Clams under t5

[ivan_dalmatia]

I've got a 55 gallon with 4 t8 32"watts each, There's 4 clams in there, 1 maxima and 3 derasa. All lovin it

 

[mr_X]

How long have you had these clams?

 

[Gregcoyote]

You should be fine for any clam.

Whether they have similar PAR ratings per inch isn't as important as their collective intensity. In other words, when you have a coral under a 24" lamp, it's getting light from all 24", as is the coral under the 48" lamp.

Can you clarify this? How is the total energy of a 24" tube being delivered to a single coral? The PAR is spread out along the length of the tube. So if you could concentrate all the light from the tube to a single spot, then that spot would get the tubes total energy, but without concentration that PAR is spread out along the tubes length. A simple reflector concentrates the light around the circumference of the tube, but the light is still distributed down its length. Right? One reason LEDs with lenses can focus the energy better. But even with them the PAR is distributed across the panels area of illumination.

In the clam example with a LED panel, it may be just a hand full of LEDs in the panel illuminating the clam. The rest are lighting the surrounding area. So PAR is also a function of delivered light density.

 

[Mebbid]

The length of the tube doesn't really matter. A 24" t5 will give Tue same par as a 48"t5 the only number that matters is the depth.

 

[Gregcoyote]

The length of the tube doesn't really matter. A 24" t5 will give Tue same par as a 48"t5 the only number that matters is the depth.

At any one spot along its length, yes. A pair of 24" tubes side by side is twice as strong as one 48" tube measured down the length of the tubes at the same height. Given wattage/length are similar. Just boils down to coverage and watts per square inch.

 

[ivan_dalmatia]

How long have you had these clams?

Maybe a year now

 

[mr_X]

Can you clarify this? How is the total energy of a 24" tube being delivered to a single coral? The PAR is spread out along the length of the tube. So if you could concentrate all the light from the tube to a single spot, then that spot would get the tubes total energy, but without concentration that PAR is spread out along the tubes length. A simple reflector concentrates the light around the circumference of the tube, but the light is still distributed down its length. Right? One reason LEDs with lenses can focus the energy better. But even with them the PAR is distributed across the panels area of illumination.

In the clam example with a LED panel, it may be just a hand full of LEDs in the panel illuminating the clam. The rest are lighting the surrounding area. So PAR is also a function of delivered light density.

a 48", 54 watt t5 lamp lights a 4' tank fine. On the other hand, a 24" t5 lamp will not. The ends will be somewhat lit, but not completely, as is the spot directly under the lamp.
Light is coming from the entire length of the bulb, and the light coming from the left end of the bulb is not only lighting the area under it, it's also lighting the surrounding area somewhat as well. What I propose is that the 48" lamps' entire radiation is lighting the entire tank, so then all of the area in the tank would be brighter.
A coral in the middle of the lamp is also being hit by radiation from the left and right of the lamp. I hope I explained that clearly.

 

[Gregcoyote]

I think that helped. The first comment confused me. It's a good calculus problem as the coral is illuminated from multiple angles. The hot spot from a corals point of view still would be directly perpendicular to the tube (shortest path) overhead. So a specific organism such as a clam, would benefit more from multiple parallel tubes than one long tube. The tanks length dictates the tubes length. But 4-24" tubes arranged to cover 48" would be the same as 2-48" tubes.

 

[ants86]

I think that helped. The first comment confused me. It's a good calculus problem as the coral is illuminated from multiple angles. The hot spot from a corals point of view still would be directly perpendicular to the tube (shortest path) overhead. So a specific organism such as a clam, would benefit more from multiple parallel tubes than one long tube. The tanks length dictates the tubes length. But 4-24" tubes arranged to cover 48" would be the same as 2-48" tubes.

That's what I thought. I always thought the higher wattage for longer bulbs had more to do with the amount of power needed to light a longer tube than there being higher intensity throughout the bulb. Thanks for the insightful comments everyone.

 

[ants86]

Now what about an anemone for my lights? Other than BTAs, what else are considered "easy" anemones? My tank is coming on 6 months old, thinking about getting one in a couple months!

 

[jeffaquarius]

So a specific organism such as a clam, would benefit more from multiple parallel tubes than one long tube. The tanks length dictates the tubes length. But 4-24" tubes arranged to cover 48" would be the same as 2-48" tubes.

+1 It may also safe to say that 4 24 in-tube in a 24" tank will have the same PAR as 4 48 in-tube in a 48" tank, provided both are the same type and are mounted at the same depth.

 

[ivan_dalmatia]

Now what about an anemone for my lights? Other than BTAs, what else are considered "easy" anemones? My tank is coming on 6 months old, thinking about getting one in a couple months!

Green bubble tip is easy I think