output loss overtime. The starting method causes a lot of spattering during ignition. These lamps must have a low fill pressure to start reliably. Probe start lamps are old technology and will be phased out in the coming years in the commercial lighting field.
HQI ballasts will decrease lamp life when used with lamps not designed for them. A prefect example is the Radium 400-watt lamp. This is a European lamp but is not designed to typical specs. It is actually designed for a standard pulse start / low current ballast. Using the HQI reduces service life significantly. This is not true for the 250-watt version. The 250-watt Radium lamp is designed for a HQI ballast (ANSI M80).
HQI 250-watt ballasts are built to an ANSI M80 specification. All DE 250-watt lamps are built to this spec and only a few SE lamps are built to this spec. The M80 spec is considered a world specification.
Currently the HQI 400-watt ballasts in North America are 430-watt HPS ballasts. These are not the best choice but operate European spec 400-watt lamps (AB/BLV/Ushio 10,000K and BLV 14,000K) closer to spec than other ballasts available in North America.
I was asked to help design an improved North American 400-watt HQI ballast when 400-watt DE lamps were coming out. Unlike the current 400-watt HQI which is a Constant Wattage Autotransformer which uses a capacitor for lamp regulation it is a single core ballast with two coils (HX ââ"šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ High Reactance Autotransformer) and the capacitor is used only for power factor correction. The first coil converts the voltage to 220 and uses a second coil on the same core to limit current to European specs. This is the same way a North American ANSI M80 ballast is designed. They had a few prototypes made but they havenââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢t been released due to a low number of lamps made to this spec.
A ballast limits current to a lamp. A HQI will overdrive probe start SE lamps (most SE lamps available in North America) and other low current spec lamps with more current than they are designed for. This causes the lamp to operate at a higher temperature. The temperature increase will also increase internal operating pressure. Quartz glass softness at higher temperatures. This allows salts and metals to leach out the arc tube and also increases the rated of impurities to leach inside.
This can be seen with some lamps. The getter inside the outer bulb becomes exhausted quicker. With some lamps the getter will change color. The getter is placed between the outer and inner bulb. The getters job is to remove impurities / mainly hydrogen that will alter lamp performance.
For optimal service life lamps should be used with the ballast the lamp was designed for. Using anything else will alter performance and these other combinations are not usually tested by the lamp manufacturers so the long term performance is unknown.
When looking at tests where the wattage was measured from the input does not mean the lamp is actually being driven at that wattage. Another thing is lamps are listed by the ballast wattage (the nominal lamp wattage the ballast is designed to operate). For example look at the Radium 20,000K (Blue) lamp wattage ratings:
150-watt lamp is actually rated at 160-watts
250-watt lamp is actually rated at 270-watts
400-watt lamp is actually rated at 360-watts
The rated wattage is what wattage the ballast outputs to the lamp (when used on the designed ballast).
Note: Most manufacturers rate universal operating SE MH lamps in the vertical position. Operating them horizontally causes the arc to bow upwards and increases electrical demand. This will also change the color temperature and usually decreases light output and life. DE lamps are only rated for horizontal use and optimized for horizontal operation.
Using a ballast that under drives lamps is also not recommended by lamp manufacturers. Metal halide lamps are complex lamps. They are designed to operate within certain specifications. When a lamp is under driven the arc tube never reaches the optimal operating temperature and internal pressure. This causes some of the halides to not completely vaporize. The none vaporized halides can react with the arc tube wall altering lamp performance greatly. The decrease in operating temp/pressure can also increase the wear on the electrodes. The getter is also designed to function properly at a certain temperature.
If you look at the manufacturers specs to most of the electronic ballasts imported today you will clearly see these ballasts are not really designed to operate all types of MH lamps which people are lead to believe. These ballasts are generally designed to operate pulse start and/or probe start MH lamps. These ballasts will operate a 250-watt DE (ANSI M80) lamp like a standard pulse start (ANSI M138/M153) ballast would. In my opinion the electronic ballasts are a great alterative to probe start and pulse start magnetic ballasts."
So it seems that the bottom line is that DE should be on HQI/HQI equivalent e-ballast, and that SE should be in e-ballast, or you will end up with diminished bulb life/spectral shifting. This supports a few pages or so ago where I posted that a lighting engineer (former pupil of Sanjay at Penn) stated that running HQI might seem good, but diminishes PAR by 60% within the year. She must have been talking about SE bulbs only, which makes sense since that is what she runs on her reef (She is against DE because something about the sockets easily arcing and welding the bulb in place...???...then again, SE has a rather violent end-of-life response). This also matches with my experience where my 10,000Ks seemed to color shift more when running on Icecaps than regular HQI when comparing to ones I had just put in. The e-ballast would in that case be worse for the DE bulbs than HQI. Hmmm.
Sanjay, I was talking with my doctor buddy Al (ReeferAl here). He mentioned that he sent you various bulbs for long term bulb spectrum and PAR testing. I hope you plan on comparing the DE & SE on HQI & e-ballasts and mix&match to get some results that many a reefer has wondered over the years. So many mysteries revolve around these combinations of bulbs and ballasts regarding long term wear... I cant wait for concrete evidence!!!
- Status
Similar threads
