![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Everyone says the reference point to get lights are base on watts/gallon.
My question is how tall does the tank has to be in order to use that rule. Does 3 W/G become 6W/G when you place the coral in the middle. For example if you tank is 18" tall and you place the coral at 9" will you double the light on them? how about at 15" up? I ask because I've been seeing those nano cubes with 18-30 watts with nice coral set up. TIA Ruben |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
When you figure watts per gallon, you are figuring the
well being of everything in the tank at all levels. But yes if you don't have as strong of a light you can move the corals up higher, but it's just so much easier to to have plenty of light, and not have to worry about moving the corals higher to get enough light. With lower light levels you can do soft corals instead of the higher light corals. Wayne Sallee Wayne's Pets RubenD wrote on 12/24/2006 4:45 PM: Everyone says the reference point to get lights are base on watts/gallon. My question is how tall does the tank has to be in order to use that rule. Does 3 W/G become 6W/G when you place the coral in the middle. For example if you tank is 18" tall and you place the coral at 9" will you double the light on them? how about at 15" up? I ask because I've been seeing those nano cubes with 18-30 watts with nice coral set up. TIA Ruben |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
RubenD wrote:
Everyone says the reference point to get lights are base on watts/gallon. My question is how tall does the tank has to be in order to use that rule. Does 3 W/G become 6W/G when you place the coral in the middle. For example if you tank is 18" tall and you place the coral at 9" will you double the light on them? how about at 15" up? I ask because I've been seeing those nano cubes with 18-30 watts with nice coral set up. TIA Ruben Ruben, Watts per gallon is the worst measurement for light just because of the reasons you list. It does not take into account the depth of the tank or where in the tank you are putting the creatures. What you need to look at is how much light the coral needs and how much light you have. A nano cube with 30 watts of light (say a 12 gallon) is only 2.7 watts per gallon or so, while my 180 with 2 400 watt lights is 4.4 watts per gallon. Both of which are very low according to the watts per gallon rules of thumb. My 180 is setup as a SPS tank and really has intense lighting on each end of the tank, with no light in the middle. While my nano has moderate light on the whole tank. As for the depth, you are correct in that if you move the coral up in the tank you will increase the amount of light on the coral but you do not change the watts per gallon. Kim |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Watts per gallon is the worst measurement for light just because of the reasons you list. It does not take into account the depth of the tank or where in the tank you are putting the creatures. What is the best measurement for lighting then? I supposed the coral under the bulb is the winner regardless of the watts/gallon rule or the size of the tank, but how much light would be acceptable? If I place the coral under the 30watts bulb, he'll be getting not 6w but 30w, right? What you think? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
RubenD wrote:
Watts per gallon is the worst measurement for light just because of the reasons you list. It does not take into account the depth of the tank or where in the tank you are putting the creatures. What is the best measurement for lighting then? There is no good measurement for hobbiests. If you had the equipment you could measure the par in different places in your tank and then see if the coral you were looking at would survive with that amount of par. I supposed the coral under the bulb is the winner regardless of the watts/gallon rule or the size of the tank, but how much light would be acceptable? If I place the coral under the 30watts bulb, he'll be getting not 6w but 30w, right? Close but not quite. If the light was a point light source, with a perfect reflector then yes the coral would be getting all 30watts of light The best thing I can say is post on here what size of a tank you are setting up and what specific corals you want to keep and where at in the tank you want to keep them. What you think? Kim |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Wayne Sallee wrote:
While the watts per gallon rule is not perfect, I find it interesting when people knock it as being of no value, and then they can't even come up with anything better. OK, here is something better - LUX, on a per organism basis. IE: This acropora needs X lux, that maxima clam needs y lux, etc. Then one can use any old light meter... er... make that any old WATER PROOF light meter, to see if the spot they plan on placing the organism in their tank gets enough light. Next best thing after that would be lumens per gallon. (I know you said lumens is percieved light (or something similar) a few posts ago, but that ain't EXACTLY so. Lumens can be looked at measure of light output in the visible spectrum -- more correctly called "luminent flux") Lumens per gallon would indeed be better than watts per gallon. I would even be OK with the watts per gallon were it to be based on the radiant flux wattage of the light, rather than the electical consumption of the light. In fact, this would be the best overall method, since it would show the true light output of the bulb. But usually, when you see "watts" listed with a bulb, they are talking about electrical consumption, not radiant flux. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Wayne, Someday you need to learn how to read. There is a good measurement that will give usable info PAR or PUR, the only problem is that the tool to measure it is to expensive for most hobbiests. Watts per gallon is meaningless. Let me give you an example. I setup a 125 gallon tank for a friend of mine that has 150 watts of light on it. What corals can he keep in that tank? Wayne Sallee wrote: While the watts per gallon rule is not perfect, I find it interesting when people knock it as being of no value, and then they can't even come up with anything better. Wayne Sallee Wayne's Pets kim gross wrote on 12/30/2006 5:51 AM: RubenD wrote: Watts per gallon is the worst measurement for light just because of the reasons you list. It does not take into account the depth of the tank or where in the tank you are putting the creatures. What is the best measurement for lighting then? There is no good measurement for hobbiests. If you had the equipment you could measure the par in different places in your tank and then see if the coral you were looking at would survive with that amount of par. I supposed the coral under the bulb is the winner regardless of the watts/gallon rule or the size of the tank, but how much light would be acceptable? If I place the coral under the 30watts bulb, he'll be getting not 6w but 30w, right? Close but not quite. If the light was a point light source, with a perfect reflector then yes the coral would be getting all 30watts of light The best thing I can say is post on here what size of a tank you are setting up and what specific corals you want to keep and where at in the tank you want to keep them. What you think? Kim |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
RubenD wrote:
Watts per gallon is the worst measurement for light just because of the reasons you list. It does not take into account the depth of the tank or where in the tank you are putting the creatures. What is the best measurement for lighting then? I supposed the coral under the bulb is the winner regardless of the watts/gallon rule or the size of the tank, but how much light would be acceptable? If I place the coral under the 30watts bulb, he'll be getting not 6w but 30w, right? What you think? Watts is not a measure of lillumination. LUX is the measurement of illumintation. Lumens is a measurement of light output. therefore it makes no sense to ask if a coral would be getting "30w" of light. The difference between lux and lumens can be illustrated thusly: LUX will decrese with distance from bulb. How much a decrease there will be needs to take many factors into account - distance from bulb, what is in between (ie: water, glass, etc) and even the spectrum of bulb. LUMENS will NOT decrease, since the bulb is still just as bright no matter how far you are from it. Lumens is how much light gets put out, LUX is how much light is reaching what you are trying to illuminate. What we SHOULD all be using is LUX. It would make sense to say things like "this crocea clam needs about 32000 lux", but I have never seen that used. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Add Homonym wrote:
RubenD wrote: Watts per gallon is the worst measurement for light just because of the reasons you list. It does not take into account the depth of the tank or where in the tank you are putting the creatures. What is the best measurement for lighting then? I supposed the coral under the bulb is the winner regardless of the watts/gallon rule or the size of the tank, but how much light would be acceptable? If I place the coral under the 30watts bulb, he'll be getting not 6w but 30w, right? What you think? Watts is not a measure of lillumination. LUX is the measurement of illumintation. Lumens is a measurement of light output. therefore it makes no sense to ask if a coral would be getting "30w" of light. The difference between lux and lumens can be illustrated thusly: LUX will decrese with distance from bulb. How much a decrease there will be needs to take many factors into account - distance from bulb, what is in between (ie: water, glass, etc) and even the spectrum of bulb. LUMENS will NOT decrease, since the bulb is still just as bright no matter how far you are from it. Lumens is how much light gets put out, LUX is how much light is reaching what you are trying to illuminate. What we SHOULD all be using is LUX. It would make sense to say things like "this crocea clam needs about 32000 lux", but I have never seen that used. As I stated in another responce on this thread. There is a problem with lux. It does not weight the light according to photosythisys, IE yellow and red add to lux but do not add much to photosynthisys. But it is a much better measurement than watts per gallon since as long as you know the spectrum of the lights or you are using a full spectrum light source. Kim |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
55 watts of light for 26 gallon ? | Dukester | Plants | 2 | November 18th 05 03:53 AM |
pleco per gallon rule? | spiral_72 | General | 7 | February 7th 05 06:38 PM |
How many watts per gallon do I need with T5? | James Smith | General | 12 | October 23rd 04 04:08 PM |
How many watts per gallon do I need with T5? | James Smith | Plants | 12 | October 23rd 04 04:08 PM |
How many watts per gallon with metal halide lighting | Scott Rogahn | Plants | 1 | May 30th 04 12:36 PM |