|
|
FAQs about Fluorescent Light and Lighting for Marine Systems,
Fixture Selection Related
FAQs: Fluorescent
Light 1, Fluorescent Light 2,
Fluorescent Light 3, Normal Output (NO),
High Output (HO), Very High Output (VHO),
Compact Fluorescents (CFs, PCs), Compact
Fluorescents 2, T5, TN Fluorescent
Lighting, & FAQs on Fluorescent:
End Caps, Ballasts,
Regular and High-Output Lamp Selection,
PC Lamp Selection, T-5 Lamp Selection,
Lamp Life-Span Issues, Power
Consumption Issues, Installation-Wiring,
Troubleshooting/Repairing,
By Make/Model/Manufacturer: &
Metal Halide Lighting, Lighting
Marine Invertebrates, LR
Lighting, Tridacnid
Lighting, Small
System Lighting, Related
Articles:
Fluorescent Light &
Lighting, Spectral
Quality of Various Fluorescent Lamps by Dana Riddle,
T5 Fluorescent Lighting, Coral System
Lighting, |
Watts per gallon... is a very slippery measure of how much "light"
is necessary, desirable... Real quanta of use-able spectra, ones
goals (growth, color, reproduction, maintenance), and costs
fixturing, power... all need to be taken into consideration. |
I've been told that you can use VHO fluorescents on tanks up to
about 24"deep, but more than that you need metal halides. Does it go
the other way, too? I mean, if you have a tank that is only 12"
tall, can you use regular full-spectrum fluorescents and still have
a successful reef?
To a large degree yes; though an answer to
this sort of query must delve into a few statements of fact,
definitions and qualifiers to be of real use. First, let’s agree
that the intensity of light (number or quanta of photons) is
the principal difference between full-spectrum fluorescents (FSF)
and metal halide (MH) lighting sources. That is, both types produce
adequate amounts of light in necessary and desirable (function and
aesthetic) wavelengths to support and showcase captive reef life. MH
is more intense, and thus able to penetrate to greater depths and
provides more light to shallow ones.
Whether this is critical or
something you want though depends on two further major
considerations: the type of life you intend to keep, and how much
you want to "push" it. In aquariums as in the wild, there is a
broad range of benefit and tolerance to more light. For example,
Corallimorpharians (coral anemones), most of the photosynthetic
gorgonians and soft corals (Order Alcyonacea) available to hobbyists
get along quite well on FSF and compact fluorescents (CF) in the
deepest of hobby aquariums. On the other hand, several of the
popular true or stony corals (Order Scleractinia), do poorly unless
provided either a roost in a shallower setting (with FSF, CF), or MH
in greater depths.
The "pushing" issue is a consideration of how
much you want to enhance your organisms metabolic rates. Lighting,
along with nutrient availability, conscientious filtration, and
current are principal inputs to this physiological "driving". Do you
want your Acropora for instance to grow about as fast as
possible? Maybe it will become more spindly, less colorful, more
short-lived as a consequence... Perhaps the cost of water testing,
dosing and amelioration is only "worth it" up to a point. Each
aquarist must ask themselves this question; "Per the
species/specimen and environmental settings, what do I want my
livestock to do?"|
Obviously all light-affected life needs to be
accommodated within its environmental tolerance; hence you must
study and provide at least the minimum or at most the maximum
amounts of light per that species/specimen in your setting. Such
information is invaluable, and often more than just a matter of
reading and chatting with other reef hobbyists and dealers. A tried
and true approach for new introductions is initially placing them
further down or away from the most intense light area, and moving
them "toward the light" as they display a propensity for it.
One
last element of this "how much light will do/is too much" question
I’d feel remiss to leave out is the effects of dissolved (mainly
colored) material in the systems water. The cleanest of seawater
absorbs, reflects and diffracts light; more and more with depth. The
presence of suspended solids and various chemicals has an
additional, often pronounced effect on diminishing photo strength.
In practical terms, and for more than light penetration reasons, you
want to keep concentrations of this matter to a minimum; principally
through skimming, water changes and possibly the use of chemical
filtrants. This is an area of discussion that merits much more
emphasis and investigation. |
Lighting/Duro-Test Vita Lite 10/3/09
Dear Mr. Fenner
<James with you today.>
I recently read an article you wrote about lighting where you gave your
full endorsement to the Duro-Test Vita-Lite full spectrum light as the
best overall useful light for an aquarium. I wanted to know since the
writing of that article if you still consider this the best type of
useful light or have newer technologies and higher Kelvins become the
new recommended way to go?
<Frank, I'm thinking that article was written shortly after the Romans
scrapped their chariots for a better ride (no offense, Bob).
<Et tu James? RMF>
The newer technologies, T5's, PC's, HQI, etc., along with the wide Kelvin
range available, is definitely the way to go. Although the Duro-Test
lamp is a decent lamp, rendering a CRI of 91, and a Kelvin temperature
of 5500K, it is not available in T5 or PC format, T8 being the best they
deliver with this lamp. Best to go with the high output/high efficiency
systems.>
Regards,
<Cheers, James (Salty Dog)>
Frank H.
Re Lighting/Duro-Test Vita Lite 10/3/09
Yes Bob, can understand Et tu. I was likely riding along side of you,
only a little further back.
<Maybe a side car?>
Nothing like a little humor to break up the dailies routine.
<I'll say!>
Cheers,
James
<And you my friend. B>
Lighting Question (PC v. T5)
8/15/09
Good day,
<Hello>
Thank you for the wealth of information on your website. I am new to
reef aquariums and I made some initial mistakes your website is helping
me correct and others it has helped me avoid.
<We're glad you are making good use of it.>
The system was given to me and I am working with my current specs and
upgrading as money and time allow.
I have read through the entire section (3 of them actually) and I still
am left a bit confused on lighting.
<There are a lot of options.>
Here are the specs of my system:
35g bow front (12D X 32W X 24H)
40 pounds of live rock
2 inches of live sand
Deluxe Red Sea Prizm Skimmer
Fluval Canister Filter
2 400gph powerheads
Livestock:
5 Hermit crabs, 5 snails, TR Percula Clown, Red Scooter Blenny, Fire
Goby, Blue Green Chrome, 2 Shrimp (Fire Red and Cleaner)
Corals:
Mostly soft corals (clove polyps, mushrooms, white xenia, Xenia and
Zoanthids). I also have a purple tip frogspawn.
My current lighting system is a PC with one bulb (it is actually a dual
bulb, one blue and one white; 10,000K/460nm). It began to flicker so I
removed it and am currently borrowing a friends TEK T5 lighting system
(4 24" bulbs - Pink, Blue and two whites) while I determine the best
system to purchase.
<Alright.>
I would like to add some SPS (like the Montipora capricornis) and
another LPS (a branched hammer).
The tank has a hood that limits the size (only about 4" deep) of a
fixture and makes heat a potential problem...this seems to rule out MH
lamps.
As I look on your website, talk to guys in my local reef society and LFS
owners I get more and more confused as to what my lighting needs are.
The responses are so dogmatic and diverse it makes the whole thing sound
like a preferential choice. It seems the needs of the different species
are too specific to leave it up to preference
<Likely most of the species you want to keep can be kept under T5
lighting.>
Given the limitations of my hood size (and my wallet) I seemed to be
left with a couple of options; (I am happy to restrict my species
purchases for the sake of staying in my current set up)
1) Upgrade my PC's to a dual bulb system and possibly get my other PC
fixture fixed and add it as a third, dual bulb)
2) There are small T5 set ups by companies such as Current (i.e - the
Nova Extreme) but the wattage is much smaller and I am not sure any
improvement over what I currently have.
<I would recommend T5's.>
3) Something altogether different I have yet to discover.
<However, please consider a T5 Retrofit kit with individual reflectors
as an alternative to T5 fixtures. It will be much less expensive, more
effective, and generally smaller inside the hood.>
The only other livestock considerations (as I sneak in extra questions).
Would this lighting system sustain the same tank if I switched to
anemones from the corals down the line? And is it bad husbandry to
purchase a fish too small for my current tank (a sand sifting goby like
the diamond goby) to allow it to work on my tank until it grows and then
give it away via a local reef forum to someone with a bigger tank?
<I would say that is bad practice, they are also surprisingly hard to
remove from an established tank.>
Sorry for the length of this. I wanted to make sure I gave all the
pertinent information though I am sure I have left much out.<You did
fine.>
This has already proved to be a wonderful hobby but with a huge learning
curve. Thank you for your help and patience with beginners.
Steve
<You are welcome, Josh Solomon.>
Lighting T5 vs. PC – 02/14/09
Hi Bob,
<<EricR here>>
I
have a question concerning a lighting choice for a 65 gallon reef tank.
<<Okay>>
I spent a lot of time on WWM and designed a really nice 45
gallon sump / refugium from acrylic and I also learned a lot from past
mistakes.
<<Excellent…good to know>>
I don’t want metal halide and
I am torn between ATI T5 6x39 watt Sunpower fixture $479.00 or going
with 4x96 watt pc's.
<<Depends on what you “need”…the PC fixture will
be measurably brighter/more intense than the T5 fixture (384 watts vs.
234 watts), assuming similar Kelvin ratings of the bulbs selected…but
likely either “will do”>>
I don’t have the need to keep sps, but I
am very confused about T5. A lot of people say T5 is better, but when I
ask if they use them they say no.
<<Just differing technologies… The
T5s are sleeker, more modern looking, and seem to have a wider selection
of bulbs/Kelvin ratings available…and with the excellent reflectors
available for them, when used, they do seem to have an edge on output
over the PCs>>
The Sunpower T5 fixture has active cooling and
high-end reflectors. Can this produce equal or more light/par?
<<Watt
for watt…it can, yes. But I don’t think there is any way 234 watts of T5
lighting is going to out-produce 384 watts of PC lighting…as long as
both are using bulbs of the same Kelvin>>
I understand restrike from
pc's and I just want some feed back from a smart person.
<<I honestly
don’t know just how much light is lost from “restrike” between the legs
of PC bulbs…but of the two units you have listed here, I’m fairly
confident the PC fixture will provide the most output due to its
significantly greater wattage…again, assuming similar color temperature
among the bulbs in the two units>>
Thanks for your help.
Sap81352
<<Happy to share. EricR>>
Lighting Question, fluorescent clas., use comp. 2/10/09
Hello Crew,
<Hello Matt, Minh at your service.>
I have a very
simple question for you today. I currently have a standard 55 gal tank
with some mushrooms and polyps and about 60 lbs of live rock.
I am
currently running a 2x55 watt power compact fixture. I really want to
start keeping many types of corals in my tank so I feel that I need to
upgrade my lighting. I was thinking about getting a 4x65 compact
fixture.
My question is, is there a difference between power compact
lighting and compact fluorescent lighting?
<No, they are one and the
same.>
Sorry for the lame question, but I am seeing both of these
listed and see no difference between them. Also, does the lighting
upgrade above seem to be good enough? One more thing, what about the T5
fixtures that are out there?
<Although 4x65W PC/CF fixture is an
improvement over your current lighting set up, the better alternative is
High Output T5 (or T5 HO) lighting. T5 HO lighting runs cooler, lasts
longer, and has a better wattage/intensity ratio than PC/CF lighting.
More information can be found here:
http://tfivetesting.googlepages.com/.>
Thanks for your help
Matt
<You're welcome. Cheers, Minh Huynh.>
Re: Lighting Question, fluor. f' 2/11/09
Thanks for the quick response. I have one more quick question for you
today. Should I consider MH lighting as an option. I love how it looks
but I have read concerns about the heat. My tank is an open top and I do
not want to overheat the water. If MH is an option, can I place a 36"
fixture over my 48" tank to save some money or do I need the 48"
fixture?
<A 36" MH fixture would work on a 48" long tank. However,
consider that MH is a single point light source and as a result, the
sides of the tank will be dim. This could be a positive in the sense
that it will create a sense
of depth and also allow you to set low
light corals in these areas.>
Also, what type of wattage should I
have in the MH if I decide to go that way?
<The type of MH bulb is
more important than the wattage of the set up. For example, a 175W
Iwasaki 15k bulb has more intensity than some 250W bulbs and even some
400W bulbs. Take a look at this site for some intensity data
on most
popular bulbs: http://www.manhattanreefs.com/lighting.>
Thanks
Matt
<You're welcome. Cheers, Minh Huynh.> Re: Lighting
Question, T 5... 2/11/09
Say I decide to
go with the t5 lighting, would it be too much light for the 6x54 watt or
should I use the 4x54 watt?
<This would depend on the type of T5
lighting you chose. Certain setups, with high performance ballasts,
reflectors and bulbs can be extremely bright and 6x54W could be
overpowering and push some corals into over-saturation and
photo-inhibition. If you intend to keep mostly soft corals and LPS, most
proper 4x54W T5 HO set ups would be more than sufficient. For SPS and/or
anemones that require more intensity, 6x54W would be a better choice.
For reviews on the most common T5 lighting fixtures, go to this site:
http://tfivetesting.googlepages.com/.>
Matthew Diethorn
<Good
luck, Minh Huynh.>
Re: Stocking, Questions in general, reef 11/17/08
Scott,
Thanks again for your help.
<Welcome.>
Just one more
question. What I'm looking to do is add frogspawn, torch, or hammer
corals to my tank.
Do you think the lighting I have now would be
efficient, if the coral is about 12" from the light, or should
I
replace the Coralife t-5 with another dual 55watt t-5 light, giving me a
total of 220 watts?
<If adding light is an option, I would. What you
have is on the low end as it stands.>
And would this be efficient for
this type of LPS?
<Yes.>
Thanks again, I did read through the
FAQs, but it seems a little dated, not much about t-5s, and the ones
that do, aren't the same tank size, or are stocking different corals.
Marc
<Welcome, Scott V.>
Comment on Light Posting, fluo. fixt. choices 11/18/08
Dear Scott,
<Hello again Andy.>
I was reading Today's Questions
and saw a snippet of a post about the TEK vs. Aquactinics lights.
Unfortunately, I couldn't find the original post/answer, so forgive me
if I'm way off base here. The post/answer was:
"Re: Lighting for 55
gallon reef 11/16/08
Thanks Scott.
<Welcome.>
With bulbs and
all, they were very close in price. It seemed that the Tek light was the
better deal, but with the Aquactinic rep I wanted to make sure I wasn't
missing something.
<Nah, same basic thing except the extra bulb.>
dean
<Scott V.>"
I assume the poster/you were talking about the
TEK 6 light HO T5 versus the Aquactinics TX5 fixture? <Yes.> I have
seen/observed both of these in action, and I can tell you that there is
a pretty significant difference between the two fixtures, IMO. The
difference in output/light quality/brightness is pretty astounding, with
the Aquactinics being the superior fixture. I'm not poo pooing the TEK,
which is a fine fixture, but the 5-bulb Aquactinics I've seen produces a
much better/brighter output than the 6-bulb TEK. Maybe it's the
reflectors, maybe it's the ballasts, maybe it's the bulbs that were
being used--I don't know. I've been told that the TEK runs very hot,
which I'm also told reduces the efficiency of the fixture/bulbs.
Although I don't always subscribe to this way of thinking, I honestly
believe there is a reason the Aquactinics fixture is more
expensive--because it is hands down a better fixture. My LFS uses both,
and the difference really is impressive. I'm sure you/others have a lot
more experience with light fixtures, and maybe these models in
particular, but I just thought I'd share my impressions/$.02.
<Thank
you for your input, I do have to say I myself have not seen the
difference. There are so many factors to consider: bulb type/spectrum,
age of bulbs, fixture maintenance (reflector cleaning), and even the
perception of light put out. Both of these fixtures use HO T5 bulbs with
individual reflectors. I do appreciate your comments and this will be
posted for others to make a more educated choice. Thank you.>
Andy
<Talk again soon, Scott V.>
Re: Lighting for 55 gallon reef
Further Comment on Light Posting,
fluo. fixt. choices 11/18/08
Hey,
<Hello Dean.>
I was
reading the dailies and saw a response to my post. I have comment of my
own.
<Okay.>
Scott and Andy,
I did choose to go with the Tek 6
HO light for a couple of reasons. I agree that the Aquactinics TX5 has
some performance characteristics over the Tek 6 Light, but the Tek 6 has
some as well.
The Aquactinics has better reflectors and active
cooling, and both contribute to the fixtures performance. From my
research, the TX5 can penetrate better. My tank however is only 20"
deep, with a DSB also in the mix, so I cannot take full advantage of the
reflectors. If my tank was a 65, 36x18x24 it would be a different story.
As for active cooling, I saw my third snowstorm of the season today, My
place doesn't get that warm, and I can always add a fan. In the end what
was the deciding factor was the sixth bulb. Not because extra wattage,
but because a sixth bulb give me more flexibility in mixing bulbs and
tuning the spectra.
<A good point not yet mentioned.>
My bulbs
are:
Back
ATI Blue Plus
ATI Korallin Zucht Fiji Purple
Giesemann Midday
ATI Blue Plus
UVL 72.25
ATI Blue Plus
Front
The TX5 may be the better fixture, but the Tek 6 made more sense in my
situation as it turns out. I would have had to give up my 75.25 and I
really wanted that to pull out the reds in my firefish and coralline.
But thanks for the help! This has been very educational for me. Y'all
rock.
Dean
<Thank you for the further input Dean. My stance re has
already been
posted. Glad you are happy with your choice. Scott V.>
The post was:
*Comment on Light Posting, fluo. fixt. choices
11/18/08*
<Hello again Andy.>
I was reading Today's
Questions and saw a snippet of a post about the TEK
vs. Aquactinics
lights. Unfortunately, I couldn't find the original post/answer, so
forgive me if I'm way off base here. The post/answer was:
"Re: Lighting for 55 gallon reef 11/16/08
Thanks Scott.
<Welcome.>
With bulbs and all, they were very close in price. It
seemed that the Tek light was the better deal, but with the Aquactinic
rep I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something.
<Nah, same
basic thing except the extra bulb.>
dean
<Scott V.>"
I assume
the poster/you were talking about the TEK 6 light HO T5 versus the
Aquactinics TX5 fixture? <Yes.> I have seen/observed both of these in
action, and I can tell you that there is a pretty significant difference
between the two fixtures, IMO. The difference in output/light
quality/brightness is pretty astounding, with the Aquactinics being the
superior fixture. I'm not poo pooing the TEK, which is a fine fixture,
but the 5-bulb Aquactinics I've seen produces a much better/brighter
output than the 6-bulb TEK. Maybe it's the reflectors, maybe it's the
ballasts, maybe it's the bulbs that were being used--I don't know. I've
been told that the TEK runs very hot, which I'm also told reduces the
efficiency of the fixture/bulbs. Although I don't always subscribe to
this way of thinking,
I honestly believe there is a reason the
Aquactinics fixture is more expensive--because it is hands down a better
fixture. My LFS uses both, and the difference really is impressive. I'm
sure you/others have a lot more experience with light fixtures, and
maybe these models in particular, but I just thought I'd share my
impressions/$.02.
<Thank you for your input, I do have to say I
myself have not seen the difference. There are so many factors to
consider: bulb type/spectrum, age of bulbs, fixture maintenance
(reflector cleaning), and even the perception of light put out. Both of
these fixtures use HO T5 bulbs with individual reflectors. I do
appreciate your comments and this will be posted for others
to make a
more educated choice. Thank you.>
Andy
<Talk again soon, Scott V.>
Mercury/CF Lamps – 07/14/08
Hi Bob,
Am wondering how many
aquarists are aware of the higher mercury content of Compact Fluorescent
and T5 lamps.
<Doubtful many>
One T5 lamp contains 3mg of mercury
and Compact Fluorescents even more. As you know, mercury is a potent
neurotoxin and handling these lamps should be done with care to avoid
breakage which leads to mercury contamination of the area. There are
some states that have made it illegal to dispose of these lamps in
normal trash pickup...they must be recycled.
Have a nice day, James
(Salty)
<... Will post, share... B> Aesthetic
Fluorescent Supplementation, Marine Tank 03/23/07
Howdy Crew,
quick one for you.
<Hello.>
I am running 2, 250 HQI 14.5K bulbs
on my reef tank, but I don't get the "pop" colorwise without running
actinics.
<They are "neat" looking....and yes neat is a scientific
term....maybe.>
Could I get away with adding 2 standard 40W actinics
with a reflector?
<It's just for color/aesthetics so yes...won't
hurt anything.>
Will they make a difference visually, even though
they only total 80 watts?
<Visually yes, but as you know
they won't make a difference par rating wise.>
I do have VHO's but I
really don't want to use them since its wastes more electricity and
generates extra heat, not good.
<I understand.>
What are you
opinions.
<N.O. fluorescents are fine, but you can also look into
T-5's, and not just the high output versions either but the normal
output as well...they are low wattage, don't impart much heat onto the
water.>
Thank you for your time.
<Of course.>
Paul
<Adam J.> Overdriven fluorescents and anemones
– 03/17/07
Hello.
<Hello Mark, Brandon here tonight.>
I
have a long tentacle anemone, probably a Macrodactyla doreensis, but
possibly a Heteractis crispa in a 30 gallon tank with two small maroon
clowns and a couple of torch corals.
<For either of these species of
Anemone this is too small a volume. Please consider an upgrade.>
Water quality is good, except for 2-4 ppm nitrates. I've had the
anemone for six weeks, and after staying put in the first month it's
now taken up wandering aimlessly. I fear for the corals and worry about
the anemone's well-being.
<This is common with all anemones. It is
recommended to never place an Anemone with other Cnidarians.>
Might
the lighting be a problem?
<This is always a good possibility.>
I have four 20 watt NO, two 10000K and two actinic, all of them 2X
overdriven. I haven't been able to find anything definitive about light
output from overdriven NO vs. compact fluorescents.
<I will be
honest with you, I would not keep an Anemone of any sort under PC or
overdriven NO. The minimum I would use would be four, four foot 110
watt VHO lights. Two Actinic 03, two Full Spectrum 10000k. Better
still, (and what I currently use) would be HQI double ended 10k MH. All
of this is rather dependant on the size of your tank. I will assume
that you have a normal 100 gallon (by this I mean rectangular.) In this
instance I would use one 150 watt HQI MH fixture.>
Just from
eyeballing, it looks like I get the same light output per watt from
both, so I'm guessing my 80 watts 2X overdriven is about the same as
140-160 watts from compact fluorescents. Is that adequate, do you think?
<You can’t guess by eyeballing. Light levels can be deceiving from
outside the tank. The only sure way to tell is with a Lux Meter. But
at a guess, no it is not the same, and I would not think with the
Anemone moving like this, that the light is adequate. Additionally with
the overdriven NO’s you will have a very short bulb life, say one - four
months, as opposed to six - a year with the PC’s or MH. Please do some
reading here, http://www.wetwebmedia.com/marlgtganthony.htm.>
On the
assumption that its a doreensis, I've had it on the sand bed, 3-4 inches
deep, with live rock surrounding a bare area 2-3 inches in diameter.
According to the usually reliable LFS, it will dig its base into the
sand and probably attach itself to a buried rock. Is that true?
<It
should dig into the sand yes. It would help if you could send a
picture, as this will lend to a positive ID.>
It doesn't seem
inclined to attach itself to a rock anywhere. There is a nook currently
occupied by a torch at the top of the aquarium. Might it be worth a try
moving the coral and putting the anemone there?
<I would not move
it. It will go where it wants to. Right now it is looking for an area
that suits it‘s needs and is not finding one. I would seriously look at
upgrading my lighting in the next few days or so. If you decide to go
higher in output do try to slowly acclimate your critters using a piece
of screen over the top of the glass or a shortened light period. Much
more on this on WWM.>
How likely is a doreensis or a crispa to
attach itself to rock, as opposed to substrate?
<See above Re:
picture.>
Thanks so much. Without forums like WetWebMedia, I don't
think reef aquaria would exist, even with the hardware and technology of
the last decade.
<Thank you for the kind words. I am proud to be a
part of an organization that allows this much free exchange of ideas and
information like this.>
It means an awful lot to me that at the end
of the day I can leave the rat race and chill for a bit with a hundred
gallons of Nature and beauty. Sort of gets me centered again.
<Agreed. Good luck with this. Please try to send an image. Brandon.>
Mark
Re: Stacking fluorescent lighting 12/20/03
Crew,
First
off, a big thanks: WWM and TCMA have been indispensable sources
of information.
<Glad to hear you have benefited!>
I'm
researching possible lighting solutions for a 120 gal reef
tank. I'd like to keep tridacnid clams (derasa, gigas or Squamosa)
and compatible soft corals.
<The clams that you listed are the
least light demanding, so read on for what will probably be a
pleasantly surprising solution to your dilemma.>
Is it possible
to stack fluorescent lamps within a canopy? (provided I solve
ventilation and lamp support issues) I am assuming this
isn't advisable since I've only seen canopies that feature lamps
flat on a single plane parallel to the water's surface.
<Stacking
the lamps will lead to almost no additional light reaching the
animals in the tank. An unlit lamp is nearly opaque, and although
it isn't intuitive, so is a lit one. The lower set of lights will
essentially shade the tank from the lamps above them. But on to the
good part.... If you get four full length lamps over the tank, you
can keep any of the three listed species of clams if you keep them
in the upper half of the tank. If you can jam six lamps in
(shouldn't be too hard), you can keep them anywhere in the tank
(assuming all of their other needs are met). Don't expect
outrageous growth rates, but they should remain quite healthy.>
Thanks in advance,
<always a pleasure! Adam>
Jon (drawing
attached) | 
|
Reef lighting
How many watts of lighting does a reef tank need
per gallon. I have a 75 gallon tank.
>>
The watts consumed or
rated is not much to go on when guesstimating needed/desired
illumination for aquariums... for a few obvious and maybe a couple of
unknown reasons... Turns out, different means of producing light are
more/less efficient in terms of apparent and actual (useful) light
yielded per watt (kilowatt hours actually) of electrical consumption...
Further, the wattage-required if you will varies in the way of depth,
other qualities of system water...
And importantly, there is a wide
range of what sorts of light/wattage-required depending on the types of
light, and what you want it "to do" with a given system... Fish Only
systems can be barely lit, SPS Corals, Giant Clams require intense
lighting...
Now getting down (finally) to some sort of answer... for
your 75... probably somewhere in the 160 to 500 watt range... depending
on... Just lighting a FO system on the low end... to midway for Fishes
with Live Rock and maybe some low-light-using life to the Corals and
Clams mentioned on the high end...
Could you "use" even more
"wattage"? Yes, to drive photosynthesis, growth, even reproduction of
some life forms... are you willing to put in all else that this
"driving" requires? Manipulation, testing of water, addition of
biominerals...
Bob Fenner, who will gladly help you develop an
algorithm to explain this answer mathematically Lighting
Once again I seek knowledge...
I read your article on wetwebmedia.com
about lighting in the aquarium and did some research on the web. I
checked out the Dura-test webpage and couldn't really find a way to
order just a few vita-lite bulbs for my tank.
<They're
manufacturers... who don't sell to the end-user...>
It seems
everything that could be ordered was in mass quantity. Also in the area
on their page where it talks about use with pets, the bulb
it recommended was 20 watts. Is this really enough for a 125 gallon
tank, even if I used a couple?
<No, but they do sell larger lamps,
larger wattages, power twist (tm) types... The statement you saw
probably referred to small mammals, birds...>
I know that the
spectrum of light is important, but I also thought that wattage was as
well.
<Yes, as interpreted as intensity... lumens... and per kilowatt
energy produced...>
I was thinking about using metal halide bulbs,
but the cost and the heat factor seem to be keeping me from going that
way.
<These are downsides>
Plus, you didn't rate them too well in
your article.
<MH are appropriate, even the best available, most
appropriate technology for very deep (relative to hobby use) systems...
with high-intensity light using organisms like SPS corals, tridacnid
clams... but the modern Compact Fluorescent light technology can outdo
them for function, cost of installation/use, safety.... in almost all
cases... most public aquariums are switching to CF's or have done so...>
I suppose a disadvantage too would be to have no top on your tank
whatsoever when you hang the light from the ceiling. Even so, these
bulbs seem to be less expensive than the compact fluorescent bulbs.
Sheesh! Talk about forking out a lot of cash!!! I want to have more
power than the two standard 30 watt 36" fluorescent bulbs I'm using now,
but the choices seem rather confusing. I do plan to get an anemone down
the road, and there does seem to be some coral growth on my live rock
(it looks like two brown hairy flower buds that haven't opened yet, with
tiny circular red mouths) so better lighting seems like the right way to
go.
Will 20 watt vita-lite bulbs actually work better than compact
fluorescents?
<No...>
How many would I need? How would I get
them? Uhh... my brain is about to explode again, so I guess I should
stop.
<Don't explode... take a look at the CF retrofit kits
FFExpress.com is offering... save up, and install these... this is the
best route to go for your 125>
Oh yeah, one more thing. I'm trying
to get my 3-stripe damsel out of the tank, but having 90 pounds of live
rock in there doesn't help. Do you suggest any special way of coursing
the fish into the net? Or should I use 2 nets? Any advice would be
helpful, and thanks again.
-Matt Lindstrom
>>
Always use two
nets... one to drive the animal, one to lift it from the water... but
good luck... maybe training this animal to eat above a "permanently
installed net" might work...
Bob Fenner Fluorescent
lighting: Best type?
Bob,
I Have gone through the FAQ's and
other responses and have a couple of questions for lighting. I am
planning on a having a heavily stocked reef only system. (maybe a few
clowns and smaller fish).
1. I understand that I should use 3-5 watts
per gallon. But is 3 watts per gallon like Microsoft saying that
WindowsNTserver will run on a 486 with 24 megs of Ram? (yes it will but
it kills the system operator and it really sucks) I already have 2 units
48 inch with two bulbs each (total 4 bulbs) at 40 watts each. Ready for
my new 55gal(std aquarium size here) reef tank that has recently
matured. Will this be enough? or is it really a trying to run a fortune
500 company on a 486? I have thought of changing them to the CF but did
not fully understand the cost benefit of changing.
<Like your
comparison, and yes, it is quite apt on a few counts... more, much more
to this "story"... The CF's would be better, even at par comparison of
watts consumed or produced in lumen equivalence... the useful light
produced by these different formats is not the same... sort of like the
Intel CPU's with limited cache...>
1. In ranking the least to
greatest beneficial usable light output where do CF's fall when
comparing them to normal fluorescents, then HO and last VHO. I get
different stories from my LFS.
<CF's are at the top in terms of
production (by watt-production, kilowatt consumed, overall cost per
lumen/useful photon... of all these formats>
Thanks,
Sean Warren
Could you respond back to this email so that I may read this while I am
traveling.
We must decide what we will do in the brightness of day
before the night falls and the storms set in
<Bob Fenner, who feels
like he's in India with the above stmt.> Still unclear on
lighting?
I am still in need of a little help on the ACTINICS
lights. I usually think of them as only as for looks only but in your
response to another you recommended them are they of any real value in a
FO tank or Reef tank?
Here is the case were you recommended them.
Pasted from your site.
<Actinic lighting refers to certain
wavelengths ("life-engendering", embodying "actinism", if you will) that
are more specifically supplied by "actinic fluorescent lamps"... Are
these useful to hobbyists, culturists? Minimally... as enough
intensity/lumens/photons of this EMR are provided by most all other
lighting modes... For some, mainly deeper-water (collected) organisms
that hobbyists utilize, such specialized light production can be
worthwhile... but is it "cost effective" relative to "higher Kelvin
rated" light sources? Almost always never. Put another way, for the cost
of acquisition and operation, neglecting esthetic considerations,
actinics are by and large a waste of money for home aquarists. Why are
they sold may be your real question? To make money. Why would I (or
anyone) reply in a general way to a home hobbyist that they might/should
add this sort of lighting? Because I/we have no idea of what they might
now or later add to such a system... and yes, some animal groups
(tridacnid clams, some Acroporids, Pocilloporids, Faviids...) do
demonstrate discernible improvement with accentuating these
wavelengths... plus a few other "reasons"... Bob Fenner>
> We have
just purchased a 110 gallon aquarium, with wet dry filter, protein
skimmer and an additional power head. We have also just purchased live
rock uncured and cured from FFE. My question is two part (we are novice)
1st I eventually want to add lighting for soft coral, etc. what would
you recommend for this size tank.
> <If only live soft corals, VHO
fluorescents, possibly VHO and Compact Fluorescents (some of actinic,
some whites of 5k, 10k temperature)... to Just CF's... If you might go
the SPS coral and tridacnid clam route, possibly the addition of two, or
even three Metal Halides in addition to some CF actinics...>
> #2-The
live rock will be coming today, since the tank has been running for over
a week, can I cured the live rock in this tank? Please give me your
opinion.
> <Yes, do cure the live rock in place... see the articles
on this and related topics stored at www.wetwebmedia.com>
> Its great
to know that their are professionals who are there to help
> Thank
you, Connie
> <You're welcome! Bob Fenner> Lighting?
We're the fish men YEAH!
Bob I have read your book and carefully the
section about lighting. My questions is this. After finishing I thought
that the blue Actinic were of no value except to the human eye. However
in the following response you gave you encouraged actinic. I have pasted
it here. I am a little confused. I have a 125 (standard measurements.)
and a 55. I'm planning the 55 to be a reef tank. Will 4x 48inch reg. 40
watt bulbs and the name brand recommended most in your book be fine for
the 55?(the name slips me now but you really spelled it out very
clearly).
<Probably Dura Corp. (RIP) "Vitalites"... and time marches
on my friend... these were the best lighting (to my knowledge) when the
section was penned, later published in CMA (in the mid-90's)... compact
fluorescents are far better functionally, aesthetically now... and in a
few years? Beware of linear thinking and logic in this universe>
Also
the 125 is fish only with 60lbs of Fiji live rock. would 4 of the 40
watt bulbs be enough. (of course the name and model that you mention in
your book.
<Not in my opinion... look to the CF technology>
Your
humble Acolyte,
Sean Warren
PS. I would hope that this does not
appear that I am being anal in taking what you say below here and using
it to compare to what you say in the book. It is just that I have tried
to consume every thing I can with your name on it, paying attention to
every detail that I can. On a funny note I refer to you in virtually
every sentence and I start out every part of a conversation with "BOB
says ....." and my LFS said," Hey he is not GOD and does not know
everything". I disagreed.
Lighting
<You are seeing things not
there my young friend. I am only another struggling human. Of limited
capacities, understanding and vigor. Life to you. Bob Fenner>
Fluorescent Lighting
Hi Bob,
I have a 72 gal bow front marine
aquarium. It is a fish only tank with 2 standard fluorescent tubes. 1 -
Hagen Power-Glo 48" 40w T10 ( Lumens 2200, Lux 180, Kelvin 18000K) The
other is a Hagen Marine-Glo 48" 40w T10 Actinic Blue (Lux 105)
<Okay>
Is this lighting adequate? If not, what in your opinion is a better
choice?
<Adequate for? A fish only system? Yes... for one with live
rock? No, you need about two-three times the amount of intensity (useful
illumination) as stated. For most of the types of photosynthetic life
folks keep? No, you need about three to four times the amount... For the
higher/est photosynthetic life like many of the SPS corals, tridacnid
clams...? No, you need at least four times this amount and five or six
more times would be better/optimum... Please read over the "Light",
"Lighting" sections on the marine index on our website:
www.WetWebMedia.com and all the associated FAQs files here... You should
come to understand the underlying science and technology and your
options for getting the intensity and quality of light energy you're
looking for such a size, shape system and purposes you intend, with what
livestock you're considering...>
Thanks always for your help.
Ed
<Study my friend. Bob Fenner> Lighting for reef tank
Bob,
I am interested to maintain a 36 x 18 x18" tank with live rocks
and under gravel filtering system.
I plan to keep a wide range of
mushroom corals, shrimps and macroalgae and clay fish also.
<Clown?>
As for fish I like the flame angel or African clown fish.
<One's from
Africa?>
But I AM concern about lighting and the LFS only offer 2
type only.
1) 3' Coralife High Intensity Purified Super Daylight Lamp
( 10,000 k )
2) 3' Solar Nature Full Spectrum Color Lamp ( 6,000 k )
from Germany.
My question is which is most appropriate for reef tank
and how many are needed for my case???
Thank you in advance. David.
<Hmm, both would work... In fact I would use both, maybe one of #1 and
one or two of #2 myself for the anemones that you may end up trying.
Also do look into compact fluorescents for your new system. Much more on
your lighting options can be found on the site: www.WetWebMedia.com
under the "Marine Index". Be chatting my friend. Bob Fenner>
Marine aquarium lights
Hi Bob, I have a tall 27inches high 60
gal octagonal tank with three 15 watts fluorescent lights, one full
spectrum, one Actinic and one 50/50.
There is no room for more
lights so I hope this is enough. Is this the right choice or should
I have 2 full spectrum and one Actinic instead? I have a few fishes
and I would like to get a few anemones if it is possible.
<No to
the anemones (if the popular photosynthetic types... you don't have
near enough light). And the lighting you have is fine for fishes...
if you wanted high-light need livestock, you might consider a single
175 watt pendant type metal halide... but I wouldn't do this in such
a shaped system... very hard to control heat-wise>
Also there is
a glass between the lights and the water I know you suggest removing
it but doesn't it protect the lights from corrosion?
<Yes. Many
folks use water-proof end caps over their lamps in such settings>
or maybe it helps keeping the heat from the lights away from water,
it's hard enough keeping the water temperature constant I'm worried
that if I remove it the temperature changes will be greater when the
lights are on then off.
thanks so much for your help.
Marc
<Methinks you're ready for a larger system my friend... Bob Fenner>
Re: marine aquarium lights
Thanks Rob,
so you would say
even with my system it's much better to remove the glass between the
lights and water?
<Yes, almost always the case>
as far as heat
from the lights you mean it makes no difference with our without the
glass?
<Makes some... actually in the vast majority of
circumstances, this improves overheating... from evaporation>
you
seem to think that octagonal shaped system is difficult, why? -Marc
<The "foot stamp" or surface area versus volume relationship...
relative to more "stock" rectangular shaped systems... harder to
aquascape, keep filtered, gaseous distribution hindered... Bob
Fenner> |
Shop Lights?|
Have a question
about lighting. I want to add more light to a 100 gallon tank. I'm
thinking about using a shop light that you would get at the hardware
store. I have a large oak canopy that covers the tank so the lights are
not visible. I want the light for fish only and some live rock do you
see any problems with going this route.
<nothing dreadful, although
the fixture is not designed or warranted for applications near water.
Although many folks safely use them, they can be a bit of a hazard.
Rather than buy three new fixtures in two years because they keep
rusting out or shocking you... take a little time to look for a good
price on a proper normal output (SO) fixture new, or even search locally
for a used one in the paper or the LFS. Did you look online at some of
the vendors in the links and beyond?> Thank You, John
<regards,
Anthony> Reef Lighting
Aloha,
<Greetings.>
I have a
75 Gallon tank. I am not wanting to take a shortcut on lighting. I want
to keep some SPS and clams. I keep my house cool (about 70 degrees) I
will have 4 - 4" fans in my custom enclosed canopy over the tank
(hanging pendant- style out of the question unfortunately). My canopy
will be about 8 to 12 inches over the tank. I plan to purchase a sheet
of polished aluminum and line the entire inside with it. <I'd get it at
least coated with something... aluminum and saltwater don't mix well.>
On to the lighting... I would like to retrofit 2 - 175watt 10,000K metal
halides. Complementing that, I can either buy an Icecap 430 and
run 2 110watt actinics, OR I can purchase a 660 and run 2 110watt
actinics PLUS 2 110watt 10,000K bulbs along with the halides. Is this
overkill? <Hard to discern... you probably don't 'need' the extra 10K
fluorescents.> Again, I would like a T. maxima or T. crocea in the near
future. But I don't want to burn the SPS corals. <Make shady areas with
the rock work OR drop one of the metal halides and light with the other
on one side of the tank only, and then perhaps use the 10K VHOs on the
side that doesn't have the MH lighting.> OK, if you're still with me,
back to the MH. I have heard about UV rays, so I assume I will have to
build some sort of UV lens for my MH. <That is correct.> Is this a
special type of material or could I use a piece of acrylic? <I would use
glass - acrylic will likely melt being that close to a lamp. Glass is
available with a UV-filtering coating.> I could build a " box" over each
bulb with it. Not sure if the bulb would melt it though. <It would.> I
really don't want a piece of glass or acrylic over my entire water
surface. I want evaporation for Kalk top-offs and cooling factor (with
the fans blowing across the top of the water). <You might need to
rethink this, with fans sucking hot air out of the canopy.> I am trying
to come up with a plan to where I do not have to use a chiller, but get
sufficient lighting. <I'd skip the canopy and instead light from above
with adequate space for more fans. You will soon see that the canopy
becomes a trap for heat, and you largest problem will be getting the
heat out of the collector.> I have so many ideas in my head so if you
could blindfold me, spin me around 15 times and point me in the right
direction, that would be super cool groovyrific!! <Again... if SPS is
part of your goals, then skip the second MH. Light that side with only
fluorescents. You will still have issues with heat... you may need more
fans or you may even need a chiller. Time will tell.> Mahalo,
Jason
<Cheers, J -- > Lights for a FOWLR
Hi Guys,
First off, your website is awesome!!! Most informative, especially for
the novice marine aquarist, but sometimes since I'm a novice, it makes
my decision making difficult, so I'm going to ask the pros. Anyway,
I've got a 46 gallon bow-front, that is 24" deep and 36" wide. I am
currently using the factory bulb issued with the aquarium hood. I'm
interested in getting a couple of pieces of live rock to provide some
natural grazing ground for my Kole Tang and Yellow Tang. I also have a
couple of clowns and a Brazilian Gramma, and will eventually be adding
some cleaner shrimp and hermit crabs, etc. What are the lighting needs
to just support live rock? << Well basically none in terms of
biological filtration. But the more light (and I think the more blue
light) you have the more you can grow. So if it is for herbivory then
I'd say as much light as you can get. >> I would like to continue to use
my factory hood (which only supports one bulb), but which bulb should I
be using? I was looking at a Zoo Med Reef 50/50 Bulb, but it's only 25
watts. Your advice is much appreciated.
<< Well that is a fine
bulb, but I'd consider taking apart the light and gutting it out to hold
either a VHO light or multiple pc lights. If not, you are really
limited on what the live rock will grow. However, even without light,
live rock is excellent to have. >>
Once again, love your website!!!
The Novice
<< Blundell >>
|
|
