Yes, you can change bulbs every month if you want to, but it won't help you to grow healthier plants.
Cheers,
-
You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up
Eheim external - when to renew media?
- Thread starter AndrewH
- Start date
Cheers,
I use Arcadia Plant Pro T5s. They are the best light tubes I have ever used. On the instructions, it says to change them every 3 years. So they are being honest.
They also attached two graphs of PAR/ LUX to show how it deteriorates over the course of 3 years. It loses about 1/2 of its effectiveness in that time
They also attached two graphs of PAR/ LUX to show how it deteriorates over the course of 3 years. It loses about 1/2 of its effectiveness in that time
Mihai Boldor
Member
Let's not go too far, I was talking about changing bulbs every year witch is a bit of time, and if light output drops to 50% you should consider changing them. The guys who made this experiment saw that bulbs lose about 30% of intensity in the first half year or so and then gradually lose some more until a point and then a constant value was measured
No you shouldn't.
And so what? People use too much light to begin with. That's why there are so many problems in the hobby. It all stems from the fact that there are too many Klingons out there preaching about how they need more PAR. So everyone gets programmed to worship at the temple of Megawatt and their plants melt into oblivion or the tank becomes an algae farm only suitable for bio-fuel research.
Then the Klingons blame their problems on totally unrelated issues such as nutrients, or ratios, or water parameters, or on other nonsense.
Plants have a very simple adaptation to reduced lighting. They just increase the density of their light gathering pigments. As long as they have adequate access to nutrients and CO2 they really don't care that the lighting is reduced and it actually helps them. So you will not see any reduction in the health of the plants and you might actually see an increase in health because the plants are not having to defend themselves from mindless bombardment of photon torpedoes from the Klingon Bird of Prey.
So, while the Klingons were busy measuring the PAR reduction, did any of them think to measure the growth rates? Or was any data collected regarding the health of the plants? No, probably not, because they were too busy finding excuses to proliferate weapons of mass destruction. I did just the opposite, and instead of looking at PAR, I looked at how the plants responded to old bulbs. Some information is shown in the thread www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/two-new-tubes.8273/
Cheers,
Mihai Boldor
Member
Ok, let's leave it at that, I see you are getting worked up for nothing so I apologize if I insulted your opinions.
roadmaster
Member
I believe plant's are very good at collecting /utilizing what light is available.
Don't believe sunlight dropping by 50% such as on cloudy day's,or near dusk/dawn has adverse effect on plant growth outdoor's.
Considering many prolly use more light than is needed,a slight drop off in performance would mean less CO2 needed in high tech,and same old same old in low tech.
I change mine out when they quit.
I see I was too slow on the draw,and clive beat me to the point.
Don't believe sunlight dropping by 50% such as on cloudy day's,or near dusk/dawn has adverse effect on plant growth outdoor's.
Considering many prolly use more light than is needed,a slight drop off in performance would mean less CO2 needed in high tech,and same old same old in low tech.
I change mine out when they quit.
I see I was too slow on the draw,and clive beat me to the point.
roadmaster
Member
If you think maybe lighting is too much, then reducing it could do no harm however one achieves the reduction.
Some relector's better than other's .
Don't believe reflector's are ALWAY's a bad idea.
In low tech ,low light,they are great benefit.
TOO
Member
No, reflectors are just a way of maximizing the effect of the bulbs you have, i.e. with reflectors you can go with a less powerful bulb and get the same effect as with a more powerful and no reflectors = you save on your electricity bill.
Thomas
Puntius
Member
No he is not getting worked up he is talking pure truth dude, everyone just want to slam as much lights on their tanks. I used to have 428watts over my 155 gallon tank and now I am down to 160-200watts and my plants are still growing very nicely and more healthy then before. I am doing the ramping up and ramping down method and it works very well.
Hi all,
You can find actual figures for the decline in out-put of the different types of discharge lighting, it is "lamp lumen depreciation" or "lamp lumen maintenance": <http://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/when-do-i-replace-halide-lamps.9600/> .
The figures for electronically ballasted linear T5 lights is about 95% maintenance over 20,000 hours, and realistically the only time they produce less light is after they've failed.
How do you know when you need to change your lamp? when it won't come on.
Details are here from Cree, who don't have any reason to "big up" the efficiency of T5 lamps <http://www.cree.com/~/media/Files/Cree/Lighting/Misc Tech Docs/LightingCalculationsintheLEDEra_Benya.pdf>.
cheers Darrel
You can find actual figures for the decline in out-put of the different types of discharge lighting, it is "lamp lumen depreciation" or "lamp lumen maintenance": <http://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/when-do-i-replace-halide-lamps.9600/> .
The figures for electronically ballasted linear T5 lights is about 95% maintenance over 20,000 hours, and realistically the only time they produce less light is after they've failed.
How do you know when you need to change your lamp? when it won't come on.
Details are here from Cree, who don't have any reason to "big up" the efficiency of T5 lamps <http://www.cree.com/~/media/Files/Cree/Lighting/Misc Tech Docs/LightingCalculationsintheLEDEra_Benya.pdf>.
cheers Darrel
Last edited:
Mihai Boldor
Member
Ok, I will leave my lights to burn out from now on and see for myself if you were right or not.
Cheers
Cheers
James O
Member
So using Cree's 20,000hrs and assuming an 8hr photoperiod, we look forward to your findings (in the lighting forum
) by August 2020 at the latest
Mihai Boldor
Member
I use Juwel t5 54w tubes, maybe they are not that long lasting, I don't know how long they are supposed to be running, I keep them on for 9 hours a day. The tricky part is that I have just changed them about a month ago )
)Hi all,
I'd be very surprised if the T5 lamp fittings weren't both tri-phosphate and electronically ballasted. An easy way to tell whether a ballast is electronic or not is at the end of life, if the tubes flashes on and off the ballast is magnetic, if it just fails and won't re-strike the ballast is electronic.
cheers Darrel
I think we had a thread about Juwel lamps, but it may have been the T8's rather than the T5's. Possibly because they are a strange size in the T8 luminaire the lamps were the old style halophosphate lamps which show a much faster rate of loss of brightness. <http://www.ukaps.org/forum/threads/hygrophila-polysperma-alternative.19823/page-2#post-201350>.
I'd be very surprised if the T5 lamp fittings weren't both tri-phosphate and electronically ballasted. An easy way to tell whether a ballast is electronic or not is at the end of life, if the tubes flashes on and off the ballast is magnetic, if it just fails and won't re-strike the ballast is electronic.
cheers Darrel
The Juwel ballasts are electronic.
I would agree with the very short life of Juwel T8 tubes, usually about a year before light output is significantly lower than as new. Shame I never took a photo of the fixture one new Juwel T8 and a one year old Juwel T8. The old tube is really really dim compared to new tube, give away is plants stopped growing and it becomes difficult to see things in the tank.. Mind you Juwel tubes were considerably cheaper than Arcadia tubes.
As for Acadia T8 tubes, after one year possibly could judge old and new tubes, but basically little change. However after two years, obvious difference in brightness, between new and old, the light definitely a bit dimmer and yellowing on old tube. Two year old Arcadia definitely considerably brighter than year old Juwel T8 tube.
Now moved to Juwel T5 (with Juwel T5's) a couple of weeks ago, so nothing to report apart from pearling plants and monsterous growth.
I would agree with the very short life of Juwel T8 tubes, usually about a year before light output is significantly lower than as new. Shame I never took a photo of the fixture one new Juwel T8 and a one year old Juwel T8. The old tube is really really dim compared to new tube, give away is plants stopped growing and it becomes difficult to see things in the tank.
. Mind you Juwel tubes were considerably cheaper than Arcadia tubes.As for Acadia T8 tubes, after one year possibly could judge old and new tubes, but basically little change. However after two years, obvious difference in brightness, between new and old, the light definitely a bit dimmer and yellowing on old tube. Two year old Arcadia definitely considerably brighter than year old Juwel T8 tube.
Now moved to Juwel T5 (with Juwel T5's) a couple of weeks ago, so nothing to report apart from pearling plants and monsterous growth.
Mihai Boldor
Member
In my case I changed my Juwel T5's after one year and the difference in light output was visible.
Already costed up Arcadia T5 replacements, ready for next year.
roadmaster
Member
[/quote]I would agree with the very short life of Juwel T8 tubes, usually about a year before light output is significantly lower than as new. Shame I never took a photo of the fixture one new Juwel T8 and a one year old Juwel T8. The old tube is really really dim compared to new tube, give away is plants stopped growing and it becomes difficult to see things in the tank.
As for Acadia T8 tubes, after one year possibly could judge old and new tubes, but basically little change. However after two years, obvious difference in brightness, between new and old, the light definitely a bit dimmer and yellowing on old tube. Two year old Arcadia definitely considerably brighter than year old Juwel T8 tube.
Now moved to Juwel T5 (with Juwel T5's) a couple of weeks ago, so nothing to report apart from pearling plants and monsterous growth.
Doubt that plant's stop growing with reduced lighting for as mentioned,,,they will use what light is available.
Perhap's the growth slowed,, but so long as there is SOME light,,they did not stop growing.
Yes plants serious slowed, rather stopped.
Before going high tech planted, I also used to get green algae after about a year of using Juwel T8 tubes, I know people say light does not produce algae (and I know that now), but I would use it as an indicator lamps were failing as algae would start appearing on substrate and plants and nothing else had changed. Change the Juwel T8 tube (especially the pinky colour-lite one) and algae would go away all by itself. In those days I would attribute it to UV given off by the tube as a new tube would quickly degrade the plastic reflector clips and any other plastic within its range.
