[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PCFs Again
>In a message dated 09/06/2001 1:00:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>Aquatic-Plants-Owner at ActWin_com writes:
>
><< PCs are more efficient than normal
> florescent bulbs. >>
>
>If PCs are more efficient, from whence does the dissipated heat that is
>causing all the problems come????
Most of the aquarium hoods out there use NO flourescents, in the usual 15,
20, and 40 watt sizes. When you move up to a 55 or 96 watt light you will
be more than doubling the wattage of the lamp itself. Since CFs aren't
twice as efficient, a chunk of that difference results in increased heat
output.
If you look at that page Ivo mentioned in an earlier post
(http://www.aquabotanic.com/lightcompare.htm), you see that even the
difference between what I will call a "typical" light (triton) at 24%
efficient and the best light on the chart at 32%, you see a difference of
only 8%. Using my hood as an example, I went from a 15 watt NO lamp to a 55
watt CF lamp. If we assume the NO light to be 30% efficient and the CF
light to be 35% efficient, light output went up 428% but *heat output went
up 340%*. That's a lot more heat to deal with in the hood than there used
to be, and in some cases it's enough heat to cause problems for the
plastics used in the hood.
To everyone reading this, I know I oversimplified a bit but it gets the
general idea across.
-Bill
*****************************
Waveform Technology
UNIX Systems Administrator