Interesting Phoenix 14K results

[Mr. Fosi]

I'd love to! But I don't have a 250W fixture to test them in.

 

I could ask my LFS if they have a fixture that I could test a couple lamps in but that's the only option I can think of.

[ssirishpride]

Well I'm on board with this. Just let me know and I'll ship them right over to you.

[Mr. Fosi]

I'm gonna powwow with the owner of my LFS in the next day or two. I'll ask if he's got a 250W fixture that I can borrow of that I can fire up there in the store.

 

I don't know him all that well but he seems like a cool enough guy; he may go for it.

[Scott Riemer]

Mr. Fosi, I hope you are exaggerating with the $80 figure. If not, PM me, you're paying too much.

[Mr. Fosi]

Mr. Fosi, I hope you are exaggerating with the $80 figure.

 

Upon closer inspection, it appears I overstated it.

 

I would swear that the last time I checked Hellolights.com (last year sometime), they were $80.

[Mr. Fosi]

Follow-up.

 

Here are a couple spectrographs for you

 

 

 

~~Peak values~~

 

20W Halogen Puck

---------------

581

628

766

 

Phoenix 14K

----------

406

414

437

455

500

522

547

579

686

 

 

~Reference~

From: link

 

Here is an old one that I took of the solar spectrum as seen here in Columbia SC. You can see that the highest emission lies between ~475 and 550 nm. So you can see that neither of the above lamps come close to simulating natural sunlight.

 

 

I don't think it is really about simulating sunlight, I think it is about attaining the color and growth goals that we shoot for.

[sazarac]

My brain hurts....

 

But I'm glad I sprang for the extra $60 (shipping included) Phoenix 14k

I bought along with the new Sunpod!

 

OH, hey, what is this "burn in" I've read about with MH bulbs?

[Mr. Fosi]

It takes hours, perhaps as many as 100 hrs for new MH lamps to stabilize their spectral output... Or at least so I have heard.

 

I plan to buy a new Phoenix 14K lamp with my tax refund $$ and I am planning on looking at tracking the spectral output for the first couple hundred hrs to see if it really does shift.

[Mr. Fosi]

Here is a typical response curve for PAR sensors. You can see that they are biased against blue light, which is why bluer lamps often come back with lower PAR than yellow/orange/red lamps.

 

 

 

Consider that the bulk of the Phoenix 14K is in the most biased end of the graph and it seems as though the Phoenix must be cranking out a lot of photons to come back with PAR numbers comparable to sealevel, equatorial noon-day sunlight.

[basser1]

Thanks Mr. Fosi for posting your results! I'm on my second Phoenix bulb and I love how it makes the corals look plus I'm really pleased with the corals growth, especially the SPS corals. I had considered trying something different and even used a Geismann Mega-Chrome ( mucho diniro )! Didn't like the way the tank looked and I quickly went back to the Phoenix.

[sazarac]

Humm...ok. I'll ah keep an eye on this thread then.

 

I read an article a while back when I was first considering changing over to MH (bought with tax refund BTW) by Allen Chantelois. Called "Light Output of the Phoenix 14,000K DE MH Bulb Over Time". Have you seen it? That article was my main reason for going over to MH. I was pretty tired of changing out the lights on the stock BC hood. He used graphs too, and it also made my head hurt.

 

Seriously though, thanks for all your hard work!!!

 

It takes hours, perhaps as many as 100 hrs for new MH lamps to stabilize their spectral output... Or at least so I have heard.

 

I plan to buy a new Phoenix 14K lamp with my tax refund $$ and I am planning on looking at tracking the spectral output for the first couple hundred hrs to see if it really does shift.

[nematoad]

Mr Fosi, nice work. After all the good press about the Phoenix 14k bulbs, I'll probably be using one (250W).

 

I'm also very jealous that you can apply your research skills to reefing. But if there's a Western blot that needs doing, I'll be on it.

 

Just wondering though: you posted a spectral analysis of sunlight, and the phoenix bulb and halogen bulb, and like you said, neither are anywhere close to sunlight.

 

What's the spectral graph look like for sunlight at the surface of corals, ie, what do the corals actually see? If penetration is poorest by the longer wavelengths, then below the surface are corals effectively seeing a spectral trace like that of the MH bulb?

[Mr. Fosi]

I read an article a while back when I was first considering changing over to MH (bought with tax refund BTW) by Allen Chantelois. Called "Light Output of the Phoenix 14,000K DE MH Bulb Over Time". Have you seen it?

 

I hadn't but I went and found it. I haven't read it yet but I will.

 

I'm also very jealous that you can apply your research skills to reefing. But if there's a Western blot that needs doing, I'll be on it.

 

Don't feel bad. You'll probably make more $$ than me in the end.

 

What's the spectral graph look like for sunlight at the surface of corals, ie, what do the corals actually see? If penetration is poorest by the longer wavelengths, then below the surface are corals effectively seeing a spectral trace like that of the MH bulb?

 

Well, it depends on the depth, the turbidity and the nature of the turbidity.

 

One could use the table I reproduced in post #10 to reconstruct the theoretical light field for any depth in the ocean. Use the attenuation coefs to see how much of what color of light is at what depth(s). You can see that the greatest penetration on that table is 450 nm, which is very close to the largest peak of the 14K, 455 nm.

 

Plus, that table isn't an exhaustive list. If all integer wavelengths between 400-500 nm were enumerated, you might find that there is a more penetrating one than 450 nm... IIRC, 460 nm is actually the most penetrating but a 5 nm difference isn't going to change the attenuation coef much.

 

Of course, phytoplankton in the water will efficiently attenuate blue light (and others) but in the areas around reefs, there won't be enough to change the light field at 20 m. It'd change the intensity but not the distribution because almost all of the light would be blue down there anyway.

 

One could argue that we are giving our corals something close to a deeper-water light field but at much higher intensities.

[nematoad]

Well, it depends on the depth, the turbidity and the nature of the turbidity.

 

One could use the table I reproduced in post #10 to reconstruct the theoretical light field for any depth in the ocean. Use the attenuation coefs to see how much of what color of light is at what depth(s). You can see that the greatest penetration on that table is 450 nm, which is very close to the largest peak of the 14K, 455 nm.

 

Plus, that table isn't an exhaustive list. If all integer wavelengths between 400-500 nm were enumerated, you might find that there is a more penetrating one than 450 nm... IIRC, 460 nm is actually the most penetrating but a 5 nm difference isn't going to change the attenuation coef much.

 

Of course, phytoplankton in the water will efficiently attenuate blue light (and others) but in the areas around reefs, there won't be enough to change the light field at 20 m. It'd change the intensity but not the distribution because almost all of the light would be blue down there anyway.

 

One could argue that we are giving our corals something close to a deeper-water light field but at much higher intensities.

 

Right, that table. Forgot all about it. Yeah, really I was wondering about your last point; chiefly on the intensity of those wavelengths at certain depths. But like you say, as it seems we're giving our reefs way more light than they would get in nature. Guess that gives more credence to the argument that flow is as if not more important than lighting on SPS colouration and health.

[BumbleBeeJBG]

I can follow some of this, but can you wrap this up in english?

 

What does it mean for us and our lights?

 

Thanks!

[Mr. Fosi]

That the output spectrum of the phoenix 14K doesn't look anything like sunlight (no duh) and that it looks something like what you might expect to see several meters down in the ocean.

 

Also that it must be kicking out a ton of photons in the blue range to bring up the PAR levels because despite the bulk of the output being in the heavy bias range of the PAR sensor, the numbers are close to those of equatorial noonday sun.

[BumbleBeeJBG]

I see you struggle with English.

 

Phoenix 14k - Good? y/n

Replace in 6 months? y/n

When to replace? ____ (fill in the blank)

 

 

<3 Fosi.

[Mr. Fosi]

Phoenix 14k - Good? Y It should help you retain good coloring while driving your growth at faster than natual levels.

 

Replace in 6 months? N, unless you want to spend extra $$.

 

When to replace? When it burns out, you start seeing nuisance algae, your corals start to dull out, or whenever you feel like it. The longer you go the more acclimation you will have to do when you finally replace it.

[Rinehart77]

Thanks for Sharing your research Mr. Fosi. I've been a fan of the Phoenix bulbs for a while now, also the XM 20ks. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that we're providing a field similar to those found at greater depths, but just at a much higher intensity. I've always used "blue" bulbs over my prop tanks, and found that as long as there is significant intensity, there is not an appreciable difference in growth, vs daylight bulbs.(6500K or 10,000K) Coloration of the corals, on the other hand, is a different story. It seems intuitive that PAR is PAR regardless of where it comes from.

[BumbleBeeJBG]

Phoenix 14k - Good? Y It should help you retain good coloring while driving your growth at faster than natual levels.

 

Replace in 6 months? N, unless you want to spend extra $$.

 

When to replace? When it burns out, you start seeing nuisance algae, your corals start to dull out, or whenever you feel like it. The longer you go the more acclimation you will have to do when you finally replace it.

 

Thanks! I can't be the only one who was lost

[evilc66]

I think you were

[BumbleBeeJBG]

Yeah, well... thanks for giving me something to talk to the shrink about, he's not attractive enough to have to stare at for an hour.

[slippy steve]

Fosi brings the ruckus...again!

 

 

My ushio 175w 20k is 14months old. Some of my corals are starting to look more dull. I've been having that trouble with bryopsis. I am going to Premium Aquatics right now to pick up another bulb, but caught this thread and will buy a phoenix 14k instead. I have never tried it, but only hear good things. Thanks bro!

[got2envy]

Thanks for the info Fosi! I am getting my first MH fixture and had no clue as I use T-5's over all my tanks and ordered the Pheonix 14k just because I love the color of the tanks that I see using them

I am even happier knowing that they can last longer than 6 months

 

I am a MH noobette

[The Propagator]

I heart FOSI !!

 

 

 

 

 

Seriously though GOOD WORK MAN !!!!