# Too much light!



## keithy (Jun 8, 2010)

maybe place a screen/netting right underneath the lights to act as filter?

edit: I believe Hoppy (the light guru) once mentioned that placing a layer of insect netting reduces the light by 40% (if I remember correctly)


----------



## tuffgong (Apr 13, 2010)

I second that. Hoppy's screen wrap should fix you up perfectly!


----------



## dutchy (Jul 31, 2009)

You could run two bulbs, one daylight bulb and one plant grow "pink" bulb. The pink bulbs give just half the PAR compared to a normal daylight bulb.

regards,
dutchy


----------



## MlDukes (Nov 24, 2009)

Thanks guys. I had heard of the screen method but didnt know much about it. Ill have to try it!

As far as the plant grow "pink" bulb goes, how do they look to the eye?


----------



## heydude819 (Mar 17, 2009)

it really brings out the red in my cardinals and neons


----------



## Hyzer (Mar 9, 2010)

> You could run two bulbs, one daylight bulb and one plant grow "pink" bulb. The pink bulbs give just half the PAR compared to a normal daylight bulb.


 Don't know if that is correct. There is definitely a difference to the human eye, but I'm not sure there is a difference in actual light intensity if it is the same wattage. Wouldn't the plant bulb have just as high of a peak in the areas of the color spectrum usable by plants (and algae), if not more?

Not trying be confrontational, I am curious myself.


----------



## dutchy (Jul 31, 2009)

Hyzer said:


> Don't know if that is correct. There is definitely a difference to the human eye, but I'm not sure there is a difference in actual light intensity if it is the same wattage. Wouldn't the plant bulb have just as high of a peak in the areas of the color spectrum usable by plants (and algae), if not more?
> 
> Not trying be confrontational, I am curious myself.


No problem  
Well, That's what my PAR meter says. It measures the amount of light that is available for photosynthesis. 

Those bulbs give typically half of the value in micromols compared to a normal daylight type bulb.

regards,
dutchy


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

I was discussing this with someone at AAA meeting. Seller of T5HO light system suggested putting painters tape on 1 bulb.


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

dutchy said:


> No problem
> PAR meter measures the amount of light that is available for photosynthesis from a pink bulb half of the value in micromols compared to a normal daylight type bulb.


Yet some plants grow better with pink bulbs. In fact one said that his plants grew faster with a Aqu-glo than with the Power-glo, which have same kelvin. I have both and see that the Aqu-glo is pink. Very interesting!


----------



## dutchy (Jul 31, 2009)

There are more factors that could play a role here. If nutrition or CO2 was limiting, less light reduced demand, The limitation is alleviated, and plants start to grow better.

This way it looks like the light was the cause, but it was just a secondary effect.

regards,
dutchy


----------



## MlDukes (Nov 24, 2009)

dutchy said:


> There are more factors that could play a role here. If nutrition or CO2 was limiting, less light reduced demand, The limitation is alleviated, and plants start to grow better.
> 
> This way it looks like the light was the cause, but it was just a secondary effect.
> 
> ...


I see what your saying but its alot like - which came first, the chicken or the egg?

The nutrition and Co2 were limited yes, but it was solely due to having too much light. So whos to say which is the primary/secondary effect? They both go hand in hand. w/o the excess light the limited Co2 and ferts wouldnt be an issue. 

i will be undoing this "fix" once i have the funds for a pressurized setup - at that time EI will be implemented accordingly.


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

MlDukes said:


> The nutrition and Co2 were limited yes, but it was solely due to having too much light.


If it is too much light you would see algae where most of the light is. This is what Hoppy noticed on his tank. It seems easier and cheaper to adjust the light.


----------



## MlDukes (Nov 24, 2009)

Hilde said:


> If it is too much light you would see algae where most of the light is. This is what Hoppy noticed on his tank. It seems easier and cheaper to adjust the light.


 
Hoppy is always right. roud:

Heres the story

Every since ive had this fixture ive been battleing BGA on the open substrate. Cut the lighting back, and back, and back :icon_cool and tried DIY Co2 but It wasnt enough to keep up. I figured out DIY + excel kept it completely out of sight (likewise with the small amount of BGA i had) and the plants have been growing like crazy! So im runnin diy co2, dosing excel, and the ferts to keep up.. Its just too much... Until i can pick up a pressurized unit (to eliminate the DIY and excel) I want to lower my light levels, and therefore lessen the plants co2 and nutrient consumption.



and thats how this thread came to be.


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

MlDukes said:


> Its just too much... Until i can pick up a pressurized unit I want to lower my light levels, and therefore lessen the plants co2 and nutrient consumption. The plants have been growing like crazy


Is the tank the one in the advatar? How long has it been up? Have you thought of getting a SAE fish? Is the light still 4in above the tank? Can you raise it more?

I had read that one whom set up a tank using mineralized substrate had BGA. The plants were growing fine so he just waited out and it eventually went away.


----------



## MlDukes (Nov 24, 2009)

Hilde said:


> Is the tank the one in the advatar? How long has it been up? Have you thought of getting a SAE fish? Is the light still 4in above the tank? Can you raise it more?
> 
> I had read that one whom set up a tank using mineralized substrate had BGA. The plants were growing fine so he just waited out and it eventually went away.


yeah the one in my avatar pic. I guess the 55 has only been setup for 4 months. Been select with my stock in this tank and didnt really want to get a SAE cause they get a lil bigger than id like. 

The BGA started getting out of hand, it may have took a small school of SAEs to tackle it lol. The plants were doing well but the bga did even better until i discovered the power of excel  Its done wonders for me. Been dosing excel every other day and there isnt a spec of BGA in my tank.


----------



## keithy (Jun 8, 2010)

another idea that I have seen people here used is to get floating plants to reduce light getting into tank.


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

MlDukes said:


> The plants were doing well but the bga did even better until i discovered the power of excel  Its done wonders for me. Been dosing excel every other day and there isnt a spec of BGA in my tank.


Congratulations!! 

Ah, then the there is an imbalance carbon to lights. A cheaper alternative to Excel is Metricide is a 2.6% solution while Excel is ~1.5%. Recommended dosing of Metricide would be 2.9ml daily for 50g (Excel is 5 ml) It is 17.15 + ship 7.95 is 25.10.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 17, 2008)

Have you thought about switching the bulb to T5 NO?


----------



## MlDukes (Nov 24, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> Have you thought about switching the bulb to T5 NO?


 
Is it that simple??? Can i put NO in a HO fixture??? I just assumed that wasnt an option.


----------



## ReefkprZ (Aug 21, 2010)

I'm not sure about your ballast in particular, but in most cases, putting a RO bulb on a vho ballas or a ho electronic ballast isnt a problem. some ballast you can get flickering from when you do that. but I would say try it if it doesnt work return the bulb.


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

T5 NO bulbs are 28W and T5HO bulbs are 54W. Thus wouldn't you be overdriving the bulbs and shortening their life span?


----------



## ReefkprZ (Aug 21, 2010)

depends on the ballast. a good electronic ballast wont. a crappy mechanical will.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 17, 2008)

I would have used more words than ReefkprZ ;-) 
but that's the tale of using NO in an HO fixture. 

For those who question the issue, there are magnetic ballasts for T5 lamps. I didn't know that until I looked it up one time. Everything I'd read prior to that look up, consistently referred to electronic ballasts with T5.


----------



## Hilde (May 19, 2008)

ReefkprZ said:


> I'm not sure about your ballast in particular, but in most cases, putting a RO bulb on a vho ballas or a ho electronic ballast isnt a problem. some ballast you can get flickering from when you do that. but I would say try it if it doesnt work return the bulb.


By RO did you mean NO? Have you actually done this?

Hoppy told me that, "In theory the T5NO bulb would be driven at the same wattage as a T5HO bulb, but would have a very short life before losing much of its intensity. I base that on my belief that fluorescent ballasts essentially control the current going through the bulb, and the voltage is determined by the bulb type and length. I would expect the NO and HO bulbs to run at the same voltage across the bulb, so that would mean the NO bulb would be overdriven to HO wattage." Theory can differ from actual practice though.


----------



## ReefkprZ (Aug 21, 2010)

Yeah I have. I have 3 icecap 660's I cant even eplain all the different bulb combo's i have tried out. I have also OD'd NO t-5 in a coralife t5ho fixture for temporary light because they were out of ho for a week and I didnt want to run lightless.

I agree with hoppy in that respect, they are overdriven by pumpin xamount of watts extra into the bulb producing more light and heat. but the biggest problem from shortened lifespan is actually the extra heat. if you dont increase cooling capacity when you increase power you dramaticly shorten the life of the bulb, if you increase the cooling, the bulb life is almost the same. I'm speaking of cooling the bulbs most people leave stock cooling or no cooling when they overdrive and this is detrimental as heck to the bulbs.

Of course some of the phosphers in the bulbs burn out at different rates (the blue end goes first) and the more juice you pump through them the faser they burn out it is inevitable. 


NOw to really confuse you. the icecap 660 electronic ballast is built to power 16 feet of bulb

here is a couple quotes from the people at icecap:

"The Model 660 will run any T-5 HO lamps. If they are 5 ft lamps, the max is 3. Otherwise 4 lamps are allowed. Shorter lamps require more attention to venting off heat from the lamps for a long lamp life.

As far as the ballast, we had already made upgrades for the few die-hards out there running 4 X 96-watt PC lamps. The load to the ballast is very similar to 4 X 54-watt T-5 HO lamps. Ballasts over 3 years old may be more prone to heat related problems but proper heat sinking will deal with it. Newer ballasts run with a heat sink are not compromised by running T-5 HO applications. 
We don't recommend running the A4 on T-5 HO applications.
Andy 
*From IceCap:
The wattage draw and output for the T-5 HO 4ft lamps (54-watts) is close to or exceeds that of VHO lamps, on our VHO ballasts. 

The 5 foot T-5 HO lamps run at an even higher range. Seeing is believing because on paper it doesn't make as much sense.

also, we've found problems going beyond 4 lamps with our ballasts regardless of the wattages involve.

Andy*


----------

