SolaTubes for reef tanks

[Herpervet]

Originally posted by Shoestring Reefer
Why couldn't they be closer?

The curb that fits on the roof is very large and putting them much closer would have risked them overlapping.

I think I also had some issues with rafters (I didn't want to cut any) so I was pretty much left with this spacing. Its been at least 18 months since I did this so forgive me for my foggy memory.

The ceiling rafters I did cut and used angle iron supports to prevent any problems.

Just FYI If I had to do it again I would probably bite the bullet and go with Solatube brand. They apparently have a better spectral lining (which they are very proud of $$$) that results in less loss of light per bounce.

[Herpervet]

Originally posted by delnino
Earlier in this post I plugged Natural Light tubes. I have installed 6 of them myself and am really impressed with the kit. Nothing like the HD ones and not much more $. None are over tanks but one is over a lizard cage. I see that people are often not using any diffusers. I think dust in the tubes is a huge concern and some sort of cover should be used. The silver oxide coating is extremely reflective and needs to be kept this way for maximum efficiency. Alternative Energy Store is where I got mine from, can't remember the exact URL. Am planning a tall, slender seagrass bed refugium, lit with a 13" or perhaps 18" tube.

I got mine from the Alternative Energy Store also.

http://shop.altenergystore.com/items~Cname~Tubular+Sky+Lights~Cc~TUBULSKY~iTpStatus~0~Tp~~Bc~.htm

As a side note: I think its plausable to mount a 150 watt Par lamp in the center of the tube and have very little obstruction of the natural light yet allow supplemental 20K.

I agree with you on closing the tubes. I have been thinking about how to do this on the end of the extension tubes. Let me know if you figure out a clean way to do it.

[Herpervet]

Originally posted by Chihuahua6
Herpervet where do you live and what time of day were the photos taken? Where did you purchase the tubes? Are you going to add any supplemental lighting?
Thanks for sharing. I can't wait to get mine going. The house should be done toward the end of September. The tubes need to be ordered but I don't know which brand to go with, SunTunnel or SolaTube. One goes with the slope of the roof and one mounts straight up with a dome. The roof slopes to the South so I don't know if it's relevant which I choose. I remember the SunTube website mentioned they had some sort of intensifier to make it brighter but I can't find it on the website any longer.

I live in El Paso Tx. aka. "Sun City" for its large number of clear days.

I don't remember when I took those photo's. I will try to take an hour to hour sequence when I get the chance.

Regarding brands: I have talked to a few vendors and Solatube has the best BS. :D

If I were to do the tubular skylights again I would consider using them given their claims, i.e. you get more light esp. if you have a long distance to run the tube.

Another vendor to consider is called the Natural lighting company (different than Natural light) They are more into the commercial market. I used them for my 600 gallon project which is nearing completion :lol: yea right.

http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=5264016#post5264016


their site:

http://www.daylighting.com/index.html

Check out the active tracking unit. I think I posted on this way back when on this thread. I am not convinced its the way to go anymore. During this time of year the sun is nearly directly over head and for a period of the day I get direct/un-bounced light.

The mirrors get in the way however. (they actually like this feature for building light as it cuts down on intensity so its not TOO BRIGHT. (SACRILEGE!))

I might end up taking the tracking unit down for the summer months and putting it back up during the winter when the sun is lower in the south sky.

[Isayso]

:eek1:
this is an excellent threads..
Beatiful tanks...
how ever...........
is there any chance of direct sun for us here in Canada?
or we are not as luky as the ones down South?:confused:
:rolleye1:

[Cody Ray]

good question, that has never been a problem here in arizona!

[douglass]

Herpervet,

Any updated pictures? How are the tubes working?

[Goalie66]

Time to bump this back up and hopefully get some updates. :)

[JMBoehling]

No new pics but here is an update on my 90 Gallon Reef with (02) 10" Tubular Skylights.

I am learning very quickly that while Light is critically important to a Reef Tank and its inhabitants, there are other factors that can play equally important roles in the overall health and appearance of our tanks.

At this time I cannot give an overall "Thumbs Up" or "Down" to using skylights... While my initial feeling is "thumbs up". I have recently made many modifications to my reef, as as all of you know, change can have negative short term impact on the growth and appearance of SPS.

My changes are as follows:

1. Drip Kalk in Makeup water

2. Added a fan above my refugium because my water temp was consistantly hanging around 83 to 84 degrees.. Now it is 78...


3. Got rid of my Modified Seaclone Skimmer and installed a Deltec AP600... BEST $600.00 I have ever spent!

4. Dumped my DSB in my Refugium and all sand (Bare Bottom) in my display.

Enough changes... I agree, so now I am relaxing a bit, not adding or changing anything. My initial take after 1 month of being Bare Bottom is the overall health of my SPS are very good. I have good Polyp extension, and one unknown frag is really coloring up from a dark brown to a bright green coral.

The verdict is still out on natural light, now that I have my Nutrients in check, I hope to post some seriuos growth pics soon.


Later,

Jim

[Hef]

I dont think we are looking for Miracles with natural light, just something beyond survivability. So much has been written recently on the amount of light needed for corals is less than previously thought.
I'm moving very slow in my plans, but ultimately want to have 3 tubes over a 6 ft. tank, and have my halide and vho light system on a sliding rack to enhance the natural light.

More Photos sure would be nice though. Why dont you set up a Tripod and take a series of maybe 5 photos during the day to show what the light looks like. Might look cool.

[Puffers]

Wish I could put a few of thouse over my reef but I don't know if WI would get enough light.

[JMBoehling]

Here are some pics from today of my Reef.

This Picture is at 9:30 this morning with Supplemental PC's and the Sun

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2138.JPG


This is my tank at 10:30 am

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2139.JPG

My tank at Noon

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2140.JPG

Same picture with Skylights blocked

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2141.JPG

Same Pic with Skylights only.. No PC's on..

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2142.JPG

Hope this gives everyone out there an idea.. Of course, everything is brighter and more dramatic in person.

Later,

Jim

[JMBoehling]

Quick Note:

I realize I have an algae problem. Just discovered HIGH phosphates in my reef. Apparently my single stage of my DI unit doesn't take all the phophates out of my water. Put two tablespoons of Rowaphos in my Upflow unit and the Phosphates have reduced significantly in just 24 hours. Ordered another stand alone DI unit to strip my tapwater free of phosphates.

[Goalie66]

Do you have any SPS in there and if so how are they doing?

Thanks for the pics!!!!

[JMBoehling]

Got a few Monti Dig, Monti Caps, and some Misc. Frags people have given me. My SPS have had a toughtime, not because of light intensity issues but because of every other parameter being terrible recently:

Let me list some recent issues:

1. Temperature of tank was 83 to 84... Installed a fan on my fuge, now at 78

2. Nitrates were 40 to 60 ppm.. Dumped my sand bed and DSB in fuge, upgraded my Skimmer to a Deltec AP600, and substituted Chaeto for my Caulerpa and now they are at 0 ppm

3. Salinity was thought to be at 1.026.. I purchased a refractometer 2 days ago and found out my salinity was actually 6 points higher at 1.032

4. Phosphates in my tank were 1.5.. Added extra Di cartridge and ROWA to my upflow filter and got them down to less than .05.. I will add more ROWA in 1 week to get them to 0.

So back to your original question, Do you have SPS? Yes. Are they doing well? No, but think it was water quality issues. Hard to get good calcification and coloring up on SPS with High Nitrates and Phosphates at 1.5 :)

More to come in a month or so.

[YodaHart]

Originally posted by JMBoehling
1. Temperature of tank was 83 to 84... Installed a fan on my fuge, now at 78

2. Nitrates were 40 to 60 ppm.. Dumped my sand bed and DSB in fuge, upgraded my Skimmer to a Deltec AP600, and substituted Chaeto for my Caulerpa and now they are at 0 ppm

3. Salinity was thought to be at 1.026.. I purchased a refractometer 2 days ago and found out my salinity was actually 6 points higher at 1.032

4. Phosphates in my tank were 1.5.. Added extra Di cartridge and ROWA to my upflow filter and got them down to less than .05.. I will add more ROWA in 1 week to get them to 0.


Wow! That's crazy. I hope you get everything fixed. Its good to see that you're working proactively to solve the problems. I'd hate to see you spend so much time and $ on skylights just to have a tank that crashed. The tank looks awesome with the actinics.

[JMBoehling]

I agree.. Believe it or not, my Clowns are almost 18 years old and my Naso is 7 years old. They are tough as nails. What is crazy is the only thing effected by the HORRIBLE water conditions is my SPS (Guess that is obvious..) but all other inhabitants and inverts look great, including shrooms, caps, zoos and anemone's...

Just watch, I'll get my water perfect then everything will crash....

[Chihuahua6]

Thanks for the update Jim. My SunTunnels are installed now and the hole in the wall is awaiting the tank. I had thre 13" tubes installed. The tank will be 90" X 36" so I may need supplemental lighting even in SC. I'm going to play it by ear though. I plan to keep low to moderate light corals, no sps. I'll get pics once I get the tank.

[JMBoehling]

Originally posted by Chihuahua6
Thanks for the update Jim. My SunTunnels are installed now and the hole in the wall is awaiting the tank. I had thre 13" tubes installed. The tank will be 90" X 36" so I may need supplemental lighting even in SC. I'm going to play it by ear though. I plan to keep low to moderate light corals, no sps. I'll get pics once I get the tank.


Sounds awesome.. You will love it.. My pictures really don't do the Natrual Light only sho justice, guess you will see first hand with your tank very soon.. Keep us updated with your progress..

Jim

[JMBoehling]

Originally posted by Chihuahua6
Thanks for the update Jim. My SunTunnels are installed now and the hole in the wall is awaiting the tank. I had thre 13" tubes installed. The tank will be 90" X 36" so I may need supplemental lighting even in SC. I'm going to play it by ear though. I plan to keep low to moderate light corals, no sps. I'll get pics once I get the tank.

Amanda,

Any updates?

Jim

[Jimsreef]

Is there a way to build your own sun tunnel? I am interested in using natural sunlight. My aquarium is going to be on the south side of the building and I hope I can get enough light here in KY.

[JMBoehling]

Originally posted by Jimsreef
Is there a way to build your own sun tunnel? I am interested in using natural sunlight. My aquarium is going to be on the south side of the building and I hope I can get enough light here in KY.

I have heard of people using Mirors but I can only imagine that is extremely expensive. I would just purchase the intallation kits available from Solatube or any other tubular skylight mfg'er. Just do your homework before you start cutting holes in your roof.. Study your layout of Rafters and Ceiling Joists...

Also, take a look at trees etc, and make sure there is no potential of future foliage growth blocking the skylights.. Now is the time to plan before they all drop there leaves..

I would think you would get similiar sunlight that I get in Virginia, so my guess is you are good to go...

Best of luck with your project.

Jim

[Jimsreef]

I appreaciate your response.

Do you have to purchase anything else with the solatubes?

What brand do you suggest and are the ones from homedepot ok to use?

How many and what size do you suggest for a 180 6' x 2' x 2'.

They say 2'x2' for MH's what would the coverage be for 14" NSL tubes?

Thanks Jim

[JMBoehling]

I have (02) 10" Suntek skylights (The ones from Home Dopt- I think they are under the name Gordan now..) I would think (03) 10" would work, but (03) 14"'s would be even better... Also, remember you will need room for any supplemental light (VHO, T5 or PC Actinic) just so you can enjoy your reef in the evening and to throw some Blue's into your tank, as natural Sunlight is very White...

Some others on this thread say the Solatube Mirror finish is better than others. Unfortunately I cannot comment on this since I have no experience withthe other mfg's products.

Your initial setup and installation cost will be similiar to installing (03) 250 MH's but just remember, you won't have to change bulbs every 6 to 12 months and your using no electricity (Other than some Supplemental lights should you want it.. Plus, you get the perfect spectrum of light for your reef :)

Later,

Jim

[Jimsreef]

Do you use the dome cover that came with the light? What about the UV rating? Do you have a cover on the bottom?

Thanks Jim

[Herpervet]

Originally posted by JMBoehling
I have (02) 10" Suntek skylights (The ones from Home Dopt- I think they are under the name Gordan now..) I would think (03) 10" would work, but (03) 14"'s would be even better... Also, remember you will need room for any supplemental light (VHO, T5 or PC Actinic) just so you can enjoy your reef in the evening and to throw some Blue's into your tank, as natural Sunlight is very White...

Some others on this thread say the Solatube Mirror finish is better than others. Unfortunately I cannot comment on this since I have no experience withthe other mfg's products.

Your initial setup and installation cost will be similiar to installing (03) 250 MH's but just remember, you won't have to change bulbs every 6 to 12 months and your using no electricity (Other than some Supplemental lights should you want it.. Plus, you get the perfect spectrum of light for your reef :)

Later,

Jim

Actually, not to be argumentative, but I thought the same thing regarding the perfect specturm etc. but after talking extensively with a lighting engineer among others I found out its probably not the case. I think Anthony Calfo pointed some of this out.

Anyway, According to at least a couple ofsources there is a very big difference in color (i.e. spectrum) of light at different locations.

Example: Sea level with low ambient humidity produces light that is shifted toward the yellow/orange spectrum compared to sea level around the ocean where the ambient humidity is almost always very high.

The water in the atmosphere shifts the light toward the higher Kelvin ratings. So the color spectrum of light reaching even 12" of depth is much more "Blue" than lighting at 12 inches depth in a vessel of water in the desert for example (i.e. where I live)

Does it make a huge difference is the question? I don't know. But intuitively I would think for some creatures yes and some no.

My own tank seems to be functioning reasonably but the jury is still out.

I do know that the appearance is nicer with a color filter over the skylights.

[JMBoehling]

Has Anthony ever installed skylights on his reef tank or tanks? I am in no way shape or form a Lighting expert. I got a wild hair one day and decided to do the Tubular lights because it seemed to make some sort of logical sense.

As I have mentioned in previous threads, the jury is somewhat out with my reef as well, but now that I have Non-Light related reef issues (Major ones at that..High Nitrates, High Phosphates, Low Calcium, and extremely high Salinity) corrected I have seeing some awesome growth and polyp extension on my SPS.

I just introduced a Cali Tort frag, I have taken a pic of it today and plan to take a pic in 6 months... Proof will be in the pudding, as they say:)

[gatohoser]

Sunlight contains all colors. Water only filters out certain spectrums. When you say it is shifted towards one spectrum or the other you are just saying which is most prevalent. Therefore yes the sunlight may appear visually different but will still contain all the correct PAR at all latitudes.

[Herpervet]

Jm: I think I asked you this before but how close are your tubes to the water surface?

Nice screen name Gato. I think I get it.

No doubt all the spectrum is there but the question is wheather or not the shorter wavelenths hurt anything and of course esthetics.

My tank has some issues also I believe and I am not really trying to grow sps because of flow and filtration issues. (skimmerless on a large tank with relatively low flow and the only sps in the tank is one P. damicornis frag that is languishing along with some hitchiking Porites sp. that is also not extending polyps)

[JMBoehling]

Originally posted by Herpervet
Jm: I think I asked you this before but how close are your tubes to the water surface?



9 inches from the water surface.

[hllywd]

:cool: FWIW I live in NW Ohio and installed a 10" Solatube about five years ago. It's over our dining room table and my wife keeps a ficus tree under it throught he cold months. There is of course some difference in the intensity of the light because the tree will drop some leaves once we bring it inside. I do have 2 more 10" units that are not installed yet that I've toyed with using over a 75 or 90G tank I'd like to set up I do think I'd suppliment them with a couple of VHOs or PCs but that's just my preliminary thinking. Also if anybody has some ideas, I really don't think due to the cold here I could eliminate the difuser at the bottom, obviously the diminishes the intensity but I don't see any good alternative.
I am very pleased with the product quality and performance of our first unit. It really is all it's advertised to be and I think it's got great promise over a reef tank.:D
There's my 2 cents,
Tim

[JMBoehling]

Originally posted by hllywd
:cool: FWIW I live in NW Ohio and installed a 10" Solatube about five years ago. It's over our dining room table and my wife keeps a ficus tree under it throught he cold months. There is of course some difference in the intensity of the light because the tree will drop some leaves once we bring it inside. I do have 2 more 10" units that are not installed yet that I've toyed with using over a 75 or 90G tank I'd like to set up I do think I'd suppliment them with a couple of VHOs or PCs but that's just my preliminary thinking. Also if anybody has some ideas, I really don't think due to the cold here I could eliminate the difuser at the bottom, obviously the diminishes the intensity but I don't see any good alternative.
I am very pleased with the product quality and performance of our first unit. It really is all it's advertised to be and I think it's got great promise over a reef tank.:D
There's my 2 cents,
Tim


Tim,

I originally had a local glass shop replace the platic diffuser with a 1/8" piece of glass and siliconed it into the cover. I removed it because of condensation issues.

Jim

[hllywd]

Did you get condensation on the glass or up in the dome? I've never had condensation on the original difuser of the tube I have installed.

Tim

[xouttheeyes]

Also, did you try using rainx or fogx. I'm not sure if it would work or not but its just a thought. May be too late now though.

[JMBoehling]

Originally posted by hllywd
Did you get condensation on the glass or up in the dome? I've never had condensation on the original difuser of the tube I have installed.

Tim

Condensation in the tube.. I have since run it weithout covers with very little problems. There may be a little dust build up but not enought to cause any major problems for my SPS..

Jim

[wazbot]

Just for interest sake with the condensation, whats the local humidity and are you running air con?

[hllywd]

Ours is in the 70 - 80% range and higher (I'm estimating) in the summer and generally lower than that in the heating season, probably 30s or 40s indoors. We do have AC. I've never had a problem with condensation using all the supplied materials with the kit. It's sealed at the top and bottom so there shouldn't be much air exchange to allow humidity into the tube. The tube is uninsulated. Strictly talking about it as a skylight we couldn't be more happy, my interest is for a near future tank I'd like to install. I already have second and third 10" units in the attic to install when the time comes. I'm convinced.
Tim

[mmoore0803]

So my celing is vaulted above my 90g....can the tubes work? The light would have to pass through approx 8 feet of open air (from ceiling to the bottom of the tank) I love this option of natural light...I live in Southern California and want to keep heavily light dependent corals (currently my tank has about 500W of PC lighting over it)

Mike

[THE GIMP]

Do I get a prize for reading this entier thread? :D

Great job guys in going for something new. I am impressed. Thanks for the pictures. I have considered this before, as I am sure others have, reading this thread. I was unsure of the intensety, having installed suplimental light in sola tubes in a couple of kitchens.
I have been planing a major upgrade for a couple of years, and after reading this I am going to use light tubes for at least part of the system, probably for the 300 gal grow tank in the garage.
Thankyou for taking the time to share.

[hllywd]

I really think it can only help, I think here in Ohio and with how I need to locate mine on the roof they will be supplimental but I have 2 of the 10" units waiting in the garage...:cool:

[coreygoforth]

nice replies!

[Gusto]

Amazing, in one more month this topic will have been alive for almost 4 years. This has got to set a record of some type...

[Hef]

Has anyone tried to go with more of a full skylight design, say 2 feet wide by 6 feet long. Use Reflective material inside down to the tank level. Or are the smaller Tunnels the only way to go.

[delnino]

Hef, there is much in this thread regarding skylights, including pictures and details of installation. I imagine this thread will still be going strong in 10 years. I have been doing extensive research on the future of the worlds energy supply and it ain't pretty. Things are changing fast right now and the majority of people on earth have no clue what is in store in the next 5-10 years. The US will probably suffer the most from steadily increasing energy costs. 1000 watt halides are a terrible investment if you care about your economic future. That said, I have 300 watts over my 25 gallon!!

[Reefbone]

Pretty cool stuff. How often do you have to replace those bulbs in the tube lights? :D

[Lordhelmet]

Any slowed growth or any change now that the sun is dipping lower in the sky. pictures would be great as well:cool:

[JMBoehling]

Originally posted by Lordhelmet
Any slowed growth or any change now that the sun is dipping lower in the sky. pictures would be great as well:cool:

The only thing that continues to slow the growth of my SPS is continually making bone head mistakes. For example, just 2 weeks ago a snail caused a mishap, causing my float valve to dump 5 gallons of Kalk into my setup.... To say the least, this will slow the growth of any SPS :) I am looking forward to 6 straight months where nothing goes wrong with my reef.. Imean it's been a little bit of everything 1st High Nitrates, then High Salinity, then High Phosphates and now oversaturating of Kalk which made my Calcium, Alk and Mag all fall to extremely low levels...

With all of this happening, I do have some SPS living... I wouldn't say they are lighting the world on fire with growth, but at least they are hanging in there. Here are some pics.. I hope some of you other Tubular Skylight users will chime in with your updates :)

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2348.JPG

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2355.JPG

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2347.JPG


If you look real close you'll see a Chips Acro I recently lost.. It was doing great until the Kalk issue.. UGHHHHH!

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2380.JPG

Can't forget to show off my favorite couple!

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2377.JPG


It is interesting that everyone is so concerned about light when for me it is just achieving some stability in my water parameters for my reef. I will keep updates posted as they seem fitting to do so...

Later,

Jim

[ol'reefer]

Glad to see some pioneers out there.

[cwloo]

I seem to recall someone use the skylight but not those tube type over his newly extended fish room... anyone can find the link ?

[hllywd]

I can't remember what that was about but the SolaTubes are basically a 10" hole using a reflective pipe to get light into the building. The dome on the roof has a reflector to help direct sunlight into the tube. The nice thing about these is they are on a scale where you can direct the light down the tube and into a tank. It would be harder to direct the light with a regular sky light but you might have a much larger hole in the roof to allow light in as well. I don't have a reason other than getting the light where you want it that a regular skylight wouldn't work.
Tim

[hllywd]

Actually assuming you could direct the light I would think bigger is better...:cool:

[barryhc]

For a skylight applicaton, IF you are near a wall, two 4' x 8' sheets for "opposite walls" of mirrored acrylic could be curved in a nearly parabolic curve, from 4' wide at the top, to whatever tank width that you desire, with flat sheets at the sides, to make your "collector-amplifier". If you are 4' square wiyh the skylight, for instance, and run this into a 48" x 18" tank, you have captured 16' sq. ft. of light.

A 10" Sola Tube only delivers .55 sq. ft. per tube, so even if the skylight method was only half as effecient as the Sola Tube, 4 Sola Tubes offer a total of 2.2 sq. ft. of area, whereas the skylight version, even when rated at 50% would effectively deliver 8 sq. ft. of sunlight.

This mirrored acrylic sheet is readily available in 1/8" thick sheets, and is not that expensive. I think the relative effeciency would actually be better than 50%. It would require a bit of "boxing" in the rafters, but it wouldn't be that bad.

I just happened to have some of this for a diy hood I've been designing, and the skylight questions here got me to thinking.

Just some food for thought, this is a great thread by the way. Thanks for all the pictures Jim, and the best of luck, with corraling "Murphy". :thumbsup:

> barryhc :beachbum:

[Hef]

Interesting thoughts. I've never heard of Mirrored Acrylic, I have worked with a lot of Mirrored Aluminum & Stainless. The Stainless is best, and this collector could be made with 1/32" thick material. I'm thinking a simple wooden frame could be constructed and a couple of screws would hold it in place.

Do you think you would need any type of special collector at the top, on the outside of the roof?

The numbers you are showing are staggering as far as amount of light that could be collected. I would like to hear others opinions on this.

Hef

[barryhc]

Hef, I have had a 4 x 8' sheet of it for several years, and it is just as reflective as your bathroom mirror.

The curves of the sheets would be inside the house, and it takes almost nothing but gravity to put these gradual bends into the acrylic sheet. The stuff that I bought is specificaly heat resistant for close proximity to the light hood design that got put on hold for a couple of years.

As far as collecting ouside the house goes, I think you might be better off without it, just to keep things maintanence free on the roof. The numbers should be pretty accurate, but I haven't tried it.

The large tank that I will be putting in soon is going to be in the basement, so I may not get the chance to try this myself any time soon.

Four times as much light as (4) 10" Sola tubes, is certianly a lot of light, and it may be more that you need to sheild some of it in the summer, more than trying to get more at the surface of the roof.

The 16 sq. ft. collection area is already taking care of this I would think. Just my two cents.

Happy Reef Keeping! > barryhc :beachbum:

[salty joe]

Barry,
That's a real interesting. I'm going to kick that one around a little bit.

Glad to see you on my other favorite thread. I love the direction this hobby is going.

Joe

[Chihuahua6]

Hello again everyone. Sorry I haven't given an update but that's because nothing has changed. The 3 13" Suntunnels have been installed which I mentioned already. The hole for the inwall tank is done and trimmed out. I still need the tank! I will be placing my order soon but it will take up to 2 months to get it. You will hear from me as soon as the tank is here and running.

[JMBoehling]

Originally posted by Chihuahua6
Hello again everyone. Sorry I haven't given an update but that's because nothing has changed. The 3 13" Suntunnels have been installed which I mentioned already. The hole for the inwall tank is done and trimmed out. I still need the tank! I will be placing my order soon but it will take up to 2 months to get it. You will hear from me as soon as the tank is here and running.

Thought you may have dropped the hobby and picked up something like GOLF instead :)

Look forwad to seeing your setup in the coming months.

Jim

[Covey]

Come guys updated pics!!

[cwloo]

Hi guys, nice tube there.

Just one question, will the newly introduce corals bleach b'cos the strong sunlight cause a light shock to them ?

[gatohoser]

I don't have a solatube but I would say the procedure is the same as for strong halides or any other strong light. You have to slowly bring them up to a spot where you want them from a darker area or else cover the tank with layers of a light reducing material like bird netting or whatever they use (have never gone that far with it but have seen it done) and slowly remove layers over a week or 2.

[delnino]

I could be a little off here but I would recommend against using mirrored acrylic for any light reflectors. I know that standard glass mirror is terrible for this purpose because it has a black backing that actually absorbs light. A room filled with mirrors appears very dark. A room painted white is very bright. Mirrors are designed to show an accurate reflection and I think the acrylic mirror is made for the same purpose. Polished aluminum, silver oxide coated aluminum, or even white metal will much better I think.

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6281425#post6281425 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by delnino
I could be a little off here but I would recommend against using mirrored acrylic for any light reflectors. I know that standard glass mirror is terrible for this purpose because it has a black backing that actually absorbs light. A room filled with mirrors appears very dark. A room painted white is very bright. Mirrors are designed to show an accurate reflection and I think the acrylic mirror is made for the same purpose. Polished aluminum, silver oxide coated aluminum, or even white metal will much better I think.

The light never gets to the "backing" because it is reflected from the mirror surface. ( and out of the "mirror filled room" for that matter )

Take a miirror and a white sheet of whatever, and lay them both flat outside on a bright sunny day. Now look into the mirror so that you can see the sun, try the same with the white sheet, if you can still figure out where it's at, and you are not on your way to the hospital.

Questions? > barryhc :beachbum: :D

[hllywd]

I wouldn't bet my life, but if I remember correctly delnino is right concerning the reflectivity of a mirror. The mylar over aluminum type materials are supposed to reflect much more light. The glass itself will absorb some light since it has to travel through the glass twice to go where you want it...

[hllywd]

I wouldn't bet my life, but if I remember correctly delnino is right concerning the reflectivity of a mirror. The mylar over aluminum type materials are supposed to reflect much more light. The glass itself will absorb some light since it has to travel through the glass twice to go where you want it...

[gatohoser]

I heard that too.

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6292464#post6292464 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hllywd
I wouldn't bet my life, but if I remember correctly delnino is right concerning the reflectivity of a mirror. The mylar over aluminum type materials are supposed to reflect much more light. The glass itself will absorb some light since it has to travel through the glass twice to go where you want it...

I think you are getting confused about "dispersing" more light, and a white room will be very bright, in fact the brightest, by way of this "dispersion". Dispersion, however, is not what we are looking for when attempting to "direct" light to a "new location".

Also, the absorbtion of light through "mirror-grade-acrylic" is quite low.

Still, if this doesn't make any sense, then take the prospective materials outside on a sunny day, and look at the suns' reflection, and throw away the ones that don't blind you.

Did you ever notice how bright a white shirt looks under a "black light"? "Perception" is a "multi-edged" sword.

Happy Reef Keeping!!! > barryhc

:beachbum: :thumbsup:

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6292465#post6292465 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hllywd
I wouldn't bet my life, but if I remember correctly delnino is right concerning the reflectivity of a mirror. The mylar over aluminum type materials are supposed to reflect much more light. The glass itself will absorb some light since it has to travel through the glass twice to go where you want it...

Good "mirror" is 97% reflective, so how much more reflective is 100%, or "perfect reflection"?

Are we making progress?

> barryhc :) :) :)

[hllywd]

Sorry guys I hate to beat this to death but I went back and looked at some of my info on glass mirrors, acrylic mirrors are a little better reflectivity-wise at about 85% where a good glass "plane" mirror is about 80% reflective. A front surface mirror such as a telescope primary or secondary mirror, depending on the coatings and enhancements, can be up to about 98% reflective. Specular aluminum is from about 85% reflective to the high 90%s. Painted steel can be greater than 85% and can be enhanced to over 90%.
The confusion of appearances arises because of the way the light is reflected. A plane mirror reflects the light rays parallel and looks bright, a concave mirror's reflection converges at a focal point and if large enough won't blind you but will set your head on fire when you look at it, a convex mirrors reflection is divergent and will appear less bright. Specular aluminum, and painted surfaces can and usually are more reflective than a "regular" mirror. The difference is the light rays scatter or are more difuse.
Tim

BTW I agree white wouldn't be the way to channel light into a space but neither is a "regular" or "plane" mirror unless you're talking about reflecting the light once. Everytime the light changes direction you'll lose intensity. At 80% that will add up fast.

[barryhc]

If we look at "transferrence" of light, it is going to stack up a little bit differently. Firstly I will concede to Hollywood's numbers. And we can get into fine detail on reflectivity, but the "look at the sun" analogy, is going to remain. This redirects, or transfers the light to an "aimed" new location. We can get into exact energy absorption, and therefore supposed effeciencies, by reading the temperature on the back of the surface, but any "mirror surface is going to put many factors of "more" light to the new location relative to the alternative material that is not as "blinding".

Have a great day!! > barryhc :) :)

[hllywd]

I think there are different ways of resolving this issue to our goal. The manufacturers of the tube skylights as far as I know all use some kind of specular aluminum, I installed a couple 14" Velux "tubes" this past fall that had flexible tubes much like a dryer vent only 14" dia with a shiny aluminum coating. I don't think these deserve consideration for our purposes because my instinct tells me the rigid tube would direct more light where it's desired. I think my 10" rigid Solatube is brighter than the 14" flexible Velux unit. I don't have a light meter but that's what my eyes tell me.
I think these have promise for reducing dependance on artificial lighting but unless a way to implement a larger skylight and get most of the light onto the tank area they will remain suplimental.:cool:

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6197689#post6197689 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by barryhc
For a skylight applicaton, IF you are near a wall, two 4' x 8' sheets for "opposite walls" of mirrored acrylic could be curved in a nearly parabolic curve, from 4' wide at the top, to whatever tank width that you desire, with flat sheets at the sides, to make your "collector-amplifier". If you are 4' square wiyh the skylight, for instance, and run this into a 48" x 18" tank, you have captured 16' sq. ft. of light.

A 10" Sola Tube only delivers .55 sq. ft. per tube, so even if the skylight method was only half as effecient as the Sola Tube, 4 Sola Tubes offer a total of 2.2 sq. ft. of area, whereas the skylight version, even when rated at 50% would effectively deliver 8 sq. ft. of sunlight.

This mirrored acrylic sheet is readily available in 1/8" thick sheets, and is not that expensive. I think the relative effeciency would actually be better than 50%. It would require a bit of "boxing" in the rafters, but it wouldn't be that bad.


> barryhc :beachbum:

Selfexplanatory

[goby1]

Actually, a good front-surface mirror can be pretty much 100% reflective. As long as the material is reasonably pure, and the roughness is less than the wavelength of light you want to reflect, you're good to go. Of course, that would be cost prohibitive for the casual solar collector. Edmund optics has cheap parabolic mirrors, FYI.
G1

[salty joe]

If your skylight measures 4' x 4', and your aquarium measures 4' x 18", what is the advantage of curving the reflective material in the light tunnel versus running flat panels?

Joe

[hllywd]

The idea is to "focus" the light onto a spot the size of the tank.

[salty joe]

But the sun does not stay in a fixed position. It seems that the light would be focused at different points in different times of the day. Maybe I'm being really dense here, but I still can't see the advantage of curved panels versus flat tapering panels.

[Trickman2]

When I finally get a house and not a condo. I plan on doing the solatubes for my tank.

[hllywd]

Salty, The thead is specifically about Solatubes and has been expanded to the large "square" skylight idea. My personal feelings are that the Solatubes are a better idea for the reason you stated although their collection area is limited. The one I installed is not over a tank but over the dining room table where my wife keeps a ficus tree during the months it can't be outside. In bright sunlight it offers a lot of light and it's directional nature isn't affected by the sun's changing position although it's intensity is. It provides about a 6' circle of light on the floor from the 8' ceiling, moonlight is also transmitted enough to light the table at night during the more "full" phases of the lunar cycle. It was very easy to install taking about an hour and a half to complete. I think the application, at least in NW Ohio, is supplimental lighting not a replacement for the artificial lights.

I also think if you can figure out how to make the 4 x 4 hole in the roof and maintain the roof's integrity, keep it from sweating and leaking, and focus the light on the tank, that is an even better idea but due to our winter length of day and timing you still wouldn't completely replace the artificial lights.

Unless somebody comes up with a revolutionary idea for this short of a heliostat and high quality mirrors for a system costing many thousands I'll continue to make my plans for the other $400 worth of Solatubes waiting in the attic for just such a project.

Tim:cool:

[hllywd]

Trickman, I installed 2 of the 14" Velux units in a condo I built an addition on this past fall. Installation isn't terribly invasive and you don't alter any structural components. Unless your association is different from how they work here you shouldn't have a problem.

Tim:cool:

[Trickman2]

Wish I could but I am a lower unit and have someone directly above me.

[salty joe]

Thanks for the reply Tim.

I understand that on a lot of applications, a flat roof for instance, a Sola tube will collect more light than a conventional skylight of comparable size.

I am thinking of a large skylight facing true south. From the solar panel industry, I found that the optimum angle is easily ascertained. Where I live it is approximately 45°. In this type of situation, I think any advantage from the Sola tube is negligible.

So back to my question. If the skylight is 4' x 4', and the aquarium is 4' x 18", how could using curved panels in the light tunnel yield more light than flat tapered panels in the light tunnel?

Joe

[barryhc]

Joe, it's just a matter of getting that 45 degree condition at the collector lense ( or skylight ) "turned" to match the "level" condition at the top of the tank. ( by way of curving the panels ) Also let's throw out any conception of "parabolic" here while we're at it, that was a poor choice of words, way back, on my part.

Also, the bottom portion of the mirror panels can be made to be more nearly parallel with each other so that the light is "funneled" more directly "down" into the tank, which reduces the amount of light that is able to "escape" through the tank walls.

I hope this is helpful. > barryhc :)

[barryhc]

I could make a little "graphic" thing, to illustrate, if you like.

Happy Reef Keeping! > barryhc :)

[salty joe]

Barry,

It would be great if light could be made to consistently hit the surface of the aquarium at a right angle. That seems like a mighty tall order considering that the sun does not stay in the same place. But maybe I'm missing something.

Yeah, I would appreciate it if you could post a picture.

By the way, light entering the surface of the water cannot escape directly through the glass of the aquarium. It has to be reflected off the rocks or fish or something first. I am pretty sure that there is a name for this phenomena , but I don't know what it is.

Joe

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6298695#post6298695 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by salty joe
Barry,

It would be great if light could be made to consistently hit the surface of the aquarium at a right angle. That seems like a mighty tall order considering that the sun does not stay in the same place. But maybe I'm missing something.

Yeah, I would appreciate it if you could post a picture.Joe

Joe, I worked this up over the weekend, been real busy.

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/4180/95799Skylight_concept_101-med.jpg

This works well here for a 12 x 12 pitch roof. I need better info. on seasonal and regional inclination to get more accurate, and look into accomodating seasonal variations.

The roof is considered to be pointing south here. I don't think we need tracking for the daily path of the sun.

A lot of good might be gained however for seasonal inclination differences. I would have to work on it more.

A lower pitch roof starts to make it a bit less advantageous for the curved panels, because of aspect ratios. I would need to work on more accurate values to see if any advantage could be made there.

By the way, light entering the surface of the water cannot escape directly through the glass of the aquarium. It has to be reflected off the rocks or fish or something first. I am pretty sure that there is a name for this phenomena , but I don't know what it is.

Well, that depends on the angle of incidence, and I haven't tested or researched that for specific values, but in the case of the skylight, this might be taken into account to improve morning and evening transferrence, with a two panel lense to improve incidence angle.

Let me know what you think.

Happy Reef keeping > barryhc :)

[cwloo]

Well, no matter solartube or skylight. The basic point here is to prove that it is workable to use Solar light as a reliable primary source of light to the reef tank.

I think we just need more picture, especially from senior reefer like SAT :D

[Trickman2]

I second the vote for Pictures.

[shookbrad]

Has anyone found any tubular skylights that have a dome the does NOT absorb the UV rays.
I wnat to install a few of these over my tank but I am not having any luck finding the domes I need.

[H20ENG]

Could you not just scrap the dome and use some framed starphire or other high UV transmittance glazing? The frame would be the skylight flashing.

I cant see the actual dome "catching" much more light than a flat pane.

Isnt the UV not really neccesary since most corals are several ft below the surface, which filters it out anyway?

[shookbrad]

Good question. I don't know. Anyone??

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6379141#post6379141 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by H20ENG
Could you not just scrap the dome and use some framed starphire or other high UV transmittance glazing? The frame would be the skylight flashing.

I cant see the actual dome "catching" much more light than a flat pane.

Isnt the UV not really neccesary since most corals are several ft below the surface, which filters it out anyway?

I think that the dome "catches" more light during "adverse conditions", like early and late in the day, and less than "optimum" at "high noon". Actually I'm quite sure of it. It also "mediates" latitude and seasonal variations in the same manner.

Where are these tanks where the corals are several feet below the surface?

> barryhc :)

[H20ENG]

What I mean is that on a reef, the corals are several feet below the surface, and the water will filter out some UV. How much UV do they really need in our tanks?

I'm sure this topic has been beat senseless elsewhere on RC:D

So is it an issue or not with the polycarbonate domes?

I can see how the prizms in the dome could catch some light at odd angles, I just wonder how much.

[barryhc]

I don't have the specifics right now, but if you read a lighting thread, it will be specificly stated, "do not use high intensity lights without a UV filtering lense".

There are two types of UV, A and B. One is much more allowable than the other, and good "UV lenses" take this into account.

Yes, they are many feet to 10's of meters deep in the ocean, but not in our tanks. Think about UV "sterilizers".

> barryhc :)

[H20ENG]

UV sterilizers use UVC light at 257nm and would kill anything exposed to it for enough time. This is why they are inside an opaque tube- NOT above the tank.

I know about the UV protective glass for the DE halides,and again I ask: is NOT ENOUGH UV an issue with the domes? :)

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6379653#post6379653 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by H20ENG
UV sterilizers use UVC light at 257nm and would kill anything exposed to it for enough time. This is why they are inside an opaque tube- NOT above the tank.

I know about the UV protective glass for the DE halides,and again I ask: is NOT ENOUGH UV an issue with the domes? :)

Sunlight includes every wavelength of light in the spectrum, and the exposure time is 960 times as much as a UV sterilizer.

Std. polycarbonates do not filter UV to any significant degree, and the resulting exposure to reef animals would be dangerous. The "filtering" elsewise, starts at the surface of the water. We don't have enough water depth to reasonably mitigate this effect.

"Not enough", is most certainly not an issue.

> barryhc :)

[barryhc]

I understand that many animals benefit from "some amount" of UV, it is not "a lot". Unshielded sunlight at the depths that these animals are in our tanks is dangerous. Filtering is required.

> barryhc :)

[gatohoser]

That seems sort of an unsupported claim. UV light in the upper spectrums (UVA) activates photosynthesis. UVB you do not want but 12 inches of water will just about eliminate it. Polycarbonate blocks some of UVA and all of UVB. "Clear coated polycarbonate absorbs all UV below 380nm. The absorptive pigments are in the clear scratch resistant coating."
http://aboc.8m.com/4.html

UV blocking lenses are required on HQI lights because they produce large amounts of UVB as well as even UVC which is mutagenic and lethal. UV sterilizers WOULD kill anything in the tank were they exposed to it. Fortunately they only act on those organisms which pass through the tubing:)

[gatohoser]

As for if there is a deficiency of UV problem, I think experience would tell us no. Many of us use lights that are completely UV blocked and likely our corals are not getting UV but we still can keep them okay.

It seems like the dome serves a use though to gather light and you would want to use it.

[gatohoser]

And as for this extra transmitted UV being harmful, I doubt it since many corals actually are exposed to direct sunlight when the tides recede. Maybe some corals aren't gonna be big fans but I think if slowly acclimated from the bottom of the tank (12" or deeper) they will get the required UV blocking pigments.

[gatohoser]

Oh and UV light adds some cool fluorescent pigments to corals (and shows them off too).

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6380305#post6380305 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by gatohoser
And as for this extra transmitted UV being harmful, I doubt it since many corals actually are exposed to direct sunlight when the tides recede. Maybe some corals aren't gonna be big fans but I think if slowly acclimated from the bottom of the tank (12" or deeper) they will get the required UV blocking pigments.

Thanks Gatohoser, I think we have been stating the same things in the last couple of posts. Uncoated Polycarbonate does not have this protection and I can't say what coatings "Sola Tubes" have, but I don't think that there is much reason for it in normal Sola-Tube installations.

I think that many corals could be hampered severly by this UV light, when distances are short, like under 12" vaguely, but you have probably researched this more than I.

For std. Sola Tubes this would be a good bit less of a problem, than when you put 8-12 times "natural sunlight", by way of skylight "concentrating".

Reef Lighting has not been on the "top of my list" lately, looks like I should "brush up" a little bit.

Thanks, > barryhc :)

[JMBoehling]

I'll chime in.. I researched Tubular Skylights quite a bit before deciding to install them over my tank. A number of fellow hobbyist stated that it couldn't be done because of "Heat" from the sun. Well the UV resistant dome prevents a lot of the radiational heat from making it to the tank. Actually, there is very little heat transferred. I probably wouldn't attempt to replace the Dome's with Non-UV inhibiting glass or domes. Just my .02 cents..

later,

Jim

[cwloo]

Jim,

How long is your solar tube ? And the size of your tank ?

[gatohoser]

Ya that sounds like another really strong reason not to remove the polycarbonate then.

Barryhc, don't forget that the tropical sun is much stronger than our northern hemisphere sun anyways though. I don't remember how it works but when you think about water absorbing light its halfs for every certain fraction of the total distance it can travel. So maybe after like 3" its 1/4 of what it is at the surface. And corals can take that directly.

We do agree though. You probably shouldn't take that lens off. I just don't think that the problem is that you would get UV over-radiation.

[JMBoehling]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6382119#post6382119 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cwloo
Jim,

How long is your solar tube ? And the size of your tank ?

90 gallons

(02) 10" tubes approximately 10 feet long.

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6382614#post6382614 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by gatohoser
Ya that sounds like another really strong reason not to remove the polycarbonate then.

Barryhc, don't forget that the tropical sun is much stronger than our northern hemisphere sun anyways though. I don't remember how it works but when you think about water absorbing light its halfs for every certain fraction of the total distance it can travel. So maybe after like 3" its 1/4 of what it is at the surface. And corals can take that directly.

We do agree though. You probably shouldn't take that lens off. I just don't think that the problem is that you would get UV over-radiation.

That depends on the "collection factor" for one thing, and you have to decide if you believe that 2 times the amount of "natural" sunlight can be pumped into the tank with "skylight collectors". I am stating that it can. Sola Tubes can only get about 50% the value "natural sunlight into the tank. If you don't believe this, then that is a point of contention, but elsewise "think about it".

Secondly, water depth "degrades" light penetration through several mechanisms, you are right about that, but it is not degraded by 75% in three inches, 25% in 6 to 12" of depth would be a lot closer.

We will get less light in upper latitudes, because of "photoperiod", and because of "inclination angle". Aside from some reduction that occurs in regard to inclination angle, as a function of how much light "skips off" the atmosphere, the proper collection of light in higher latitudes can be rather effecient. Photoperiod reductions are about 33% VS "summer" in the midnorthern latitudes. Inclination angle losses can be even more severe, IF methods are not utilized to mitigate these losses.

So, probably not much concern with too much UV radiation with Sola tubes only, but watch out for running MH, or Skylight collectors without UV lenses.

Happy Reef Keeping! > barryhc :)

[gatohoser]

Doing more research again I found that the first 3 sites that I found that UVB only penetrates 12" were incorrect. Its 5m. Big difference. Still unimportant.

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6387214#post6387214 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by gatohoser
Doing more research again I found that the first 3 sites that I found that UVB only penetrates 12" were incorrect. Its 5m. Big difference. Still unimportant.

That makes a lot more sense, but I don't understand the "unimportant" part. I'm not "picking" with you here, I'm here to learn, but I don't understand that statement. Can you explain or give "links to" why it is "unimportant"?

Thanks > barryhc :)

[gatohoser]

I think we agree barryhc. I was agreeing with what you said about it not being a problem.

[Fursphere]

This has got to be one fo the best threads on RC.

YEARS of debating and researching, but little to no actual field results.

:lol:

[hllywd]

Is'nt that a fact?!?!?!

Sort of like a thread for a device to increase gas mileage on a '68 Pontiac to 175 MPG.....:D

[JMBoehling]

Rome was not built in a day, and neither is my Reef. Pictures and "PROOF" will soon follow. Like a fine wine, "Patience" my friend :)

Jim

[Lordhelmet]

JMBoehling i am patiently waiting the day.
Your tank has insired me to completely rethink the way we do lighting. When the time is right i will be useing all the free lighting in the world as well.:D

[OhMatic]

If I wanted to cut a hole in my roof and use sun light to light my tank. (two 4'x4' sections)
What would be a substance to use to cover the holes in my roof and what would be a good thing to cover the walls of the tube to my tank? Would you make the tube round or square?

[hllywd]

For 4x4 holes you'll probably need to consider commercial skylight units of some type, then for a 4x4 hole you need to do some structural framing, insulating and finishing in the roof and ceiling. The round skylights discussed here be they Sola Tube brand, Velux, or some other brand don't need the framing and trial and error engineering if you are diy-ing the entire project.. Sure I think a 16 sq ft hole in the roof will probably let in more light but how much of it can I keep in my 90G tank and still be confident of the integrity of my roof. I think the beauty or these round skylights is the non invasive nature of the installation (the one I have installed now took me ~2 hrs with little mess). Not that you can't diy a 4x4 hole but I think that's a whole construction lesson in itself, not a diy thing unless your wife is cool with wet carpet...
:cool:

[barryhc]

Lots of people put in skylights after the house is originally built, and most of them don't leak. Don't trust uncle Marvin, if he's missing three fingers from mowing the lawn.

Sola tubes are fine, but they don't bring in enough light to avoid supplementation.

Either one requires you to run a "natural" photoperiod, which is the biggest drawback for me.

Happy Reef Keeping ! > barryhc :)

[salty joe]

Barry's idea of bending a piece of reflective plastic got me to thinking. Maybe using a piece of flat reflective material set at an angle would direct the sunlight more directly into the aquarium. I know very little about the properties of light, but would placing the reflective panel at 22 1/2 degrees from plumb cause the reflected light to go straight down if the light is coming in at a 45° angle?

Joe

[barryhc]

You're thinking correctly here Joe, the interesting thing is that the "incoming angle" is changing with the seasons.

We might be able to do pretty well with this still, if say, two angles were utilized. I'll try to work up a graphic later today.

> barryhc :)

[salty joe]

That sounds good Barry.

I was thinking that setting the angle at the optimal point for winter might be best for better consistancy year round.

An adjustable panel would be interesting.

Joe

[hllywd]

Barry, I have no illusions many people retrofit skylights successfully, however when somebody asks "what substance would I use to cover a 4x4 hole in my roof", it's irresponsible not to point out the fact you CANNOT cut a hole and seal a piece of plexiglass on and not expect to severely damage to your $200,000 investment. I've fixed abortions like that where people knew better than the construction industry standards and decided to reinvent the wheel on their own. I also would contest your your claim "most don't leak". There are many cheap and inferior products on the market yet today that are real bastards to seal properly, I've seen 14"x 48" "bubble" skylights with 2" flanges that leave proper flashing to the installer. Ultimately most DIYers resort to roofing sealant in an attempt to seal these units which usually makes things worse. I still believe it is unrealistic for an average DIYer to install a "couple" or even one 4x4 skylight and end up with a SAFE and SECURE structure.
FYI - WHen I speak of DIYers I don't mean it in a bad way, I supervised volunteer construction labor for over 4 years building homes locally for a large national organiation. As an estimate 75 - 80% of the volunteer people claiming competency required immediate supervision to run shingles in a straight line, frame a wall, hang drywall, etc...

I already have a SolaTube of my own installed in our dining room. It provides a lot of light to the area. Do I think I'll be able to get rid of my lights with the two others I have over a 6' tank? NO! If I can offer my organisms some natural sunlight without rebuilding a section of my roof I will. Would I consider an option that has been engineered and tested to get 16 sq ft of light into the same 6' tank? SURE! Maybe I'd build on a sunroom and not worry about it...

I think the whole idea here was a non invasive way to catch some free natural sunlight, not to completely redesign the house.

Good luck.

[barryhc]

hllywd, I would only use a high quality skylight, and I would not expect the installation of the skylight, or the "reflectors-hood" is to be considered any sort of "typical- DIY" installation.

I have never mentioned DIY.

If skylights cannot be installed correctly, whether during new construction, of retrofit, then explain it to the mfg.

>Barry :)

[BeanAnimal]

hehe "bubble" skylights. I thought those went out with fondue and bell bottoms.

Bean

[hllywd]

Nope. Still in the big box, "home improvement stores".

[hllywd]

Oh... fondue is back in too... A whole chain called the "Melting Pot":D

[BeanAnimal]

yeah my brother and a few other couples went to "the melting pot" and the whole deal ended up costing over $100 per person. Thats a lot fo cheese and chocolate. I ate at Mo's in Indy not long ago and spend less than that on a ribeye the size of Rhode Island and a baked tater to match.

Bean

[hllywd]

I don't particularly object to the 100 bucks - just not for fondue tried it... wasn't too impressed...

For 100 beans I better leave with my fill of sushi and tanked on hot saki!!!:celeb3: :D

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6530348#post6530348 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hllywd
I don't particularly object to the 100 bucks - just not for fondue tried it... wasn't too impressed...

For 100 beans I better leave with my fill of sushi and tanked on hot saki!!!:celeb3: :D

15 years ago, It was the "Fondue Stube", about $35 a pop.

I loved it, and haven't been back since. I got my daughter a "chocolate foutain" for Christmas, I can't wait until "she" fills it up, and gives me "the front row". :dance:

I'll take my Ribeye "pink not red" thank you very much ! ! ! :wave:

> Barry :p

[BeanAnimal]

Then you want to eat at Mo's in Indianapolis.... About $60 a steak if I remember... but well worth every penny. Then again you could go to HOSS's and pretend.

[barryhc]

I've got a little place called the "Old Mill", about two blocks from here, that offers it every Tuesday night for $7.50, and I've never had the equal, even at $80.

Just pays to live in the middle of a corn field !

> Barry :)

[JMBoehling]

Nice hijack guys... Is this still the Solatube thread???

[BeanAnimal]

nope were talking about steaks...

though with a solotube and a magnifier or parabolic dish you could likely use the solotube to cook the one of the fine ribeyes were are discussing.

Bean

[Hef]

No seriously,
Take it offline.

[BeanAnimal]

No seriously,

Lighten up and realize your post is inflamatory; wasting as much bandwidth as ours; is as off topic as ours and makes you look kind of silly on your high horse. I contribute to hundreds of threads here, as does barry (including this one). 3 or 4 good natured posts surely are acceptable to most folks, but maybe you should still use the "report link" button and get a mod to keep things on track. And your last (only?) contribution to the thread was? Ohhh yeah telling me to shut up.... kind off topic in it's own right. Would it not have been easier and less hypocrytical if you just said nothing :)

Have a nice evening.

[Hef]

Hey, I've been following this thread for over 2 years. Everytime it gets updated I check it. Someone with your experience ought to know that.

Politely asking you to take your conversation elsewhere, certainly is not inflamatory. I guess it doesnt take much to get you off.

[Dwayne]

Get the conversation back on topic. I don't need the extra work of extracting the off topic remarks. The topic of proper cooking techniques and cost of a fine steak are better suited for the Lounge.

Thanks for your understanding.

[hllywd]

:D Not a prob!

[barryhc]

Here is the graphic Joe.

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/4180/95799Skylight_Concept203-med.jpg

Notice the "loss" of some portion of the sunlight. It should still "collect over 2/3 of the incoming sunlight, or at least 10 sq. ft.

Is this off topic ? :D

> Barry :)

[BeanAnimal]

I think the distinction here needs to be made between a "skylight" and a "light pipe".

Lets say the LIGHT PIPE has only 50% transmitance of the actual outside light it collects. Lets say tht a skylight has 95%. The problem (as mentioned here a few times) is that the skylight will not be focusing that light on the tank. As the sun moves, so will the bright portion of the light. The skylight will also not collect the same amount of light as the sun moves. The lightpipe keeps the light focused over the tank, and has a wider range of input angles that transfer a useable amount of light to the tank.

I hope that is on topic enough, I sure would hate to get sent to the office again. :D
Bean

[barryhc]

Light reflects off of ocean water, in a continually graduated way, from morning to noon, and back again toward dusk, very similar to what reflectivity losses occur with a flat skylight. This isn't that much of a problem you see.

The skylight's big advantage, is that it simply has a much larger "collection area" to start with. Four 10" Sola-tubes ( or light pipes ) have at total area of 2.18 sq. ft. One 4' sq. skylight has 16 sq. ft. of collection area. That is 7.3 times as much area, so guess how much light might get to the tank.

> Barry :)

[BeanAnimal]

How much of that light spills over and misses the tank? How much of that light never hits the tank due to the suns angle and the way it reflects off of the frame?

I don't know the answers, but some simple drawings, and or experiments could be done I suppose.

[hllywd]

With your drawing Barry, I'm confused about how much actual light will make it to the tank even with the large opening. As the shaft or pipe or what ever we wish to call it narrows the light reflects more often, As we discussed before there is a loss with each reflection then you get some portion reflecting the wrong way from what you want, as your drawing shows, due to the angles. I don't mean to be argumentative but I'll bet you still end up with not enough intensity where you need it and still need to suppliment.


hllywd, I would only use a high quality skylight, and I would not expect the installation of the skylight, or the "reflectors-hood" is to be considered any sort of "typical- DIY" installation.

Barry, I understand you would use only high quality skylights, I think the very nature of this thread is aimed at DIYers. I'm simply asserting the DIYer can't go off half cocked with a project like either yours or a Sola Tube for that matter. I think my point is that yours involves a lot more than going to HD and asking the new 17yo employee what to cover the new hole in the roof with. :cool:

BTW - Bean, I'm the Union President at work, getting sent to the office is often fun! Don't talk about it like it's such a bad thing!!!:D

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6537380#post6537380 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hllywd
With your drawing Barry, I'm confused about how much actual light will make it to the tank even with the large opening. As the shaft or pipe or what ever we wish to call it narrows the light reflects more often, As we discussed before there is a loss with each reflection then you get some portion reflecting the wrong way from what you want, as your drawing shows, due to the angles. I don't mean to be argumentative but I'll bet you still end up with not enough intensity where you need it and still need to suppliment.

I haven't done this yet, but I doubt it, as far as "not enough".

Do you think this is not happening in a Sola-Tube as well ? :cool:




Barry, I understand you would use only high quality skylights, I think the very nature of this thread is aimed at DIYers. I'm simply asserting the DIYer can't go off half cocked with a project like either yours or a Sola Tube for that matter. I think my point is that yours involves a lot more than going to HD and asking the new 17yo employee what to cover the new hole in the roof with.

I agree, and now they know better.

If it was done "properly" and brought down to a 1 sq. ft. area, "WE" could get some of that "pink not red" that I prefer so much, but to stay on topic however, at the 7 to 1 collection area ratio, a skylight is going to outperform Sola Tubes considerably. :)

> Barry :)

[hllywd]

I think the problem is trying to use a "funnel" for the light, the result is you end up with some, and I don't know how much, light reflecting back out of the tube/tunnel. I also would assume if you didn't have your angles right at some seasonal point you could even cut off the direct reflections. I would say no the SolaTubes don't have the same problem because their reflector walls are parallel and each reflection travels in the correct direction.

Here are some pics from about 20 minutes ago.

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/1998solatube3.jpg

The unit is supposed to be air tight... as you can see by the bugs, mine isn't. Please disregard the bugs!!! This was taken on a sunny day (1/19/06) at approx. 2:00pm in Findlay, Ohio. It is actually installed on the north side of the roof (6/12 pitch) and still collects a good amount of sunlight since the roof dome has the internal reflector. The actual incoming light is bright enough to cause the camera to black everything else out.

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/1998soolatube1.jpg

The ficus tree is normally outside during the spring and summer and under the solatube in the winter. When it come in in the fall it does drop some leaves. This was taken the same time as the previous pic.

[hllywd]

Boy my camera sucks huh????

[barryhc]

Firstly, I am not bashing Sola Tubes. they are a great idea, and I may use some of them one day.

There certainly doesn't need to be any "VS" here.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6538425#post6538425 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hllywd
I think the problem is trying to use a "funnel" for the light, the result is you end up with some, and I don't know how much, light reflecting back out of the tube/tunnel.

Less than 1/3 in the winter. I'll do the Summer version soon, the fall and spring conditions will result in the largest light "delivery".

I also would assume if you didn't have your angles right at some seasonal point you could even cut off the direct reflections. I would say no the SolaTubes don't have the same problem because their reflector walls are parallel and each reflection travels in the correct direction.

Personally, I would get my angles right. The Sola Tube does not gather as much light at midday, because of it's "bubble" collector.

It gathers more light PER SQ.FT. during early morning and nearer dusk, than the skylight, for the same reason.

I assure you that the light collected would be so bright, that you would need to sheild the animals from the midday sun.

This would be most effective for larger tanks, and those that are being considered before building the house, in many cases.

Then again . . . . .

> Barry :)

[BeanAnimal]

I guess I am seeing the skylight design by "barry" and the solotube as the same basic concept. barry is just customizing the idea to make it more conducive to our reef needs. This is different than a simple "slylight" in a vaulted room or skylight with a sheetrock shaft into a flat cieling room.

Bean

[hllywd]

Not sure of the term "VS"...:rolleyes:

I totally agree on the adaptation theme. I have a little knowledge of optics but frankly it's mostly from grinding and figuring a couple telescope mirrors and building the scopes. That's why I question the loss each time the light's direction changes. Mirrored plexiglass or aluminum, while the look very reflective, are only ~80 - 90% reflective and I'd assume it varies by spectrum.

Tim

[barryhc]

And how reflective is the interior of the Sola Tube?

What is the initial angle of incidence of the light rays, to the tube wall, after the light has gone thru the "bubble collector" ?

> Barry :)

[hllywd]

"How can Solatube's products bring so much daylight into the room?
The reason for this astonishing claim, is the ultra-high "specular" reflectance of our tubing materials! With the advancement of Spectralight Infinity, less that 1% of the daylight is lost with each "bounce" of daylight down the tube!
This increase in reflectivity (and, therefore, the skylight's efficiency of light transmission) becomes increasingly important for the winter months, early morning or late afternoon hours, and overcast days when a significant amount of the useable daylight is coming from low angles of the sky.

At these times, the reflected daylight may make hundreds of bounces down the skylight's tubing, which would result in minimal usable light output for skylights using the older tubing materials (where 8% or more of the light is "lost" with each bounce). However, with Spectralight Infinity, the advantages are clear, over 500% more light output for these normally problematic daylight hours, resulting in radiant, useful daylight in your home or office!"

I found this when I did a search for Spectralight Infinity. It is SolaTube's proprietary tube material. The original ones used an Alcoa product with similar properties. Mine are the older type. I think one of the things that make the ST work so well is the reflectors inside the dome that send more light into the tube at a more advantageous angle.


:cool:

[hllywd]

Evidently these are new.

http://www.solatube.com/res_solamaster.php

My guess is these are not cheap, but if you had 2 of them over a 4" tank I think you solve most of the problems of directing light into the tank. I'll bet you could begin to rely on them for most of your light.... Anybody want to buy a couple "new in the box" 10" tubes to help finance BIG ones?:D

[barryhc]

You're up to 5.75 sq. ft. now with the pair of "21 inchers". Quite an improvement.

> Barry :)

[greg65]

Those 21"ers are huge and could pose more of an issue w/ install due to rafters usually @ 16" OC.

I placed a couple of the 14"ers over my new 340g.They fit nicely between rafters. Even in the winter months they do a credible job of bringing in natural light. Not super bright, but a nice supplement. Relatively easy install as well.

We'll see how the natural light affects the sps over time.
-Greg-

[hllywd]

Greg,
I agree on the extra framing for installation of the 21" tubes, if you know what you're doing it would be fairly easy to header the rafters off to enable the larger opening without affecting the structure.

[Herpervet]

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/21836Clinic_front_view_2.jpg

Poor quality photo but at least you can see the sunlight entering the tank.

[Hef]

Very nice, is that sunlight only? How are you doing it.

[JMBoehling]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6717432#post6717432 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Herpervet
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/21836Clinic_front_view_2.jpg

Poor quality photo but at least you can see the sunlight entering the tank.

Very nice and natural..

Thanks for the update

[Herpervet]

Sunlight with actinics in this photo. I have two 48 X 48 inch skylights over the tank. The light-well is lined in mylar and ends at about 40 inches above the tank surface for head room (I have a catwalk around the tank to service it so any lower and I would hit my head.

Then there is a mylar curtain around the tank.

I have Six 150 watt par lamps hanging over the tank for supplemental light during the evening hours but they are off in this photo.

[tinyreef]

herp,
gorgeous setup!

do you get a significant "tracking-effect" from that setup? i.e. different shadows and light angles throughout the day.

do you have a shot of the setup behind the scenes? especially the skylight linings you noted.

[Herpervet]

tiny,

Yes the angle of the sun constantly changes so every few minutes you notice a different look.

I'll take some pics of the filter room for you this week If I can remember to bring my camera to the office.

[dgasmd]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6717432#post6717432 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Herpervet
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/21836Clinic_front_view_2.jpg

Poor quality photo but at least you can see the sunlight entering the tank.

This is a picture I ahve been looking forward to seing for a long time now!! Looks pretty good. Would love to see the filter room too and also a picture witht he actinics on.

When you refer to actinics, are you saying 150 watt 20K MH bulbs?

[Herpervet]

Nice to see your still watching the progress Alberto.

At this point I have six 20K 150 watt Par lamps (flood type) but I recently added four T5 actinics placed just above the tank front viewing panel to give better fluorescence of the coral pigments.

I guess I have to clean the filter room for photo's :o

[Chihuahua6]

Question to Herpervet and Jim. How long are your tubes and how much do they bend if at all before they reach your tank? I have three about 12' from roof to tank, all have an elbow. I don't have the tank yet so I don't know how bright it will be.

[Herpervet]

Chihuahua,

The above tank has two 48"X 48" skylights above it with no bend in the light well.

The roof is about 11 feet above the surface of the tank and the light well ends about 40 inches above the tank surface.

There is a mylar curtain that is a somewhat successful attempt to extend the light well but still allow room to work.

If I had to do it all over I would DEFINATELY add a window to the west and/or south of the tank as this would greatly improve the lighting.

During the mid-day you get very nice bright light but late afternoon it tapers off quickly. Facing a west window would do wonders.

[salty joe]

Herpervert,

What direction do your skylights face & what pitch is the roof, which is usually measured as a fraction with a denominator of 12, with rise over run? (A 12/12 roof is steep, a 4/12 roof is easy to walk on).

Your setup looks great!

Thanks

Joe

[JMBoehling]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6731116#post6731116 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Chihuahua6
Question to Herpervet and Jim. How long are your tubes and how much do they bend if at all before they reach your tank? I have three about 12' from roof to tank, all have an elbow. I don't have the tank yet so I don't know how bright it will be.

Amanda,

I am right around 12' from my roof. I've got them about 1 ft above the water from my tank.

You won't have ANY problems with brightness. The only thing you may want to consider is some supplemental lights (Highly recomend Blue+ T5's) to bring out some colors in your fish and corals..

Can't wait to see your updated pics when the time comes..

Later,

Jim

[Herpervet]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6731864#post6731864 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by salty joe
Herpervert,

What direction do your skylights face & what pitch is the roof, which is usually measured as a fraction with a denominator of 12, with rise over run? (A 12/12 roof is steep, a 4/12 roof is easy to walk on).

Your setup looks great!

Thanks

Joe

Flat roof or very nearly flat. So the skylights are certainly not optimized.

Jim has his tubes a lot closer than I could pull off since my skylights cover the entire footprint of the tank.

I would like someone to show me how to rig up a diy telescoping section on the distal portion so the tubes/light well could be raised and lowered for ease of access and still maximize light.

[Chihuahua6]

BTW if anyone is curious my roof has a 10/12 pitch. One dome is on the east side and two face south. They're all close to each other. This is a lower roof section over the laundry room. The house has a complicated roof. Hope that makes sense.

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6732191#post6732191 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Herpervet

I would like someone to show me how to rig up a diy telescoping section on the distal portion so the tubes/light well could be raised and lowered for ease of access and still maximize light.

Look at the angular graphics on page 26. Even on that system it would be easy to put a "hood" that goes vertical, by 3 feet or more, and a straight sided enclosure would be every bit as easy.

It sounds like your light is not being concentrated to the top surface area of the tank.

> Barry :)

[Chihuahua6]

BTW if anyone is curious my roof has a 10/12 pitch. One dome is on the east side and two face south. They're all close to each other. This is a lower roof section over the laundry room. The house has a complicated roof. Hope that makes sense.

[Herpervet]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6732362#post6732362 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by barryhc
Look at the angular graphics on page 26. Even on that system it would be easy to put a "hood" that goes vertical, by 3 feet or more, and a straight sided enclosure would be every bit as easy.

It sounds like your light is not being concentrated to the top surface area of the tank.

> Barry :)

Can you explain that in Texican for me?;)

Yes. I believe I am losing quite a bit of the potential although during the summer when the angle changes I will be getting actual direct illumination for part of the day. (Last summer when the tank was installed I noted that I could see the sun directly from one side of the tank.)

[hllywd]

If you could keep the salt from eating the mylar, the curtain idea sounds like something to explore...

Also on a flat roof I would think some type of reflector on the roof to help the collection efficiency would be a huge benefit.

[Herpervet]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6733370#post6733370 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hllywd
If you could keep the salt from eating the mylar, the curtain idea sounds like something to explore...

Also on a flat roof I would think some type of reflector on the roof to help the collection efficiency would be a huge benefit.

The skylights I used have a tracking system that uses a photo-cell to keep a set of louvres facing the sun. the problem is that during the mid-day hours it actually shades the tank.

It should in theory provide more light throught the early morning and late afternoon.

I took them down because they were not tracking properly.

I havn't noticed any corrosion on the mylar at all. I think its mainly a plastic right?

[hllywd]

Mylar has a film of aluminum deposited on the surface, what's not working with that idea? Downfalls?

Louvers huh??? Seems like that should work if they're set up right...
:D

[hllywd]

Chihuahua6, How far from the bottom of the tube to where the top of your tank will be?

[Herpervet]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6734701#post6734701 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hllywd
Mylar has a film of aluminum deposited on the surface, what's not working with that idea? Downfalls?

Louvers huh??? Seems like that should work if they're set up right...
:D

The louvers worked ok when the tracking system functioned properly but it was inconsistent.

Our building doesn't have easy roof access and so I came to the conclusion that I'd be better off without them.

They are angled such that they actually decrease light with the mid-day summer sun.

[salty joe]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6732191#post6732191 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Herpervet

I would like someone to show me how to rig up a diy telescoping section on the distal portion so the tubes/light well could be raised and lowered for ease of access and still maximize light.

When I set up my skylight system, I am thinking of building the light tunnel of plywood lined with specular aluminum. It will come down almost to the top of the tank. There will be a horizontal hinge that runs the entire width of the light tunnel about 2 feet from the top of the tank.

[spsboy]

I love this thread, I've always woendered if this would be possible,
Thanks to all for posting your experiences
drew

[tinyreef]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6734701#post6734701 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hllywd
Louvers huh??? Seems like that should work if they're set up right...not sure if this link ( Sunlight DIrect (http://www.sunlight-direct.com/products.html)) was posted, i'm still reading/catching up on this thread.

i don't think it's on the market or even meant for the consumer-market (at this time, probably more commercial/government) but it seems to optimize the light potential. serious bling-bling though. :eek1:

one significant drawback (imo) is that i don't think it offers the "sun tracking-effect" mentioned earlier, which i kinda value-aesthetically and functionally.

side note: i think the aluminum in the mylar is laminated though. so i don't think it should be a big issue. much like the cheapie backgrounds taped to tanks. (c'mon, we've all used it at one time or another :p )

[hllywd]

WOW... that looks like it has real potential for us!!! 2008 til a residential unit is available unfortunately:rolleyes:
1 dish for 40 track lights. If we can hack that down to a reasonable number to fit over a tank we'll be all set!:D
The down side is a 4' dish that's not going to fly with some loaclities' zoning limitations.:cool:

Point well taken for the mylar.

[tinyreef]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6740040#post6740040 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hllywd
The down side is a 4' dish that's not going to fly with some loaclities' zoning limitations. "that's uh...my new DirecTV dish. yeah, that's it! it gets fijian channels." :rolleyes:

maybe it can be an option for aquaculturing though. maybe some uber-reefers, a la TOTM.

i'm wondering if the fiber optics filter/change the spectrum though. i think they mentioned (in another article) that it doesn't but i'm the suspicious-type. they probably aren't talking as spectrum-critical needs like we require, i.e. CRI renderings.

[hllywd]

Might still need some actinics because it's removing all the UV, it sounds like it's electronics could turn on supplimentals automatically on cloudy days too...

[Chihuahua6]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6734721#post6734721 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hllywd
Chihuahua6, How far from the bottom of the tube to where the top of your tank will be?

I was thinking 12"-18". The extensions haven't been added yet.

[H20ENG]

I just found some huge gear driven Pan-Tilt drives for some old security cameras. Solar tracker????? Runs on 120v.
Hepervet, what kind of controller does your tracking device use?

[cwloo]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6725641#post6725641 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Herpervet
Nice to see your still watching the progress Alberto.

At this point I have six 20K 150 watt Par lamps (flood type) but I recently added four T5 actinics placed just above the tank front viewing panel to give better fluorescence of the coral pigments.

I guess I have to clean the filter room for photo's :o

Herpervet ,

Some detail photo of the filter room & the skylight installation will be nice :D

[JMBoehling]

Quick Update. I resolved a 6 month issue with my reef, removed the toxins and things are starting to pop. I also removed all of my pC Supplemental lights and re-worked them with T5's. Here is the latest pic

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2847_Resize.JPG

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2805.JPG

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2844_Resize.JPG

Stay tuned. things are getting ready to take off ! :):beer:

[DanielMar]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=375641#post375641 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by 440cudaman
I would like to know if anyone else has tried to use this type of lighting scheme?

I have been using them for 2yrs now and have had great success with them.
My SPS corals have been going crazy in the natural light.
I thought that I might need to have supplemental lighting, but I took a chance and it worked out for the best.

I was hoping that someone out there has had the same success I've had.
My next project is to change my tank over to the Eco-Wheel so that the captive reef could be as close to natural as possible.

Any thoughts on that?
I knew someone would do SolaTubes=what I dreamed about!!!!!!
GOOD SHOW!
Daniel

[hllywd]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6896789#post6896789 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by JMBoehling
Quick Update. I resolved a 6 month issue with my reef, removed the toxins and things are starting to pop. I also removed all of my pC Supplemental lights and re-worked them with T5's. Here is the latest pic

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2847_Resize.JPG

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2805.JPG

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2844_Resize.JPG




Stay tuned. things are getting ready to take off ! :):beer:


JMBoehling, That's what I'm talking about...:thumbsup:
What do you have for T5s and how much do you run them?
Tim

[JMBoehling]

I've got (02) Geissman Aqua Blue + (11k) & (02) Ati Blue +.

Ati Blue + 7:00 am to 10 pm
Ati Blue + & Aqua Blue + 10 am to 7 pm
Aqua Blue + 11 am to 3 pm

Seems to work nicely and compensate for the cloudy days. I will say on sunny days you can easily see the Soalr Tube BNatural light overpowering all four of the T5's.. It looks really nice...

I found out I had (02) chemical issues with my reef. the fiorst was I installed a healthy amount of Oatey Plumbers putty in my Megaflow to atttempt to fix a slow leak in a bulk head. I didn;t know it had petroleum (Hydrocarbon Oils) in it.

The slow leak was going thru some 3/4 " plywood and then dripping into my sump. another "No No" with SPS..

Well all is better now, and I have seen more growth an encrusting on my SPS in 3 weeks than I got all last year.. I am pretty excited!

I'll update periodically.

[hllywd]

Duh... I guess if I'd read about your current tanks....:rolleyes:
Looks good though!!!:cool:

[wazbot]

Havn't posted in a while...but i'm still around :rollface:

Here's my 10 x 2.5 x 2.5, solatube only tank:

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f20/warrenerraw/tank.jpg

everything is going smashingly :D

I will add some small metal halides if I can find some that look good and dont ruin the aesthetics of the solatubes!

Not all the corals look as good as they did under MH 14000k lighting, there is a distinct lack of green, however the reds look awesome, and blues show up heaps better. I was thinking of adding some 150w 20000k MH's or maybe some t5's to blue it up a bit, but they need to look good or be hidden in the wall/behind the tubes...

this pic is taken about 1pm'ish if i remember, the light is so intense the picture doesn't do it justice..

The way the light moves around, and slowly intensifies towards mid-day and then disperses as evening comes along is awesome...
And the moonlighting is superb! :eek1:

:cheers:

[hllywd]

Waz, Is your mandarin pic natural light? Tank looks good, that's a pile of rock!!!:cool:

[wazbot]

The mandarin in my gallery has sadly perished :( .

It was destroyed by my sixline wrasse, for no apparent reason, right before my eyes :eek1: .

But no, those pics are three years old now! I should update my gallery, I had completely forgotten those pics were still there. Note the awesomely scratched glass in the pics, that tank is atleast 20 years old, and has seen a scourer too many times. I decomissioned the tank only 4 weeks ago as it was the sump for my 6x2x2, which is now the sump for my 10x2.5x2.5 , which may in turn be sump for some humugeous tank in the distant future...:rolleye1:

Here is another piccy taken in the afternoon, about 4pm'ish:

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f20/warrenerraw/DSCF6457.jpg

:cheers:

[JMBoehling]

Wazbot... Looks fantastic! I bet (04) tubes really make your reef sizzle. Thanks for the update.

[JMBoehling]

Wazbot,

As I am sitting here looking at my reef on a Partly Cloudy day, it is pretty awesome to watch the light intensity fluctuate at clouds cover the sun then as they move away the tank just "Booms" with light...

Have you noticed that with your reef?

Jim

[imbuggin]

what about heat into the tank. Have you noticed much heat transfer with that set-up?

[JMBoehling]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6945081#post6945081 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by imbuggin
what about heat into the tank. Have you noticed much heat transfer with that set-up?

Don't know about others, but I have little or no heat with my Tubes. All my heat comes from my pumps and supplemental T5's, whick is very little. I do not run a chiller..

[hllywd]

No IR is supposed to tranfer. I've felt around the one in our dining room and there's nothing noticable.:cool:

[hllywd]

No IR is supposed to tranfer. I've felt around the one in our dining room and there's nothing noticable.:cool:

[hllywd]

No IR is supposed to tranfer. I've felt around the one in our dining room and there's nothing noticable.:cool:

[wazbot]

@ JMBoehling : the clouds effecting the tank are brilliant, I don't know why everyone isn't doing this. My power bill is a lot better of too!

the sun rules!

No heat at all transferred, but i do think some supplemental light is a must, unless all your friend and family only come over during the day :) or if you dont mind the loss of a bit of green colouration ;)

:cheers:

[Hef]

Those are great pics Waz. Got to get some SUN.

[AJT]

Wazbot, are those the brand "SolaTube", or antother brand that some people are using? Are you using the deflector?

Any more pics, close ups of corals with light shining on them?

Thanks
Andy

[p4ck37p1mp]

Tagging along, very interesting concept. Waiting for a house that I might be able to do it.

[Scuba_Dave]

I'm still planning on adding solatubes to my addition for my tank
Just a matter of where it will be located

[wazbot]

@AJT, yup they are the solatube brand. There is an acrylic dome on the roof with a mirror attachment to catch most of the days sun. Apart from that the tubes are hollow and I'm not using any of the deflector plates on the end of the tubes. That being said, in the next few months I am going to have to clean the domes on the roof and give the tubes a light dusting as the spider webs are starting to build up, and nothing is allowed to block the sun over my reef! :lol:

:cheers:

[AJT]

I am looking for property to build a new home & upgrading my 200 to a 500-600 gallon. I'm thinking these solatubes might be a good option.

[tinyreef]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7116224#post7116224 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by AJT
I am looking for property to build a new home & upgrading my 200 to a 500-600 gallon. I'm thinking these solatubes might be a good option. just build a sunroom. that's what i'm planning (wishing). a gigantic 2000g+ cube tank, viewable on all sides (sunlight on 3-sides, 4th being the house).

i'm building it shortly after winning the lottery. any day now. any day. yup, any day... :sad2:

oh yeah, this is my back-to-reality 2.5-gallon sunlight pico-tank.
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/135982006-0401-4-LowResRC.jpg

:sad2:

i think the sola-tubes is more applicable to a house/structure already built and defined. if you're building from scratch, a series of skylights or a sunroom is probably a better option imo.

[KMDO]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=553495#post553495 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SAT


The light meter in my camera indicates that a high percentage of the light hitting the top of each tube is coming out the bottom. Not a very precise measurement, but good enough to make me very happy. :D


Maybe sometime you can take a meter reading from an 18% gray card at the water surface and if the shutter speed is the recipricol of the film speed @ f16 it would be roughly eqaul to full sunlight in intensity, it will likely be less from some loss but with the number of stop or stops to open up it could be SWAGed pretty close.

Would be very interesting to know what the meter says, an incident light meter would negate the need for a gray card, so if anyone has access to a flashmeter like a Minolta Flashmeter IV or V AND a light tube maybe post the results.

[KMDO]

SAT sorry about the query I saw your gray card post on page 5, long thread been all over this one.

The 20% difference on a scale would be markedly reduced in a sensistive flashmeter that will show 1/10th stops.

Thanks for info, impressive that the outside reading is same as inside on card.:)

[wazbot]

I will never build a tank again without using the sun as the main source of light. I am so stoked I took the plunge. even on overcast days it looks good.

Next tank I might just build it outside, above the house so there is no shadow, with a ladder to get up to the viewing platform! Kinda like a castle tower, but with a fish tank.

:cheers:

[Dwayne]

I just came across this and thought it might worth mentioning in this thread. Pardon me if this was mention earlier in the thread.

Parans (http://www.parans.com/default.htm)

FWIW

[JMBoehling]

As promised, some updated pics.. Things are really starting to take shape...

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022P5010052.JPG

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022P4070105.JPG

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022P5010074.JPG

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022P5010068.JPG

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022P5010066.JPG

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022P5010063.JPG


Will update as things continue to grow :) :cool:

Later,

Jim

[kmacartney]

Wow, that is a great looking tank. Do you have any supplimental lighting?

[kmacartney]

Oops. i see that you do. Can you post a pic of how you have the tubes arranged with your lights?

[pvtschultz]

A quick trip to his gallery gives this picture:

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/91022DSCN2812.JPG

He's got a bunch of others in there too for ya.

Great updates though, I definately need to take advantage of the sun for the next tank setup...

[kmacartney]

Cool setup! Is the veiwing done from the other side of the wall?

[JMBoehling]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7296965#post7296965 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by kmacartney
Cool setup! Is the veiwing done from the other side of the wall?

Thank you! Yes the viewing is from our Great Room.. The previous photo is from the Mudroom side (Very convenient for doing water changes :) )

Later,

Jim

[Lordhelmet]

well I'm sold on them. the tank is really starting to look great.

[onetrickpony]

great setup
what brand are you using and size
I am thinking of trying the 24"
what side of the house are they on /orientation to the sun n-e -s =w
what do you think
thanks
ken

[JMBoehling]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7302300#post7302300 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by onetrickpony
great setup
what brand are you using and size
I am thinking of trying the 24"
what side of the house are they on /orientation to the sun n-e -s =w
what do you think
thanks
ken

Brand is Gordon from Home Depot. (02) 10" tubes with approx 12 ft. of extensions. I do not have the diffusers mounted.

The tubes are positioned that I get perfect, unobstructed sunlight from approx 9 am to 3 pm.. At this very moment I am getting max sunlight.

Iabsolutley love the natural light, but you do need supplimental light like T5's or VHO's to get the purples, etc out of your SPS...

Thanks again for the kind words!

Later,

Jim

[nyvp]

I wonder how many I would need to fill a 120"x 36" tank

[pvtschultz]

I would consider the tube lights to be similar to MHs: one for every 24" of tank. If you go with 10" units, you can probably go with four if you desired, two on each side of the center brace. I am thinking that I will be using two 14" tubes over my 90 AGA (48x18x24, LxWxH). The 14" tubes should fit between the rafters snug.

[JMBoehling]

Sizing depends on what type of Supplemental lights you are planning to run, if any...

For the 120" tank I would think (04) 14" ers would work great, unless you can step it up to the 20"ers.. Unfortunately you'll need some major planning on boxing out rafters and joists, as 20" Tubes don't fit very well on 16" centers...

On a 90, the 10" tubes are all I could fit, in addition to my supplemental T5's.. Even at that, my T5 bulbs block the natural light a bit..

Later,

jIm

[sushiking]

Wish I could use SolaTubes. But my tank is on the lower level of my home which would require too many elbows and thus decreasing the efficiency of the tubes.

[T Man]

I'VE GOT A 4FT. BY 4 FT. BY 2 FEET TALL PLASTIC TANK THAT I'VE BEEN EXPOSING TO THE SUN IN THE AFTER NOON [ ABOUT THREE HOURS] A DAY AND THE REST OF THE DAY IS SOLEY AMBIENT SUN LIGHT.
I HAVE A VERY SMALL ATOLL IN THE CENTER OF THE LAGOON THAT HAS SPS ON TOP OF IT AND VARIOUS FRAGS DOWN BELOW MOSTLY SOFTIES. THEY REACT TO THE SUN LIKE THEY WERE IN THE WILD, WHICH ALLOWS FOR ACCELERATED GROWTH. I'M ALL FOR NATURAL LIGHTING, AFTER ALL THATS WHAT WE STRIVE TO GIVE OUR INVESTMENTS.TINMAN

[DgenR8]

Tin man,
Please do not post in all caps, it is the BB equivelant of screaming at us.
I promise we'll hear you just fine if you take off that caps lock.

[Sanjay]

has anyone tested light output from the sola tubes ? I am curious as to how it compares to MH in terms of intensity and spread.

sanjay

[JMBoehling]

I f you go to the Solatube brand website, they have some light ouput reading for geographic areas, etc.. If my memory serves correct, I believe a 22" Tube is equivalent to a 400 Watt Halide during peak intensity.. My 10" tubes have the "appearance" of a 175 Halide... The natural light shimmer easily overpowers my (04) 55watt T5HO's. If anyone wants to allow me to borrow a light meter I will run some tests and post my findings...

[DannyPSI]

Guys! I was browsing around this time last year and found this thread. I went out and remodel house and put a 360 gallon 96x25x36 in my wall. I went out and had (3) 15 inch solatube in my wall. After a few months I add (8) 4 ft. VHO and (2) 400 halide.


Here are some pic. from beginning.
July 05




http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b154/DannyPSI/SolatubeInstalled.jpg

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b154/DannyPSI/PurpleCapAugust05.jpg

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b154/DannyPSI/DSC01130.jpg

[IMG]
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b154/DannyPSI/DSC01688.jpg[/url]

[DannyPSI]

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b154/DannyPSI/FullTank.jpg http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b154/DannyPSI/FullView.jpg http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b154/DannyPSI/GreenBirdnestNov.jpg http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b154/DannyPSI/f92670d3.jpg http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b154/DannyPSI/MontiCapRedNov.jpg http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b154/DannyPSI/b5614bf3.jpg http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b154/DannyPSI/37e53c03.jpg http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b154/DannyPSI/1b1119b3.jpg

[AJT]

So are you happy with them? With adding 2 400 MHs, do you think adding 2 more sola tubes would have been better?

Can you give us some feedback?

Thanks
Andy

[DannyPSI]

I am happy with them but i don't know i would go with halide. Some days are great but winter is not that sunny. I can tell you one thing is with Halide on and noon time arriving you can see sunlight beam stand out. I wouldn't mine adding another 2 but I would still add halide. I run halide 8 hours a day also so i get great lighting for Hard corals. If you are into LPS only tube would be plenty.

My electric bill is only another 60 dollar or so a month with this setup. My brother inlaw set up a 450 gallon with the following setup and light bill is around another 150 dollar.

450
(8) 400w halide
(6) 6ft VHO


So for any day of the week I would use Sunlight. Also don't give out any heat at all. Hope this help some of you guys to decide.

[DannyPSI]

FYI those pic above are 8 months or so apart. Just to show you the growth. The rest of my setup are as follow.


2 dart on return
1 dart on close loop with om 4 way
1/2 hp chiller
asm g4x modify skimmer
K2R Cal. reactor
Kalk reactor

[JMBoehling]

Very nice setup Danny PSI! Love to see fellow "Tubers" show off their systems...

[AJT]

Thanks for the info. I am getting close to designing my new house & some how I am going to use sunlight on the new 500gal.



Andy

[DannyPSI]

A little suggestion is if you are able to place on south side of roof. You will be getting extreme amount of sunlight all day. I get extreme like for only about 4 hours a day. Mine is place on east side so around 4 my lighting is okay. If I ever build my new home I will design it to sit on the south side of my house. I think if I had (3) 21 tubes i might not need halide as much. my just 2-4 hrs a day for backup.

[pvtschultz]

Does anyone have a link to somewhere that shows minimum (or maximum) winter solar inclination? I am in WI and the layout of my new house is as such that that tank will have to be on the north side of the house, but near the midpoint. If I put them on the North side, I will have about 8 ft of tubing, on the south side it will end up being over 10 ft. Is it possible to put them near the rigde line but have them stick up higher above the roof so in the winter the ridge doesn't block the sunlight? Meaning, is there a set height of these products on the roof or can I have it stick up an extra foot to keep them on the south side.

The other alternative is to install the halides and only run them during the winter half or third of the year to make up for the lack of sunlight.

[JMBoehling]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7341701#post7341701 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by pvtschultz
Does anyone have a link to somewhere that shows minimum (or maximum) winter solar inclination? I am in WI and the layout of my new house is as such that that tank will have to be on the north side of the house, but near the midpoint. If I put them on the North side, I will have about 8 ft of tubing, on the south side it will end up being over 10 ft. Is it possible to put them near the rigde line but have them stick up higher above the roof so in the winter the ridge doesn't block the sunlight? Meaning, is there a set height of these products on the roof or can I have it stick up an extra foot to keep them on the south side.

The other alternative is to install the halides and only run them during the winter half or third of the year to make up for the lack of sunlight.

The dome is part of the flashing so it must remain flush with the roof top. One thought.. I wonder if Solatube could come out with a "Y" connector allowing you to install a Roof dome on both sides of the roof to one single tube to your tank..

Another thought.. You probably only need about 4 hours of intense natural light for your SPS.. Just supplement with some T5Ho's and your good...

Best of luck with your project..:beer:

[pvtschultz]

Well, I did some math...I think. Is it just me, or are degrees of latitude the angle that the sun is from the normal at the location (since the sun is an "infinate" distance away). For example:

Milwaukee, WI is at 43 degrees north latitude. At the dead of winter, the sun is at the tropic of capricorn which is 23 degrees south latitude. All totalled that is 66 degrees from the normal at high noon (solar noon). So that means that the sun is coming in at an angle of 24 degrees from the horizontal. So if my roof is at or less than 24 degrees, I should always be able to get sun at the surface, and since the house is a ranch, I should be able to get more dawn and dusk sun than a normal roof.

Here's a pic of the house. You are looking at the east face (the front) and the tubes would stick through near the peak of the north face. What do ya'll think? Is the north going to work for me?
http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f308/pvtschultz/house.jpg

[JMBoehling]

If it means an extra 4 feet of tubing, I would go for the South... Even with the relatively low pitch on your roof, I think the Southside is my recomendation.. I've got at least 12 feet of tube to my roof and the light is still pretty intense..

Let's see what other's have to say..

[JMBoehling]

If you install on the South side, do you add any 45 of 90 degree elbows that you wouldn't have on the north side? You want to stay away from hard turns..

[pvtschultz]

Yeah, I think that moving them to the south side will add 2-45 degree elbows/bends to the piping. I don't have the house yet, we close on June 2nd, so I'm not real familiar with how it will all be run quite yet. I may be able to move the tank to another wall, but I'm really not sure yet if that will work or not. I guess we'll have to wait and see when June comes. I'll be sure to have plenty of pictures of the in-wall setup and the installation of the tubes when the time comes. Stay tuned I guess.

[kochu]

You know this is what I have been wondering for a long time!! I am right at the tropics in Kerala the southern tip of India.
O have a 200gal Reef that’s ahmmmm OK. I have always wanted a large wall to wall tank in the sitting room. I was afraid; considering the cost of electricity and normal power outages in a developing economy.
This sola tube idea stuck me early on but I did not come across this forum. To-day I did.
Now I will start planning.
But there is a problem, my house is double storied and the tube has to go to the top. Any one who tried this?
I have 3-4 years gap for planning and slowly collecting all needed equipment. I plan to have a sump with Mangroves that will take care of the nitrates problem.
It is my hope that I will have a nice reef with seeded oysters that will not be harvested. So in times of need it will be a good investment!! A ready money source as the pearls would be really huge *smile*.
But I do not know how to decide all the equipments needed. Any body who can point me in the right direction?
Reef keeping is nascent in India. But we will catch up.

[onetrickpony]

I am in the process of remolding my next house
The room I will have my next tank in faces east
So the tubes will be on the East side I will have them straight down I am planning on using the 20" tubes
So today the east side got sun from 7am to 5 pm
I am going to frame the 20" tubes in a false chimney
It will raise them to get more direct sun light
I think it make a big difference in the winter with the shorter days
But as plans go, I will have too se how things work out
Ken

[Lordhelmet]

More pitures. this is the only way to go for lighting IMO

[Lordhelmet]

More pitures. this is the only way to go for lighting IMO

[Lordhelmet]

More pitures. this is the only way to go for lighting IMO

[Chihuahua6]

I have a question for those of you with Solatubes installed. I have 3 14" Suntunnels installed, two face south, one faces east and we get lots of sun here. The tank will be 90X48X30 so I know the 3 tubes will not be enough to grow the types of high light corals I will be growing. Can someone advise me on a possible supplemental lighting scheme that would suit my needs? Here is my need list:
1. Lowest operating cost. I added to tubes partly to defer some of the electrical costs so I don't want to add a ton of wattage if I can help it.
2. Lower heat. I do not want to use a chiller. Halides are okay but not so many as to raise the temperature of the water.
3. The back portion of the tank can be darker, meaning every square inch of the tank does not need to be lit up.
4. Modestly high light. I don't believe in the "more is better" concept when it comes to lighting. To give an idea, I had 2 175 watt 10K with actinics on my standard 90 gallon. That was perfect to me. I am open to trying 6500 as recommended by Anthony Calfo.
Thanks.

[JMBoehling]

Amanda,

I have (04) 54 Watt (48") T5HO's on my 90. (02) are the new Uri True Actinic and (02) are the Geismann Actinic Plus. These lights coupled with the Natural light are perfect for my Tort, Hoeki, Chips Acro, Tricolor, Milli's, other various SPS along with lots of softies and anemones.

T5's use relatively low wattage and produce very little heat. Personally I wouldn;t consider any other type of supplemental light for your setup.

Can;t wait to see some pics.

Later,

Jim

[Chihuahua6]

Hi Jim. I actually answered your post a few days ago but it didn't go through.
So are your T5s actinic only?
Anthony Calfo just told me that if I do want to do a shallow water Indo-Pacific biotope with some Yellow Fiji Leathers (I love this coral) that I should use as many halides as I would be using if I didn't have any tubes at all. He didn't think I would be impressed with the output of the tubes. It's hard to disagree with him since he grows coral with sunlight for a living but all the folks here seem to have success with the tubes. I may just buy a light meter to test how much output these tubes give off and compare it to a halide fixture. I'm pretty sure I will have to add some halides since the tank is 30" deep and with the 48" width it would take so many flourescent tubes to get good coverage. Perhaps I should get corals from slightly deeper waters than the Yellow Leather. I have so many decisions to make.
BTW the tank is going to be made from plywood sealed with epoxy with a glass front and side panel on one end. My husband is going to build it. If you are handy at all it's a very affordable way to get a large custom tank. I can't wait!

[JMBoehling]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7670961#post7670961 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Chihuahua6
Hi Jim. I actually answered your post a few days ago but it didn't go through.
So are your T5s actinic only?


I have (02) 54 Watt Uvi (Old Uri) T%HO Super Actinics and (02) Geissman Actinic Plus.

I'm pretty sure I will have to add some halides since the tank is 30" deep and with the 48" width it would take so many flourescent tubes to get good coverage.

Watt for Watt, you will get better PAR and coverage with T5's than Halides. Halides give you more of a Spotlight than Flood light coverage. Your previous post indicated you are concerned about energy consumption and heat. These are two reasons why I recommended T5's to you. As far as depth, your reef will only be 6"'s deeper than mine. I currently have Pink and Blue Stylo, Chip's Acro, Richmond Tricolor, and Green Milli at 18" from the waters surface and they are doing GREAT, with only (04) T5's and the (02) 10" Solar Tubes.

Just sharing what formula has worked well for me here. Best of luck with your decision.

Jim

[Airman]

Kochu welcome to reefcentral. :) I don't think you need intense lighting for oysters. If you are going to have other corals in your tank than invest in a lighting system.