PAR Readings

I replaced both of the Hamilton 20K metal halide bulbs but kept the same T5's running. The bottom of the metal halide pendant is 9.75" above the water surface and PAR increased on average 23% versus the 9 month old metal halide bulbs. The left metal halide ballast is drawing 269 watts and the right side is drawing 257 watts.

JF Fox Flame

RR Rainbow Loom

Ricky's Planet Earth Austera

PAR Readings

I borrowed an unopened Apogee MQ-500 quantum meter to test the PAR readings on both of my tanks. The metal halide bulbs on the 120 gallon are 9 months old and the T5's are and the bottom of the metal halide pendant is 9.75" above the water surface. The bulbs on the 80 gallon are 11 months old and the bottom of the Sunpower is 8.5" above the water surface.

120 Gallon

Bulb combo: 2 Hamilton 20K & 2 ATI Actinic

80 Gallon

Bulb combo: 4 ATI Blue Plus, 2 ATI Coral Plus & 2 ATI Actinic

PAR Readings Part III

My other Lumatek ballast went and I replaced it with another LuXcore and also a new Phoenix 14K bulb to compare the PAR to the Hamilton versus a 6 month old Phoenix bulb from the previous post. I still cannot run the LuXcore ballasts on a GFCI but I am not having issues with them firing up without being connected to the GFCI.


Results:

Phoenix 14K on LuXcore ballast:
HQI Setting -  269 watts of power draw at 825 PAR
Standard setting - 256 watts of power draw at 775 PAR


One week old Hamilton
Hamilton 20K on LuXcore ballast:
HQI Setting -  261 watts of power draw at 765 PAR
Standard setting - 249 watts of power draw at 720 PAR

The PAR measurements were taken 8" under the bottom of the reflector. The Phoenix has more of a white look when compared to the Hamilton. I wanted to have a bluer look than what I am used to without sacrificing PAR so I think I am going to run two Hamilton's over my tank. I have been running Phoenix 14K bulbs for the past 9 years and feel it is time for a change.

PAR Readings Part II

I wanted to test out two other brands of metal halides as I have only ever ran Phoenix 14K bulbs for the past 9 years. I tested the redesigned Hamilton 20K blue bulb and the 20K Ushio. After firing them both up the Hamilton bulb is very blue, almost like Windex whereas the Phoenix 14K is more white with a hint of purple/blue. The Ushio bulb is noticeably dimmer and has much more of a purple look which is good for running Blue Plus T5's and the Phoenix/Hamilton would look good with pure Actinics. The Ushio was ran on the LuXcore ballast and the Hamilton was ran on the Lumatek & LuXcore ballast. I sent back the LuXcore ballast because it was tripping my GFCI so these results are with a new LuXcore ballast which does draw a little more power and will in turn produce more PAR.

Results:

Hamilton 20K on Lumatek ballast:
HQI Setting -  301 watts of power draw at 895 PAR
Standard setting - 278 watts of power draw at 815 PAR

Hamilton 20K on LuXcore ballast:
HQI Setting -  271 watts of power draw at 770 PAR
Standard setting - 257 watts of power draw at 730 PAR


Ushio 20K on LuXcore ballast:
HQI Setting -  271 watts of power draw at 580 PAR
Standard setting - 257 watts of power draw at 530 PAR

The PAR measurements were taken 8" under the bottom of the reflector.


Out of curiosity I put a 6 month old Phoenix bulb in the Lumatek & LuXcore ballast after the glass was cleaned and the PAR readings did increase from the original test on January 10th with dirty glass.

Phoenix 14K on Lumatek ballast:
HQI Setting -  301 watts of power draw at 820 PAR
Standard setting - 278 watts of power draw at 740 PAR

Phoenix 14K on LuXcore ballast:
HQI Setting -  271 watts of power draw at 690 PAR
Standard setting - 257 watts of power draw at 645 PAR

PAR Readings

One of my Lumatek 250 watt dimmable ballasts went on me the other day and I replaced it with a CoralVue LuXcore 250 watt dimmable ballast. The 14K Phoenix bulbs seem to burn the same color on both ballasts but I wanted to do some testing to make sure I was still getting the same amount of PAR as my previous ballast. One thing I do like about the new ballast is that it fires the bulb up faster than the Lumatek ballast. The Phoenix bulbs that are being tested are approximately 6 months old.

Results:

Lumatek ballast:
HQI Setting -  301 watts of power draw at 775 PAR
Standard setting - 278 watts of power draw at 710 PAR

LuXcore ballast:
HQI Setting -  261 watts of power draw at 675 PAR
Standard setting - 248 watts of power draw at 620 PAR

The PAR measurements were taken 8" under the bottom of the reflector.

I also tested my T5 supplemental lighting with two 48" ATI Pure Actinic bulbs and the power draw was 125 watts.

The light on my frag tank is a 8 bulb 48" TEK T5 Fixture. The bulb combination from front to back is as follows:
ATI Blue Plus
ATI Blue Plus
ATI Coral Plus
ATI Purple Plus
ATI Blue Plus
ATI Coral Plus
ATI Blue Plus
ATI Pure Actinic

PAR measurements were taken 8" under the fixture.

Results:

Left side the fixture the PAR was 795
the front center was 900
the back center was 795
the right side of the fixture was 665

Overall power consumption for the 8 bulbs was 489 watts. I really do miss the simmer from the metal halides but the color looks better than the display tank plus it draws less power and has higher PAR.

PAR Values

I am currently running two (8 month old) 250 watt Phoenix 14K metal halides with Lumatek dimmable ballasts on HQI mode and two (two month old) 54 watt UVL Super Actinic T5's.

PAR Readings

I broke out the PAR meter today to take some readings, here are my results with two 8 month old 250 watt Phoenix 14K metal halides and two 8 month old ATI Blue Plus 54 watt T5's.