Lighting Website Updates

[Sanjay]

Sorry.. I missed it. I just looked at the table. Time to give the USHIO rep a call.

sanjay.

[xabo]

Originally posted by Sanjay
Sorry.. I missed it. I just looked at the table. Time to give the USHIO rep a call.

sanjay.

Keep us posted!!!

[k9cop1512]

I just recieved some 250W, DE lamps. I ordered the pheonix 14K.
The box and lamp says PEC lamp MH-250W/TD Blue. Is this the Pheonix 14K? They sent me the wrong ones earlier this week---sent me hamilton 14K's. Tim

[Reefvet]

Originally posted by Aquatic Hamster
For anybody that is interested, this is the reply I got from PEC concerning PEC and Phoenix bulbs.

Dear Sir,

Thank your for your inquiry.
Yes, the Phoenix lamp and PEC products are exactly the same.
Just to let you know, Phoenix is our head office in Japan, and all of the
blue metal halide lamps are made in our factory in Japan. Thus, they will have the same spec.
http://www.peclamp.com/aboutpec.htm

[k9cop1512]

thank you!

[Herbert T. Kornfeld]

I just was at the Christmas party for the Wisconsin Reefers Society this weekend, where a french reefer, and his Mrs. reeferette, attended. The Mrs. is a lighting engineer, and an ex-student of yours Sanjay...took two classes of yours on lighting engineering at Penn St. she said. We had an interesting discussion on all things lighting...as she has the unique dual background to solve many lighting/reef questions.

One thing we talked about was HQI vs. Electronic ballasts. She seems to be a huge fan of electronic. I told here of my perceptions of HQI maintaining the color of my 10,000K bulbs better than the icecaps (a while back, when changing out mmy Aqualine 10,000Ks, I noticed that in comparison to the new bulbs, the icecap seemed to have more of a color shift than the HQI...and usually HQIs, esp with bluer bulbs, are said to color shift faster than e-ballasts. She broke it down into what we could see with out eyes and what the actual output/ PAR would be. She said that on HQI, the PAR might start out higher, but will diminish that much faster and by replacement time have a much lower PAR, sometimes only 40% of starting, compared to an electronic ballast which will hold its PAR longer...and may color shift more, but keep the higher output longer. The HQI w/ 10,000K might look like it has shifted less according to our eyes, but its output is waaaaay less than an e-ballast.

She also confirmed a theory of mine. T5s are a superior lighting technology...less draw, more PAR per watt than anything by far...but for some reason, corals, esp SPS, just seem to favor the ability to focus themselves on the point-source intense lighting of HID lighting.

So sometimes PAR isnt everything...which I know will upset alot of people who say "PAR is all that matters, not spectrum or anything else". I always believed my corals alwaysgrew better under bluer light...but hey...

[Sanjay]

Originally posted by Herbert T. Kornfeld
I just was at the Christmas party for the Wisconsin Reefers Society this weekend, where a french reefer, and his Mrs. reeferette, attended. The Mrs. is a lighting engineer, and an ex-student of yours Sanjay...took two classes of yours on lighting engineering at Penn St. she said. We had an interesting discussion on all things lighting...as she has the unique dual background to solve many lighting/reef questions.

One thing we talked about was HQI vs. Electronic ballasts. She seems to be a huge fan of electronic. I told here of my perceptions of HQI maintaining the color of my 10,000K bulbs better than the icecaps (a while back, when changing out mmy Aqualine 10,000Ks, I noticed that in comparison to the new bulbs, the icecap seemed to have more of a color shift than the HQI...and usually HQIs, esp with bluer bulbs, are said to color shift faster than e-ballasts. She broke it down into what we could see with out eyes and what the actual output/ PAR would be. She said that on HQI, the PAR might start out higher, but will diminish that much faster and by replacement time have a much lower PAR, sometimes only 40% of starting, compared to an electronic ballast which will hold its PAR longer...and may color shift more, but keep the higher output longer. The HQI w/ 10,000K might look like it has shifted less according to our eyes, but its output is waaaaay less than an e-ballast.

She also confirmed a theory of mine. T5s are a superior lighting technology...less draw, more PAR per watt than anything by far...but for some reason, corals, esp SPS, just seem to favor the ability to focus themselves on the point-source intense lighting of HID lighting.

So sometimes PAR isnt everything...which I know will upset alot of people who say "PAR is all that matters, not spectrum or anything else". I always believed my corals alwaysgrew better under bluer light...but hey...

Do you happen to remember her name ?

I never trust my eyes when it comes to lighting. Human eyes are not designed to work with PAR, we just do not treat all photons equally.

I think its time to run some longterm tests on MH lamps and thier degradation with different ballasts. I have tried to start it 2 times and had to abort midway due to technical problems with the lamps I was using for the tests (ends broke off on the 150s.. and one lamp died when trying this out on 400W lamps). May be its time to try again. It is quite likely that the electronic ballasts prolong lamp life.... I have some random data that may point towards it.. but I am not yet ready to back it up strongly..since I have hunch that it may also involve lamp quality.

sanjay.

[jrandreassen]

Hi Guy's...
These threads are intresting, would it be possible to point me to a FAQ or definitions page. For me as a fairly novice in the lighting ralm it would be good with a primer for jargon and definitions.
Thanks
JR

[Codeman00]

Originally posted by jrandreassen
Hi Guy's...
These threads are intresting, would it be possible to point me to a FAQ or definitions page. For me as a fairly novice in the lighting ralm it would be good with a primer for jargon and definitions.
Thanks
JR

http://reefcentral.com/modules.php?s...&eid=2&ltr=all
http://www.reefcentral.com/FAQ/general/index.php

[Herbert T. Kornfeld]

Sanjay, her name is Julie...cant remember her last name right now, but she looks to be about 40 (maybe 35, maybe 45 tops). Ill get a last name for you.

[Sanjay]

Here is the 2nd installment of the tests of 175W lamps.


http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/12/review

For those of you huge fans of 14K lamps.. make sure you check out the Iwasaki Aqua2.

sanjay.

[Sanjay]

Originally posted by jrandreassen
Hi Guy's...
These threads are intresting, would it be possible to point me to a FAQ or definitions page. For me as a fairly novice in the lighting ralm it would be good with a primer for jargon and definitions.
Thanks
JR

A lot of the terms are defined in the first article I wrote on lighitng.

http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/...lideLamps1.htm

sanjay.

[tsalter]

whoa thats crazy par for that iwasaki.

[B.PETERSEN]

For those of you huge fans of 14K lamps.. make sure you check out the Iwasaki Aqua2.

sanjay. [/B][/QUOTE]

Sanjay
Do you know if Iwasaki is going to come out with 250 and 400 watt versions of this bulb?

Thanks
Bryan

[Sanjay]

No idea, ask ICECAP.. they got me this lamp and htey have better connections with Iwasaki.

The par of this lamp rivals a lot of 250s, I would love to experiment and see if this lamp in a lumenarc or lumenmax would be enough to replace some 250s. But unfortunately I do not have a set up where I can do this easily.

sanjay.

[B.PETERSEN]

I know, I can't believe a 175 watt 14K has more par than most 250watter. I will try and contact IC.

Thanks for the info and all your hard work on all this lighting information.
Bryan

[Codeman00]

Sanjay, Do you have any pictures of the new Isawaki Aqua2 175W lamp on a tank? This sounds like a great bulb to replace my XM10K when it comes out.

[timr]

Sanjay, when will you update the website so we can compare all of the bulbs in 175 watt study? Right now it only list the XM and Aqualine bulbs.

Thanks

[dgasmd]

Originally posted by Sanjay
I think its time to run some longterm tests on MH lamps and thier degradation with different ballasts. I have tried to start it 2 times and had to abort midway due to technical problems with the lamps I was using for the tests (ends broke off on the 150s.. and one lamp died when trying this out on 400W lamps). May be its time to try again. It is quite likely that the electronic ballasts prolong lamp life.... I have some random data that may point towards it.. but I am not yet ready to back it up strongly..since I have hunch that it may also involve lamp quality.

This is something I have been eagerly awaiting for 2+ years I think you ahve gone above and beyong in the testing of lamps, but the biggest question still remains for most of us: So how long should I run this lamp that I know puts out X PAR to begin with?

I guess in all reality, many more of us should have PAR meters to do this right given we spend so much in lights and other stuff I'll continue to patiently await for the tests. As a hint, I think you should start with the 400 watt SE lamps

[Herbert T. Kornfeld]

Nah, 250watters are more common, and DE would be the most interesting...but we all know 400wattSEs would be top on your list dgasmd!

[dgasmd]

I am just trying to be consistant here. He started testing 400 watter and went down from there in wattage in the rest of the testing. I am just helping out LOL................

[tsalter]

I am with ya dgasmd.

[trueblackpercula]

sorry

[trueblackpercula]

Sorry for this question if it has already been answerd. But can some one tell me .
1) what is the par for a 250watt se 13kmegachrome bulb on a icecap electronic ballast?
I just can't sem to find it anywere
Thanks
Michael

[RedEyeReef]

I can't wait for the Ushio 14K 400w SE...