[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [APD] plexi lid vs glass?



polycarbonate is much better than acrylic for light transmission....I think
you can get that at the Depot too.

Terry

> Hi, you guys have been discussing how much light is lost through glass.
That is good to know. Anyone know if more or less is lost through a 0.25
inch piece of plexi from Home Depot? I friend of mine added this to his tank
and I was considering doing
> it also. I have so much evaporation with an open top.
> Thanks,
> Kelleen Harris
>
> aquatic-plants at actwin_com on Tuesday, September 20, 2005 at 9:00 AM
wrote:
>
>
> >Send Aquatic-Plants mailing list submissions to
> > aquatic-plants at actwin_com
> >
> >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants
> >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > aquatic-plants-request at actwin_com
> >
> >You can reach the person managing the list at
> > aquatic-plants-owner at actwin_com
> >
> >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> >than "Re: Contents of Aquatic-Plants digest..."
> >
> >
> >Today's Topics:
> >
> >   1. Rubins (Richard J. Sexton)
> >   2. Light and Lids (Rachel Sandage)
> >   3. Re: putters and gruntlements (RMGTBTS at aol_com)
> >   4. Re: Light and Lids (Mariano F. Bonfante)
> >   5. Re: Light and Lids (Jerry Baker)
> >   6. Re: Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 25, Issue 57 (Jerry Baker)
> >   7. Re: Alternatives to watt/gallon rule (Andrew McLeod)
> >
> >
> >----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >Message: 1
> >Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 09:02:03 -0400 (EDT)
> >From: "Richard J. Sexton" <richard at aquaria_net>
> >Subject: [APD] Rubins
> >To: aquatic-plants at actwin_com
> >
> >
> >>Have you tried Rubins?
> >
> >Yeah but they made me itch. I'm going back to briefs.
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >
> > /"\                         / http://lists.aquaria.net
> > \ /  ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN / Killies, Crypts, Aponogetons
> >  X   AGAINST HTML MAIL    / http://new.killi.net
> > / \  AND POSTINGS        / http://images.aquaria.net
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------
> >
> >Message: 2
> >Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 06:19:15 -0700
> >From: Rachel Sandage <rachelsor at gmail_com>
> >Subject: [APD] Light and Lids
> >To: aquatic plants digest <aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
> >
> >One question I have is if all these light measurements and stuff take
into
> >account any glass or acrylic cover which might be on the tank? Standard
tank
> >cover glass is probably pretty bad at transmitting light - no extra-low
> >dispersion glass, no anti-reflective coating, standard green soda glass.
Has
> >anybody ever done studies to show how much light is lost in the lid?
> > My husband enjoys these discussions mightily, since he is an active
amatuer
> >astronomer, which is all about light gathering capabilities. They spend
some
> >time on their lists discussing how best to get light from place (star) to
> >place (eye) too.
> > Rachel
> >
> >
> >------------------------------
> >
> >Message: 3
> >Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 10:00:00 EDT
> >From: RMGTBTS at aol_com
> >Subject: Re: [APD] putters and gruntlements
> >To: aquatic-plants at actwin_com
> >
> >scott
> >
> >i would write a response but i can't see the screen because of the tears
in
> >my eyes from laughing so hard.
> >
> >tks you made my day
> >
> >rich green
> >milton ma
> >
> >
> >------------------------------
> >
> >Message: 4
> >Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 14:18:57 +0000
> >From: "Mariano F. Bonfante" <mariano_bonfante at hotmail_com>
> >Subject: Re: [APD] Light and Lids
> >To: aquatic-plants at actwin_com
> >
> >With a luxometer I messured 11% loss. The same value was obtenied with 3
mm
> >to 6 mm glass.
> >
> >Mariano
> >
> >
> >
> >>From: Rachel Sandage <rachelsor at gmail_com>
> >>Reply-To: rachelsor at gmail_com,        aquatic plants digest
> >><aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
> >>To: aquatic plants digest <aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
> >>Subject: [APD] Light and Lids
> >>Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 06:19:15 -0700
> >>
> >>One question I have is if all these light measurements and stuff take
into
> >>account any glass or acrylic cover which might be on the tank? Standard
> >>tank
> >>cover glass is probably pretty bad at transmitting light - no extra-low
> >>dispersion glass, no anti-reflective coating, standard green soda glass.
> >>Has
> >>anybody ever done studies to show how much light is lost in the lid?
> >>  My husband enjoys these discussions mightily, since he is an active
> >>amatuer
> >>astronomer, which is all about light gathering capabilities. They spend
> >>some
> >>time on their lists discussing how best to get light from place (star)
to
> >>place (eye) too.
> >>  Rachel
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Aquatic-Plants mailing list
> >>Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
> >>http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------
> >
> >Message: 5
> >Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 08:08:43 -0700
> >From: Jerry Baker <jerry at bakerweb_biz>
> >Subject: Re: [APD] Light and Lids
> >To: aquatic plants digest <aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
> >
> >Mariano F. Bonfante wrote:
> >> With a luxometer I messured 11% loss. The same value was obtenied with
3 mm
> >> to 6 mm glass.
> >
> >I do believe that nearly all of the loss with glass occurs due to
> >reflection at the physical boundaries (i.e., the interface between air
> >and glass). No matter how thick the glass is within a normal range found
> >on an aquarium, the loss will be the same. I always understood that
> >about 7% was lost at each surface with normal uncoated glass. Seems like
> >if that was the case, a lid would be predicted to lose about 13.5%, but
> >that's not far out from what you measured.
> >
> >-- 
> >Jerry Baker
> >
> >
> >------------------------------
> >
> >Message: 6
> >Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 08:11:38 -0700
> >From: Jerry Baker <jerry at bakerweb_biz>
> >Subject: Re: [APD] Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 25, Issue 57
> >To: aquatic plants digest <aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
> >
> >S. Hieber wrote:
> >> Of course, it's more a matter of personal preference than
> >> "proper" amount. In fact, I know a few folks that do about
> >> 1.0-3.2 putters per gallon per week and love every minute
> >> of it. Their gruntlement has reportedly reached as high as
> >> 10-12 grunts-of-pleasure per day, which equates to
> >> 34.4-41.28 smiles per week -- of course that's C-scale
> >> weighted for solitary activity. On the A-scale, weighted
> >> for group activity, the numbers would be even higher.
> >
> >Dude! You forgot the introverted-extroverted exponent on the A scale,
> >which would make the numbers lower for group activity :?
> >
> >-- 
> >Jerry Baker
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------
> >
> >Message: 7
> >Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 16:37:19 +0100
> >From: "Andrew McLeod" <thefish at theabyssalplain_freeserve.co.uk>
> >Subject: Re: [APD] Alternatives to watt/gallon rule
> >To: "aquatic plants digest" <aquatic-plants at actwin_com>
> >
> >On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 22:43:28 +0100, Jerry Baker <jerry at bakerweb_biz>
wrote:
> >
> >> I have often wondered about applying an infrared blocking film to a
> >> shield in extreme cases of MH lighting heating up a tank.
> >
> >Probably a really, really bad idea BTW...
> >Firstly, the 'heat' that seems to come from a bulb may not just be
infrared radiation - all radiation (including visible light) will warm
things up if they absorb it (i.e. they are not white/reflective).
> >Secondly, if MH's do put out a fair amount of infrared, then an infrared
filter will have to absorb all of that radiation - as heat. So if it's
enough to warm up your tank, think what it will do to a little bit of
film...
> >
> >-- 
> >Andrew McLeod
> >thefish at theabyssalplain_freeserve.co.uk
> >
> >This email was scanned carefully before transmission to remove any
content, information or relevance.
> >
> >
> >------------------------------
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Aquatic-Plants mailing list
> >Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
> >http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants
> >
> >
> >End of Aquatic-Plants Digest, Vol 25, Issue 61
> >**********************************************
>
>
> Kelleen
>
> Central Coast Watershed Studies
> Phone: (831) 582-5217
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Aquatic-Plants mailing list
> Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
> http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.2/105 - Release Date: 9/19/2005
>
>

_______________________________________________
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants