T-5 Ignorance

[maxrep12]

When asked what type of lighting my tank had, I told the LFS employee that I had T-5.

"Oh, you can't keep sps unless you run Halides", he responded.

"Well, actually I have some sps that have been growing pretty fast that I'd like to turn into store credit here".

1. I don't have to run or buy a chiller.
2. I don't have to run fans.
3. I only evaporate 1.5 gallons per day on a 260cube.
4. Electricity consumption is extremely low.
5. Tank doesn't get over 79degrees.
6. You can get a tan standing near my tank!

I'm not an intelligent guy so help me out with this statement: "You won't get deep light penetration with T-5's".

My tank is 2ft tall. For about 3 hours during the day I run all 16 bulbs. During this warp drive phase of the photo period the the sand on the bottom really is too bright. What mean penetration? Are these folks telling me not enough light is reaching my sand?

I've had two tanks with halides - this time I wanted the advantages of T-5's. I have too admit that I have yet to encounter any of the drawbacks I was told I would have with T-5's.

Ok, here's my real question:

I have noticed that the lumens produced from a 150watt incandescent bulb are more than twice that of a 75 watter. Would it stand to reason that using an IceCap 660 ballast to overdrive T-5's would give the same results as far as lumens per watt would be concerned?

 

[Reefugee]

I can't answer your question, but I just wanted to say NICE TANK! Did you custom build your tank?

 

[maxrep12]

I just built the stand.

 

[maxrep12]

Okay, here's a shot of the "16 bulb salute". Small children should step back from the monitor at this time!

 

[mikester]

Awesome tank! My next tank will be a 48" cube with a center overflow, viewable from all 4 sides. Of course, that won't fit anywhere in my current house, so it will be awhile.

 

[Deuce67]

Yah. T5s are great! I got an 8 lamp setup on my 90. The only drawback I have is I cant keep mushrooms. They tend to shrivel up when all 8 lamps are on. Even if they are on the bottom. I have one zoo that opens only when 4 lamps are on but closes when all 8 are on. Awesome cube! Is it a 4X4X2?

 

[romunov]

I really like the amount of LR. Not too much, not to little.

 

[maxrep12]

Thanks for the kind words. The cube is 49.5x49.5x24

 

[Deuce67]

Maxrep 12, what lamps do you have?

 

[AJtheReefer]

awesome tank, keep it up!

I have the same question. What lamps?

I recently got the 8x54w Tek Lights and couldn't be happier

 

[AQUAN8TOR]

OOC, what is the stand made of??? It kinda looks like birch ply and poplar, but it looks too nice to be that......maybe maple??

Very nice. I built my own stands (with the help of a friend) out of oak, which I can't quite show off due to the fact I am in techno-free zone. I have no digital camera. I'm getting a scanner from a friend, so that way I can at least scan my 35mm pics.

 

[fred says]

Who made the tank? By the way, great looking setup

 

[AQUAN8TOR]

Back to the topic at hand, I was under the impression that MH was more efficient than even many fluor. systems by way of lumens per watt comparison. Perhaps some of you net junkies out there can help me on this. I spend WAY too much time cleaning other people's cesspools I mean dirty aquariums during the day. I wouldn't even know where to look for that information. I've read a lot of Dr. Joshi's articles, but don't really know how to go about finding out this info, or translating PPFD into lumens/watt.

Your tank looks awesome, don't get me wrong. Isn't the point-source illumination model missing in the discussion?? A metal halide lamp has all of its light coming from a very small gas capsule. A fluorescent light is very diffuse, even by overdriven T5 standards. The little glitter lines don't only look cool. Isn't it also true that the 'lensing' effect of glitter lines is important for sps??

I'm trying to remain open minded and not ignorant, here. I do use MH and have for years; I am one of those at the LFS that would have said the same thing to you, and I'm now feeling like maybe I should at least give the T5's a little more thought and research. I'm not about to change the setup I have. I get great results, and don't want to change. Call me stubborn. What I do want to do, or learn, is what SPS you're growing; acropora, monti, etc. Are you getting natural growth---enough distance between branch nodules, etc. I'm not trying to sound skeptical, just trying to be accurate.
Thanks to all out there in lighting land.

 

[delv]

You can probably keep any SPS you like. Start the SPS near the top (top 4 inches). When they start growing and are acclimated, move them progressively lower.

Very nice,
d.

 

[The Grim Reefer]

The Ice Cap 660 drives a 54 watt lamp at around 80 watts according to ice cap. I use 2 660's on my 80 watt lamps which are supposed to run at 100 watts or so. Pretty bright.

Supposedly T5's start losing their punch at about 18" but I've never seen any PAR measurments done to confirm it. My Crocea clam was constantly knocking itself off the rocks and I finally just left it in the sand. It seem quite happy down there.

 

[maxrep12]

Maybe we can get someone else to chime in here, but I believe I have read on a couple of threads that T-5's with their reflectors are even more efficient than halides watt for watt.

I am keeping acro, monti's, and milli's. If I put them in the top 4 inches - they would be bleached! I have already bleached part of one and have bleached some coraline algea as well.

One thing that I don't understand is all the refernces to MH and light penetration. I know that more than plenty of light hits the bottom of my 2ft tank. I would bet that if light readings were taken on my sand and also on a similar tank with MH lighting, we would find higher readings from the T-5 light. I don't know about the quality of the spectrum of light being cast by both systems or if indeed "Glitter" lines play a vital role or not. I guess more information will come in time.

 

[The Grim Reefer]

Watt for watt T5 are supposed to produce more lumins than any other lighting BUT, that is industrial data and doesn't relate to PAR penetrating through the water which is what we need to be concerned with. It stands to reason that a direct source of light like halides would penetrate better than fluorescent lighting. Sort of like the difference between a spotlight and a Fluorescent lamp. The fluorescent will produce light in a wide area but the light is pretty much faded away after 15 or 20 feet. The spotlight doesn't light up nearly as big an area but the light travels much farther.

 

[Fliger]

That is a fantastic tank & stand. You're making me wonder if I should go T5 only. I used to run a Tek-Light on (4x 54w) on my 150 and loved it. What pendant are you running? Tek-Light?

Do you have more shots of the inside of your stand? Or the building process? What wood/stain did you use? It is beautiful.

 

[maxrep12]

I'm still not getting the light penetration logic.

1. The T-5 reflectors are accurate in their light placement, they are not throwing light willy-nilly all over the place. T-5 owners will back me up on this one!

2 Point source!? Yes, I know MH bulbs have a very bright intense point source. T-5 have an infinite number of light sources that are much less bright. The real world measurement of "penetration" is how much light is reaching the sand throughout the tank floor. I have 864 watts of T-5 lighting, half of which is actinic. Most of the time I use only 432 watts of lighting, half of which is actinic. My tank is 49.5x49.5x24. If I was running MH I would need 4 x 250 bulbs plus actinic bulbs. I have had two other tanks with MH that did not light up the sand bed like this set up!

FLIGER: two 8 bulb Tek Light fixtures. Trim is pine and Birch veneered plywood with a whitewash stain. I didn't document the build, sorry.

 

[The Grim Reefer]

MAXREP,

Like you said, you would need 1000 watts of halides to do what your currently doing with 432/864 watts of T5. Reason being the halide is a much more focused beam so it will travel farther through the water before dissipating.

I too have a 24" tall tank. I overdrive 6 80 watt T5's and my Crocea clam is much happier in the sand then it was up on the rocks. My BTA's hang out about half way down the rocks turned to the front of the tank so I obviously get plenty of light in the tank for them. Still, I wouldn't put exotic acros in the sand. I keep my SPS at least half way up and they seem to do well. I had a frag on the bottom for a while and it did OK but obviously wasn't getting as much light as it could use.

One big advantage of T5 is how close they can be to the water. Could you imagine the glare you would get from 4 halides 8 or 10 inches above the water so you didn't cook everything?