![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
One thing I've noticed in my research is that different plants that one
might include in an aquarium require different amounts of light. The usual measure is "watts per gallon" which strikes me as a rather shaky measure since it produces different light intensities for a wide, shallow tank as opposed to a short deep one. But leave that aside for the moment, a more fundamental question is "watts of what kind of light?" Fluorescent lights produce more light per watt than do incandescent. And there are halogen and metal halide lamps that have yet different efficiencies. For comparison, direct sunlight is about 1000 watts per square meter (pretty close to 100 watts per square foot) when the sun is directly overhead (which technically only happens in the tropics) and becomes less intense as the cosine of the angle between the sun and vertical. Virtually any artificial lighting for a tank is going to be significantly dimmer than that. To produce the sunlight of a bright summer day in my tank would require something like 170 watts of light--more actually, since that 170 watts has to be the energy of the actual light and not include the energy "wasted" by the light. Figure about 400 watts for fluorescent and four times that (with the consequent heat) for incandescent. Obviously, you don't want anywhere close to that if for no other reason than heat. Still, I wonder if the little 17 watt fluorescent that came with my "starter kit" is really adequate. So how much light does a planted aquarium really need and what options are there to get it? -- David L. Burkhead "Dum Vivimus Vivamus" "While we live, let us live." My webcomic Cold Servings http://www.coldservings.com -- Back from hiatus! Updates Wednesdays |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
heat is the real consideration. you dont want to overheat the tank with anything
except "cool" lights. altho there isnt much difference between regular fluorescence and "sunlight" types in terms of spectrum (both are full spectrum) there is a difference in the intensity of certain spectrums, more blue in regular and more red in "sun" types. the more red the better stuff looks, so get a typical light unit set up for the size of your tank and then pop for the extra cost of one that makes the fish and plants look good. at least with GF, most real plants wont survive long anyway. there are now some of those LED available, so check those out too. Ingrid |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
To revisit this, (and cross it over to rafp, which I didn't even know
existed when I started) recommendations for lighting (based on what particular plants require in the aquarium) are generally given in "watts per gallon" Well, I did some research on how much light is produced per watt by different types of lighting systems as follows: Tungsten Incandescent: 5-17.5 Lumens/Watt Quartz Halogen: 24 T12 Fluorescent: 50 Compact Fluorescent: 45-60 White LED: 26/70 (some prototypes are running up to 150) Metal Halide: 85-95 T5 Fluorescent: 104 So the question when trying to judge such recommendations remains "watts of what kind of light?" Example: Ludwigia Repens (one of the plants in my aquarium) calls for 2-4 watts per gallon. 58-116 watts in a 29 gallon tank (my tank size). The problem 116 watts of T5 fluorescents is about six times as much light as 116 watts of Tungsten incandescents. If the recommendation referred to incandescents, then 20 watts of T5 fluorescent would serve. (All of this, of course, assumes lights with spectra that are reasonably useful for the plants.) One thing I note, the metal halide lamps, they are less efficient than the T5's, but they do pack a lot more watts into a smaller package. Which just goes to show that "efficiency" is not the be-all-end-all of the matter. -- David L. Burkhead "Dum Vivimus Vivamus" "While we live, let us live." My webcomic Cold Servings http://www.coldservings.com -- Back from hiatus! Updates Wednesdays |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yes, you have correctly deduced that watts per gallon is a rough
estimate and not an absolute rule. I think typical plant guides dumb things down in such a WPG way is because of the perception that people are not sophisticated enough to be able to handle a more accurate accounting of aquarium light levels. (i.e. counting the actual photons with micro-Einsteins per square-meter per second) I've read that this traditional WPG number comes from Normal Output (NO) 40 watt T12 tubes. Now the most common tube is T8, which are at least 20 percent more efficient. T5 and T6 are at least another 20 percent more efficient than T8. Also, WPG glosses over the fact that we really aren't interested in the light produced by the bulb, but in light produced by the bulb and then sent down into the aquarium. A great reflector on linear tubes can more than double this. Also note that a great reflector prevents light from being wasted from shining from one tube into another tube. So, most aquaium fixture are less than great, and I would go so far as to say not very good. ![]() Some bulb types don't allow great great reflectors. For example Power Compact. PC tubes always shine light from one part of the bent tube into another (restrike) and their physical shape prevents a pseudo parabolic reflector. So, you really have to crank up the wattage to get good CF results. And it seems to be quite silly to get CF aquarium fixtures for the most common linear tube length of 4 feet. But, that's what vendors have been pushing for the past 5 years -- go figure! Other bulbs types do allow great reflectors. Metal halides are something of a small point source of light, so it's quite easy to put a super efficient reflector behind the bulb. These send pretty much all of their light straight down into the tank in a narrow beam. Aesthetically, this is an almost theatrical spot light with shimmering effect. Also, when you scale up past 500 watts, the best some metal halides are more efficient than T5 in lumens/watt. Linear tubes also allow great reflectors. The standard commercial T5 HO fixture that does this exceptionally well is the TekLight. I simplify light levels by delimiting with a count of four-foot linear fluorescent T8 tubes in front of a good, but not excellent reflector. Low is one tube, Medium is two tubes, High is three tubes or more. It's still just a rough estimate, and it ignores concerns about the depth of the aquarium. For example, a single T5 or T8 tube with an excellent reflector provides medium light to a not-very-deep aquarium. I think the traditional WPG "rule" will be exterminated when LED fixtures become cost effective. The best of them are now past 150 lumens/watt. In 5 years, we might see 200 to 250 lumens per watt from them. Here's to the future! In rec.aquaria.freshwater.plants David L. Burkhead wrote: : To revisit this, (and cross it over to rafp, which I didn't even know : existed when I started) recommendations for lighting (based on what : particular plants require in the aquarium) are generally given in "watts per : gallon" Well, I did some research on how much light is produced per watt by : different types of lighting systems as follows: : : Tungsten Incandescent: 5-17.5 Lumens/Watt : Quartz Halogen: 24 : T12 Fluorescent: 50 : Compact Fluorescent: 45-60 : White LED: 26/70 (some prototypes are running up to 150) : : Metal Halide: 85-95 : T5 Fluorescent: 104 : : So the question when trying to judge such recommendations remains "watts of : what kind of light?" : : Example: Ludwigia Repens (one of the plants in my aquarium) calls for 2-4 : watts per gallon. 58-116 watts in a 29 gallon tank (my tank size). The : problem 116 watts of T5 fluorescents is about six times as much light as 116 : watts of Tungsten incandescents. If the recommendation referred to : incandescents, then 20 watts of T5 fluorescent would serve. (All of this, of : course, assumes lights with spectra that are reasonably useful for the : plants.) : : One thing I note, the metal halide lamps, they are less efficient than the : T5's, but they do pack a lot more watts into a smaller package. Which just : goes to show that "efficiency" is not the be-all-end-all of the matter. : |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If you have a planting plan to maintain the aquarium and a sword or other aquatic fern, then you should consider the T5 lights or compact. Compact lighting is old technology, low efficiency. Compact fluorescent light bulbs need replacing every six months because the spectrum of change, they lose their power.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Lighting for my new Planted Discus Tank | Justin | Plants | 4 | December 6th 05 09:25 AM |
Planted Tank Focus Group -- Custom made lighting hood | fireblade | Plants | 2 | September 7th 05 03:39 AM |
Planted Tank Focus Group -- Metal halide lighting units | fireblade | Plants | 1 | September 6th 05 03:24 PM |
Planted Aquarium Calculator | Chuck Gadd | Plants | 3 | December 9th 03 04:18 AM |
Planted gf aquarium | ponder | Goldfish | 0 | November 19th 03 01:05 AM |