T5's: A cautionary note

[FastUno]

I too was looking for some official T5 info to much avail.

Maybe we can inspire Sanjay to due some tests for us? I would be willing to send him my bulbs, heck I can even send him my fixtures to test out.

I think it will be more difficult to test T5's, since there are many more reflectors, bulbs, bulb combos...etc to consider. Even if you do a per bulb testing, there are many more factors to consider when actually using them.

 

[RGibson]

FastUno Sanjay has the T5 bulbs and the IceCap ballast to test and has had them for some time .You could ask how the test came out.

 

[FastUno]

Good to know, I will inquire.

 

[Warnberg]

I found this info on T5 bulbs.... but it doesn't tell you what ballast they are being briven by.... but nice info on all the differant T5 bulbs.

http://www.specialty-lights.com/t5ho.html

 

[The Grim Reefer]

The reason I am leaning towards the EVC is that spike just below 420nm. It seems to me that should fluoresce things pretty good.

This is what I am really after, the Hamilton 14K's. I checked with Tom from Aquactinic & he said that he could get it for me, only drawback would be that I would have to wait another week for the order to come in. So I decided to give the XM's a try.

http://www.reeflightinginfo.arvixe....avelength=400&Maxwavelength=700&Submit=Submit

 

[Obi-dad]

In my T5 system (4 bulbs on Icecap, 2 on Triad) I got over 300 on the PAR meter on the sandbed - 17" down. Over 700 at about 5" down. Bright.

 

[Codeman00]

obi-dad, How far are your lights off of the water?

 

[Obi-dad]

About 3 inches, no shield. I do have to wipe down the bulbs and reflectors occaisionally due to the salt accumulation.

 

[Luis A M]

Thanks for the reply. I was going to sell the PC lights and go straight T5.

Can somebody enlighten me (spun intended. )about the relatives pros and cons of PC compared to T5?.I couldnÃ"šÃ‚´t find any comparative study.

I see that a 55W PC is about the same length of a 24W T5.Does it mean that PC give about twice as much light?

 

[Codeman00]

Someone else can explain..but a T5 will knock the socks off a PC. Much more light than a T5 and reportedly better color and less of a washed out look to everything. T5s are probably more equivalent in light output to halides than anything else.

 

[freddie40]

We are having a discussion in the RMRC forum about T5 and I have searched for answers. Basically I know that T5's have a par reading of 150 umol's and a reading of 100 for 3x150 watt halide with 150 watts of PC actinics.

Does anyone have readings for 250 watt MH at 18 or 24" and readings for 400 watt MH.

Also, does overdriving T% with an Icecap ballast extend or shorten the life of the bulb.

Thanks,

Dave

 

[Luis A M]

Someone else can explain..but a T5 will knock the socks off a PC. Much more light than a T5 and reportedly better color and less of a washed out look to everything. T5s are probably more equivalent in light output to halides than anything else.

Let me see if I got it right.A PC is basically a bent in two halves lamp,so it is reasonable that a 55W PC gives twice as much light as a 24W T5 of the same lenght,unless a TC had a much different lux (PAR)/W ratio. What you mean by equivalent to MH?.

Why would people choose to use T5 instead of PC?

 

[Ti]

Let me see if I got it right.A PC is basically a bent in two halves lamp,so it is reasonable that a 55W PC gives twice as much light as a 24W T5 of the same lenght,unless a TC had a much different lux (PAR)/W ratio. What you mean by equivalent to MH?.

Why would people choose to use T5 instead of PC?

Because the narrow tube allows better reflection to increase output where as the PC is too bulky to make a reflector as effecient.
The PC wattage is in a sense wasted and not used effeciently.
Reflectors are the Key.

 

[TEC1364]

Now this is not scientific at all, but looking at a 54 watt T5 hurts my eyes a lot more than looking at a 55/65 watt PC. :eek1:

 

[Ti]

Now this is not scientific at all, but looking at a 54 watt T5 hurts my eyes a lot more than looking at a 55/65 watt PC. :eek1:

reflectors work wonders.

 

[growyourown]

Let me see if I got it right.A PC is basically a bent in two halves lamp,so it is reasonable that a 55W PC gives twice as much light as a 24W T5 of the same lenght,unless a TC had a much different lux (PAR)/W ratio. What you mean by equivalent to MH?.

Why would people choose to use T5 instead of PC?

The reason I decided on T5 over PC, was that, for the same price I could achieve a better par value at deeper depths. I could also fit a more diverse lighting array under my canopy than going with PC and/or MH and VHO actinic combo.

I like the color choices of T5 and the technology is getting better and better.

For instance, I have a good friend that works for a ballast manufacturer, (to be named at a later date, not sure if I have permission) and he is getting me some new programmable/dimmable, T5 ballasts. All I have to do is keep track of bulb life and Par readings weekly and report the numbers to the engineering manager. They are supplying the meter as well.

When these hit the market, they will quickly change the T5 landscape. The estimated retail on these ballasts will be around $65 for the normally driven 54W x 2 and $105 for the overdriven model.

I think T5 is just the future where as PC and soon MH are the past.

Lighting for the reef world is evolving.

Glenn

 

[The Grim Reefer]

Don't count metal halide out yet. T5's are great but they can't do what a halide can.

 

[FastUno]

In my T5 system (4 bulbs on Icecap, 2 on Triad) I got over 300 on the PAR meter on the sandbed - 17" down. Over 700 at about 5" down. Bright.

What bulbs do you have on, all aquablue & blue+? What would you normally expect to get using only MH 250W bulbs at the 17" mark, did you test this?


Hey, I will vouch for T5's anytime. I still think they are a great resource for us, either as main lighting sources or as supplements. I have heard it said quite a few times, that you can't beat the overall effects of MH. I hope to soon find out & give evidence to this notion.

I went back to look at par values produced by various ballasts & bulbs that tickle my fancy. The three bulbs that I have in mind are XM 20K, Ham 14K, & AC 14K. It seems that the Reef Fanatic & EVC ballast produce the best overall results when these 3 bulbs are considered (preferance given to AC 14K). Purchasing ballasts based upon bulb selection seems a tad extreme, I wonder just how many reefers do this? I guess with all the info provided to us, it only makes sense that we harvest a favorable outcome.

EVC:
XM 20K: 254 pars
Ham 14K: 350
AC 14K: 438

Reef Fanatic:
XM 20K: 246
Ham 14K: 350
AC 14K: 441

 

[Ti]

Don't count metal halide out yet. T5's are great but they can't do what a halide can.

Yup, no reason to discount halide.

 

[growyourown]

Don't count metal halide out yet. T5's are great but they can't do what a halide can.

Grim,

Can you enlighten us as to what you mean? What besides shimmer lines can the MH do that T5 can't?

IMO MH gives a washed out darker appearance than T5, this is not a look I want at all.

Due to heat concerns and the size of halide reflectors, they were never an option for me personally. Although I did toy with the thought, I just couldn't justify the time and effort of modifying my canopy to raise it high enough for halides and VHO actinic supplements.

Glenn