New Lumen Bright Reflector. ... any info on them - Page 6

drudude · #**126** 10/28/2007, 04:53 PM

gents,
i have found this thread increadiably informative. so i would now like your opinions. I have a 6' by 2' by 2' tank, and am going to use 175w 12k or 15k bulbs (coralvue or Iskwa respectivly) with icecap ballast. (this is due to increadibly high cost of power)

I would like too use 3 reflectors (and thus 3 175w bulbs) one for each of the sections (the tank is cross braced having 3 2' by 2' holes at the top.)
I was originally looking at the luminarc 3, but am starting to think that the lumenbrights might be better due to the low wattage of the bulbs and the depth of the tank.

My thought is that the LB will penitrate to the bottom of the tank and because i am using one for each 2'by2' the spead will not matter that much.
Thoughts?

Deuce67 · #**127** 10/28/2007, 05:38 PM

Raised the lights to where the lamp is at 16" The dark areas in the middle got brighter and I like how it looks now. New par readings:
[IMG]

[/IMG]

Deuce67 · #**128** 10/28/2007, 05:40 PM

Old Par readings
[IMG]

[/IMG]

JRaquatics · #**129** 10/28/2007, 07:06 PM

WOW Duce that a huge difference. Your tank is looking good. Thanks for the par readings. I stopped by Acropora nut's (Mike) house about a week ago and saw first hand a great reef tank. The new Lumenbright reflectors directed more light in the tank and less outside. After seeing the new lights on Mikes tank I decided to sell my lumenarc minis and get the Lumen bright reflectors. I should be getting them this week and I can't wait. They will be a great addition to my new tank.

Jim you rick work looks great. I must also say that Mikes coral colors have intensified since he placed the new reflectors on his tank. Everyone must see these lamps in person, if they are installed to the right height, I believe these LB reflectors are the best thing out right now for rectangular tanks.

edwar050 · #**130** 10/28/2007, 08:21 PM

I think those par readings are much better, thanks for the great post with pics. I just wanted to say keep in mind in Dueces tank that although they are really high they are also 400 watters on a 24" tall tank if I am not mistaken that is 5 foot long.

bubbletip2 · #**131** 10/28/2007, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by drudude
gents,
i have found this thread increadiably informative. so i would now like your opinions. I have a 6' by 2' by 2' tank, and am going to use 175w 12k or 15k bulbs (coralvue or Iskwa respectivly) with icecap ballast. (this is due to increadibly high cost of power)

I would like too use 3 reflectors (and thus 3 175w bulbs) one for each of the sections (the tank is cross braced having 3 2' by 2' holes at the top.)
I was originally looking at the luminarc 3, but am starting to think that the lumenbrights might be better due to the low wattage of the bulbs and the depth of the tank.

My thought is that the LB will penitrate to the bottom of the tank and because i am using one for each 2'by2' the spead will not matter that much.
Thoughts?

I am glad you have enjoyed the thread. It got a little hairy there for a bit.

I am not sure what the energy costs are in Bermuda but the first thing I would recommend is really considering betrween 175w and 250w bulbs/ballasts first. If you are planning on keeping SPS, the general recommendation with a 24" deep tank is 250w bulbs. Now I would love to see some par readings on some 175w bulbs and these new LuemnBrites. I would think from Deuce's examples that the intensity would be higher with the LumenBrites and because you have 2x2 foot areas to cover you could probably get away with lowering them a bit to maybe 10"-12" and still be fine with spread - hard to say without testing but from the anecdotal evidence we have so far I am sure it would test out positively. And with 175w bulbs you would not have to worry about heat as much as these 400w bulbs. If you do go with the 175w bulbs, I woudl have ot say that your more demanding SPS should be in the top half of the tank for sure to allow for optimal growth and color.

I just figured out the differnece betwen energy costs here on 3 - 175w vs 250w bulbs ran for 8 hours a day(would not be a problem reducing light cycle to this amount of time.) and it showed a difference of $5 per month. Again, you should really decide on the wattage first - you don't want to buy bulbs and ballasts twice - the reflectors will be good with either and can be reused but an extra $600 U.S. for a new set of bulbs and ballasts would not be an ideal situation for you I am sure.

I do love the 12K Reeflux and have a 250w on my 30g cube that is doing great. I would like to hear what you decide...

bubbletip2 · #**132** 10/28/2007, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Deuce67
Raised the lights to where the lamp is at 16" The dark areas in the middle got brighter and I like how it looks now. New par readings:
[IMG][/IMG]

Wow Deuce, your tank is lit up like a Christmas tree and you raised them 6 inches

Looks really good and the middle seems to have filled quite nice. In my tank I compromised a bit and left some open room on the sides of the tank for LPS and softies. I am pretty shocked at the par readings myself. If you raise these little babies you get par to the sides where there was barely any at 10.5 inches. That acro that was at 110 is now at 340 - holy cow! Now you will have less heat transferred at the surface, better circulation in your canopy, less evaporation, and more light for all of your coral. What do you know, these things do work as they are supposed to, for aquarium keepers.

Glad to see you don't have to shell out more money for different reflectors

And thank you for doing some real testing for everyone so people can see first hand what is really going on here.

bubbletip2 · #**133** 10/28/2007, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JRaquatics
WOW Duce that a huge difference. Your tank is looking good. Thanks for the par readings. I stopped by Acropora nut's (Mike) house about a week ago and saw first hand a great reef tank. The new Lumenbright reflectors directed more light in the tank and less outside. After seeing the new lights on Mikes tank I decided to sell my lumenarc minis and get the Lumen bright reflectors. I should be getting them this week and I can't wait. They will be a great addition to my new tank.

Jim you rick work looks great. I must also say that Mikes coral colors have intensified since he placed the new reflectors on his tank. Everyone must see these lamps in person, if they are installed to the right height, I believe these LB reflectors are the best thing out right now for rectangular tanks.

Thanks for the complement on the ("rick")rock work. I have 30lbs of rock in the sump so that I can open the display a bit for the fish. Lots of caves and plenty of ledges for coral. Just starting this one out though so it will be a bit until we see some real progress.

And yeah Mike's tank is insane. I know you have seen a bunch of pictures but man when you see it in person do you really verify for yourself how crazy the color and growth is in the tank. Not something many people see up close for themselves.

drudude · #**134** 10/28/2007, 09:33 PM

im in bermuda and we are talking about between 30 and 35cents a kwh. if i went with 250 in stead of 175 i would be looking at like $50 a month..(if i remember correctly.. i know it was a lot). And that was before pumps, chiller ect. ect. the thing is i dont need crazy growth, i just need to maintain. can i run a 175w on a 250 ballast? would that overdrive the bulb. mind you if i only ran the bulbs for 8 hour you might be right, it might not be that bad. when i was calc it was for 10-12 hour days.

The reason i ws going to go with the Iwakia (SP) is because on sanja website it has like a .59 efficentcy. i figure i could get the most bang for the buck.

What i am trying to do most is keep my electirc bill to a min.

bubbletip2 · #**135** 10/28/2007, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by drudude
im in bermuda and we are talking about between 30 and 35cents a kwh. if i went with 250 in stead of 175 i would be looking at like $50 a month..(if i remember correctly.. i know it was a lot). And that was before pumps, chiller ect. ect. the thing is i dont need crazy growth, i just need to maintain. can i run a 175w on a 250 ballast? would that overdrive the bulb. mind you if i only ran the bulbs for 8 hour you might be right, it might not be that bad. when i was calc it was for 10-12 hour days.

The reason i ws going to go with the Iwakia (SP) is because on sanja website it has like a .59 efficentcy. i figure i could get the most bang for the buck.

What i am trying to do most is keep my electirc bill to a min.

If you look on the home page of RC you will find a tank electrical calculator. I put in 35 cents a kwh and the difference was $63/month for 8 hours on a 250w and $44/month on the 175watters. So figure an extra $200 a year or so for food for your coral. Something to think about. Again, if you decide on the 175 watt bulbs, than place any SPS in the top 10 inches of the tank and you should be fine. Just do your research as to what SPS will be easier to maintain with lower light levels. I feel your pain on the elctric bill. Wow I thought our electric was expensive.

Your tank may be a good test to see what these LumenBrites can do. I think everyone can benefit form hearing about your progress.

MJAnderson · #**136** 10/29/2007, 07:50 AM

I guess I don't understand the logic of replacing a reflector that gives a broader spread with one that gives a more focused thread and then raising it up to get...a broader spread. Is it for circulation only?

MJAnderson · #**137** 10/29/2007, 08:11 AM

btw, here's the article I couldn't find earlier on photoinhibition and saturation points. The acros all saturate at 300-340. So if you believe the study, you're wasting light by providing anything greater than that (which would be the top half of your tank). Although they don't have photoinhibition points, I have some notes from the last MACNA at home that gave some additional readings. The one acro they do mention inhibits at 600 and saturates at 300. I think I remmeber from MACNA that monti caps hit photoinhibition around 300? It sticks out because I went home and lowered my cap. =)

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007...hotoinhibition

It's always difficult to gauge success from a picture, because they obvious response is 'what could it have looked like if things were done differently?'

bubbletip2 · #**138** 10/29/2007, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MJAnderson
I guess I don't understand the logic of replacing a reflector that gives a broader spread with one that gives a more focused thread and then raising it up to get...a broader spread. Is it for circulation only?

Hey MJ,

I think you can answer your own question if you read through my dribble to why it is so important to raise your lights. Secondly, if you looked at the picture of the LumenArcs that I own you will see that you need to raise those too in respect to a less than optimal situation being a five foot tank. Raising your lights will create more spread, given with any reflector.

I beleive one of the biggest reasons experienced reefkeepers tend to give the advice to newcombers in the hobby that you do not need 400 watt bulbs is out of fear that they will give the advice and the person will burn their coral. By raising your lights you are decreasing the amount of UV radiation that our bulbs give off - especially DE bulbs. What amount of UV radiation is lossed by raising your lights I will leave to the scientists. But there is some lost for sure. Another reason that advice is given against 400w bulbs is the amount of heat transfer these things give off is immense. If you have 3-5 of these things over your tank, most situations will require a chiller. Excessive heat swings can mean stress on the inhabitants which tends to turn into a chain of events where much of your livestock is dead. I would be very careful myself also when giving advice to those that desire 400 watt bulbs that their set up should consider these variables.

From the previous post again, raising your lights will mean more air circulation throughout the canopy which in turn will mean less heat build up and a happy tank. And again you will have less evaporation and RO/DI water to replace.

What do you lose out on by raising your lights? Intensity!

This is the real issue here people. Why don't most reefkeepers usign Lumenarcs raise their lights? I have an answer for you, because they will spread the light out too thin and the intensity drops to a level that "maintaining" coral becomes more difficult in all areas of the tank especially on the bottom.

These LumenBrites were designed for the reefkeeper because we want the light in our tanks. Deuce's examples are very telling as we can now see that the laser beam gets much wider as you raise them to a recommended height. The intensity is still there and that is what these reflectors are all about. Deuce if I can speak for you brother, you are probaly more shocked than any of us.

The real issue here is revealed. Most tank designs have centered around keeping lights too low to get full use out of a bulb. By driving the light down in the tank instead of out, you can raise your reflectors getting all the benefits listed above and still have plenty of light to grow SPS at all levels of the aquarium granted it is not deeper than 36".

For all of those that are afraid of the possibility that aquarium coral may suffer the same photoinhibition as coral seeded in its final resting place in the ocean where noone is photoacclimating that coral to a higher depth in the ocean, I would suggest you stick to 250w bulbs. If you are concerned about your ability to keep SPS alive because you keep bleaching them under 400w bulbs than change to 250's. For those that know how to benefit from the intensity that 400w bulbs give off, more power to you. There are examples to explain every paradox in this hobby ladies and gentleman. Mike's tank is one of them.

I have been an aquarist for 28 years and have seen every gimmick in the freshwater and saltwater hobby. A few years after I started reefkeeping , I stopped contact with pretty much everyone involved in this hobby and just kept my tanks. I did not discover RC until last year and one of the big things that brought me back ironically was all the new technology that is available to reefkeepers to help us keep our livestock healthy and thriving, not just "alive." I support anyone out there that is providing products that work for us and do what they are meant to do.

The LumenBrites just happen to be a very important step in improving the light we provide our systems as simply just one piece of the puzzle to keeping a thriving reef tank. One thing is for sure I am glad I bought a 20" canopy to allow me to set up LumenBrites in an optimal way.

Jim

Deuce67 · #**139** 10/29/2007, 09:16 PM

Im pretty satisfied on how the LBs perform now. They are definitely meant to be installed high up. Would I get the same results with full size LAIII, I dont know and prolly will never personally know. Yes, im pretty shocked on the results being that high up and looking back at the current readings, it looked like I missed a couple of readings. In the center, higher up, on the old reading, it was showing 220. Now its up to 320. And on the left side were it showed 700 is now at 410. A couple of thing I like so far is now I have all kinds of working space above. I can even stick my head in the canopy and have a good topdown look. Second, I keep my heaters to kick on at 78 degrees. The MH just went out and the tank is at 78.6 degrees. No chiller, just a couple of Icecap fans in the hood and a small fan on the sump. Time will tell on how the results will be and Im confident Ill have positive results. I dont know anything about photoinhibition and dont really care. There is a couple of guys in my reef club who runs 1000W MH on LAIIIs on thier system with excellent results. On my old 90 my caps were getting a par reading of over 500 and it showed good growth and color. Ill stick with these LBs for now.

bubbletip2 · #**140** 10/29/2007, 10:20 PM

I am happy to hear that it is working out. You have finally seen the "light" Deuce or should I say 'laser beams."

You made yourself a believer and sometimes in this hobby that is best. You can't take everyone elses word for it all of the time, sometimes you have to give it a try and see what you think.

As I said you are now going to have less issues with heat transferred to the tank. I do not run a chiller either and have almost the same setup except I have LumenArcs. I should be getting my LumenBrites soon. I have 4 fans installed and usually only the two run and my temp swings a half a degree to a degree from 78.5-79.5. I have not been over 79 in two weeks.

As you can see for yourself how strong the LumenBrites can be, I would still recommend acclimating new coral as those 400watters are pretty strong, obviously. Acclimate them slowly and you will have a beautiful reef if all your other variables are up to par.

And lastly I am glad you were able to raise your lights and were not restricted by your canopy. You will have to post some top down shots for all of us in the future.

Jim

Hendersonracing · #**141** 10/30/2007, 09:02 AM

how high do you have them? Im thinking about raising mine up a little also?

Deuce67 · #**142** 10/30/2007, 09:32 AM

Mine is 16" from the waterline to the bottom of the lamp.

Hendersonracing · #**143** 10/30/2007, 09:46 AM

Ok I may mount mine up a little to to try to eliminate some heat! and Like you get in the top of the tank!

bubbletip2 · #**144** 10/30/2007, 10:28 AM

I have to say I like this type of discussion going on. I think it will be helpful for everyone to discuss how to optimally use the LumenBrites in existing setups and those in planning their new set ups.

Deuce67 · #**145** 10/30/2007, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bubbletip2

And lastly I am glad you were able to raise your lights and were not restricted by your canopy. You will have to post some top down shots for all of us in the future.

Jim

Funny you mentioned topdown shots. I actually took some last night! Keep in mind Im no photographer and only have a point and shoot camera to use.
[IMG]

[/IMG]

[IMG]

[/IMG]
[IMG]

[/IMG]

bubbletip2 · #**146** 10/30/2007, 03:58 PM

Deuce,

Those are some pretty nice shots bud. Seriously, I really like the composition on the first two and the next two have good detail also. Shoot away my friend. Not a big deal but I think it would be nice if you brightened them up a little bit. Everybody wants to see what you are seeing.

Deuce, you got some really nice coral there by the way. Take care of those gems

Jim

Deuce67 · #**147** 10/30/2007, 04:03 PM

Lol! Ill try to get some brighter shots next time. But my big fat head tends to block out the light from above!

bubbletip2 · #**148** 10/30/2007, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Deuce67
Lol! Ill try to get some brighter shots next time. But my big fat head tends to block out the light from above!

I did not mean the shots were not manageable. A lot of my shots come out darker than I wanted. Just brighten it on the computer afterwards

brad23 · #**149** 10/30/2007, 06:00 PM

Just for all the low light SPS sayers in this thread, I had much better growth and color when I went from a 250w 14k to a 400w 20k that put out 600 more par at the water surface.

I have a couple of friends in my club who use 400w bulbs on 24 inch deep tanks with great success.

I tend to go with Sanjays results more than this new article.

biasegab · #**150** 10/31/2007, 07:53 AM

So, what do you think about these configurations?
which is the best?

a) 2 large LB on a 4'x 2,3' surface
b) 2 large LB on a 4,5' x 2,3' surface

a) and b) with 400W reeflux bulbs with coralvue e-ballasts, 2' deep

only sps!!!

Gabriele