Solaris Led lighting systems

[BeanAnimal]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10138395#post10138395 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by stimpy4242
ok so after pulling physics books at the library...yeah you read right...i can't believe i am doing this, but I hate being wrong....it very clearly states as the short excerpt that I posted before...that ONE TYPE OF ENERGY is HEAT...but ENERGY IS NOT ONLY HEAT AND NOTHING ELSE....energy comes in multiple forms....ONLY ONE of which is HEAT...prove me wrong...

Stimpy...

Again, not trying to be rude, but it is pretty much a waste of time. You do not appear to grasp the "big picture" here or the context of the entire "heat and energy" context as it relates to this conversation.

Several people have tried to kindly explain it to you. Proving that your "wrong" just takes too much energy (no pun). Your grasp of (or lack of) this subject and your insistance that your correct is very obviously not going to make teaching you easy. Therefore, even though you are wrong, convincing you of that is going to be impossible.

I honestly suggest reading further to the point where your book explains that HEAT = ENERGY...

...then go read the bucket examples again. It should become clear that not only does ENERGY = HEAT, but light, motion and sound are (of course) ENERGY (the other kinds your book talked about). Energy can be transformed from one state to another, but can niether be created nor destroyed. Please read the bucket examples again until you understand... It will honestly (if you really do like physics and want to learn) be an eye opener.

 

[BeanAnimal]

[/b]Bean - I think you meant the word "prospective" [/B]

What are you talking about


Okay so I went back and fixed my typo... Thank you for catching it... I could be a "perspective" customer, you know, one with an "angle"....

Doh... I will stick to my day job.

 

[stimpy4242]

I agreed that for this conversation heat = energy...read my previous posts...but heat is not the ONLY form of energy....why can't anyone of you admit that?

 

[PFO Lighting]

Spleen93
The 36" unit would be equilavent to 1.5 400W 20K bulbs. Each bulb runs 465 Watts when you include the ballast. So 465*1.5=697.5 Watts if you were using a metal halide.

697.5 Watts/440 watt=1.57 or 43% more efficient.

That does not include the fans you would probably be running if you had the metal halide units.

Pat

 

[bstreep]

Well, I'm still trying to decide whether to 1) buy a chiller and wait a couple of years for the technology or 2) buy a 24" fixture from each of them and do my testing. Frankly, I don't have time for the testing, and there doesn't seem to be much enthusiasm amongst folks here for me to go thru the effort.

It seems only PFO and Aquaillumination are interested in seeing my test & results.

 

[BeanAnimal]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10138592#post10138592 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by stimpy4242
I agreed that for this conversation heat = energy...read my previous posts...but heat is not the ONLY form of energy....why can't anyone of you admit that?

Good grief...

Energy can take many forms. Sound, Light, Motion, Heat.... Nobody said it couldn't. Back to the bucket example

 

[BeanAnimal]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10138647#post10138647 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bstreep
Well, I'm still trying to decide whether to 1) buy a chiller and wait a couple of years for the technology or 2) buy a 24" fixture from each of them and do my testing. Frankly, I don't have time for the testing, and there doesn't seem to be much enthusiasm amongst folks here for me to go thru the effort.

It seems only PFO and Aquaillumination are interested in seeing my test & results.

I think there is a good bit of interest. If both are willing to support you in the test, then I would go for it.

You may even prove all of us wrong

 

[bstreep]

Stimpy, we ALL recognize that there are many forms of "energy". It's just that you don't understand that, in our environment (lighting), nearly ALL (except the minor amount stored energy in our photosynthetic tank inhabitants, and that that escapes thru our windows) of the energy generated by lighting is converted to heat. It may be directly converted to heat (as in a hot bulb or a hot ballast), or it may heat the water as it passes thru, or heat your rock/sand/corals/fishes/snails/etc. as it radiates off of them. The light that escapes the tank, becomes heat when absorbed by the surroundings.

In the pump example, if you have a pump on a closed loop, for example, ALL of the energy going to the pump is converted to heat. ALL OF IT. Through FRICTION. Newton's first law says that without friction, once you fire up that pump for second, if you turn it off, the pump will spin forever, and the water will circulate for ever. Friction is the only reason the pump needs to keep pumping. Friction = heat. Whew.

 

[Drewcipher]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10138592#post10138592 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by stimpy4242
I agreed that for this conversation heat = energy...read my previous posts...but heat is not the ONLY form of energy....why can't anyone of you admit that?

If I remember this right, maybe this will help. As has been stated, energy can not be created or destroyed, but it can be added to or removed by work. In our case, work would be the light turned on. This brings internal energy to the light. I went a briefly looked this part up, but in thermodynamics, heat is simply defined as the transfer of internal energy from an area of higher temperature to an area of lower temperature. Heat is in fact equal to energy. "Heat" is just a word to define the transference of energy from one place to another.

Also, someone tell me if I remember wrong, but if you go basic enough in physics, aren't there only 2 forms of energy? Potential and Kinetic?

 

[spleen93]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10138591#post10138591 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by PFO Lighting
Spleen93
The 36" unit would be equilavent to 1.5 400W 20K bulbs. Each bulb runs 465 Watts when you include the ballast. So 465*1.5=697.5 Watts if you were using a metal halide.

697.5 Watts/440 watt=1.57 or 43% more efficient.

That does not include the fans you would probably be running if you had the metal halide units.

Pat

Pat - that all may be true. But I find it misleading when your page on the website states LED wattage of 300 watts for my fixture and my fixture actually draws 440 watts.

http://www.solarisled.com/Specifications/H4Specifications/tabid/73/Default.aspx

My assumption therefore was that the electrical draw of the fixture was going to be 300 watts at max. Perhaps that truly proves what they say about assumptions ... Oh well, my electrical savings will not be as big as I had calculated (I started with 2 x 250 watt MHs)

Spleen

 

[SWSaltwater]

RC MODS can we possibly split this thread into 2? One for Solaris/LED Lighting owners and one for LED technology debate? The non owners seem to give more opinion on the Solaris then owners here.

 

[RichConley]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10140453#post10140453 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SWSaltwater
RC MODS can we possibly split this thread into 2? One for Solaris/LED Lighting owners and one for LED technology debate? The non owners seem to give more opinion on the Solaris then owners here.

Again, the non owners generally aren't giving oppion. Theyre giving specifications.

I really dont think this should be split. The fact that LED technology at this point isnt very efficient is just as relevant as someone saying "my solaris is sweet"

 

[stimpy4242]

I own one and it is working just fine...i am done.

 

[bstreep]

I agree with Rich - I can't believe I just said that - don't split the thread.

Rich, should I go ahead with the test, or not?

SWSaltwater, how about some new pix of the SPS in your tank? You and Dick are selling the fixtures, so you kind of have a dog in this hunt. When I look at his website, there have been no updates since September: http://www.theculturedreef.com/solaris.htm . If they are working "fine" - why don't you 2 guys have some pictures?

Stimpy, saying "it's fine" isn't quite what folks are looking for. You buy high-end lighting to grow stoney corals. Period.

 

[stimpy4242]

Well actually i am just filthy rich and i bought it because i like the lcd display...period.

 

[RichConley]

bstreep, the aquaillumination one should hold up pretty well if theyre using those 100l/w LEDs. If they'll give you one, go ahead. I dont think you'll get a solaris from PFO, because frankly, its going to get spanked, and they know that.

 

[SWSaltwater]

I will try to get some pics done soon, I have been super busy over the winter setting up new tanks and still have not seen the "slow" season start. Once the summer lull hits I should have some time to think.

 

[bstreep]

Actually, PFO HAS agreed to provide one - remember, I'm paying for it up front. I don't want anyone to think I'm getting something for free, and that it will influence me in any way. He won't have one until August, but that's probably in line with Aquaillumination's release.

How long does it take to take a couple of pix?

 

[hahnmeister]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10140769#post10140769 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by stimpy4242
Well actually i am just filthy rich and i bought it because i like the lcd display...period.

Oooo, you would love that BMW 750i with iDrive then... thats a great big LCD to play with on an expensive car (that had its entire first year recalled because it didnt work).

 

[BeanAnimal]

Could you post more detail about your planned test?