Lighting my 225

[afgun]

Hello. I'm relatively new to the Austin area. We had a 150 reef before we moved to Tejas, for about 9 months. We are putting together a new system, but I'm really stumped as to what to do for lighting...

It's a 30" deep tank, and 6' long. So I'm thinking a combination of 3 MH and some actinic CFLs or VHOs. We plan on keeping a wide variety of soft, LPS and SPS corals as well as some fish and other critters that belong in a reef.

There are more opinions out there than people, it seems.

Do you recommend 250 or 400W bulbs for a 30" deep tank with my mix of "stuff" ? What temperature ? And as for wattage of the actinic ?

Thanks!

--andrew

[+mcallahan]

for 30" deep, I'd go 400 to get the penetration to the bottom of the tank.

I've always been happy with 14K temp as it is a perfect combo of white and blue light. Everyone's tastes are different tho so you'll probably benefit from buying some used bulbs @ different temps and trying them out to see what you like. Since you are just starting your tank, it'd be a perfect time as you can switch out bulbs w/out worrying about how it might affect your corals.

For actinics, the general rule of thumb is 1 W of actinic for each W of MH. Personal tastes will dictate how much actinic supplementation you want.

[afgun]

Thanks. 400 is what I had been leaning towards.

What if I get crazy and instead of using 3x400@14k, I do 3x250@10k and 2x250@20k for a broader spectrum of light. Yes, this gets to be crazy expensive for ballasts and bulb replacement, but I'd like to ensure that I have a really good-viewing tank. Am I nuts?

Referencing this discussion http://www.reefland.com/forum/equipment-archives/3274-250-hqi-better-than-400-watt.html; obviously my tank is quite a bit smaller than that one...

[caferacermike]

No I don't think you are nuts and if you are willing to do the many 250's it could make for a very nice and well lit tank. I would still consider running a couple of VHO actinics to really make the colors pop. I forget which one of the 4 super reefers, Calfo, Borneman, Melev or Sanjay said something once about how 400w MH penetrate past 24". Ok so that's good advice and all but how many of use grow SPS on the sand bed of a 30" tank? I prefer to cover the bottom of my tank with LPS brains, Zoas, and rics. So that makes me wonder if what was said about 400w bulbs is really even pertinent to the hobby. I think 250's would be perfect for growing all of your SPS from midwater up, as most hobbyists do anyways.

Edit:, not sure how I left that "5" out of 250 but it sure changes everything when you do.

Edited September 6, 2009 by caferacermike

[+mcallahan]

No I don't think you are nuts and if you are willing to do the many 250's it could make for a very nice and well lit tank. I would still consider running a couple of VHO actinics to really make the colors pop. I forget which one of the 4 super reefers, Calfo, Borneman, Melev or Sanjay said something once about how 400w MH penetrate past 24". Ok so that's good advice and all but how many of use grow SPS on the sand bed of a 30" tank? I prefer to cover the bottom of my tank with LPS brains, Zoas, and rics. So that makes me wonder if what was said about 400w bulbs is really even pertinent to the hobby. I think 20's would be perfect for growing all of your SPS from midwater up, as most hobbyists do anyways.

Mike, I pondered the same thing. Maybe not getting 400W of light to the sandbed is a good thing as it makes for "zones" where you can grow other types of corals.

I will say that my friends @ Vivid run 2x1000W and 1x400W on their tanks. They say that 250W just wasn't getting it done for them so they went to more juice. Yes, they have softies/zoas/acans on the sand bed and they are doing fine.

What makes Vivid different from afgun is that Vivid is probably mostly focusing on rapid coral growth for resale so therefore the need for more light power.

[subsea]

Good thread and many good thoughts. From experience, 400W MH are very hot. Why use light to push coral when food works much better. Read Calfo on lighting for reef tanks are read Ron Shimek (H:\Feeding a reef tank DSB.htm). In addition to being expensive up front, excessive lighting is expensive to operate and often requires chillers to remove excessive heat. Just my opinion.

Pat

[DrChayus]

I would go with 3 250 double ended MHs in Lumenarc III reflectors, and VHO actinics. Bulb choice is all a matter of taste.. I agree with others in that 400 watt bulbs might be overkill/too hot, especially under a canopy.

[afgun]

My aquarium guy is pushing me strongly towards 400W HQI and actinics to supplement, given the depth of my tank. I have a 12" canopy, so I should be able to get the lights far enough above the tank to minimize heat transfer. And I have a chiller, just in case.

Recommendations on brand/model?

[offroadodge]

3-400wMH/SPS14k and 2-36"VHO SuperActinics. Then if you want LED's for moonlight just add them. VHO by far for actinics are the most eye poping. Come see my tank one night after 8:59pm and you will agree with VHO. TsMO......(thats my opinion)

[offroadodge]

3-400wMH/SPS14k and 2-36"VHO SuperActinics. Then if you want LED's for moonlight just add them. VHO by far for actinics are the most eye poping. Come see my tank one night after 8:59pm and you will agree with VHO. TsMO......(thats my opinion)

[afgun]

So with a change in finances, my tank still sits empty in the living room. I have received a modest bonus from my employer, though, and am considering stuffing money towards my tank. To that end, I am strongly considering stepping up to the PacificSun BT-EX 120 (1 master and 2 slave modules). The US distributor (just getting up and going) assures me that these will put out sufficient light for my tank. Of course, it's still a pretty penny to swallow, but it looks like this would allow me to skip running the chiller, drastically reducing my over-time run cost. And the geek-factor of computer controlled lighting isn't bad, either. Your thoughts ?

[+Daniel]

Those are cool, but expensive. LEDs probably are big part of the hobby's future.

Personally, I've seen a lot of great T5 tanks lately, including my own, so I would personally recommend going that route. But I agree with Mike on the MHs-- 250w lamps are all that you need, even at 30" depth. 400w are only necessary, from what I've seen, in SPS-only tanks where there are light-demanding corals placed very deep. However, many hobbyists wish to keep an array of corals-- thus proper placement is the more important factor.

As for Vivid's use of 400w and 1000w lamps, it is very likely that they keep these lamps far from the surface of the water. This allows them to maximize light coverage, while minimizing the numbers of MH fixtures.

[+mcallahan]

As for Vivid's use of 400w and 1000w lamps, it is very likely that they keep these lamps far from the surface of the water. This allows them to maximize light coverage, while minimizing the numbers of MH fixtures.

No further than the average hobbist's canopy.

Here's a pic from my video. The black bar on the bottom of the screen is the top of the tank.

[afgun]

Those are cool, but expensive. LEDs probably are big part of the hobby's future.

Yes, expensive initial outlay, but assuming that they will work fine for 5 years, at the end of that time I'm ahead of the game financially due to no bulb changes and no chiller running... I hope. I hope. I am still working the numbers, and will have to wait to see how the bank account shakes out after the next couple of weeks, but I am definitely anxious to get my tank up and running. Thank you for the advice.

[+Hydro]

I have a 175 gallon tank (24" deep) with (3) 400 watt lights with (3) 24" VHO actinics and I'm finally very happy with my lighting system. To be honest your lighting wattage should be somewhat based around what color spectrum and brand of bulbs you choose. Different brands and colors have different lumen outputs and have to be considered.

For example when I started my reef tank I had a 400 watt 14k ushio in the center and 250's on either side with 10k reeflux bulbs (all single ended). The 250's were brighter and penetrated to the bottom of the tank much better than the 400 watt. This is because typically the more blue the bulb has the less lumens it produces. I changed my center bulb out to a reeflux 12k (SE) (which I think has the best color and lumen output of any bulb). The reeflux 10's were very bright but the color wasn't right, too white, so I changed out my 250's to the reeflux 12k bulbs. The color was great but changing these bulbs seemed to cut my lumens in half which I didn't like. I ended up upgrading my 250's to 400's (all reeflux SE 12k now) and this seems to be perfect for me. I can tell that from my experience (3) 250 watt 10k reeflux bulbs are brighter and penetrate the tank better than (3) 400 watt 12k reeflux bulbs. If you are considering 12k-20k bulbs I would have to recommend the 400's.

I wouldn't get several 250's with different colors, the different color bulbs do not blend well together in the tank and you will be able to see sections of these different colors. If you want to use all 250's or 400's I would suggest picking all the same color bulbs and use VHO t5's to add other colors if you want.

My company sells lighting products for plants so I'm very familiar with the LED vs MH debate. LED's will probably be the future of lighting but they aren't ready yet. Sure you can light your tank with LED's and if you only have fish that is a great option. But if you want to grow coral don't be fooled by claims that they will produce the same results as MH. I have seen plants DIE under $2k worth of LED's, they don't pack the punch needed to maintain aggressive growth. VHO t5's are a much better choice if not using MH lighting IMO.

I could help you setup a water-cooled lighting system if you are interested in something unique.

[Mike M.]

One thing I have not seen mentioned is your power supply parameters. If you have only one 15 amp service to your tank and you are going to run couple of 100-120W return pumps, a skimmer with more than Silence pumps on it that pulls something near 1 amp, you will not be able to safely supply 3-400W MH ballasts. So word to the wise, look at your electrical infrastructure and either plan for it, or plan to add a dedicated circuit to supplement the electrial supply. If memory serves, the 400W ballast pull over 4 amps a piece.

[wayneb]

If I can add to Mike's comment. A dedicated electrical circuit of at least 20 amps would probably do it. If you think your 15 amp will handle everything, make sure you don't have other outlets that are ganged into it. Most rooms have multiple outlets feeding one breaker with lamps, computers, tv, etc. being run on it. Adding the aquarium equipment would be a good way to keep popping the braker, and don't even want to mention worst case. Also change or have an electrician change the breaker to a GFI one.

wayne

[Mike M.]

Okay, I have been mulling this over for us a little more and want to throw another variable into the works for you to think about. Reflectors are your absolute best friend when trying to get as much PAR to bottom of the tank as you can. Any of you that have spent time reading the Reef Central forum have to have stumbled upon Melev's Reef. The guy is a true reef-a-holic and has taken a tremendous amount of time to post good solid data on lighting his reef tank. The Lumenbright thread found here:

Lumen Bright Thread-Lots of info

Here is one photo he posted showing par values on a six foot long tank with three reflectors, two-250W and one 400W lamp:

When you read deeply into the thread, I think you might become convinced that using a reflector like the Lumenbright or Lumenarc or Lumenmax might make the 250's work well for a mixed tank. I retrofitted my 120 with two 400W lamps and Lumenbrights two years ago and have become convinced that it is OVERKILL. Side effect...lots of energy used and heat generated and lots of energy used for my chiller to keep things cool. This is with five fans running in my hood. Here is my hood:

Now that brings me to your 12" tall hood. Your lamps are going to be very close to the water relative to what most of the major reflectors dictate for focusing the light on the tank. Most of the Lumenarc/Lumenmax/Lumenbright reflectors need the lamps 14-18" off the water. This allows them to spread light over an adequate footprint to not have dim places or hot spots. In addition, by moving the lamps away from the water's surface, you have less heat transfer. This is a good thing for sure.

I plan to setup a 180 gallon tank in the upcoming year and I am seriously thinking about configuring it like Melev's tank shown above. a 20K radium with appropriate ballast to overdrive in the center and then the two 250-W lamps abutting it to strike a balance between the energy pig 400W lamps and the 250's.

Chew on this a little while. As you start to do the math on the electrical requirements, learn about your needs on reflector spacing and light spread, consider heat accumulation, you may find that 3 250's or the Melev mix shown above might be a nice compromise.

Yes, the commercial guys are gunning out the PAR with 1000W lamps, but that comes at a tremendous cost. Yes, there are reefers here in Austin that have three 400W lamps over six foot tanks and yes, it will work, but it does come at a cost. My two cents worth is that more is not better and that a tank with three 250's over it will work nicely for you and that might even be where I end up in the next year. If so, you'll see my 400W ballast's for sale right here on this board.

[+Daniel]

No further than the average hobbist's canopy.

Here's a pic from my video. The black bar on the bottom of the screen is the top of the tank.

Is the center lamp the 1000w?

My point, of course, is that coral placement is the more important consideration than simply higher wattage (and higher PAR) lamps. At some point, given excess light, coral growth rates will be negatively affected. Growth rates may be excellent under a variety of different lamps (T5s, MH, etc), assuming proper placement of corals AND proper water conditions.

Considering the upfront cost of an LED system, you're paying more and possibly getting less. All the comparisons I've seen show LED fixtures slightly trailing 20k kelvin, off-brand 250w lamps (Low PAR)-- in other words, they don't seem to hold their ground in real-world comparisons. Of course, with proper coral placement and stable water parameters, you can probably have a very healthy reef with LEDs... but a comparable T5 fixture will cost less, produce more light, give you a good variety of color options, give you excellent growth, produce minimal heat, and fit well with your canopy. Or a MH fixture... which will cost less than T5s or MHs up front, give you the best results in terms of coral growth, but produce a lot of heat (especially considering the shorter canopy). Yes, I am gunning for you to try T5s

[+Hydro]

Very good point about the electrical, I had to have a new circuit installed when I switched out my 250's for the 400's, cost about $400 for an electrician to do that. I checked and my 400 watt digital ballasts use 3.25 amps each and the 250 watt digital uses 2.08 amps. Traditional 400 watt coil ballasts use closer to 4 amps each.

Something that I thought was really smart that my electrician came up with. My chiller is now on a dedicated circuit and the lighting is also on a separate dedicated circuit, he used a double 20 amp breaker (a 220v breaker) to supply power this way if one breaker trips both will trip. This is a little reassurance in case my chiller circuit trips it will also turn off my lighting. It's really nice if possible to have at least 2 circuits to work with that way you can put pumps and powerheads on different breakers for the same reason.