# Tek lights



## guadua (Jul 3, 2007)

I read everywhere about the watts per gallon ratio. 1-2 watts low light, 2-3 medium and 3-up high lighting. Yet, people seem to use below those figures in watts with the Tek lights and get great results. Are 3 watts a gallon produced by Tek lights stronger than compact fluorescents ? I'm in the market for some lights for a 65 gallon. Just wondering if the 36" 6 x 39 Teks would be overkill. That would be 3.6 watts a gallon. A few people have told me to go with the 4 x 39's instead. I'm just hoping to here from the Tekkys out there. Let me know your experience with them. How strong are they ?


----------



## lemonlime (Sep 24, 2006)

I recently purchased a tek 48" 4x54w fixture for my 72g which works out to 3wpg. I must say that it is a very bright 3wpg indeed! 

From what I've gathered, t5s are "brighter" due to less restrike and because of the linear configuration of the bulbs. The tek reflectors are superb as well. The 3wpg "high light" rule is based off CF and doesn't directly apply to T5HO. The 39 T5HO watts are something like 50CF watts.

All in all, in my opinion, the 4 bulb would suffice. You will be able to grow whatever you like with that setup. The 6 lamp isn't really bloody overkill but that's a lot of light, really. Honestly it is just more ferts, more pruning, less stable and not necessarily a better looking aquascape or plants.

I found this post http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/lighting/25638-t5-t5ho-vs-compact-fluorescent-power.html if you wanted to get a better idea of lumens wpgs and all that jazz


----------



## Daud (Jun 23, 2007)

*Tek sources*

Are these expensive fixtures priced similarly in all outlets ?


----------



## lemonlime (Sep 24, 2006)

Daud said:


> Are these expensive fixtures priced similarly in all outlets ?


found mine for $281 shipped with 4 geissman 6500k bulbs.. did not do a whole lot of shopping though


----------



## guadua (Jul 3, 2007)

Where did you find them for $281 - shipped !


----------



## boasist (May 14, 2007)

Call Bob Glenn from seeds etc on ebay. He can do a similar deal, I paid 320 for the 4x54w with tank bracket shipped.

Bulbs optional.


----------



## ganjero (Aug 4, 2005)

there are two versions, the aquarium version and the one to grow plants (non-aquatic) which doesn't have water proof end caps and are not rust proof. they run for about $150 less, so $280-300 shipped is about right, including bulbs. If you get the non aquatic version you might have electrical problems at some point. 
You can find anywhere the aquarium version for $280 shipped but no bulbs and about $370 shipped with bulbs. Try reefgeek.com they have it for $280 shipped no bulbs and $329 shipped with bulbs (amazing deal). They are a reputable store.


TEKs are just fancy looking fixture but are not the best t5 fixture. I'm not saying they dont work but there are better t5 fixtures out there, but for a planted tank they are alright.

How deep is your tank?


----------



## guadua (Jul 3, 2007)

ganjero, can you list some other brand T5 fixtures. I'm trying to research them all. I'd like to find a decent fixture at a decent price. The Tek seem expensive. Hope these better fixtures arn't too much more than the Tek.


----------



## ganjero (Aug 4, 2005)

guadua said:


> ganjero, can you list some other brand T5 fixtures. I'm trying to research them all. I'd like to find a decent fixture at a decent price. The Tek seem expensive. Hope these better fixtures arn't too much more than the Tek.


oh yes, they are 3 o 4 times more expensive and for some you have to get in a waiting list so I wont even bother listing anything because then you might get confused, stressed or greedy. As I said Teks are usually good for planted tanks, the other ones are more suitable for reef tanks (I have one).

how deep is your tank and what do you plan to keep? dose?


----------



## lemonlime (Sep 24, 2006)

If the Teks are out of your budget there are certainly other options without sacrificing grow capability. 

If you have a hood on your aquarium you could install a t5 kit and save a good bit of money.

Coralife and Current USA make nice CF fixtures also. 

Another idea is to find some classic strip-lights that come stock with most aquariums and retrofit them with the AH supply kits. Craigslist would be a good place to look for the strips. The kits are made to replace the innards of the stock lights.

With a little investigation you can put something really nice together.

In my opinion, go Tek or go AH supply/t5kit and build yourself a setup.

ps: I have the aquarium version, waterproofed with 2 cords/switches


----------



## Daud (Jun 23, 2007)

There certainly is a temptation to use the non aquarium rated Tek fixtures like here for $150 with lamps. Is it such a problem if the tank has a versa glass top ?


----------



## ganjero (Aug 4, 2005)

Daud said:


> There certainly is a temptation to use the non aquarium rated Tek fixtures like here for $150 with lamps. Is it such a problem if the tank has a versa glass top ?



Well That is not a TEK fixture, it is made by the same company though. I dont think it has individual reflectors which reduces PAR, lux, etc etc. 
You could use it, it all depends on your needs (how deep is your tank, what do you plan to grow, etc) but I wouldn't recommend using this fixture, because even though you have a versa top (which is also gonna reduce performance) you will have to hang it as far as possible from the surface to avoid water demage from evaporation or any splashing during water changes.
But you know what I dont think those lights that come with tanks are waterproof at all so I guess it is possible to use this one.


----------



## ruki (May 28, 2007)

guadua said:


> I read everywhere about the watts per gallon ratio. 1-2 watts low light, 2-3 medium and 3-up high lighting. Yet, people seem to use below those figures in watts with the Tek lights and get great results. Are 3 watts a gallon produced by Tek lights stronger than compact fluorescents ?


You probably just want to keep in mind that watts per gallon is a rough estimate, not a firm rule. It's easy to calculate so we keep using it. It measures how much power is consumed, not how much is sent down into the tank.



> I'm in the market for some lights for a 65 gallon. Just wondering if the 36" 6 x 39 Teks would be overkill. That would be 3.6 watts a gallon.


Ugh. A watts per gallon number with a decimal point (shudder shudder)   

Here's why it's a rough estimate. 
(1) tube efficiency
The standard tube T12 linear used 40 watts. The more recent T8 produced the same light for 32 watts. T5 tubes produced another 20 percent efficiency gain. T5 HO, is less efficient in output, but more intense. It's about the same a T8 efficiency, but brighter. PC is hard to gauge since there are more pin connections and special vendor claims that are difficult to confirm. Probably not as good as T5 HO because of restrike and the fact that it didn't come from Europe where energy conservation is an important design criterion.
(2) reflector efficiency
T12 is thick, so it blocks more light from the reflector than a T8, which blocks more light than the thinner T5. As the tube gets thinner, a really efficient reflector can be made much smaller to boot. PC is thin, at least most of them, but all are bent, so you can't use a pseudo parabolic reflector around bent tubes very well. Plus there are multiple surfaces to block reflected light when compared to a single linear tube. In theory one can make a much better reflector for a linear tube than a bent tube. Not that most vendors bother with this. 

But this adds up to maybe +/- 50 percent efficiency with watts consumed and light produced and maybe much more than +/- 50 percent reflector efficiency versus what light is actually sent down into the tank.



> A few people have told me to go with the 4 x 39's instead. I'm just hoping to here from the Tekkys out there. Let me know your experience with them. How strong are they ?


With a TekLight you have pretty efficient tubes with a very efficient reflector. It might send three times as much light per watt down into the tank than a PC fixture.

It's a really well designed fixture. Solid metal fixture, no fan needed. Note that T5 HO tubes were designed to be more efficient when warm and not shorten tube life when ran warm.

I have a 6 tube 4 foot long fixture, but only use 4 of the tubes.


----------



## ganjero (Aug 4, 2005)

Not having fans is one of the main "defects" of the TEKs though. If you retrofit a fan the efficiency increases about 20%. 
With the TEK light you dont have efficient tubes, efficient tubes depend on the brand that you buy, most places give you freedom to select which tubes you want. So if you go for the TEK try to also get good quality bulbs to get the most out of your fixture. 
Also, try to get a fixture with individual reflectors for better performance, TEKs do have individual reflectors.


----------



## lemonlime (Sep 24, 2006)

20% is laughable.. The TEKs are made from aluminum which is a great for dissipating heat. TEKs are convection cooled via the slots arranged around the fixture. TEKs also use individual reflectors another reason a fan isn't warranted. 

TEKs are superior to the competition for planted tanks. But if you want to spend $800 for a Aquactinics with a parabolic reflector and a fan then to each his own. Aquactinics have a fan because 5 bulbs with a parabolic reflector all in a unit smaller then a TEK equals heat, lots of it.

Efficiency is won or lost with the reflectors and the ballast. T5 Bulbs are all about the same consumption/output.


----------



## lemonlime (Sep 24, 2006)

Daud said:


> There certainly is a temptation to use the non aquarium rated Tek fixtures like here for $150 with lamps. Is it such a problem if the tank has a versa glass top ?


http://www.ahsupply.com/36-55w.htm

4 x 55 watt Bright Kit™ brighter waterproof.. better. factor in bulbs and light housings and it's not a whole lot more then the TEK you linked. But with the added bonus of about 100% more light.


----------



## guadua (Jul 3, 2007)

Well, I ordered a 4x39 watt Tek. Found one for only $255 - shipped. Thank you all for your help !


----------



## ganjero (Aug 4, 2005)

lemonlime said:


> 20% is laughable.. The TEKs are made from aluminum which is a great for dissipating heat. TEKs are convection cooled via the slots arranged around the fixture. TEKs also use individual reflectors another reason a fan isn't warranted.
> 
> TEKs are superior to the competition for planted tanks. But if you want to spend $800 for a Aquactinics with a parabolic reflector and a fan then to each his own. Aquactinics have a fan because 5 bulbs with a parabolic reflector all in a unit smaller then a TEK equals heat, lots of it.
> 
> Efficiency is won or lost with the reflectors and the ballast. T5 Bulbs are all about the same consumption/output.


20% laughable? ( I wish I could improve efficiency by 20% in many things that I use) and then you say is all the same consumption? Well if its all the same consumption I want that extra 20%, especially if you have a fairly big tank and you are growing carpet plants. The Fans in fixture like the aquatinics are not only for dissipating heat, but by doing so it improves PAR (almost doubles the PAR compared to TEKs) and efficiency on the bulbs. The individual reflectors on the TEKs are not the greatest quality neither except for the ones that the Limited Edition has. 
The fact that teks have slots around the fixture can't be compared with having fans, unless you have crazy wind blowing inside your house. Individual reflectors do one thing and fans do another, so you cant say that because of the individual reflectors “the fan isn’t warranted.” 
I'm not trying to say that TEKs are garbage but they are not the best. 
Yes they are excellent for small planted tanks (less than 14” deep) but I still wish all the TEK fixtures had the reflectors that the limited edition has. 


Guadua, Good luck with your tank hope everything goes ok.


----------



## NewMariner (Sep 30, 2002)

ganjero said:


> The individual reflectors on the TEKs are not the greatest quality neither except for the ones that the Limited Edition has.
> The fact that teks have slots around the fixture can't be compared with having fans, unless you have crazy wind blowing inside your house. Individual reflectors do one thing and fans do another, so you cant say that because of the individual reflectors “the fan isn’t warranted.”
> I'm not trying to say that TEKs are garbage but they are not the best.
> Yes they are excellent for small planted tanks (less than 14” deep) but I still wish all the TEK fixtures had the reflectors that the limited edition has.


Do you own or have you used Teks? I wouldnt trade my Tek for anything with a fan! I cant stand that fan noise! I love how my Tek doesnt produce any noticeable heat to my tank and the fact that I can grow anything I want..


----------



## supaflyz (Apr 4, 2006)

I run the tek for like 10 hours a day since its a low tech tank. When I go to turn it off its not that hot. I have own the coralife setup before and it has the fans. The sound is not annoying but I ran it for like 6 hours a day and it's really hot when I barely touch it.


----------



## ganjero (Aug 4, 2005)

NewMariner said:


> Do you own or have you used Teks? I wouldnt trade my Tek for anything with a fan! I cant stand that fan noise! I love how my Tek doesnt produce any noticeable heat to my tank and the fact that I can grow anything I want..


I have owned two TEKs and I thought they were great until I found the Powermodules that I have now. I use them in my planted tank and also my reef tank, I also have a reef tank with a Solar Flare. Neither of them have fan noise, they are as quiet as the TEKs. The fan noise comes from cheap fixture or big fans installed in canopies.
I also have to said that one of the TEK had all the endcaps "toasted" 

As I said earlier TEKs are exellent for planted tanks and the quality is acceptable, but there are better fixtures that if you can afford you should get.


----------



## supaflyz (Apr 4, 2006)

I agree I have a hamilton metal halide setup. I have 2 but I dont use them though. The electric bill giong to go really high if I ever use them. Teks are ideal for keeping plants no need to go to the high end stuff. For a saltwater tank high ends lights are a must.


----------



## lemonlime (Sep 24, 2006)

ganjero said:


> 20% laughable? ( I wish I could improve efficiency by 20% in many things that I use) and then you say is all the same consumption? Well if its all the same consumption I want that extra 20%, especially if you have a fairly big tank and you are growing carpet plants.


I'm saying nobody is going to convince me that if I install a few fans on my TEK unit the output is going up 20%.

The reason Aquactinics have such a "high output" compared to TEKs is because 1) parabolic reflector. Focusing light into a very strong band down the center of the tank. for deep penetration. 2) 5 t5 bulbs crammed into a space much slimmer then the TEK unit. 

I do not believe and doubt I will be convinced that these other brands have found a breakthrough way to send electricity through phosphorous filled glass tubes. I do agree there are better fixtures for reef aquariums. I'm not saying TEKs are the end-all elite lighting, they are super for growing plants and theres no reason to splurge for one of the very high-end reef fixtures.

Guadua: Nice! very good choice of lighting for your tank and goals.


----------



## ganjero (Aug 4, 2005)

lemonlime said:


> I'm saying nobody is going to convince me that if I install a few fans on my TEK unit the output is going up 20%.
> 
> The reason Aquactinics have such a "high output" compared to TEKs is because 1) parabolic reflector. Focusing light into a very strong band down the center of the tank. for deep penetration. 2) 5 t5 bulbs crammed into a space much slimmer then the TEK unit.
> 
> ...


If you can buy or borrow from somebody a light meter, measure the PAR with no fan and then put a fan a measure it again and you will see that it is actually more than 20% improvement (I've done it). That is if you want to see the difference, since you said you wont believe it. 
The powemodule that I have has individual reflectors not parabolic, same with the solar flare (but this fixture over drives the bulbs, so it's not fair to use it for comparison)
I keep mentioning the fan just because I said that it's the mayor draw back, but like you said the effeciency is also improve by the ballast and reflectors. For example, the nova extreme has fans but it doesnt get close to the performance of a TEK.

Yes, TEKs are great for growing plants, but if you put a fan I'm sure with 3 or even 2 bulbs you will get the same grow as having 4 bulbs. 

If you go with the higher end, there is a lot more trimming dosing, etc etc but I I feel there is better colorationg with plants. 

I always like to try new things, I'm currently setting up a 20g long to grow just hair grass and have a few rocks, maybe rasboras or shrimps. I'm gonna be using a 150w MH pendant. I saw a similar setup at the LFS Aqua Forest in SF and it is just amazing.

ps I'm not trying to convince anybody to buy high end fixtures. People can say whatever they want one the Internet with no proof so nobody should go with one crazy person says on the Internet (in this case, me.) I really recommend that before purchasing something or doing anything new to your tanks do a lot of research until you see it is what you want or what you need. Remember this is not an exact science and there are different routes to have beautiful tanks.


----------



## g8wayg8r (Dec 24, 2003)

You can DIY the parts but you won't save much and you will still need to build a box to house the parts. I did a lot of shopping and $280 for the fixture and shipping is about a good as you can get with aquairum models. The conventional TEK grow lights are less expensive but that at the sacrifice of another on/off switch.

I can't comment on the heat because the one I purchased is on a truck (or perhaps a slow boat) somewhere. 

Temperature can affect bulb output fo T5's - and cooling isn't always the solution. This could be a strike against DIY if the manufacturers design their fixtures to operate in the optimum temperature range. 
http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/nlpip/lightingAnswers/lat5/pc10.asp

Good read on T5's: the whole article. 
http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/nlpip/lightingAnswers/lat5/abstract.asp


----------



## supaflyz (Apr 4, 2006)

Didnt one of the guys on here figure it out to switch some parts and get 2 switch. I remember one of the threads that he bought the wrong tek lights the grow out one and was able to turn it into two switch.


----------



## ganjero (Aug 4, 2005)

supaflyz said:


> Didnt one of the guys on here figure it out to switch some parts and get 2 switch. I remember one of the threads that he bought the wrong tek lights the grow out one and was able to turn it into two switch.


if you open the fixture you see the two set of cables going into one switch, all you do is drill a hole to add the new switch add a new power cord (if you need one) and connect one set of cable to the new switch.


----------



## dantra (May 25, 2007)

supaflyz said:


> Didnt one of the guys on here figure it out to switch some parts and get 2 switch. I remember one of the threads that he bought the wrong tek lights the grow out one and was able to turn it into two switch.


Here is the link --


----------



## ruki (May 28, 2007)

ganjero said:


> If you can buy or borrow from somebody a light meter, measure the PAR with no fan and then put a fan a measure it again and you will see that it is actually more than 20% improvement (I've done it). That is if you want to see the difference, since you said you wont believe it.


That's interesting. You don't want to cool the fixture down too much. I just looked this up. Optimum temperature is 35C.

One reference http://ee.emsd.gov.hk/english/lighting/light_faq/light_faq.html









From the diagram, to get a 20 percent improvement, your tube temperature was at 55C. That's really running it hot. 

Another reference:
http://www.archlighting.com/industry-news.asp?sectionID=1349&articleID=451894
This article states that T5 and T5 HO are used in fixtures that aren't warm enough to get the extra light output. They said there was an 8 percent gain in output when going from 25C to 35C. This number is much less than the Hong Kong document indicated.

P.S.
How much did the PAR meter cost? I looked at getting one, and the cost was around $1000 US. The meters I found online were an expensive remote sensor that plugged into a meter box. These were non-mass-produced biological laboratory gear, so that's what probably made them so expensive.


----------



## lemonlime (Sep 24, 2006)

The only information I could find *anywhere* regarding fanning the TEK system was one fellow on reefcentral oddly claiming the same 20%+ increase. He didn't give much information regarding his test (singular) ie. ambient room temperature, actual bulb temperatures, bulbs types (actinic?) etc. etc. 

If anyone could pull a temperature reading from the bulbs in their TEK I'd be really interested in the findings. If one's bulbs we're actually 120-130F I think many TEK owners would be interested and a cooling strategy may be a good idea.


----------



## Fishstein (Jun 5, 2006)

ruki said:


> (2) reflector efficiency
> T12 is thick, so it blocks more light from the reflector than a T8, which blocks more light than the thinner T5. As the tube gets thinner, a really efficient reflector can be made much smaller to boot. PC is thin, at least most of them, but all are bent, so you can't use a pseudo parabolic reflector around bent tubes very well. Plus there are multiple surfaces to block reflected light when compared to a single linear tube. In theory one can make a much better reflector for a linear tube than a bent tube. Not that most vendors bother with this.
> 
> But this adds up to maybe +/- 50 percent efficiency with watts consumed and light produced and maybe much more than +/- 50 percent reflector efficiency versus what light is actually sent down into the tank.


Only one correction Ruki - a T8 reflector can be just as efficient as a T5 reflector so long as the T8 parabolic reflector is proportioned for T8. I made DIY parabolic reflectors for 4 ft T8 bulbs and I get the same 200-300% boost in light pushed down into the tank. T5 lamps are great - I'm only saying that you can achieve the same reflector result with them with a good parabolic reflector made of mirror aluminum (+90% reflectivity).


----------



## Fishstein (Jun 5, 2006)

ganjero said:


> there are two versions, the aquarium version and the one to grow plants (non-aquatic) which doesn't have water proof end caps and are not rust proof. they run for about $150 less, so $280-300 shipped is about right, including bulbs. If you get the non aquatic version you might have electrical problems at some point.


Hi Ganjero,

Actually you'll be in good shape with the non-aquatic version so long as you a) put an acrylic or glass shield on the opening of the Tek light below the bulbs b) put a little dielectric grease, which you can get from any auto parts store, on the bulb and end cap leads, to prevent corrosion. The fixture should last you many years with these small steps. And you'll barely lose any meaningful efficiency when using the shield

Note also the non-aquatic version can be converted easily to 2 switches which can be set to separate timers just by adding another plug and moving some ballast wires to that plug - a highly technical guy in my local aquarium club did it and it works great.


----------



## ruki (May 28, 2007)

Fishstein said:


> Only one correction Ruki - a T8 reflector can be just as efficient as a T5 reflector so long as the T8 parabolic reflector is proportioned for T8. I made DIY parabolic reflectors for 4 ft T8 bulbs and I get the same 200-300% boost in light pushed down into the tank. T5 lamps are great - I'm only saying that you can achieve the same reflector result with them with a good parabolic reflector made of mirror aluminum (+90% reflectivity).


It depends, and this could just be choice of wording. If you use a purely parabolic reflector, T5 will win over T8 because it's thinner and blocks less light. With a parabolic reflector behind the light, some light will be sent back at the light since the focus isn't infinitely thin.

If you use one of those "pseudo parabolic" reflectors with the notch on the top (directly above the tube) to not shine light back at the tube, you can do just as good with T8 as T5, but it takes more space and materials to do it.


----------



## Fishstein (Jun 5, 2006)

Hi Ruki,

I'm referring specifically to the V-notched parabolics - rather than a flat back facing the bulb, these have the point of a V facing the back of the bulb, which directs the light from the back of the bulb sideways and downward into the water rather than right back at the bulb. These V-notched parabolics are the most efficient-shaped parabolics made for T5 - I've made the exact same design for T8 bulbs, scaled for T8, and they work just like the best notched T5 parabolics. I may be making them available in a ready-made reflector (rather than raw reflective aluminum sheets I had made available) that clips onto T8 bulbs soon. Anyone who has good T8 bulbs and equipment would get so much light out of them with these reflectors that there would be no reason to upgrade to T5 for quite a while (and in the meantime, T5 bulbs and fixtures would come down in price).


----------



## ruki (May 28, 2007)

We might see T6 cheap before we see T5 cheap. It's length compatible with T12/T8, so I have a gut feel we'll see those take off as energy efficiency becomes more important to conserve fossil fuels and reduce carbon emissions. When you have something used for commercial use, that's when it gets cheap pretty fast.


----------



## ianiwane (Sep 7, 2004)

Fishstein said:


> Hi Ruki,
> 
> I'm referring specifically to the V-notched parabolics - rather than a flat back facing the bulb, these have the point of a V facing the back of the bulb, which directs the light from the back of the bulb sideways and downward into the water rather than right back at the bulb. These V-notched parabolics are the most efficient-shaped parabolics made for T5 - I've made the exact same design for T8 bulbs, scaled for T8, and they work just like the best notched T5 parabolics. I may be making them available in a ready-made reflector (rather than raw reflective aluminum sheets I had made available) that clips onto T8 bulbs soon. Anyone who has good T8 bulbs and equipment would get so much light out of them with these reflectors that there would be no reason to upgrade to T5 for quite a while (and in the meantime, T5 bulbs and fixtures would come down in price).


Not true. T8 reflectors proportionally would have to be bigger. Meaning greater light spread, therefore just by that notion they would be less efficient. The light spread that the SLR icecap reflectors put out are ideal. Anything greater would be less than ideal.


----------



## Fishstein (Jun 5, 2006)

Hi Ruki, 

Good point regarding the T6. Often adoption of new products or technology is a function of how well they fit into existing paradigms or systems.

Hi ianiwane,

I think you may be confused. A T8 v-notch parabolic made to clip onto 1 bulb is proportionately a little higher and wider than a T5 v-notch parabolic, but it is pushing the same 200-300% (close to 300% if you use 95% reflective aluminum like I do). And you can fit 4 of them (one per bulb) inside a 75 gallon hood, to give you the light equivalent of almost 12 bulbs from just 4 bulbs. V-notch parabolics are shaped to push light straight down into the tank, in an area wider of course than the bulb, but the main point is that almost ALL the light gets pushed down into the tank. They are designed not to waste any light and are the most efficient reflector design that can be engineered to push light into an aquarium. If the Ice Cap reflector you are talking about is one of those flat back jobs that goes behind all your bulbs, it is no where near as efficient. It's simple physics and optics.


----------



## ianiwane (Sep 7, 2004)

The icecap T5 reflector is regarded as one of the most efficient reflectors on the market. Way more efficient than the TEK reflector. From my readings on the reef forums there is a new TEK reflector with the icecap design but it is a little larger. The forum "guru" stated that the reflector was too big and would not put too big of a light spread for typical reef tank needs.


----------



## Fishstein (Jun 5, 2006)

Hi ianiwane,

You are actually saying the exact same thing that I was saying. I never saw the Ice Cap T5 reflector until a minute ago when I looked it up - and guess what? It's a V-notch parabolic reflector - same as the design I made for T8. This is the most efficient shape for a reflector of a tube bulb like T5 or T8. That is all I was trying to tell you. Combine this shape with 95% reflective aluminum, and you have almost 300% more light going down into your tank.

I was not referring to a Tek or Ice Cap reflector or any particular brand reflector, only to the superiority of the v-notch parabolic shape to any other shape of reflector - and the fact that such a reflector can be used with great results for BOTH T5 and T8.

Your statement is unclear - "From my readings on the reef forums there is a new TEK reflector with the icecap design but it is a little larger. The forum "guru" stated that the reflector was too big and would not put too big of a light spread for typical reef tank needs." What exactly do you mean? If you have tube lights covering most of the width of your tank, with efficient reflectors pushing the light down and slightly to the side, you'd have plenty of light. Believe me that if you use V-notch parabolic reflectors with 4 T5 or T8 bulbs, you have plenty of light to grow anything in a planted tank. In fact, with only 2 T8 bulbs and such reflectors I can grow almost anything in a 75 gallon tank, including plenty of red plants. With 4 I can grow anything.

FYI the v-notch parabolic shape doesn't "belong" to Ice Cap or any particular brand. It's just the most efficient shape any company can use to make a reflector for a tubular light source.


----------



## lemonlime (Sep 24, 2006)

I think we all agree that parabolic+v > flat? I'm lost to what ianiwana is arguing  

Fishstein - Sounds awesome! Any pics of your setup? I'm always interested in fellow aquarist's noodling. 

I don't agree with ianiwane that "greater light spread" is less efficient barring the angles in the reflectors are so obtuse that light is directed wildly out of the tank. T5 is more efficient because you have roughly the same amount of light beaming from a smaller source thus limiting restrike..that is all. 


Oh, anyone notice the t5VHO bulbs on drfoster? hmm


----------



## ianiwane (Sep 7, 2004)

Greater light spead means less penetration. Say your light spread is double (front to back) on one light than the other. What does that mean to the light penetration? Am I the only one that sees the relationship?


----------



## lemonlime (Sep 24, 2006)

What exactly is the light "penetrating"? water? 12"-20" in most cases.. Water light diffusion is measured in meters not inches.

If you are worried about light penetration I would suggest water change or perhaps a new filter.

Some light is lost at the surface of the water due to reflection. Some is "lost" in the tank due to turbidity. Again, small fractions here.


The majority of light that passes through the surface of the water in into your tank tends stays in the tank. Reason being that most light is hitting the sides of the aquarium is reflected back into the tank because of whats called Total Internal Reflection.. and a bunch of equations and physics laws come into play that I don't pretend to fully understand.

An easy demonstration..

Ever notice the absence of shadows in your tank? 

Take note of how well lit your room is with just the aquarium light running. Now flip the light so its beaming into the room instead of the tank.
Or for a more fair test, hold it say 18" from the cushions of your couch. 
Voila!:biggrin:


----------



## ruki (May 28, 2007)

re: penetration
What this is about consists of water quality PLUS how perpendicular to the water surface the light enters.

For example, I have one of those Coralife 98 watt CF fixtures, with the thicker tube that has THREE bends. Just from looking at it, you can see that much of the light is wasted by re-strike and the bulb blocking it after it hits the reflector. The light that does happen to hit the water is traveling in all directions, so it doesn't travel far down into the aquarium. My other fixtures, even with sub-optimal reflectors, kick butt with how much better they are able to send light deeper into the tank. (This fixture is my pathological example at how misleading watts per gallon, when used as a rule can be    )

Yes, there are the refraction rules which help keep light inside the tank, but that's not the entire picture.

There is also the reflection law of equal angles. If the light enters far from perpendicular, it will bounce many times back-and-forth off the sides increasing its chances of getting blocked something suspended in the water. If the light enters close to perpendicular it doesn't have to go criss-cross by bouncing off the mirror that forms due to the refraction mentioned earlier. The light has a shorter path to get to the bottom which means less chance of hitting suspended particles, thus the light penetrates deeper.

The Physics isn't bad if you draw a picture of what's going on.


----------



## lemonlime (Sep 24, 2006)

Any reasonably well designed parabolic reflector does a good job at sending a beam straight down. That's kinda the definition of 'parabolic'. The amount of light hitting the surface at a near parallel angle is really small..really..with a parabolic of course. Also when a beam is traveling through the air, say 45*, and hits the water surface it doesn't continue further at 45* but is bent closer to perpendicular to water surface further reducing zigzag.

If I moved my lights an inch closer to the water surface I could exponentially reduce zigzag as well. 

A better reflector I suppose would be a very precisely curved piece of material shaped something like a 'm' with the bulb sitting in the middle. The curve being calculated by the diameter of the bulb and its relation to the reflector.

I think the shape of the tube bulb itself is the limiting factor when it comes to sending a beam at the at the appropriate angle to achieve total reflection or near perpendicular entry angles.

The amount of turbidity it would take to significantly reduce the amount of light hitting the substrate would be, well gross.

As for the physics, I was just recalling a community college physics course I took lol when the professor was describing how why and how often light is reflected off water. I remember it was interesting but that about it.


----------



## ruki (May 28, 2007)

re: reflector shape.

There was a geometric diagram posting how a modified parabolic reflector worked really well for a simple, single shape. The usual parabolic reflector has a bad spot there light is reflected back into the bulb. If you make notch there it sends it off to the side where it will reflect again off the reflector down into the tank.

Since the tube is thick and has a curved, moving the light closer to the water doesn't really change that much. Most of the light that is sent straight down comes off the reflector. The stuff coming directly off the tube is coming in at all angles. Pulling the fixture further away from the water and attaching some sort of skirt to the parabolic shape might make improve things. It would probably be quite ugly though... This would start looking like the 'm' shape, but with really long outer legs. Doing this with multiple tubes, close together, isn't going to be very practical.

When thinking along these lines, LED fixtures start looking really good


----------



## lemonlime (Sep 24, 2006)

guadua said:


> Well, I ordered a 4x39 watt Tek. Found one for only $255 - shipped. Thank you all for your help !


Well, any thoughts on your purchase?


----------



## guadua (Jul 3, 2007)

Well, it looks nice. I bought the tank legs for it instead of hanging it. They get in the way of the glass top on my aquarium and I have to take the light off the aquarium to get to the tank. That's my only negative. I'll probably get the acrylic guard and go topless eventually. Grows the algae my Beaufortia kweichowensis needs and he's getting really fat. It was a good purchase. I just need to get a pressurized co2 system and get rid of this diy.


----------

