T5s vs. MH... What would be the ultimate faceoff?

[Sanjay]

I am about ready to start testing T5 setup and comparing them to MH.

I would like to get some input on what would be the best setup on T5s to compare against the MH ? and also get some input on what would be a reasonable comparison of the 2.

I have set up the lighting grid that I used for my reflector tests, to have variable heights and also be expandable to 4ft fixtures.

So here are the questions:

1) What be a good surface area to compare over ?

2) What would be good hieghts to compare at ?

3) Spacing of measurement points ? right now its set up for measurement at 3" intervals.

based on past experience I know it takes a lot of time to test the light spreads, and I really hate doing it. So I want to do as little as possible and yet come up with some meaningful answers.

the purpose is not to really pit one against the other, but to get an understanding of the differences.

So help me determine what to test and what would be useful to the reefkeeping community. I want to use my limited time productively.

Thanks,

sanjay.

[DesertBandits]

I think a powerful and probable (someone would actually set it up like this because it would produce nice color) setup for T5s might be:

1 GE6500k
1 UVI Super Actinic
2 ATI Blue +

You could set them up on the Icecap individual reflectors also to give them their best chance.

Finaly, I think many T5 users put their lights about 3in above the tank, since it is easy to do so with fluorescents.

[Ti]

awesome stuff sanjay!
I guess 50/50 aquablue and blue+ is a good mix

[dlucia]

I work in a paper mill and the electrical department here had a rep come in and give a demo on MH vs T5's for a new building. A bank of 4 T5's gave out more visible light than a 400 watt MH. T5's last a lot longer with no change in spectrum and cost a lot less to run. less heat to. No brainer!!!

[Ti]

Originally posted by dlucia
I work in a paper mill and the electrical department here had a rep come in and give a demo on MH vs T5's for a new building. A bank of 4 T5's gave out more visible light than a 400 watt MH. T5's last a lot longer with no change in spectrum and cost a lot less to run. less heat to. No brainer!!!

This is why Sanjay has chosen to test it out.
Thanks again Sanjay.
Looking forward to your results.

[gcarroll]

I would like to get some input on what would be the best setup on T5s to compare against the MH ?
I'd look into the SLS T5 fixtures. You could use something like the ATI or one of the other European fixtures that perform better, but they are not redily available in the US.

and also get some input on what would be a reasonable comparison of the 2.
I would like to see the SLS T5 vs. a 14K Phoenix 250 watt DE in a SLS LMIII run by an HQI ballast

1) What be a good surface area to compare over ?
2’ x 2’

2) What would be good hieghts to compare at ?
I think the T5 should get a 4” handicap over the MH. I think people typically run T5 4” off water and MH 8” off water.

3) Spacing of measurement points ? right now its set up for measurement at 3" intervals.
I think that the 3” interval is still sufficient.

[chilwil84]

testing on a deep tank would be a nice change i am a t5 user and knowing how deep (intensity loss through water not air above the tank) the t5s would still be in the same league as mh

[dippin61]

Originally posted by dlucia
I work in a paper mill and the electrical department here had a rep come in and give a demo on MH vs T5's for a new building. A bank of 4 T5's gave out more visible light than a 400 watt MH. T5's last a lot longer with no change in spectrum and cost a lot less to run. less heat to. No brainer!!!

you obviously dont know who sanjay is, or what it is he does for the reefkeeping lighting gurus

[mahoneyc3]

just make sure there are individual reflectors on the T5s as well as active cooling as seen on Fauna Marin's new fixtures as well as ATI fixtures. unlike MH, T5s have a optimal temperature at which there output is much improved as opposed to the temperatures a bank of 4 or 6 T5s can reach without the active cooling.
looking forward tot he results very much.

[Ti]

Originally posted by dippin61
you obviously dont know who sanjay is, or what it is he does for the reefkeeping lighting gurus

Registered: Nov 2006
Location: new york
Occupation: Engineer
Posts: 7



Be nice now.

[sjm817]

We have been waiting for some time to get this. This will be great information.

T5 setups are different than the typical MH since a mix of color temps are used. I'm not sure how exhaustive a test you will be running, but I would say a couple of tests.

A typical platform would be 48" bulbs with Ice Cap SLR reflectors, Triad ballasts, 3 - 5 'off the waters surface.

Day bulb test:
(6) GE 6500K and/or Geismann 6000K

11K test:
(6) ATI and/or Geismann Aquablue

20K test
(6) ATI or Geismann Blue+

"Typical" mix test:
(2) Aquablue
(1) Day
(3) Blue+

There are lots of other possible combos, but that is a start.

[gcarroll]

Originally posted by mahoneyc3
just make sure there are individual reflectors on the T5s as well as active cooling as seen on Fauna Marin's new fixtures as well as ATI fixtures.

Neither of those fixtures are readily available nor widely used in the US. For that reason, I personally feel they should not be used.

[Sanjay]

I know there are going to be too many variables with t5s... bulb mix, ballast mix, etc. Hence my question - What would be the best set up to test ?

I know one thing I am going to test for sure, is light output at 30 inches. This would simulate light reaching the bottom of a 24" tank, with lights at 6" above.

I would like to do a 4X3 area so the full length of the 48" T-5s is taken into account. This means there will be a lot bigger grid of data points. Just as reference... my old gird of 3ftX3ft took about 1.5-2hrs to just take one set of readings. So you can see that time (and boredom) will soon become a factor. Hence I have to choose carefully and need your input in what would be valuable.

sanjay.

[gcarroll]

Originally posted by Sanjay
I know one thing I am going to test for sure, is light output at 30 inches. This would simulate light reaching the bottom of a 24" tank, with lights at 6" above.

Sanjay I was under the impression that most people using T5, run them 3" - 4" off the water. This small difference would definitly increase par compared to a system that is 6" off the water. That is why I sugested a 4" handicap for the T5.

[chilwil84]

the 4" height if the norm but it would be nice to know the full potential of t5s with the odd size aquariums out there that seam to be gaining popularity are usually highter than standard aquariums but at the same time like you said most have them 4" above a standard 18-24" tank great now i am not sure which way i hope it goes sounds like it is going to be a good test whatever way it goes

[hahnmeister]

Hello Sanjay,
I have contemplated the same..."what is a fair comparison?" the bulbs themselves are completely different. A T5 has a lower overall intensity at any given point, but a wider area to spread that light out over, so it tends to penetrate deeper. And with both types of light, the output can be varied, and to a certain extent, depends largly on the type of reflectors used. You couls try a 'best of the best' comparison. This would include using 3000K bulbs for both the halide and the T5. the lumen figures from the mfg's suggest a lumen/watt output of 85 to be the most for T5HO (95 for regular T5), and 105 for halide. So from the bulb standpoint... halide is the winner.

But then you have the reflector variable. A good 60%, if not more of the T5's output depends on the reflectors. Individual parabolic reflectors are assumed to be the most likely, and most useful pairing for comparison... but which one?!?!? Icecap, Tek (or the new Tek on the way), Fauna-marins, etc? And the list from overseas gets even more complicated. Sure, you could eliminate the reflector all together, and this might not be a bad place to start... but a halide w/o a reflector and a T5 witout a reflector are hardly fair comparisons, or realistic.

And which halide reflectors? 250wattDE ones like the PFO mini, SLS optix3? Or the lumenmax3 or lumenarcDE? You could spend just as much time trying to compare every T5 reflector as you have with the halides (and we cant thank you enough for that already). It just seems to hard.

And 3000K? Who uses that? FWIW, T5s are able to generate blue light better... they lose less PAR as they get bluer in comparison to a halide. A 3000Kish bulb can lose about half its output just going to 10,000K, and another 50% going to 20,000K. A T5 though, seems to lose very little... after all, there are no supplimental-actinic halides really as much as T5s.

So while a 3000K MH vs T5 might lean towards the halide, a 10,000K blend may not.

And then there are ballasts and ventilation considerations. OSRAM? Sylvania? or even though its not 'spec' would an Icecap660 overdriven setup also be worth looking into? FWIW, ballasts can vary the outputs greatly. The aromat (volsche-schwab or however you spell it) and OSRAMs seem to be the best because of their thermal monitoring right in the ballast, and Sylvanias are the US equal to the OSRAMs, yet I have not heard as of yet any equally raving reviews. My comparison tests of the OSRAM, V-S, Sylvania, Universal Triad, Advance, and Icecaps will have to wait until I return to the US in a few days... and how soon I can get my hands on the V-S ballast I still need.

There is also the aspect that a PAR test wont show. Unlike Halides, T5s and now LED's dont put out as complete of a spectrum. A 20,000K T5 has little to no red, orange, yellow...unlike a 20,000K halide, and is very unlikely to be used alone as a lithe source.

The other thing that seems to vary between T5s and halides is how they both get the light into the water. Rays that are less perpendicular to the water surface seem to get reflected easier, and a larger reflector area, as is seen with T5s, catches and redirects this back to the water. in the past, your tests do not take into consideration the light being passed through a semi-reflective surface, and the role it plays beteen various reflectors. The light lost from a PFO mini-pendant at the surface compared to a lumenarc3 is more than an open-air test will show.

The best methods I have come up for comparison have been as follows:
1. 'dumb luck' match: Try to find a T5 bulb mix that closely matches what you already have in spectrum, using visual perception, or better yet, a spectrometer, and then measure the comparable PARs and distributions. This gives you as close to a realistic comparison of 'likely used' systems. Examples:
-pheonix 14,000K 250wattDE on HQI ballast is similar in spectrum to a 3x39wattT5 setup consisting of 3x aquablue/11,000K by G-man or ATI, and 3x blue+/actinic+ by G-man or ATI.
-Ushio 14,000K 250wattDE on HQI could be compared in spectrum to a 6x39watt system of 3xGE 6500K or G-man midday and 3x ATI blue+.
-EVC 20,000K 250wattDe on HQI is similar to 2x39watt G-man true actinic03, 2x ATI aquablue 12,000K, and 2x ATI blue+.

the thing is.. I realize that wattage-wise, the true-wattage of the 250wattDE is over 300watts, while the T5s are well under 250... so 8x39wattT5 is a more fair comparison... however, FWIW, my 6x39watt Tek spanks my 250wattDE setups.
2. based on 'dumb-luck', but better: Take some 'signature' halide bulbs, then use a spectrometer to match the coloration of a system similar to the halide in T5 bulbs. then analyze the rest w/o regard for output so much as output-PAR per watt at various levels/spreads within the tank. This is better than #1 in that is allows you to more easily compare w/o need to match wattages/distribution. The best I have come up with is to compare a PFO 250wattDE pendant to a 234wattT5 setup... still a small wattage difference in favor of the halide (enough to warrant a 8x39wattT5 setup instead!!.. as the PFO M80 really draws about 320 watts and the T5s only draw a true 240), but both are able to light a 36"x18" 'breeder' size area in a similar manner. I have the PAR readings with the Apogee to show you if you like (they are in my photobucket and have been posted in other threads already). Finding 'spreads' that are fair to compare are harder than anything. A 6x54watt T5 setup is more of a fair comparison (coming to 324 watts) to a 250wattHQI, but the HQI covers a 3x3 area at best, and the T5s will cover a 4'x2' area in 'real world'. Unless you want to compare some dual halide setups to the T5s, this is why I think 3' T5s are the best size to compare. A 8x39wattT5 setup is the best true-wattage comparison to a m80 ballast then.

3. Being that some things are impossible to directly compare, I think the best way to 'round up' a T5 comparison, and then compare to halides would be to take spectral readings of a good deal of T5s out there, then in combinations with each other. These combinations would combine 2-3 types of bulbs... like a sun pro, a blue+, and an aquablue. I think its far more useful to know what the color comparisons between some T5 combos are than individual bulbs, since T5s, unlike halides, are not capable of 'stand alone' use. Then light field comparisons of typical combos over typical size tanks would be a good way to determine lighting fields.

4. Perhaps the best yet is something based on #1. you could give us a list of halides that you would want to compare... sort of 'benckmark samples' like a radium 250wattSE on a M80 ballast, and the 'T5 groupies' could try to come up with a 8 bulb combo that would match as closely as possible. I would suggest 250 DE/HQI bulbs only at that: the XDE 10,000K, the Ushio 10,000K, Ushio 14,000K, Pheonix 14,000K, Hamilton 14,000K, EVC 20,000K, and Ushio/BLV 20,000K. Then after we come up with the best comparison list of bulbs, you could compare them in a 8x39watt format. the T5 bulbs I would make sure to compare would be as follows: the entire lines from Giesemann, ATI, Aquascience, and UVL, as well as the GE 3000K and 6500K. Combos of these bulbs should give you accurate matching to any halide out there.

~~~on a side note, I would make sure to have a laser pyrometer on hand to make sure that the T5s are at their ideal temp. their outputs can vary wildly with heat buildup.

~~~there still remains the question of 'what reflector is fair' for the halides. Heck, all my testing is based on comparing 250watt bulbs (the most common and multi-use bulb it seems), and DEs at that. A M80 is fair for the ballast, as its the designated spec after all, and I can tell you that Icecap e-ballasts arent even worth comparing (they get spanked by T5s). For 250wattDEs, a lumenmax3 or lumenarc3 would be good to compare to T5s since they have the best 'spread' and penetration. But comparing a SLS RO3 or PFO mini-pendant might also be a good idea as they are more common.

As for getting parts/ballasts/reflectors/etc. I would contact Aquarium Obsessed to get two 4x39watt samples of their ultra-solaris fixtures (used side by side as a 8x39watt setup). They have removable reflectors, so you could easily swap around between Tek and Icecap retrofit reflectors. They also use the OSRAM ballasts and have a fan so that the unit monitors the heat on its own... one less variable to worry about. I know AO would be interested in having their fixtures tested by someone such as yourself, as it would really help their product launch in the US.

You might try the same with ATI to get one of their powermodules through Reefgeek. The reflectors are fixed, but this unit promises to be the highest output fixture you can get... 2x the output of a Tek light with the exact same bulbs. It might interest ATI to have its fixture stacked up against halides as well as the fauna-marins... fauna-marin being a major competitor, and the powermodul having such a performance pinnacle for T5s... it might be nice to see how far the T5s can go.

If you need Icecap SPR reflectors to test, I have new ones around I can send you in whatever length you need, or Im sure IC wouldnt mind.

[hahnmeister]

Oh, to be more direct, I would compare 8x39wattT5s to a 250wattDE HQI at 3", 6", 9", 12", 18", 24" and 30" on a 4'x4' grid... 3" spacing is fine, and no more than 5" Id say.

You say you want to just observe the differences, not 'pit' them against one another. I just dont see this happening. You might consider pitting them and getting it over with... its gonna happen sooner or later (you already said 'faceoff' in the thread title...lol).

If all you are trying to do is compare a halide to T5s in a 'general use/ typical configuration'... Ive already done that with the Apogee. The water becomes a huge variable when comparing the two types of bulbs however.

[dippin61]

Originally posted by Ti
Registered: Nov 2006
Location: new york
Occupation: Engineer
Posts: 7



Be nice now.

hehe.. i just reread my post.. sometimes tones dont make it through

the obviously comment was because of his low post count, wasnt meaning obvious as in not knowing for not knowing sake. and thats why i ended it with and

sorry.. didnt mean to come across any different

[pjf]

A comparison criterion should be the amount of UV radiation emitted that may be detrimental to coral health.

Dana Riddle has found that MH SE bulbs fail to block most of the UV generated (http://www.masla.com/reef/uvlighting.html). You have found that the “shields” of DE fixtures filter PAR but fail to block most of the UV (http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issu...4/feature1.htm).

[hahnmeister]

pjf, if this is a concern, you can simply adjust the PAR ranges from 400-700 to 300-700 so you can see the UV range outputs. Otherwise, the determination of the effects of UV on corals would be something more up Dana's alley, and a seperate test all together. A T5 vs. MH comparison wont address it as much as the use of some long-wave and short-wave UV bulbs in a long-term exposure test.

[EnderG60]

my only suggestion would be to actually test thier ability to penitrate water. 3" intervals is fine, but I would love to know how each light differs at depth, since it might have the same values at the surface but at 24 or 30 inches who knows.

[supertech3]

I think like the others if it is a comparison you must check them both at a mounting height typical with a hallide bulb. Mine are mounted inside a canopy(8" off the water) both the t5's and the mh.
The comparison may also need to be against different wattage bulbs,color spectrums, manufactures.

[Ti]

Sanjay: Maybe you could do this. The aquablue bulb is supposed to be 11K, so compare a set of all aquablue with nearly the same wattage to a XM 10k halide maybe?

[The Grim Reefer]

The Aquactinics 6x54 watt solar flare is likely the best T5 fixture out there as far as raw power.

If you want to measure raw power I would fill up a Solar flare with GE daylights and match it against a 2x250 with Lumenarcs and Iwasaki 6500K's.

[Shawnts106]

I definatly want to hear what the PAR is on Geismann bulbs as well as UVL bulbs and ATI bulbs.. as well as..

JUST TEST THEM ALL! haha