Need input on Aquatinic TX5

Work Horse

 

Thanks!!

 

I will test the TX5 tomorrow, well thats if I feel like going to work... Monday latest, the levels will be posted in this thread.

The Doc

 

Good test results. I may take the spash shields off my 250w HQIs today and see if I get better par results too. Thanks.

 

Don't wanna do that, Bogie. Unless you mean as a seconds-long test and not above your tank. Unlike mogul base halides, DE, HQI bulbs rely on those tempered glass UV shields to block radiation that could burn your skin, blind you, or at the very least kill everything in your tank.

EDIT: I figured you knew that, thanks for letting me know.

 

Did you ever get around to testing the PAR without the shield? Let us know your results.

Thanks,
Daniel

 

I will visit doc at work and ask him

 

Yes I did. I have tested the 4 and 6 lamp Tek, the TX5, a NO Coralife 2 lamp, and a 30" PC with brand new 50/50 65w lamps. I am trying to compile my results better and I am waiting to test a NEP before I post them. My goal is to test just about everything I can, it just a matter of when I should start posting the results...

Here is a quick sneak peak at the results....
I essentially tested 3 times, each time I figured another way to make the test more accurate and even. I wanted to compare the fixtures apples to apples not apples to oranges.
Here is what I did... Assuming that water is too much of a variable to have accurate results(clarity, surface agitation...) I tested the fixtures/lamps in air. I made a grid of points that I would test, 4" from each and of fixture, and dead center, then I plotted the points over the tanks depth, front to back. I tested at 4.5" from front and back along with dead center for 9 testing points.
The probe was 7" away from the lamps in all tests.

TX5 with shield

159-----254-----151
226-----359-----206
129-----201-----115

TX5 with OUT shield

176-----293-----173
251-----402-----245
149-----229-----132

As you can see it is an improvement but IME not what I expected from Aquactinics nor the TX5. On paper this light rocks!! In use, not so much, looks like the concave SLR design hurt the performance overall.

 

excuse what might be a dumb question

why in all the tests do the figures vary in that one end or 4.5 inches from that end, is giving higher values than the same distance from the other end? and its always the same end thats higher

Steve

 

Not sure Steve.... Thats what boggled me.... It would be one thing if I had all the lamps arranged so the starters were all on the side.
I tested them three times before I came up with that way to make it more consistant. I originally went from end of tank but none of the fixtures were all evenly spaced over the tank, thats why I did the measurements off fixture rather than tank.

Oh, now that I look at it again Steve, since that was the same fixture tested 2x, IME it SHOULD have the same side stronger, if that is the case, no?