What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Lighting upgrade question

vraev

Carnivorous plant enthusiast
Admin
Hi guys,

After pondering about the issue for about 2 years now, I have finally decided to step up and upgrade my lighting.

Currently I am using a 4' T5 system (4 bulb: 54watts/bulb) (20000 lumens) + 4' T8 (2 bulbs) to light my two WxLxH (2' x 2' x 3') tanks.

The upgrade options are as follows:

1) Get a 4' T5 system (6 tube: 54watts/bulb) : 30000 lumens. Use that as a single fixture on the tanks. approx 225$ with bulbs.

2) Get two 200 watt 6400K Sunblaster CFL. One for each tank. Average lumen output per bulb is 15000 lumens. (http://sunblasterlighting.com/125-200-watt-cfl-lamp.php) 150$/bulb setup with fixture

The purpose is to get good colour in my plants without cooking them. I thought about it and MH and HPS lights are just unfeasable to keep temperatures down. The plants are raised about 1' from the bottom by trays, pots whatever.

What do u guys think is a better upgrade? Which one might offer a more bang for the buck and not just an incremental upgrade over my current system?

thanks,

Varun
 
Hey Varun, I dont have as much experience as some others, but thought Id give you my opinions as I have tried both.

The cfl I was using was their 125W bulb, so not quite the same intensity as the 200W you are looking at. I found it was very bright, and colored up plants nicely, except was only good for ~40cm x 40cm area. Anything outside this area grew, but didnt have the color I wanted. Putting it further away to cover more area meant my plants were losing color, and closer it made the area even smaller. It was also very hot. I am now using 4' T5 set up, with the single Sunblaster fixtures strung together to make a 4 bulb fixture. This covers ~110cm x 60cm area and uses 216W which is much better IMO. To get the same coverage using the CFL's I would need to use 2-3 of the 150W bulbs, meaning more $$ in electricity and I think it would also be more heat.

I now only use their T5's and dont see myself switching anytime soon!
 
Same here...I'm a T5 proponent myself, at least until a better (cheaper) type comes out.
 
What do u guys think is a better upgrade?

What type of clip-on reflectors do you currently use on your T5 bulbs?

If it is "none", the best upgrade would be parabolic clip-on reflectors for the T5 bulbs to bundle all the light down.
 
What type of clip-on reflectors do you currently use on your T5 bulbs?

If it is "none", the best upgrade would be parabolic clip-on reflectors for the T5 bulbs to bundle all the light down.
I totally agree. A significant amount of light is lost in fixtures that do not have parabolic reflectors. Basically, if you can see light from any angle other than looking up into the fixture then that is wasted light.
 
I agree with the above. I should have added I install these reflectors on my Sunblasters.
 
t5 also have replaceable bulbs so it is cheaper when the bulbs get old to replace them than whole cfl
 
His fixture has good reflectors...
(same brand I use)
 
His fixture has good reflectors...
(same brand I use)
To which of the above posters (& reflectors) does this comment refer? :scratch:
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Talking about what V is currently using Ron :)

heheheheh I see you edited your reply old friend :p

FWIW , a reflector shape similarr to the McDonald's double arch would be the most efficient design IMHO. Makes perfect sense if you think about it. It would allow you to direct the light from the back side of the bulb. Whereas most any other design would direct some of this light back onto the bulb itself.

The fixtures I like use faceting in an attempt to reduce this inefficiency. Most true parabolic shapes are designed to focus the energy of a source that is outside of the parabola

but then me dunno ???
 
Last edited:
  • #11
V,
I'd be a bit suspicious of the efficiency of the 200 watt CFLs because their design loses a large amount of light to obstructions.
I should have added I install these reflectors on my Sunblasters.
Are the reflectors
- parabolic?
- true mirror reflectors?

The fixtures themselves look very similar to my 1st set of T-5's (I think they are Sun Blaze). The reflectors that are available for these fixtures are a poor attempt to do an add-on reflector (& they are definitely not mirrors). The reflectors pictured for the Sun Blaster is a different design but doesn't appear to be parabolic - just semi-circular ...

The Sun Blaster 4-page PDF on Nano technology fails to explain how they even incorporated Nano technology into their reflector (unless I missed it??). However, my BS indicator pegged when I read the following on their reflectors:
Made possible only through the application of Nanotechnology, this revolutionary reflective surface has the ability to capture lost light, and simultaneously convert that light into the brightest, most brilliant light we have ever produced! The metallic crystal layer within the reflective surface helps spread the T5 light across the plant canopy diffusing it deep into the plant foliage.
Capturing "lost light" & converting it? Please .... :-)) (sounds like they outsourced their pamphlet-writing to the Superthrive folks ...) :0o:

*** My apologies in advance for the excessive sarcasm. The lights may indeed be a good value for the money - but I was less-than-impressed with their attempt-to-be scientific and their similarity to my 1st units (which are ok but far from optimum). ***

Talking about what V is currently using Ron :)

FWIW , the shape of the McDonald arch would be the most efficient design. Makes perfect sense if you think about it. It would allow you to direct the light from the back side of the bulb. Whereas most any other design would direct some of this light back onto the bulb itself.

The fixtures I like use faceting in an attempt to reduce this inefficiency,
All the reflectors I've seen use facets vs an actual curve (although they vary in how many). My 2nd set of T-5 fixtures use the "McDonald arch" you mentioned with true mirror reflectors. The downside (or possibly upside depending on your view) is that they only supply the reflectors, ballast & assorted hardware -- so I had to build the remainder of the 'fixture'. So far, I'm quite happy with them as I can easily add tubes and change spacing as my needs change...
heheheheh I see you edited your reply old friend :p
More than once ... :crazy:

The fixtures I like use faceting in an attempt to reduce this inefficiency. Most true parabolic shapes are designed to focus the energy of a source that is outside of the parabola
Outside .... :scratch: Hmmm - must ponder this ....
 
  • #13
thanks for all the replies guys. here is the fixture I currently use: http://www.contractorlighting.com/high-bay-fluorescent-4lmp-t5ho-120277-p-152.html
If you have a look at the page, you can see the reflector in one of the pics.its a big single piece of metal that has been folded into wedges for each tube to maximize reflectivity without wasting light output reflecting back onto nearby tubes.

yeah... I read about the sun blaster reflector and fixtures...but there are reasons I don't like them:
1) Expensive...each reflector is 25$. Each single tube fixture is 36$. Totally unreasonably expensive.
2) Their nano crystal coated reflector diagram is precisely a diagram and their data of optimal reflectivity has no raw measurements of lumen output when compared to the standard reflector. I agree that it is just bull crap.

Hey B...I know u were suggesting to get a second T5 4 tube, but that would be sealing the top of my tank mate and it would cook the plants inside. Also..there isn't room to get a second one on top there. The fixture alone is almost 2' wide. The 6 tube T5 is also still about the same size and should be fine.,...but there is no way I can fit a second 4 tube on there.

Thanks for the suggestions Ron...yeah...Butch told me that the 200watt CFL due to being coiled looses a bit of light by lighting parts of its own bulb instead of shooting it all down in the direction you want it to go. The issue is that there is an overlap zone of the TWO tanks which are side by side and their metal mesh on top has a 5" or so area where the light is absolutely wasted as the metal blocks all light from falling anywhere on the plants. The pro with a CFL would be spot lighting and avoiding the edge area of the tank where this metal railing exists.
 
  • #14
v,

You have struggled with this decision for over a year old friend.... and I dont think you are any closer to a decision

:p
 
  • #15
Personally, I would go with T5s in a fitting which has shiny silver curved (parabolic'ish) reflectors. The reflectors won't be absolutely perfect but would be considerably better than none at all. Butch is correct, in regards to spiral CFL inefficiencies.
 
Back
Top