Why are T5s better than power compacts?

[tangyreefer05]

PC are just old technology its kinda common sense if you think about it. but people nailed it here on the thread.

[stanlalee]

Originally posted by n00b mariner
unless the shaping of the tube has drastic effects on the performance(i dont believe it does apart from the heat issue because the are closer together) then they are the same ^^

the shape of pc bulbs are exactly why its impposible for them to be reflected efficiently. has almost everything to do with why pc arent that great even compared to VHO although on paper they should be.

[joedirt54]

A single 150W HQI MH with 2 t-5's would be your best choice for a 29gal, IMHO.

IMHO, don't depend on any tube to light your reef. Start with a MH bulb for every 2' of tank and go from there.

I'd pick the above set-up because you could run a '03 and a daylight t5(or two 03, depending on your color needs) for 12 hours and a 14k phoenix 150w HQI for 10 hours and keep any coral happy.

Dirt

[RichConley]

Originally posted by joedirt54


IMHO, don't depend on any tube to light your reef. Start with a MH bulb for every 2' of tank and go from there.

You people are ridiculous.


I just got rid of a whole bunch of nice MH fixtures because T5 seems to be doing a better job.

[bgiles11]

Wont MH's generate alot more heat and energy consumption than t5's? How does VHO stack up against PC or T5's?

[hahnmeister]

MH's dont generate any more heat than PC, VHO, or T5s...

VHO has about the same efficiency as PC from the bulb. To make a reflector as good as T5s would require a space about 4" wide because of the bulb diameter.

[tangyreefer05]

Hmm I always thought Metal halides seemed to created more heat than T5s.

[taketz]

Metal Halides produce less heat per watt than T-5's, unless I'm mistaken. However, it depends on the set-up whether or not you'll see a temperature increase or decrease.

[pjf]

Originally posted by bgiles11
Wont MH's generate alot more heat and energy consumption than t5's? How does VHO stack up against PC or T5's?

The heat generated depends on the wattage consumed. The goal is to increase efficiency by producing more light (output) per watt (input). Here is how VHO lamps stack up against PC and T5 lighting in efficiency:
• VHO T12 lamps produce ~50 lumens per watt: http://www.elliptipar.com/vertical/Vertpdf/VertGdLg.pdf
• PC or pin-based high-wattage compact fluorescent lamps (HW-CFL) generate ~60 lumens per watt: http://lightingresearch.org/programs...L-efficacy.asp
• T5 lighting produces 90-100 lumens per watt: http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/nlpi.../lat5/pc1a.asp

The efficiency of MH lighting depends on the wattage. High wattage MH lamps can be more efficient than T5 lamps. Low wattage MH lamps are less efficient.

[lakwriter]

Originally posted by taketz
Metal Halides produce less heat per watt than T-5's, unless I'm mistaken. However, it depends on the set-up whether or not you'll see a temperature increase or decrease.

Its my understanding that MH indeed produce less heat per watt than other bulbs, however, because the space the bulb takes up is so much smaller than other bulbs, the heat is more intense at that spot...the heat is more evenly distributed with a ling bulb as opposed to a single point kind of bulb.

[Cubman777]

easier to spell

[E-A-G-L-E-S]

Originally posted by RichConley
ReefGeek has the 2x retros for $159. Theyre $249 if you want the icecap ballast.

Well of course you want the 660's overdriving for brightness and PAR if you are going retro route
The 660's also are soft starters unlike say a Workhorse. don't know about Osram ballasts or anyother ballasts used for T5's.

[hahnmeister]

lakwriter is right on the money... its all about the size of the bulb. T5s and halides are neck in neck for heat output... depending on which K bulb you compare to which K bulb of the other. T5s seem to have an easier time with bluer spectrums from the PAR/watt standpoint, but nothing beats a 10,000K halide. Either way, its not really worth arguing, as even the most energy efficient halide is still converting about 75% of its electrical intake into heat energy. So at best, even if a T5 beats out a halide at a given color/size, were talking heat efficiency numbers that are 75% vs. 80% or something like that. Its still alot. Halides just seem hotter than say, a T5 setup of the same wattage because T5s have about 40x the surface area to shed that heat. Its like an open flame candle vs. a hot water radiator system... the open flame is hotter to the touch, but its not going to heat up a room as well as the radiator which cant even burn a piece of paper laying on it.

But pjf did hit on the area where things count... through use of more efficient lighting, reflectors, ballasts, etc... you can get away with lower wattage lighting in the first place. 8 years ago, the output of a 250wattDE bulb could be rivaled these days by a 150wattDE bulb, and the reflectors we can pick from now vs. then... then coralife and hello lights were selling a flat sheet of aluminum with a halide socket or two... that was a reflector. Now, a lumenarc can generate light levels 3x as high per watt at the sand as compared to then.

So now, one could use 150s where once 250s were needed (or run for a shorter period each day). This lower wattage is a greater contribution to lower heat output, as the heat efficiencies dont change so much. So if picking bulbs that are 50% more efficient means you end up using less wattage, then yes, you will see less heat. But so many reefers, it seems, keep the same wattage only to get more and more light, and so the amount of heat their lighting makes over the years stays about the same.

IF you use lighting technology to the fullest though, and truly decrease your wattage... like by replacing 4-65wattT5s with 2 or 3 54wattT5s, then yes, the heat will go down.