HQI Light comparision

[Ltspd]

Yes, the flash was on. I also agree and have suggested that I shoot the tests again in a dark room.

Its sort of a PITA to shut things down with my setup. I have to reprogram the PLC to turn things off when there not normally turned off.

[Ltspd]

Interesting comment made here in reagards to the UV issue some of us have been discussing with the HQI bulbs.

http://www.reefcentral.com/vbulletin...433#post413433

[Ninong]

Paul,

Ushio's website has always said that the UHI-150AQ and the UHI-250AQ were available with UV-absorbing quartz glass: http://www.ushio.com/files/gi_catalog.pdf You will find the information on DE lamps on page 20.

It has always been my understanding that the ones with available UV-absorbing quartz (borosilicate) glass were not the ones available for sale over here, for whatever reason. Might be because they cost $1.98 more, or something stupid like that. I know that Sanjay continues to say that the HQI DE lamps require UV-absorbing shields. I can't tell by looking at my Ushio/BLV 250w 10,000K HQI DE lamps whether the outer glass is borosilicate or not... but, there is a warning printed inside the carton that reads: "The lamp should be used only in appropriate fixtures, which should be equipped with protective glass cover. Fingerprints should be wiped off with a clean cloth soaked with alcohol to prevent their penetrating into the quartz glass. Double-ended lamps must not be operated with internal exhaust tip in downward position."

I left out parts of the warning that were not applicable to our discussion. It seems to me that the warning was written to apply to all of their metal halide lamps, both single ended mogul base lamps and double-ended lamps. Therefore, I don't attach any particular significance to their use of the words "quartz glass" in warning about fingerprints. Besides, all glass could be considered quartz glass, right? I guess the distinction is if it is borosilicate UV-absorbing glass, which they refer to on page 20 of their catalogue as simply "UV-absorbing quartz glass."

So... based on what that guy posted on RC, it looks like the Ushio/BLV DE lamps with available UV-absorbing quartz glass have the suffix UV-P attached to the UHI-250AQ or UHI-150AQ designations.

I am not sure what the situation is with AB DE lamps but I do know that their fixtures, which contain their own DE lamps, come with warnings that they should never be operated without the protective glass shield in place. Note that they call it a protective glass shield. And, as you and I found out, it is Schott Durax tempered glass without any special UV-absorbing properties. Maybe regular tempered glass absorbs enough UV??? Then when I e-mailed AB in Germany to question them on the 30 cm minimum distance above the water warning, they sent me a response that included, among other reasons, their claim that placement closer than that would expose the tank to possible excessive UV radiation. But... if you look at page B1.1 in their catalogue, you will see a picture of one of their Percula 90 tanks with an Aquastarlight Classic fixture mounted no more than 7 or 8 inches above the tank. Hmmm...

There was an interesting thread on RC a couple of weeks ago discussing Richard Harker's article "Nipple Nonsense." Mr. Harker doesn't believe there is any good reason for the myth that nipples should be pointing up. Anyway, it got really ridiculous when one member starting calling people who called the nipple the exhaust tip WRONG and stupid and ignorant, and other colorful language. This same member, who was unaware that metal halide lamps contained mercury, went on to argue that it was obvious that nipples pointed down was the only logical orientation. Just thought I would throw this in here since the Ushio/BLV warning on their lamps refers to the nipple as the exhaust tip and also cautions that double-ended lamps should not be operated with the internal exhaust tip in the downward position.

Ninong

[Ltspd]

Here is a twist on the nipples

On my 250w AB HQI bulbs the nipple is pointing down on both of them. That is the only way they can be installed.

On the 150w Ushios the nipple is pointing up, and once again that is the only way they can be installed.

So I guess we could say it doesnt matter which way your nipples are, as long as you got them ;)

[Ninong]

Originally posted by Ltspd:

On my 250w AB HQI bulbs the nipple is pointing down on both of them. That is the only way they can be installed.

That is the outer nipple that is always pointing down. The inner nipple is always pointing sideways. The only one that counts is the inner one.

On the 150w Ushios the nipple is pointing up, and once again that is the only way they can be installed.

I don't have any of the 150 watt size but I do have the 250 watt size. On my 250w Ushios the inner nipple is always pointing up and the outer nipple is always pointing down and that is the only way you can install them.

So I guess we could say it doesn't matter which way your nipples are, as long as you got them ;)

Some of us should also get a new pair of glasses so we could see that there are two different nipples involved here and the only ones that really matter are the inner ones and they should not be pointing down.

Ninong

[Ltspd]

Didnt realize there was more than 1 nipple on the hqi bulbs.

[Ninong]

Paul,

You will get a lot of good information by reading the comments of KenH in this particular thread: http://www.reefcentral.com/vbulletin...threadid=60888

Ninong

[PerryinCA]

When/if you post new pics Paul, do me a favor and shoot me a PM as a reminder to make sure this makes it to the archives. Good info guys!

Tagged for archives


-Perry

[bowfront]

Here's what happens w/o any UV protection.

[Ltspd]

Bowfront, What does that post have to do with UV protection?

First, he sticks a brand new 250w HQI light over a 26g tank, which IMO is a bit overkill.

Second he expects the bulbs not to heat the water up? If it were a 250w 6500k Iwasaki it would do the same thing, probally worse. In my case the Iwaski's ran hotter than the HQI's, or atleast it seems that way.

As far as I am concered that had no relavance to UV protection.

Yes, he should have had the glass sheild, but then the vendour didnt send it. But even with the glass sheild he still would have the problem

[Ltspd]

Here is some promised dark room shots.

The 150w is powered by a Aromat e-ballast, the bulb is a Ushio as noted on picture. There was no flash used on the camera.

[Ltspd]

250w AB bulb fired by a LN ballast. Once again no flash on camera

[Ltspd]

Just actinic's powered by a standard floro ballast purchased at HD. Once again no flash.

[Ltspd]

Sorry no moonlight shots, I had already showered for the day

[scubadude]

Much Much better pics....Thanx again Paul!....There isnt really that much difference now that I look at them on the sandbed...however if you look in the water columng it appears that the intensity rays are stronger on the 250.

[PerryinCA]

Archived.

Thanks Paul, I am sure many will find this thread useful when trying to decide HQI wattage. Great pics!

-Perry

[bowfront]

Originally posted by Ltspd
Bowfront, What does that post have to do with UV protection?

The link was provided: (1) to show the potential short-range damage that can result from an improperly shielded HQI DE bulb (2) to show the basic ignorance surrounding this type of lighting. I doubt seriously if the three degree temperature spike caused his fish to go belly up in a 3 hour time period. Personally I feel that there are too many people running around buying whatever sounds the best on these boards without first doing adequate research of the potential problems/hazards of the product. Fortunately this person did not seem to sustain damage to his eyes, which can very definitely happen. Sorry you don’t feel that it’s relevant to UV issues but I did.

BTW, nice comparison pictures. I'm not looking for an arguement with you or anyone else just throwing more wood on the fire.

[Ninong]

Paul,

Without reopening that old "Is UV shielding necessary for HQI DE lamps?" thread again, I would like to say that I agree with Bowfront that there is a lesson there in what happened with Dr_Zilla's tank. It has nothing to do with the temperature in the tank going up by 3 degrees. He should have expected that if he suddenly jumped the lighting up to a 250w 10,000K HQI DE lamp over a 26-gal tank that the water would heat up more than his previous fluorescent lighting, especially with the lamp at 9.5" above the water and no glass shield.

But... IMHO the animals in his tank were harmed by a brand new unshielded 250w HQI DE lamp because of the dangerous levels of UV radiation. I realize that Eric B. says that corals can adapt to UV radiation and I'm sure he knows what he is talking about but I still think that they would have to adapt to it gradually over time and not be hit with this sudden big increase in UV radiation all at once. And, if you remember, we finally got Eric to agree that shielding would be a good idea because of the potential for water splashing to cause the HQI DE lamp to explode even though I don't believe I could ever get him to agree that it was necessary for the health of the corals. So I guess I disagree with him on that aspect. But I don't think Eric has ever used DE lamps and he may not realize how much UV we are talking about.

Dr_Zilla is wrong to suspect that the UV radiation had anything to do with the increased water temperature. Quite the contrary, it is the other end of the spectrum that would be responsible for the most heat in the water. However, the very fact that it was a 250w lamp that close to a 26-gal tank was enough to give him a jump in temperature compared to his previous lighting.

There are at least two previous threads on Reef Central that detail the damage done to corals in reef tanks when the member decided to experiment by removing the glass shields from his HQI DE lamps in an effort to improve the coloration of his corals. The results were disastrous. Most of the corals in the tank were either dead or dying within a week.

And then there is the human safety issue. I realize that you do have a glass shield on your fixture to protect both your tank and your family from harmful UV exposure but I just want to make sure that nobody gets the impression from anything in this thread that it is OK to run HQI DE lamps without UV shielding of some kind. Because, based on everything that I have read, I am even more convinced now than ever that it is necessary to shield HQI DE lamps UNLESS they happen to be the new ones from Ushio/BLV that end in the UV-P designation that indicates they have protective UV-absorbing quartz glass--and even then it is probably necessary to shield them to protect them from splashing water that could cause them to explode.

Ninong

[PerryinCA]

I remember Richard Harker....or was is Dana Riddle?....anyway, one of them posted the UV levels of tropical sunlight vs. that of a couple MH lamps a long while back on hte compuserve board, and the sun completely put the others to shame. Although the HQI puts out small amounts of UV-C, I doubt that it'd be enough to do alot of damage. I may try going without a shield on my upcoming project tank which I will be starting by the end of the month. I will be using a 150w HQI.

I agree with Ninong in that UV shok wil likely kill things, and that the shield is good for the protection of the lamp, but I am not sold on the idea that the shields are absolutely required....although working underneath them for long periods of time is probably not a good idea.

-Perry

[Ltspd]

Originally posted by bowfront


Fortunately this person did not seem to sustain damage to his eyes, which can very definitely happen. Sorry you don’t feel that it’s relevant to UV issues but I did.

Actually the eye thing was never suggested in the original post, it was brought up by dendronepthya, and then Dr Zilla went goofy.

You post said

Here's what happens w/o any UV protection.

The water temp did not rise due to the UV. I think we can both safely state that stupidity played a huge roll in what happened. Along with the ignorance of no shield.

Ninong,
You know I of all people Fully understand the importance of using a shield. Notice I did not say UV shield becasue neither you or I have anything that can be mis-lead as a UV shield. We have tempared glass, that has no other properties for UV reduction than standard glass. The temparing only covers the heat issue. I think we determined this on one of the many posts that cover this subject.

I personally feel the the term UV shield is improperly used. We DO NOT HAVE UV SHIELDS protecting us for the supposive UV rays these bulbs produce. Please call Schott and verify once again what You are using so I may not mis-lead anyone down the line. My advice this week has not been up to par (no pun intended).

Schott Corporation
3 Odell Plaza
Yonkers, NY 10701
USA
Tel: Phone: +1 914.968.1400
Fax: Fax: +1 914.968.8585